An MP's proposal to abolish the Constitution Court and the Administrative Court as part of the government's charter rewrite drive is drawing resistance from the opposition Democrat Party and academics.
‘‘ It is not right to see these judicial organisations as a scourge just because they limit your power.
ABHISIT VEJJAJIVA
OPPOSITION LEADER
Pheu Thai Party list MP Watthana Muangsuk said in an interview with Matichon newspaper yesterday that the number of independent organisations should be kept to the minimum necessary.
He said the two courts were no longer required and the Supreme Court could replace them with divisions to be set up to handle cases.
Mr Watthana, known to be a close associate of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, floated the idea while discussing the government's constitutional amendment drive, now getting under way in parliament.
Democrat and opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said the proposed abolition of the two courts would go against the principle of having a system of checks and balances.
If the proposal was tabled to parliament, the party would be obliged to debate and scrutinise its details to ensure that the independence of the judicial organisations remain intact, which is crucial in preventing politicians from abusing their authority, he said.
"It is not right to see these judicial organisations as a scourge just because they limit your power," said Mr Abhisit.
He stressed that the two courts and other independent organisations such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission must continue to function.
Mr Watthana's proposal also received a lukewarm response from Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung and Deputy Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Nattawut Saikuar. Both said the idea was only Mr Watthana's personal opinion as Pheu Thai had not yet discussed the issue.
Mr Chalerm said it was too early to talk about it as the Constitution Drafting Assembly (CDA) had not yet been set up and interference in independent bodies was unwarranted.
"I wouldn't dare to comment because it is too early and I don't know who would be in the constitution drafting assembly," he said.
Thammasat University rector and former charter drafter Somkit Lertpaithoon said Thailand has adopted a civil law system that provides for the establishment of the Constitution Court and the Administrative Court _ like in Germany, France and other European countries _ as opposed to the common law system that has no such courts.
The courts were established in Thailand by virtue of the 1997 constitution and have since been alive and well.
The fact that someone may be unhappy with the role of the courts is irrelevant to the essence of the courts, said Mr Somkit. "The courts are still essential in Thai society," he added.
In particular, the public are given an opportunity to file lawsuits against executives of state agencies with the Administrative Court, which is empowered to ascertain the facts and evidence under the inquisitorial system of the civil law system.
Mr Somkit said the Administrative Court is essential given that private individuals are not comparable to state agencies in terms of the ability to gather evidence and prepare for litigation.
"It is like a flyweight boxer [private individuals] versus a heavyweight boxer [state agencies]," he said.
This is different from the accusatorial system that applies to the courts of justice, which adjudicate disputes between two private parties who are deemed equal in their ability to prepare for litigation.
Mr Somkit said it comes as no surprise that politicians would seek to scrap the Constitution Court, whose rulings have immense ramifications on their political careers.
He said a solution would be to streamline and improve the court instead of abolishing it.
National Institute of Development Administration rector Sombat Thamrongthanyawong said the two courts operate in line with international standards. Getting rid of them would only meet with strong resistance, he said.
"The role of the two courts has progressed too far for anyone to abolish them," said Mr Sombat, adding that the planned CDA must also take into consideration public opinion, not only the views of politicians.