In a message and a video clip on his Facebook page on Friday (January 17), he highlighted the party’s strategy with the Constitutional Court set to pronounce its verdict on January 21 in a case filed by a lawyer, Nuttaporn Toprayoon.

Nuttaporn on June 18, 2019 accused FWP leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, party secretary-general Piyabutr Saengkanokkul and four FWP board members of attempting to overthrow the democratic regime with the King as the head of state.

Piyabutr said that if his party were to be dissolved, he and Thanathorn would continue working in the political field but he warned of three harmful after-effects:

1 Dissolving Future Forward would destroy Thai people’s hopes of seeing a better political system.

2 A clash of generations in Thai society will be heightened.

3 Most importantly, this will be another example of the royal institution being used to eliminate political opponents, which could drive more people to be on the opposite side of royal supporters.

Piyabutr invited his supporters to a seminar named “Future is Now” on Saturday (January 18) at SC3 Building, Thammasat University (Rangsit Campus).

Attawit posted on his Facebok page that he had submitted his resignation from the party on Thursday.

Another Democrat stalwart, former finance minister Korn Chatikavanij, had ended his 15-year association with the party on Wednesday.

“I would like to thank the party and the public for supporting me all these years,” he said. “It is a hard decision to leave this longstanding party with a strong foundation of political ideology.”

Attawit further added that he wished to see Thai politics become more clear and concise, ready to adapt to changes in the modern world. “I want to see a political startup that dares to break through the old-fashioned administration style and comprises of people from all occupations working together to drive the nation forward.

“I have discussed with Korn and agreed that it is time for us to start the change in the political arena, and would like to invite everyone who believes in the same goal to join us,” he added.

Attawit worked closely with Korn in the party’s economic team.

He joined the Democrat Party in 2008 and won the national election from Bangkok’s Constituency 4 for member of Parliament in the same year.

Many have speculated that Korn and Attawit might form a new political party after leaving the Democrats.

Korn made the announcement on Tuesday (January 14) evening, when members of Parliament and former MPs of the Democrat Party organised a New Year’s party for its former leader and ex-PM Abhisit Vejjajiva.

More than 50 stalwarts, including party-list MP Korn, Agriculture Minister and party secretary-general Chalermchai Sri-On, Deputy Public Health Minister and party deputy leader Sathit Pitudecha, and another deputy leader, Ongart Klampaiboon, attended the event. Notable by his absence at the party was current Democrat leader Jurin Laksanawisit, as well as MPs considered close to him.

Korn got on the stage and sang “Rak Ther Sameu” (I’ll always love you), a hit song from 1990s in tears. He was joined by others, who were also in tears. When the song ended, Abhisit gave him a hug.

Korn said the reason for his resignation was he thought he had already fulfilled his duty as an MP after the 2020 Budget Act had been approved by Parliament. Korn joined the Democrat Party in 2005 and served for 15 consecutive years.

Before the event concluded, Abhisit gave a speech encouraging all MPs to maintain the political ideology of the party and commit to solving the country’s problems. He vowed to assist all party members in any way he could, provided they did not go against his beliefs and ideology. “Our bonds are stronger than any crises,” he said. “I wish all of you a good year, good health and good commitment to progress forward together.”

Srisuwan, the secretary-general of the Association for the Protection of the Constitution, said video clips of the “Run against Dictatorship” event clearly showed that the running activity at the Railway Park was an unlawful rally. Srisuwan said the leader on the stage egged the participants on to shout “Prayut, go out” with a three-finger symbol. It can be argued that the rally was not peaceful under the Thai Public Assembly Act, Section 6, he said. Srisuwan said it was the duty of the head of the Phahonyothin Police Station to enforce the law according to Section 13.

Meanwhile, evidence from the “Walking for Prayut” event also points to activities at Lumpini Park that were unlawful, Srisuwan said. He said the organisers were unable to control the people and the participants were allowed to bring posters of famous politicians for trampling besides the use of three different fruits, oranges, watermelons and strawberries — symbols mostly related to the opposition Future Forward Party — with shouting and cheering. Clapping, applauding and shouting are not regarded as a peaceful assembly according to the Thai Public Assembly Act Section 6 although the organisers had notified police about the activity, he said. He added that it was the duty of the chief of the Lumpini Police Station to comply with the law according to Section 13.

He and his supporters had rallied on the Pathumwan skywalk on December 14 after the Election Commission asked the Constitutional Court to dissolve the party.

Thanathorn is accused of loaning the party Bt191 million in alleged violation of electoral law.

Pathumwan police summonsed Thanathorn on December 27, saying his rally had violated the 2015 Public Assembly Act.

On Friday he sought to test his limitations again.

Posting on @Thanathorn_FWP, he invited supporters to gather at the police station at 3pm.

“They tried to scare us, put us in despair,” he tweeted. “But we are not afraid, we will not surrender. No one can take away our dream. Please join me to demonstrate our power from 3pm onward at Pathumwan Police Station.”

