Supreme Court Hears Witnesses in 44 Move Forward Ethics Case
The Supreme Court heard three witnesses in the ethics case against 44 former Move Forward Party MPs accused of violating standards by proposing an amendment to Section 112. Witnesses such as former Deputy House Speaker Suchat Tanjaroen and former MPs Karom Phonphonklang and Kasemsant Mithee testified about their reasons for not supporting the bill and the legislative process. The Court has scheduled the final witness session for October 27.
The Supreme Court continued hearing witnesses in the ethics case against 44 former Move Forward Party MPs who had proposed amending Section 112 of the Criminal Code. This was the third witness session, during which former Deputy House Speaker Suchat Tanjaroen, former Move Forward list MPs Karom Phonphonklang and Kasemsant Mithee testified. Suchat said that since becoming an MP in 1986 he had never introduced legislation that conflicted with the Constitution and was unaware of the party’s position on Section 112 at that time. He explained that a bill needs at least 20 MP signatures to be submitted and, once before the House, follows the regular agenda unless the meeting decides to prioritize it, subject to a meeting resolution. He added that officials notified Move Forward leader Pita Limjaroenrat of any deficiencies in the bill. Karom stated that he had been an MP with the Future Forward and later Move Forward parties and had previously sponsored other law amendments, but only five other MPs signed the Section 112 amendment with him. He said he abstained because he believed MPs have the right to decline signing, after which he stopped participating in party activities and was removed from the party’s Line group. Kasemsant said he did not sign because of his conscience, knowing that outside‑parliamentary campaigns were demanding Section 112 reform, which had led to numerous violations. He recalled that in late 2020 the party discussed Section 112 but not all members supported the amendment; he had heard objections raised to Pita and internal dissent, after which he stopped attending party meetings. After the three witnesses completed their testimony, the Court set the final witness hearing for October 27 at 9:30 am, to hear two additional witnesses.
