Thai court declines to hear case of PM’s incomplete oath | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

Thai court declines to hear case of PM’s incomplete oath

Associated Press
1659123_web1_1659123-85c6e05103e84c779c6d5fb9869e36b1
AP
Thailand’s Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha omitted a sentence in the oath of office when he led his Cabinet in the oath in front of King Maha Vajiralongkorn on July 16, and Thailand’s ombudsman ruled Tuesday that it will refer the matter to the Constitutional Court to decide whether the government was legally installed.

BANGKOK — Thailand’s Constitutional Court announced Wednesday it has declined to hear a case accusing the country’s prime minister of violating the constitution by omitting a sentence from the oath of office he and his government took before King Maha Vajiralongkorn.

The issue raised questions about the legitimacy of Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha’s government, which took office in July.

Prayuth failed to include the phrase “I will also uphold and comply with the constitution of the kingdom in every aspect.” It was unclear if the omission was accidental or intentional.

A statement from the court Wednesday said it lacked jurisdiction because the oath was a matter between the executive branch and the king.

It also mentioned that the king had issued a royal message, delivered late last month but dated the day of the oath-taking, encouraging the Cabinet members to perform their duties according to the oath they swore.

The king as a constitutional monarch is supposed to have no political role, but holds a great amount of influence.

The court’s decision appeared to preclude further legal challenges of Prayuth’s omission. The lower house of Parliament is supposed to debate the matter on Sept. 18 at the request of the opposition, but the court’s position gives Prayuth’s government ammunition to stave off any political attacks.

The mention of the king’s note giving moral support to the government helps it defend against criticism, because the monarchy is treated as an untouchable institution in Thailand, where a tough lese majeste law provides penalties of up to 15 years in prison for insulting the royal family.

The case went to the Constitutional Court after the state ombudsman forwarded complaints from two citizens who charged that Prayuth’s failure to pledge allegiance to the constitution was a breach of the charter.

Opposition lawmakers pointed out the omission, and Prayuth responded that the matter was not a problem. The ombudsman’s office said he told them he had completed the oath-taking, without elaborating.

The oath is written into the constitution that was adopted in 2017 when Prayuth headed a military government that took power in a 2014 coup.

He became prime minister again after a general election in March that was held according to laws the military regime wrote to favor its political allies.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.