Showing 1 - 2 of 2
FFP was singled out
Oped, Postbag, Published on 14/03/2020
» Re: "It's not just about FFP", (PostBag, March 12). Khun Piya Samyan defends the Constitutional Court dissolving the Future Forward Party, because "it did violate the law regarding acquisition of income". This is about the "rule of law that is equally applied to all". I fully agree with Khun Piya that the law must be applied without fear or favour -- for if not, the government would be weaponising the law to slay its enemies, so to speak.
Ruling is inconsistent
News, Postbag, Published on 27/02/2020
» I agree with the spirit of the Constitutional Court's verdict on the FFP's loan saga: loans should be considered as contributions. But have the Thai Election Commission or courts previously ruled that loans are, legally speaking, contributions? The Bangkok Post's Feb 21 editorial said: "The EC never ... informed political parties that there are regulations barring them from taking out loans. That's because there are no such rules." Also, if we had such specific and clear rules and laws, our EC and CC would have explicitly based their decisions on them, quoting the section -- but that's not the case.