Constitutional Court of Thailand
Encyclopedia
The Constitutional Court of Thailand is an independent Thai
court
originally established under the 1997 Constitution
with jurisdiction over the constitutionality
of parliamentary acts, royal decrees, draft legislation, as well as the appointment and removal of public officials and issues regarding political parties. The Court, along with the Constitution of Thailand, was dissolved in 2006 following the Thai military's overthrow of the government. While the Constitutional Court had 15 members, 7 from the judiciary and 8 appointed by the Senate, the Constitution Tribunal had 9 members, all from the judiciary. A similar institution was established under the 2007 Constitution
. The court is part of the judicial branch of the Government.
The 1998 establishment of the Constitutional Court provoked much public debate, both regarding the Court's jurisdiction and composition as well as the initial selection of justices. A long-standing issue has been the degree of control exerted by the judiciary over the Court.
The various versions of the Court have made several significant rulings. These included the 1999 ruling that Deputy Minister of Agriculture Newin Chidchop
could retain his Cabinet seat after being sentenced to imprisonment for defamation, the 2001 acquittal of Thaksin Shinawatra for filing an incomplete statement, regarding his wealth, with the National Counter-Corruption Commission, the 2003 invalidation of Jaruvan Maintaka
appointment as Auditor-General, and the 2007 dissolution of the Thai Rak Thai
political party.
. Senior judges rigorously opposed the concept on the grounds that constitutional and judicial review should remain the prerogative of the Supreme Court and that a constitutional court would create a fourth branch of government more powerful than the
judiciary, legislature, or executive. Judges stated their fear over political interference in the selection and impeachment of judges. The Constitution Drafting Assembly eventually made several concessions regarding the composition and powers of the Court.
The Constitution also did not give the Constitutional Court the authority to rule on any case in which the Constitution did not specifically delegate an agency the power to adjudicate.
inappropriate or unqualified.
and backgrounds. On 24 November 1997, the Senate voted to remove the name of Supreme
Court Vice President Amphorn Thongprayoon, on the grounds that his credentials were dubious and on allegations that he had defaulted on 3 million THB in debt. The Supreme Court was furious, arguing the Constitution did not empower the Senate to do background checks or to reject Supreme Court nominees. The Supreme Court requested a ruling from the Constitutional Tribunal chaired by the House Speaker. On 8 January 1998, in a 6:3 vote, the Tribunal ruled the Senate did not have the authority to do background checks or reject the Supreme Court's nominees. The Tribunal ruled that the Senate's review powers were limited to examining the records of the nominees and electing half of those nominees for appointment.
Immediately after the Supreme Court had filed its request to the Tribunal, Justice
Amphorn withdrew his name. After the Tribunal's ruling, the Supreme Court elected Justice Jumpol na Songkhla on 9 January 1998 to replace Amphorn. The Senate ignored the Tribunal's ruling and proceeded to review Jumphol’s background and delayed a vote to accept his nomination for 7 days so that the Senate evaluate Jumphol. Finding no problems, the Senate proceeded to acknowledge his appointment to the Court on 23 January 1998.
.
Stung by the Senate rejection of Amphorn Thongprayoon, the two Bangkok Civil Court Judges, Sriampron Salikhup and Pajjapol Sanehasangkhom, petitioned the Constitutional Tribunal to disqualify Ukrit on a legal technicality. They argued that Ukrit only had an honorary professorship at Chulalongkorn University
, while the 1997 Constitution specifically specifies that a nominee, if not meeting other criteria, must be at least a professor
. Echoing the Senate's rejection of Amphorn, the judges also alleged that Ukrit was involved in a multi-million baht law suit over a golf course
. On January 10, 1998 the Tribunal ruled that the judges were not affected parties and therefore they had no right to request a ruling. Nevertheless, the Parliament President invoked his power as chairman of the Tribunal to ask the Senate to
reconsider Ukrit's nomination.
On January 19, 1998, the Senate reaffirmed Ukrit's qualifications, noting that his professorship was special only because he was not a government official. Under Chulalongkorn's
regulations, he had the academic status of a full professor.
