Bangkok: Ruangkrai Leekitwattana is preparing to file a lawsuit against Bhumtham Wechayachai after Bhumtham submitted a request for royal approval to dissolve Parliament. Ruangkrai argues that an acting prime minister has no precedent for taking such action.
According to Thai News Agency, Ruangkrai, a political activist and former senator, has conducted a thorough investigation into historical records, revealing that Parliament has been dissolved 14 times since 1938. The most recent instance was under General Prayut Chan-o-cha's administration in 2023. Ruangkrai asserts that no deputy prime minister, having left office and then served as an acting prime minister, has ever submitted a royal decree to dissolve Parliament. He also raises concerns about potential constitutional violations, referencing a similar case involving the Move Forward Party. The party faced dissolution and its MPs faced investigation after submitting a draft amendment to the Constitution.
Ruangkrai has meticulously gathered documents to support his case, questioning the legitimacy of the dissolution of Parliament based on the lack of votes for Chaikasem Nitisiri, a prime ministerial candidate from the Pheu Thai Party. He contends that if there were indeed insufficient votes, it raises questions about how the prime ministerial vote passed through Parliament. Ruangkrai plans to file a complaint against Acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai with the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), alleging corruption and misconduct. The NACC is expected to forward the case to relevant agencies for further investigation.
Ruangkrai has collected all relevant documents about the Royal Decree dissolving Parliament. He notes that historically, only sitting prime ministers have initiated such actions. He remains skeptical about the current situation, stating that it contradicts past administrative traditions.
He emphasizes that the Constitutional Court's order specifies that a Prime Minister removed from office cannot serve as a caretaker. However, a Cabinet removed from office must continue its duties until a new Cabinet is appointed. Ruangkrai challenges the notion that the constitution allows an acting prime minister to dissolve Parliament, arguing that the absence of explicit permission equates to prohibition.