10 MPs from the main opposition People’s Party have been allowed to continue their parliamentary duties after the Supreme Court accepted a petition filed by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) against 44 former Move Forward Party MPs accused of serious ethics breach over their bid to amend the royal defamation law. However, the Court prohibited them from repeating or expressing opinion about the action of which they are accused.

The Supreme Court today (24 April) accepted a petition filed by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) against 44 former Move Forward Party (MFP) MPs accused of serious ethics breach over their bid to amend the royal defamation law.

The 44 include both former MFP MPs who have joined the People’s Party and former MFP executives disqualified from politics for 10 years following the party’s dissolution, such as former MFP party leader Pita Limjaroenrat, as well as several leading MPs in the People’s Party.

10 of them were elected to the new parliament: People’s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, Sirikanya Tansakun, Rangsiman Rome, Wayo Assawarungruang, Pakornwut Udompipatskul, Natthawut Buapratum, Surachet Pravinvongvuth, Nattacha Boonchaiinsawat, Teerajchai Phunthumas, and Taopiphop Limjittrakorn.

Natthaphong and Sirikanya were also the party’s prime ministerial candidates.

The Court did not suspend the 10 current MPs from parliament on the grounds that they did not repeat the action of which they are accused or cause further damage and because they still have parliamentary duties to perform. However, the Court prohibited them from repeating the action or “undertake any action or express opinion about the action of which they are accused” or the Court could change its mind.

If found guilty, the 44 MPs could be banned from politics for life. The NACC also requested that the Supreme Court ban them from voting in elections for 10 years.

In 2021, the 44 former MPs jointly backed a bill proposing amendments to the controversial royal defamation law, including reducing the sentence, allowing only the Bureau of the Royal Household to file a royal defamation complaint, and adding a clause protecting good-faith criticisms and disclosure of factual information in the public interest.

In January 2024, the Constitutional Court ruled that the MFP’s campaign to amend the royal defamation law was treasonous. In August 2024, the party was dissolved for committing treason. A complaint was subsequently filed against the 44 MPs.

In February 2026, the NACC ruled that the 44 former MPs had breached ethical standards and that it would seek a Supreme Court ruling against them. The move came shortly after the election. Notably, several members from the NACC assumed office with the backing of so-called blue senators, who are widely known to be affiliated with the Bhumjaithai Party.

The NACC forwarded the case to the Supreme Court on 9 April. It said in the petition that the proposed amendments sought to downgrade the protected status of the monarchy and so could be seen as an intention to undermine national security and the dignity of the Head of State.

In addition, the 44 former MFP MPs were notified by the Secretariat of the House of Representatives that their proposed amendment was improper. However, they insisted on proceeding. The NACC, therefore concluded that their actions demonstrated clear malicious intent to undermine the monarchy.

The royal defamation law, or Section 112 of the Thai Criminal Code, carries a penalty of 3-15 years in prison – a sentence repeatedly criticised for being disproportionate. UN mechanisms and human rights organizations have raised concerns that the law has been used to silence critics of the monarchy and imprison activists. UN experts have called for the law to be repealed. Meanwhile, the overly broad interpretation of the law has meant that it is unclear which action constitutes royal defamation. A recent Supreme Court ruling, for example, expands the scope of the law to cover past monarchs.

According to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), at least 291 people have been charged with royal defamation in relation to political expression and participation in protests since November 2020. Of the 63 political prisoners currently in detention, 35 are detained for royal defamation. Among the royal defamation detainees, 16 are detained pending trial or appeal, including prominent activists like Sopon Surariddhidhamrong, Anon Nampa, Jatupat Boonpattararaksa, and Attapol Buapat.

It has often been difficult for royal defamation defendants to be granted bail, but even when they are, they have often been required to place a large amount of cash as security. Many have been shackled with vague conditions like bans on joining “activities that may damage the monarchy” which restrict their freedom of expression. They have also been required to wear electronic monitoring bracelets, which many have said cause discomfort and disrupt their daily lives.

In courts, judges often refuse to summon documents for the defence to use as evidence. Recently, the courts have either ordered in camera trials or prohibited observers from entering the courtroom. They have also prohibited the publication of information on the proceedings. Such orders have raised questions about judicial transparency and concerns that defendants are not receiving fair trials.

Party leader vows to fight on

People’s Party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut said on 24 April after the court order was delivered that the party intends to fight the case against the 44 former Move Forward Party (MFP) MPs to the fullest extent after the Supreme Court accepted an ethics breach petition filed against them this morning but allowed the 10 sitting MPs to continue parliamentary duties.

Natthaphong said that, keeping in line with the court order, the party only wants to insist that it does not intend to cause harm to the democratic regime with the King as the head of state by proposing the bill.

He said that the implications of the case that are more important that the MPs’ future concern the future of Thai democracy. This should concern everyone who wants a political system with a check and balance mechanism that treats everyone equally to protect the public interest, he said, not a system that protect the interest of some people.

The party does not wish to see lawfare being waged to protect the legacy of a military coup, he said. This would reduce the power of the people and consolidate power among a group of elites without caring about the country’s future. He vows to fight the case to the fullest to protect the legislative power and said that the party will continue to work with the public for a transition to a democratic system that serves the people.