BANGKOK, Thailand – In a narrow 5-4 decision, Thailand’s Constitutional Court ruled to terminate the tenure of Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, citing a lack of evident integrity. This ruling follows Srettha’s controversial appointment of Pichit Chuenban as Minister attached to the Office of the Prime Minister, despite Pichit’s previous criminal conviction.
The Court found that Srettha’s decision to appoint Pichit, who was sentenced to six months in prison by the Supreme Court in 2008 for contempt in the “2 Million Baht Snack Bag Bribery” case, violated constitutional ethical standards. The Court emphasized that Srettha’s actions were inconsistent with the Constitution’s preamble, which aims to eliminate corruption and ensure that individuals lacking integrity are barred from governance.
Srettha’s defence, which argued that his limited political experience and lack of legal expertise led to the appointment, was dismissed by the Court. The ruling stated that as Prime Minister, Srettha held ultimate responsibility for all decisions and should have been aware of Pichit’s disqualification due to his criminal record. The Court noted that Pichit’s conviction was well-known and had damaged the judiciary’s reputation and public confidence in the Thai justice system.
The ruling cited several constitutional provisions, including Section 170, paragraph one (4), in conjunction with Sections 160 (4) and (5), which outline the qualifications and disqualifications for holding ministerial office. The Court concluded that Srettha’s actions constituted a serious breach of ethical standards, disqualifying him under the Constitution.
As a result, Srettha’s position as Prime Minister has been terminated, and his entire cabinet must also vacate their positions, as mandated by Section 167, paragraph one (1) of the Constitution. The ruling specified that the outgoing cabinet will continue to perform its duties until a new government is appointed, as provided by Section 168, paragraph one (1).
The five Constitutional Court judges who formed the majority opinion were Panya Udchachon, Udom Sithivirachatham, Virun Saengthien, Jiraniti Havanon, and Banjongsak Wongprach. The four dissenting judges—Nakharin Mektrairat, Napadol Thepithak, Udom Rathomarit, and Sumet Roykulcharoen—believed that Srettha’s tenure should not be ended on these grounds. (TNA)