This position inflamed activists and the judiciary, and prompted the Parliament President on January 21 to invoke his authority under Article 266 of the 1997 Constitution to order the Constitutional Tribunal to consider the issue. On February 8, in a 4:3 vote, the Tribunal ruled that Ukrit's special professorship did not qualify him for a seat in the Constitutional Court. The Tribunal noted that Chulalongkorn criteria for honorary professor were different from their criteria for academic professors, as intended by the Constitution. The Senate ended up electing Komain Patarapirom to replace Ukrit.
There are timing, standing, and subject limitations which determine when a Court appeal
can be sought, who can file motions, and the specific issues which the Court has the jurisdiction
to accept.
From 1998 to 10 October 2002, the Constitutional Court has issued rulings on 237 motions. 56% of those motions were concerned with the constitutionality of laws, while political party issues and the removal of officials from office comprised another 27%.
, is composed of 15 full-time justices
with terms of 9 years. 7 of the justices come from the judiciary itself: 5 are elected by the secret ballot of Supreme Court Judges from amongst their own number, while another 2 are elected by the Supreme Administrative Court from amongst their own number. In the selection of the other 8 justices, the Constitution stipulates 5 law experts and 3 political science experts. First of all a Selective Committee is chosen, consisting of the President of the Supreme Court, four Deans of law and four Deans of political science chosen from amongst their own number, and four MPs representing parliamentary political parties, each party having one representative and such representatives electing four from their own number. The Committee, by a resolution supported by 3/4's of its members, nominates ten persons qualified in law and six qualified in political science. The Senate then votes, with the winners being the first five or three on the list, as the case may be, to receive at least one half of the votes.
executive decrees issued by the Chuan
government to deal with the Asian financial crisis. The government had issued the decrees in early May 1998 to expand the role of the Financial Restructuring Authority and the Assets Management Corporation, to settle the debts of the Financial Institutions Development Fund through the issue of 500 billion THB in bonds
, and to authorize the Ministry of Finance to seek 200 billion THB in overseas loans. The opposition New Aspiration Party
(NAP) did not have the votes to defeat the bills, and therefore, on the last day of debate, invoked Article 219 of the Constitution to question the constitutionality of an emergency decree.
The NAP argued that since there was no emergency nor necessary urgency (under Article 218(2)), the government could not issue any emergency decrees. Article 219, however, specifically notes the constitutionality of an emergency decree can be questioned only on Article 218(1) concerning the maintenance of national or public safety, national economic security, or to avert public calamity. The government, fearing further economic damage if the decree were delayed, opposed the Court's acceptance of the complaint, as the opposition clearly had failed to cite the proper constitutional clause. The Court wished to set a precedent, however, demonstrating it would accept petitions under Article 219, even if technically inaccurate. Within a day it ruled that it was obvious to the general public that the nation was in an economic crisis, and that the decrees were designed to assist with national economic security in accordance with Article 218(1). The decrees were later quickly approved by Parliament.
The NAP's last minute motion damaged its credibility, and made it unlikely that Article 219 will be invoked unless there is a credible issue and the issue is raised and discussed at the beginning of Parliamentary debate, rather than at the last-minute before a vote.
On the other hand, a precedent was established by the Court that it would accept all petitions under Article 219 to preserve Parliament's right to question the constitutionality of emergency executive decrees.
that the government signed with the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
to secure emergency financial support was a treaties
, and that Article 224 of the Constitution stipulated that the government must receive prior consent from Parliament to enter a treaty.
The NCCC determined the issue concerned a constitutional interpretation and petitioned the Constitutional Court for an opinion. The Court ruled the IMF letters were not treaties, as internationally defined, because they were unilateral documents from the Thai government with no rules for enforcement or provisions for penalty. Moreover, the IMF itself had worded the letters in a way that stated that the letters were not contractual agreements.
The Constitutional Court ruled in 6 July 2004 that the selection process that led to the appointment of Jaruvan as Auditor-General was unconstitutional. The Court noted that the Constitution empowers the SAC to nominate only one person with the highest number of votes from a simple majority, not three as had been the case. The court stopped short of saying if she had to leave her post. However when the Constitutional Court had ruled on 4 July 2002 that the then Election Commission
chairman Sirin Thoopklam's election to the body was unconstitutional, the President of the Court noted "When the court rules that the selection [process] was unconstitutional and has to be redone, the court requires the incumbent to leave the post".
