The Constitutional Court maintains a neutral position when it comes to politics in Thailand and is open to charter changes related to the selection of its judges, according to court president Nakharin Mektrairat.
Speaking on the occasion of the court’s 28th anniversary on April 11, Mr Nakharin said the Constitutional Court had earned people’s trust.
This is evident in the increasing number of petitions people have submitted directly to the court seeking rulings in cases believed to involve breaches of the constitution.
Such petitions can be filed via Section 213 of the 2017 military-drafted charter, which stipulates that individuals can petition the Constitutional Court directly in cases where they believe the exercise of state authority violates their rights and liberties.
Direct petitions lodged with the court have involved such fundamental issues as the right of a husband or wife to sue in cases of adultery, said Mr Nakharin.
In June 2024 the court ruled that the Civil Code must be rectified to enable a person to also sue the lover, whether male or female, of their legally married spouse.
The ruling replaced the words “husband” and “wife” with the gender-neutral “spouse” accordingly.
Mr Nakharin acknowledged that the Constitutional Court does not exist in isolation. Rather, it functions alongside the cabinet, parliament and independent agencies.
“Petitions we have received are indicative of how confident people are in the Constitutional Court, that it can solve, rather than create, problems for them,” the court president said.
The court will only accept petitions that meet legal requirements and are filed by eligible petitioners.
The fact that agencies and institutions request the court’s help in clarifying issues of constitutional validity shows they do not reject the charter court’s authority, he said.
He added that there had been legal conflicts between state agencies and institutions that had to be resolved by the court, highlighting its role in preserving the sanctity of the law.
The Constitutional Court takes utmost care with the review of petitions and would only admit those whose petitioners meet the legal criteria.
The court president admitted that deliberating political cases may have taken a mental toll on the judges, which is normal. However, the court’s primary function is to uphold constitutionality, and political cases form only a part of its many responsibilities.
“But people tend to focus their attention on that one aspect of the duties,” Mr Nakharin said.
He insisted that the Constitutional Court is expected to be undeterred by the case it is deliberating or who is at the centre of a petition.
Mr Nakharin cited the example of South Korea where the Constitutional Court last week upheld the impeachment of president Yoon Suk-yeol, stripping him of the top job and triggering fresh elections.
Mr Yoon was removed from office over a disastrous declaration of martial law that was quickly rescinded.
Mr Nakharin also said the Thai charter court stands firm on its principle of being steadfastly impartial, which leaves no room for it being used as a tool in a political witch hunt.
Any petition the court finds to harbour an ulterior political motive will be dropped, he said.
The court is open to any change in the selection of its judges via a constitutional amendment, he added.
Currently, the judges are drawn from a pool nominated by the assemblies of the Supreme Court and the Administrative Court, as well as from a selection committee.
The candidates must be endorsed by the Senate before they can serve as judges.
- Commentary: Senate’s image takes another hit
