Constitutional Court President Highlights Need for Petition to Address Ministerial Qualification Issues

Bangkok: The President of the Constitutional Court emphasized that a formal petition is necessary to address the issue of individuals lacking the qualifications to serve as ministers. He noted that political parties are exercising caution and underscored the importance of adhering to ethical standards.

According to Thai News Agency, Mr. Nakarin Mektrirat, President of the Constitutional Court, addressed media inquiries concerning the government's reliance on ethical standards as a primary criterion for ministerial appointments. He acknowledged that past governments have appointed ministers who seemingly lacked necessary qualifications. Mr. Nakarin highlighted that the focus on ethics is a new concept introduced in Thailand's 2017 constitution, which distinguishes it from the 2007 constitution that did not include ethics.

Mr. Nakarin pointed out that the dissolution of political parties was less frequent under the 2007 Constitution because the Election Commission had the authority to dissolve parties directly if they were found to have misused funds from the Political Party Development Fund. This change resulted in a significant decrease in the number of party dissolutions since the matter did not require submission to the Constitutional Court.

He further explained that the lack of petitions is why individuals with questionable qualifications have been able to assume ministerial roles. The court cannot initiate cases or make decisions independently; it requires a formal petition to act. Mr. Nakarin clarified that the process of filing a petition about a minister's qualifications must comply with constitutional provisions, and cannot be initiated by just any individual.

Mr. Nakarin reiterated that the Constitutional Court is a passive body, only making decisions when disputes are formally brought before it. He emphasized that without an official matter to adjudicate, the court remains inactive. He concluded by expressing approval of the management's cautious approach, noting that it is prudent given the potential for legal ramifications.