However, Jaruwan refused to resign without a royal dismissal from King Bhumibol Adulyadej. She noted ""I came to take the position as commanded by a royal decision, so I will leave the post only when directed by such a decision." The State Audit Commission later nominated Wisut Montriwat, former deputy permanent secretary of the Ministry of Finance, for the post of Auditor-General. The Senate approved the nomination on 10 May 2005. However, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, in an unprecedented move, withheld his royal assent. The National Assembly did not hold a vote to overthrow the royal veto. In October 2005 the Senate rejected a motion to reaffirm her appointment, and instead deferred the decision to the SAC.
On 15 February 2006 the State Audit Commission (SAC) decided to reinstate Auditor-General Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka. Its unanimous decision came after it received a memo from the Office of King Bhumibol Adulyadej's
Principal Private Secretary, advising that the situation be resolved.
The controversy led many to reinterpret the political and judicial role of the King in Thailand's constitutional monarchy.
Thailand
Thailand , officially the Kingdom of Thailand , formerly known as Siam , is a country located at the centre of the Indochina peninsula and Southeast Asia. It is bordered to the north by Burma and Laos, to the east by Laos and Cambodia, to the south by the Gulf of Thailand and Malaysia, and to the...
court
Court
A court is a form of tribunal, often a governmental institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance with the rule of law...
originally established under the 1997 Constitution
Constitution of Thailand
The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand is the supreme law of Thailand. Since the change from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional democracy in 1932, Thailand has had 17 charters and constitutions, reflecting the high degree of political instability and frequency of military coups faced...
with jurisdiction over the constitutionality
Constitutionality
Constitutionality is the condition of acting in accordance with an applicable constitution. Acts that are not in accordance with the rules laid down in the constitution are deemed to be ultra vires.-See also:*ultra vires*Company law*Constitutional law...
of parliamentary acts, royal decrees, draft legislation, as well as the appointment and removal of public officials and issues regarding political parties. The Court, along with the Constitution of Thailand, was dissolved in 2006 following the Thai military's overthrow of the government. While the Constitutional Court had 15 members, 7 from the judiciary and 8 appointed by the Senate, the Constitution Tribunal had 9 members, all from the judiciary. A similar institution was established under the 2007 Constitution
2007 Constitution of Thailand
A Permanent Constitution for the Kingdom of Thailand was drafted by a committee established by the military junta that abrogated the previous 1997 Constitution. On August 19, 2007, a referendum was held in which 59.3% of the voters voted in favor of the constitution...
. The court is part of the judicial branch of the Government.
The 1998 establishment of the Constitutional Court provoked much public debate, both regarding the Court's jurisdiction and composition as well as the initial selection of justices. A long-standing issue has been the degree of control exerted by the judiciary over the Court.
The various versions of the Court have made several significant rulings. These included the 1999 ruling that Deputy Minister of Agriculture Newin Chidchop
Newin Chidchop
Newin Chidchob is a Thai politician. As a member of several political parties, Newin and his allies eventually joined the Thai Rak Thai Party of Thaksin Shinawatra in 2005. Until the 2006 Thai coup d'état, he served as a member of the Parliament for Buriram Province and was a Cabinet minister with...
could retain his Cabinet seat after being sentenced to imprisonment for defamation, the 2001 acquittal of Thaksin Shinawatra for filing an incomplete statement, regarding his wealth, with the National Counter-Corruption Commission, the 2003 invalidation of Jaruvan Maintaka
Jaruvan Maintaka
Khun Ying Jaruvan Maintaka is the current Auditor-General of the Kingdom of Thailand. She refused to resign her position after the Constitutional Court of Thailand ruled that her nomination was illegal. She is well known for her public criticism of deposed Premier Thaksin Shinawatra...
appointment as Auditor-General, and the 2007 dissolution of the Thai Rak Thai
Thai Rak Thai
The Thai Rak Thai Party was a Thai political party that was officially banned on May 30, 2007, by the Constitutional Court of Thailand due to violations of electoral laws during the 2006 legislative elections. From 2001 to 2006, it was the ruling party under Prime Minister and its founder Thaksin...
political party.
