Bangkok: "Sirikanlaya" expresses concerns over the Constitutional Court's decision to only examine the consideration process in the "Pichet" budget transfer case. She argues that the offense is already complete and awaits the court's verdict on August 1.
According to Thai News Agency, Ms. Sirikanya Tansakul, an MP from the Prachachon Party and its deputy leader, discussed the ongoing case involving the Office of the Secretariat of the House of Representatives. The office had requested the withdrawal of a budget totaling 178 million baht, designated for items under a strategic plan to bolster politics within a democratic regime led by the King. The funds were intended for public relations initiatives, promoting democracy, political participation, and various subsidies. The Constitutional Court is currently evaluating a similar budget for 2025, with a verdict expected on August 1.
Ms. Sirikanya highlighted that the projects in question are also included in the 2025 budget, raising concerns among relevant agencies like the Secretariat of the House of Representatives and other committees. There are apprehensions that cutting or withdrawing the budget now might impact the Constitutional Court's decision or hinder any further ruling. Despite these concerns, Ms. Sirikanya believes the offense is already complete, and the withdrawal of the 2025 budget does not nullify the actions taken. The party is awaiting a statement from Mr. Phanthil Nuamchem, an MP for Bangkok who filed the petition, ahead of the Constitutional Court's final verdict.
She also pointed out that the budget, initially proposed for 2024, was reintroduced in 2025, emphasizing the need to prove it was put forward by Mr. Pichet Chueamuangphan, the first deputy speaker of the House of Representatives. This would confirm it as a continuous offense following the 2024 budget issue.
Ms. Sirikanya further expressed her disagreement with the Constitutional Court's decision not to consider the 2015 budget results. She argued that participation in budget considerations should extend beyond the roles of MPs and committee members. As the head of an agency, there is an opportunity to allocate budgets in beneficial areas after parliament passes them. She remains uncertain about the Constitutional Court's rationale, as it seemed to focus solely on the consideration process, potentially overlooking other crucial aspects.