On May 23rd, 2024, at 4:30 PM (Japanese local time), Thai Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, while on an official visit to Japan, spoke to the press about the Thai Constitutional Court’s consideration of a petition against him regarding the appointment of former Minister Pichit Chuenban.

Earlier that day, the Constitutional Court voted six to three to proceed with the petition against Srettha. However, by a narrow margin of five to four, the judges opted not to suspend him from his duties as Prime Minister during the investigation. The court granted him a 15-day period to respond to the complaint from the date he received a copy, as reported by Thai national media.

Srettha informed the media that he would consult with his legal team in response to the court’s order for an investigation. He underscored his responsibility as Prime Minister to govern the country and confront its challenges. While acknowledging that legal scrutiny is part of a political career, Srettha emphasized the importance of transparency and clarity in handling such matters.

“It is crucial to provide clarity to the public.”

Despite recognizing the difficulty in satisfying all political factions, Srettha appealed for trust in his leadership, emphasizing the well-being of Thai citizens as his foremost priority. He also expressed willingness to address any no-confidence motions in parliament, respecting the legislative process.

Srettha highlighted the roles of both the Legal Affairs and Executive Divisions in ensuring fair and thorough oversight. As part of the Administrative Division, he pledged to elucidate matters comprehensively and transparently to the public.

National News:

On May 21, 2024, at 11:30 AM, Thai national media reported that the Talufa Group held a protest at the Office of the Public Sector Development Commission (OPDC). They aimed to submit a letter to Mr. Somkid Chuekong, the deputy secretary-general of the Thai prime minister for political affairs, demanding justice in the investigation of Ms. Netiporn “Bung” Sanesangkhom’s death.

The activist group gathered at the OPDC to hear about the progress in Netiporn’s case. However, after an hour of protest, no official responsible for the case appeared to receive the letter.

The group then moved to the Government House, where police officers prevented them from entering due to an ongoing cabinet meeting.

The Talufa Group publicly stated that the Pheu Thai Party had previously committed to considering amendments to Section 112 (Lèse Majesté) and granting amnesty to political prisoners under the same section. Despite the Pheu Thai Party being in power for ten months, there had been no response from the party, according to Thai national media.

After protesting in front of the Government House, the activists returned to the OPDC and successfully submitted the letter to Somkid.

Previously, a lawyer from the Thai Lawyers for Human Rights representing Netiporn had questioned the Thai Corrections Department regarding the cause of her death. However, the report was still pending, leaving the circumstances of Netiporn’s death in doubt, noted Kritsadang, the lawyer from Thai Lawyers for Human Rights.

National News

At 9:00 AM on May 21st, 2024, Mr. Sutin Klungsang, the Minister of Defense, addressed the petition by 40 Thai senators to impeach Mr. Pichit Chuenban, the Minister attached to the Prime Minister’s Office. Sutin expressed no concern about the matter, emphasizing that ministers must meet stringent qualifications, especially for key positions within the Prime Minister’s secretariat. Candidates undergo a thorough vetting process before being submitted to His Royal Majesty the King for official appointment.

Some suggested that Pichit should resign to preempt a Constitutional Court decision, but Sutin advised him to stay on and prove his suitability. Despite this, Pichit resigned later that morning, citing a desire to avoid potential conflicts within the government.

Sutin commented that the Constitutional Court would ultimately determine the legitimacy of Pichit’s appointment by Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin. When asked by the national media if he was concerned that a ruling against Pichit could temporarily suspend him as Prime Minister, Srettha acknowledged his concerns for governmental affairs and citizens’ well-being. However, he expressed respect for the judicial process, stating his duty to be prepared and present all relevant facts. Srettha affirmed that Pichit’s appointment was legal and recommended by the Council of State.

Pichit, according to national media, insisted that his appointment was based on his abilities rather than prerogative, despite his resignation. It remains unclear if Pichit’s resignation will shield Srettha from potential legal action, as the core issue is the legality of the appointment itself, not Pichit’s tenure in office.