Origins and controversy
Drafting of the 1997 Constitution
The creation of the Constitutional Court was the subject of much debate during the 1996-1997 drafting of the current Constitution of ThailandConstitution of Thailand
The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand is the supreme law of Thailand. Since the change from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional democracy in 1932, Thailand has had 17 charters and constitutions, reflecting the high degree of political instability and frequency of military coups faced...
. Senior judges rigorously opposed the concept on the grounds that constitutional and judicial review should remain the prerogative of the Supreme Court and that a constitutional court would create a fourth branch of government more powerful than the
judiciary, legislature, or executive. Judges stated their fear over political interference in the selection and impeachment of judges. The Constitution Drafting Assembly eventually made several concessions regarding the composition and powers of the Court.
Jurisdiction
The Constitution did not give the Constitutional Court the authority to overrule a final judgment of the Supreme Court. An affected party, or a court, could request the opinion from the Constitutional Court if they believed a case involved a constitutional issue. The court where the initial action was pending would stay its proceedings until the Constitutional Court issued its decision. Constitutional Court decisions would have no retroactive effect on previous decisions of the regular courts.The Constitution also did not give the Constitutional Court the authority to rule on any case in which the Constitution did not specifically delegate an agency the power to adjudicate.
Impeachment
The Constitution allowed individual justices to be the subject of impeachment proceedings with the vote of one fourth of the members of the House or with 50,000 approval of petitioners. A vote of three fifths of the Senate is required for impeachment. Earlier drafts had required votes of only 10% of the combined House and Senate to call for a vote of impeachment, and votes of three fifths of the combined Parliament to dismiss a justice.Appointment
The Constitution gave the judiciary a strong influence over the composition of the Constitutional Court. Originally, the Court was to have 9 justices comprising six legal experts and three political science experts. A 17 person panel would propose 18 names from among which Parliament would elect the 9 justices. The panel president would be the President of the Supreme Court, the panel itself would have included 4 political party representatives. The CDA finally compromised and allowed 7 of the justices to be appointed directly by the judiciary while the remaining 8 justices would be appointed by the Senate from a list of Supreme Court nominees.Appointment of the first Constitutional Court
The appointment of the first Constitutional Court following the promulgation of the constitution in 1997 was 4-month controversy pitting the Senate against the Supreme Court. A key issue was the Senate's authority to review the backgrounds of judicial nominees and reject nominees deemedinappropriate or unqualified.
Appointment of Amphorn Thongprayoon
After receiving the Supreme Court's list of nominees, the Senate created a committee to review the nominees' credentialsand backgrounds. On 24 November 1997, the Senate voted to remove the name of Supreme
Court Vice President Amphorn Thongprayoon, on the grounds that his credentials were dubious and on allegations that he had defaulted on 3 million THB in debt. The Supreme Court was furious, arguing the Constitution did not empower the Senate to do background checks or to reject Supreme Court nominees. The Supreme Court requested a ruling from the Constitutional Tribunal chaired by the House Speaker. On 8 January 1998, in a 6:3 vote, the Tribunal ruled the Senate did not have the authority to do background checks or reject the Supreme Court's nominees. The Tribunal ruled that the Senate's review powers were limited to examining the records of the nominees and electing half of those nominees for appointment.
Immediately after the Supreme Court had filed its request to the Tribunal, Justice
Amphorn withdrew his name. After the Tribunal's ruling, the Supreme Court elected Justice Jumpol na Songkhla on 9 January 1998 to replace Amphorn. The Senate ignored the Tribunal's ruling and proceeded to review Jumphol’s background and delayed a vote to accept his nomination for 7 days so that the Senate evaluate Jumphol. Finding no problems, the Senate proceeded to acknowledge his appointment to the Court on 23 January 1998.
Appointment of Ukrit Mongkolnavin
The appointment of former Senate and Parliament President Ukrit Mongkolnavin was especially problematic. The Senate had initially elected Ukrit from the list of ten legal specialists nominated by the selection panel, despite claims from democracy activists that Ukrit was unqualified to guard the constitution because he had served dictators while President of Parliament under the 1991-1992 military government of the National Peacekeeping CouncilNational Peace Keeping Council
The National Peace Keeping Council was a Thai military junta that overthrew the civilian elected government of Chatichai Choonhavan in 1991. It was led by Army Commander Suchinda Kraprayoon, Supreme Commander Sunthorn Kongsompong, Airforce Commander Kaset Rojananil and members of the 5th Class of...
