Constitutional Court Unanimously Rejects Petition on MOA, Citing Insufficient Evidence

On 19 November, 2025, Thailand’s Constitutional Court has unanimously rejected a petition seeking a ruling on the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed between the Bhumjaithai Party and the People’s Party, concluding that the document constituted only a political declaration of intent and did not contain actions aimed at overthrowing the democratic regime with the King as Head of State, as stipulated under Section 49 of the Constitution.

The ruling was issued following a judicial conference held today, in response to a petition filed by Niyom Nopparat. The petition accused Bhumjaithai Party leader Anutin Charnvirakul and People’s Party leader Nattapong Rueangpanyawut, of jointly drafting an MOA containing two key commitments: for People’s Party MPs to support Anutin as Prime Minister, and for Nattapong to serve in the role of Leader of the Opposition.

The petitioner argued that the MOA was part of a larger attempt to pave the way for drafting or amending a new constitution without following the proper procedures outlined in Chapter 15 of the current Constitution. He further alleged that the agreement represented an unconstitutional acquisition of executive power, forced MPs to act under party-imposed mandates or influence, and involved a pre-arranged exchange of political benefits. These actions, he claimed, violated Section 114 and amounted to using constitutional rights and freedoms to undermine the democratic regime, in breach of Section 49.

However, the Constitutional Court found that the MOA amounted only to “a negotiation or joint political declaration of intent,” not a binding agreement that allowed for political domination or coercion of MPs. The Court stated that there was no clear or sufficient evidence to support the allegations that the two political leaders had acted with the intention of overthrowing the constitutional monarchy.

The Court further noted that the petition did not meet the criteria required under Section 49 and therefore could not be accepted for deliberation. As a result, all related requests connected to the petition were dismissed.

Earlier, Niyom had submitted the same complaint to the Office of the Attorney General. The OAG declined to pursue the matter, stating that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the actions described in the MOA sought to undermine the democratic regime with the King as Head of State.

Copywriter: Siam Associated Press (SAP) Editorial Department
Pictures: Some illustrations come from the Internet. If there is any infringement, please contact us to delete it.
Source of material: official media /online news