The Constitutional Court wrote a letter to the House of Representatives, confirming that ‘Udom’ expressed his opinion after the dissolution of the Move Forward Party in response to a question on political party law, without being sarcastic, and without affecting the independence or damaging the dignity of the judiciary.
The House of Representatives website has published the agenda for the House of Representatives meeting on October 17. In the second agenda item, which is the matter that the president will inform the meeting, there is an agenda to acknowledge the matter that the Constitutional Court’s meeting acknowledged the observations and suggestions of the House of Representatives in the urgent motion requesting the House of Representatives to consider the expression of those holding positions in the judiciary in a public forum, which has been criticized by the public, leading to questions of confidence in the justice process and the performance of independent organizations, in order to forward the obse
rvations and suggestions of the House of Representatives to the Constitutional Court for further consideration. This is the case of Mr. Udom Sithiwirattham, a Constitutional Court judge, expressing his opinion at a seminar of the Constitutional Court on August 15, 2024 in Surat Thani Province regarding the dissolution of the Move Forward Party, which was criticized as inappropriate.
It was found that there was a publication of a response letter from the Office of the Secretariat of the Constitutional Court, No. Sor. 0001.1/1576, to the Secretary-General of the House of Representatives, dated October 4, 2024, stating that according to the Office of the Secretariat of the House of Representatives sending a summary of the issues and suggestions for the debate of the members of the House of Representatives in the urgent motion by mouth, regarding the request for the House to consider the expression of those holding positions in the judiciary on the public stage, which was criticized by the public, leading to que
stions of confidence in the justice process and the performance of independent organizations, for the Constitutional Court to be aware of, if the Constitutional Court has complied with any of the observations and suggestions, please inform us.
The Constitutional Court would like to inform that the meeting of the Constitutional Court’s judges acknowledged the observations and suggestions of the House of Representatives. It is of the opinion that Mr. Udom Sithiwirattham, a judge of the Constitutional Court, expressed his opinion after the Constitutional Court had already made its ruling in the case. It was an answer to a question about the political party law at the academic seminar of the Constitutional Court. It was not an expression of opinion that was sarcastic or satirical to any political party that would affect the independence, neutrality and free from bias of the Constitutional Court judges in considering the case. It did not affect or cause damage to the performance of duties or the honor of holding
the position of a judge of the Constitutional Court.
Source: Thai News Agency