.
Stung by the Senate rejection of Amphorn Thongprayoon, the two Bangkok Civil Court Judges, Sriampron Salikhup and Pajjapol Sanehasangkhom, petitioned the Constitutional Tribunal to disqualify Ukrit on a legal technicality. They argued that Ukrit only had an honorary professorship at Chulalongkorn University
Chulalongkorn University
Chulalongkorn University is the oldest university in Thailand and is the country's highest ranked university. It now has nineteen faculties and institutes. Regarded as the best and most selective university in Thailand, it consistently attracts top students from around the country...
, while the 1997 Constitution specifically specifies that a nominee, if not meeting other criteria, must be at least a professor
Professor
A professor is a scholarly teacher; the precise meaning of the term varies by country. Literally, professor derives from Latin as a "person who professes" being usually an expert in arts or sciences; a teacher of high rank...
. Echoing the Senate's rejection of Amphorn, the judges also alleged that Ukrit was involved in a multi-million baht law suit over a golf course
Golf course
A golf course comprises a series of holes, each consisting of a teeing ground, fairway, rough and other hazards, and a green with a flagstick and cup, all designed for the game of golf. A standard round of golf consists of playing 18 holes, thus most golf courses have this number of holes...
. On January 10, 1998 the Tribunal ruled that the judges were not affected parties and therefore they had no right to request a ruling. Nevertheless, the Parliament President invoked his power as chairman of the Tribunal to ask the Senate to
reconsider Ukrit's nomination.
On January 19, 1998, the Senate reaffirmed Ukrit's qualifications, noting that his professorship was special only because he was not a government official. Under Chulalongkorn's
Chulalongkorn University
Chulalongkorn University is the oldest university in Thailand and is the country's highest ranked university. It now has nineteen faculties and institutes. Regarded as the best and most selective university in Thailand, it consistently attracts top students from around the country...
regulations, he had the academic status of a full professor.
This position inflamed activists and the judiciary, and prompted the Parliament President on January 21 to invoke his authority under Article 266 of the 1997 Constitution to order the Constitutional Tribunal to consider the issue. On February 8, in a 4:3 vote, the Tribunal ruled that Ukrit's special professorship did not qualify him for a seat in the Constitutional Court. The Tribunal noted that Chulalongkorn criteria for honorary professor were different from their criteria for academic professors, as intended by the Constitution. The Senate ended up electing Komain Patarapirom to replace Ukrit.
Jurisdiction
The Constitutional Court has the jurisdiction over six broad categories of cases:- The constitutionality of parliamentary acts
- The constitutionality of royal decrees
- The authorities of constitutional mechanisms
- The appointment and removal of public officials
- Political party issues
- The constitutionality of draft legislation
There are timing, standing, and subject limitations which determine when a Court appeal
can be sought, who can file motions, and the specific issues which the Court has the jurisdiction
to accept.
From 1998 to 10 October 2002, the Constitutional Court has issued rulings on 237 motions. 56% of those motions were concerned with the constitutionality of laws, while political party issues and the removal of officials from office comprised another 27%.
Composition
The Constitutional Court, modelled after the Constitutional Court of ItalyConstitutional Court of Italy
The Constitutional Court of Italy is a supreme court of Italy, the other being the Court of Cassation. Sometimes the name Consulta is used as a metonym for it, because its sessions are held in Palazzo della Consulta in Rome....
, is composed of 15 full-time justices
Judge
A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and in an open...
with terms of 9 years. 7 of the justices come from the judiciary itself: 5 are elected by the secret ballot of Supreme Court Judges from amongst their own number, while another 2 are elected by the Supreme Administrative Court from amongst their own number. In the selection of the other 8 justices, the Constitution stipulates 5 law experts and 3 political science experts. First of all a Selective Committee is chosen, consisting of the President of the Supreme Court, four Deans of law and four Deans of political science chosen from amongst their own number, and four MPs representing parliamentary political parties, each party having one representative and such representatives electing four from their own number. The Committee, by a resolution supported by 3/4's of its members, nominates ten persons qualified in law and six qualified in political science. The Senate then votes, with the winners being the first five or three on the list, as the case may be, to receive at least one half of the votes.
