"Parit" reiterates that 44 MPs who proposed the bill should not be disqualified from politics and vows to fight to the death at every step, with the future of the country at stake.

Today (1 April) at 10:00 AM at the Parliament, Mr. Parit Wacharasindhu, a list MP and spokesperson for the People's Party, gave an interview regarding the National Anti-Corruption Commission's (NACC) decision to file a case against 44 MPs with the Supreme Court. He stated that the actions of the former MPs of the Move Forward Party in proposing the bill should not lead to their disqualification from politics. The People's Party affirms that it will do its utmost to prove their innocence through legal processes and by explaining the situation to the public.

Mr. Parit further stated that regarding the legal procedures... The next step is for the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to file a case with the Supreme Court. If the court accepts the petition, it normally issues an order to suspend the individual from duty, unless ordered otherwise. Dr. Wayo Asavarungruang, Deputy Head of the party's legal affairs team and the main person responsible for this matter, has prepared measures and petitions to request that if the petition is accepted, it will not lead to a suspension from duty.

“However, I would like to speak on behalf of the 10 MPs who are currently serving as representatives of the people, elected to the 27th Parliament. They will continue to work to the best of their abilities until the moment an order to suspend their duties is issued,”Parit said.

Parit continued, emphasizing that the concern from this issue is not the future of the party but the future of the country. Therefore, they must reaffirm the principle that proposing legislation to the House of Representatives is something that MPs, regardless of political party or era, should be able to do. If the content of a proposed law is something that one side disagrees with, they can use the parliamentary process to discuss differing opinions and even outside of parliament to address those differences. Ultimately, if the majority disagrees with the content of the law, it will be rejected according to the process. This also applies if anyone challenges the content of the law as being unconstitutional. There are procedures in Parliament that allow for requests for interpretation.

“It must be emphasized that the introduction of legislation by MPs should not lead to the deprivation of political rights. If we accept this principle, the concern is what kind of House of Representatives we will have in the future, one that constantly worries about its ability to propose legislation,” Parit said.

When asked by reporters whether the revealed accusation that politics would not be democratic without an opposition leader could be refuted by arguing that the opposition leader could be someone other than Mr. Nattapong Ruangpanyawut, Parit clarified that he understood the issue raised by Dr. Wayo was a defense regarding whether there would be an order to suspend the MPs from their duties. He stated that their reasoning was based primarily on Dr. Wayo's explanation to ensure accuracy and consistency with the facts. While there may be an order to suspend them, he believes the bigger picture is that society is questioning and watching closely whether this process will ultimately result in a decision on whether the 44 MPs have committed any wrongdoing. Therefore, they must maintain that their actions, whether in agreement or disagreement with the legislation, should not be judged as wrongdoing and should not lead to the deprivation of political rights.

When asked about contingency plans for the case involving the 44 MPs and the upcoming meeting to determine the course of action, Mr. Parit said that it's too early to conclude that the 44 MPs have been disqualified. He stated that there has been no disqualification at this time and that they will proceed step by step. Currently, they are filing a petition. Whether the court accepts it or not, there will be an inquiry into the order to suspend their duties. Even if the court disagrees with the People's Party's petition, it doesn't mean the 44 MPs are guilty; they will have to fight the case in court, which will take time. He emphasized that if anyone is concerned about the future of the People's Party, he assures them that they have contingency plans for all scenarios. However, his greater concern is not the future of the People's Party but the future of the country and the Thai political system. He affirmed that if this happened to the 44 former MPs of the Move Forward Party, he would say the same thing because it's a principle that political parties should uphold together.

When asked further about his confidence in ensuring the accused can continue performing their duties during the trial, Mr. Parit said they are doing their best and will fight tooth and nail, but the outcome will be decided by the Supreme Court. He also clarified that the party's annual general meeting is a normal procedure even without political cases. This meeting was held to discuss with party members how to drive political progress for the country. It's clear that the People's Party is currently the leading opposition party. Whether other agenda items will be considered depends on the clarification of the Supreme Court's ruling.

“I think we've discussed the contingency plans several times already. The public is already aware of the possible scenarios. Mr. Nattapong has also spoken about this many times in interviews following the election. I want to use this space to reiterate that the concern isn't the future of the party but the future of the country. At this time, I want to use this platform to communicate this,” said Mr. Parit.

Photo : Weeraphat Ratsameerueangrong