Defence in Move Forward ethics case to open on Nov 3

Supreme Court concludes hearing testimony from witnesses called by anti-graft body

The Supreme Court will begin hearing testimony on Nov 3 from defence witnesses in the ethics case brought against 44 former Move Forward Party MPs.

The five-judge panel on Tuesday finished hearing testimony from witnesses called by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC).

The 44 defendants are accused of serious ethical violations over the party’s proposal to amend the lese-majeste law. They face a lifetime ban from politics if the court upholds the complaint brought by the anti-graft body.

Ten of those named in the complaint are sitting members of the opposition People’s Party, the successor to Move Forward. They include party leader Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut.

Thirteen witnesses are reported to be on the defence’s list. The  first to testify will be Wiroj Lakkhanaadisorn, a former Move Forward party-list MP who is also a sitting People’s Party member.

Move Forward was dissolved by the Constitutional Court in August 2024 on grounds that its proposal to amend Section 112 of the Criminal Code, the lese-majeste law, represented a threat to national security.

Two witnesses testified at Tuesday’s hearing: Jirawat Aranyakanon, a former Move Forward MP for Bangkok who is now a Pheu Thai Party member, and Ekkapob Pianpises, a government spokesman and former Move Forward MP for Chiang Rai.

Mr Jirawat told the court that MPs signing their names to a proposal for a bill should understand its principles and rationale.

He said Move Forward had held meetings and invited academics to explain the proposed amendment, with members expressing differing views. Some supported it, while others opposed it. He said he did not attend subsequent meetings on the issue.

Political demonstrations were still taking place when the party proposed the amendment, Dr Ekkapob testified. Dozens of the protesters, many of them students, were charged under Section 112 and many have since been convicted and jailed. Some others faced sedition charges under Section 116.

Dr Ekkapob said he opposed the amendment in principle and eventually stopped attending meetings because he felt he could no longer work with the party. He also said eight MPs had refused to sign the proposal.

Defence lawyer Nithi La-iatdee said the defence maintains that the 44 MPs had not violated ethical standards. He said academic debate over problems with Section 112 and its enforcement had existed long before the proposal was submitted, disputing claims that the initiative originated during the 2020 protests.

Move Forward proposed shifting lèse-majesté from a crime against national security and the state to a crime against an individual, similar to ordinary defamation.

It also proposed reducing minimum and maximum sentences, and that only the royal household could initiate complaints.

Currently, any private citizen can file a Section 112 complaint against anyone else, which Move Forward said had led to abuses of the law for political purposes.