Unconstitutionality of emergency economic decrees
In its very first decision, the Court ruled on the constitutionality of four emergencyexecutive decrees issued by the Chuan
Chuan Leekpai
Chuan Leekpai was the Prime Minister of Thailand from September 20, 1992 to May 19, 1995 and again from November 9, 1997 to February 9, 2001. A third-generation Thai Chinese, Chuan was born in Trang province in a grass-roofed house. The walls of his family's house were woven from strips of...
government to deal with the Asian financial crisis. The government had issued the decrees in early May 1998 to expand the role of the Financial Restructuring Authority and the Assets Management Corporation, to settle the debts of the Financial Institutions Development Fund through the issue of 500 billion THB in bonds
Bond (finance)
In finance, a bond is a debt security, in which the authorized issuer owes the holders a debt and, depending on the terms of the bond, is obliged to pay interest to use and/or to repay the principal at a later date, termed maturity...
, and to authorize the Ministry of Finance to seek 200 billion THB in overseas loans. The opposition New Aspiration Party
New Aspiration Party
The New Aspiration Party was a political party in Thailand. In the legislative elections, on February 6, 2005, the party won 0.4 % of the popular vote and no seats in the House of Representatives....
(NAP) did not have the votes to defeat the bills, and therefore, on the last day of debate, invoked Article 219 of the Constitution to question the constitutionality of an emergency decree.
The NAP argued that since there was no emergency nor necessary urgency (under Article 218(2)), the government could not issue any emergency decrees. Article 219, however, specifically notes the constitutionality of an emergency decree can be questioned only on Article 218(1) concerning the maintenance of national or public safety, national economic security, or to avert public calamity. The government, fearing further economic damage if the decree were delayed, opposed the Court's acceptance of the complaint, as the opposition clearly had failed to cite the proper constitutional clause. The Court wished to set a precedent, however, demonstrating it would accept petitions under Article 219, even if technically inaccurate. Within a day it ruled that it was obvious to the general public that the nation was in an economic crisis, and that the decrees were designed to assist with national economic security in accordance with Article 218(1). The decrees were later quickly approved by Parliament.
The NAP's last minute motion damaged its credibility, and made it unlikely that Article 219 will be invoked unless there is a credible issue and the issue is raised and discussed at the beginning of Parliamentary debate, rather than at the last-minute before a vote.
On the other hand, a precedent was established by the Court that it would accept all petitions under Article 219 to preserve Parliament's right to question the constitutionality of emergency executive decrees.
Treaty status of IMF letters of intent
The NAP later filed impeachment proceedings with the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) against Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai and the Minister of Finance Tarrin Nimmanahaeminda for violation of the Constitution. The NAP argued that the letter of intentLetter of intent
A letter of intent is a document outlining an agreement between two or more parties before the agreement is finalized. The concept is similar to a heads of agreement...
that the government signed with the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
International Monetary Fund
The International Monetary Fund is an organization of 187 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world...
to secure emergency financial support was a treaties
Treaty
A treaty is an express agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely sovereign states and international organizations. A treaty may also be known as an agreement, protocol, covenant, convention or exchange of letters, among other terms...
, and that Article 224 of the Constitution stipulated that the government must receive prior consent from Parliament to enter a treaty.
The NCCC determined the issue concerned a constitutional interpretation and petitioned the Constitutional Court for an opinion. The Court ruled the IMF letters were not treaties, as internationally defined, because they were unilateral documents from the Thai government with no rules for enforcement or provisions for penalty. Moreover, the IMF itself had worded the letters in a way that stated that the letters were not contractual agreements.
Appointment of Jaruvan Maintaka as Auditor-General
On 24 June 2003, a petition was filed with the Constitutional Court seeking its ruling on the constitutionality of Jaruvan Maintaka’s appointment by the Senate as Auditor-General. Jaruvan was one of three nominees for the position of auditor-general in 2001, along with Prathan Dabpet and Nontaphon Nimsomboon. Prathan received 5 votes from the 8-person State Audit Commission (SAC) chairman while Jaruvan received 3 votes. According to the constitution, State Audit Commission chairman Panya Tantiyavarong should have submitted Prathan's nomination to the Senate, as he received the majority of votes. However, on July 3, 2001, the SAC Chairman submitted a list of all three candidates for the post of auditor-general to the Senate, which later voted to select Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka.The Constitutional Court ruled in 6 July 2004 that the selection process that led to the appointment of Jaruvan as Auditor-General was unconstitutional. The Court noted that the Constitution empowers the SAC to nominate only one person with the highest number of votes from a simple majority, not three as had been the case. The court stopped short of saying if she had to leave her post. However when the Constitutional Court had ruled on 4 July 2002 that the then Election Commission
Election Commission (Thailand)
The Election Commission of the Kingdom of Thailand is an independent government agency and the sole Electoral Commission of Thailand tasked with overseeing Senate, House, local and district elections throughout the Kingdom of Thailand. Established by the Constitution, the Election Commission has...
chairman Sirin Thoopklam's election to the body was unconstitutional, the President of the Court noted "When the court rules that the selection [process] was unconstitutional and has to be redone, the court requires the incumbent to leave the post".
However, Jaruwan refused to resign without a royal dismissal from King Bhumibol Adulyadej. She noted ""I came to take the position as commanded by a royal decision, so I will leave the post only when directed by such a decision." The State Audit Commission later nominated Wisut Montriwat, former deputy permanent secretary of the Ministry of Finance, for the post of Auditor-General. The Senate approved the nomination on 10 May 2005. However, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, in an unprecedented move, withheld his royal assent. The National Assembly did not hold a vote to overthrow the royal veto. In October 2005 the Senate rejected a motion to reaffirm her appointment, and instead deferred the decision to the SAC.
On 15 February 2006 the State Audit Commission (SAC) decided to reinstate Auditor-General Khunying Jaruvan Maintaka. Its unanimous decision came after it received a memo from the Office of King Bhumibol Adulyadej's
Bhumibol Adulyadej
Bhumibol Adulyadej is the current King of Thailand. He is known as Rama IX...
Principal Private Secretary, advising that the situation be resolved.
The controversy led many to reinterpret the political and judicial role of the King in Thailand's constitutional monarchy.
Thaksin Shinawatra's alleged conflicts of interest
In February 2006, 28 Senators submitted a petition to the Constitutional Court calling for the Prime Minister's impeachment for conflicts of interest and improprieties in the sell-off of Shin Corporation under Articles 96, 216 and 209 of the Thai constitution. The Senators said the Prime Minister violated the Constitution and was no longer qualified for office under Article 209. However, the Court rejected the petition on 16 February, with the majority judges saying the petition failed to present sufficient grounds to support the prime minister's alleged misconduct.Political Parties Dissolution following the April 2006 Election
See also
- Constitution of ThailandConstitution of ThailandThe Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand is the supreme law of Thailand. Since the change from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional democracy in 1932, Thailand has had 17 charters and constitutions, reflecting the high degree of political instability and frequency of military coups faced...
- History of Thailand since 1973History of Thailand since 1973The history of Thailand since 1973 saw an unstable period of democracy, with military rule being reimposed after a bloody coup in 1976....
- ConstitutionConstitutionA constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed. These rules together make up, i.e. constitute, what the entity is...
- ConstitutionalismConstitutionalismConstitutionalism has a variety of meanings. Most generally, it is "a complex of ideas, attitudes, and patterns of behavior elaborating the principle that the authority of government derives from and is limited by a body of fundamental law"....
- Constitutional economicsConstitutional economicsConstitutional economics is a research program in economics and constitutionalism that has been described as extending beyond the definition of 'the economic analysis of constitutional law' in explaining the choice "of alternative sets of legal-institutional-constitutional rules that constrain the...
- JurisprudenceJurisprudenceJurisprudence is the theory and philosophy of law. Scholars of jurisprudence, or legal theorists , hope to obtain a deeper understanding of the nature of law, of legal reasoning, legal systems and of legal institutions...
- Rule of lawRule of lawThe rule of law, sometimes called supremacy of law, is a legal maxim that says that governmental decisions should be made by applying known principles or laws with minimal discretion in their application...
- JudiciaryJudiciaryThe judiciary is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary also provides a mechanism for the resolution of disputes...
- Rule According to Higher LawRule according to higher lawThe rule according to a higher law means that no written law may be enforced by the government unless it conforms with certain unwritten, universal principles of fairness, morality, and justice...
- President and Judges of the Constitutional Court