On Thursday (December 26) the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases read the Supreme Court’s ruling on the case that saw the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NCAA) suing Benja Louichareon, a former deputy finance minister, and four other persons for abusing their authority to help Panthongtae and Pinthongta Shinawatra, the children of former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, evade income taxes on their sale of Shin Corp shares in 2006 valued at approximately Bt7.9 billion each.

The Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s verdict but reduced the jail term of five defendants to two years unsuspended instead of the 3 years given by the Appeal Court.

Benja was a deputy finance minister and deputy director of Revenue Department during Yingluck’s administration. The other 4 defendants are Jamras Yaemsoithong, Moleerat Boonyasiri and Krit Wipulanusas from the Revenue Department’s legal affairs office, and Pranee Wetprugpitak, a personal secretary to Khun Ying Potjaman Na Pombejra, former wife of Thaksin.

On December 3, 2015 they were sued for violation of Section 157 of Criminal Code: Abusing their authority resulting in evasion or underpayment of taxes. In 2006 Panthongtae and Pinthongta Shinawatra each bought 164,600,000 shares of Shin Corporation at the par price of Bt1 per share and sold them at market price of Bt49.25 per share. According to Section 39 of Revenue Code, the sellers must pay tax on the difference in share prices, which in this case stacks up to almost Bt8 billion each.

Amnesty International was referring to the one-hour flash mob protest on December 14 at the Pathumwan skywalk in Bangkok, led by Future Forward Party (FWP) leader, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, who said that the gathering of his supporters was just a precursor to the “real rally” in January.

After the event, Thanathorn and FWP members were summoned by the authorities for possible violation of laws in organizing the flash mob. Amnesty International therefore urged Thai government to stop using the provisions of the Public Assembly Act that excessively restrict the right to peaceful assembly, and Article 116 – Thailand’s sedition law – which is extensively used to stifle peaceful dissent of activists, human rights defenders, journalist and lawyer.

Thanathorn decided to organize the event after the Election Commission petitioned the Constitutional Court to dissolve Future Forward Party over Thanathorn’s Bt191-million loan, which it alleged was illegal for a political party. On November 20, the Constitutional Court unseated Thanathorn as a member of Parliament. The court ruled that he had registered to run in the March election while still holding shares in a media company, in violation of the law.

The full statement is as follow:

THAILAND: DROP CHARGES AGAINST OPPOSITION MEMBERS AND ACTIVISTS HOLDING ‘FLASH MOBS’

Amnesty International calls for an end to judicial harassment of the political opposition, human rights defenders and activists in Thailand, as authorities began new criminal proceedings against members of the Future Forward Party and activists because of their recent peaceful protests.

The charges came after tens of thousands of Thais took to the streets on the evening of 14 December for a one-hour flash mob protest in Bangkok, as well as in Chiang Mai, Khon Kaen, and other provinces in northern and northeastern Thailand. These peaceful protests followed the Election Commission’s announcement, on 11 December, that it would recommend that the Constitutional Court order the Future Forward Party’s dissolution.

The Thai authorities have filed a series of unwarranted charges against senior leaders of the Future Forward Party, including its leader, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit. A new opposition party, the Future Forward Party won 81 seats in the 2019 general elections. Both prior and subsequent to the elections, the authorities initiated measures to dissolve the Future Forward Party and disqualify Thanathorn as a member of parliament.

On the day of the protest, police charged party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and others with unlawful gathering in public and unlawful use of speakers under the Public Assembly Law.

On Monday, 16 December, Sonthiya Sawasdee, an MP for the majority Palang Pracharath Party, filed a lawsuit against four Future Forward members – leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, spokesperson Pannika Wanich, secretary Piyabutr Saengkanokkul and MP Pita Limjaroenrat. The suit accused the defendants of failing to notify authorities of the gathering, organizing a gathering within a 150 metre of the Royal Court and blocking access to public places; sedition under national security-related Section 116 of the Criminal Code; and violation of the royal institution under Article 6 of the Thai Constitution. If convicted, the party members would face a maximum of seven years’ imprisonment.

In Chiang Mai, the administrator of the Liberal Assembly of Chiang Mai University for Democracy Facebook page–a separate group promoting the protest – was also charged with failure to submit a protest notice to authorities 24 hours prior to the event. This provision under the Public Assembly Law carries a maximum fine of THB 10,000 (approx. USD 3,300) and has been repeatedly used by the authorities to intervene and suppress gatherings throughout Thailand since its enactment under the military government in 2015.

Amnesty International calls on the authorities to stop using the provisions of the Public Assembly Act that excessively restrict the right to peaceful assembly, and Article 116 – Thailand’s sedition law –which is extensively used to stifle peaceful dissent of activists, human rights defenders, journalist and lawyer. These provisions should be repealed or amended to be in line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations and commitments. The authorities must fully respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association.

Section 72 prohibits political parties and their officers from receiving donation of money or assets from any sources which they know are unlawful or have reasonable doubts of it being unlawful.

Section 92(3) allows the Constitutional Court to consider dissolving any political party that violates Section 72.

In the next step, the court will send a copy of the petition to FWP, giving it an opportunity to explain the allegation within 15 days after receiving the copy.

On December 11, the Election Commission filed a petition to the Constitutional Court, asking it to consider dissolving FWP over a loan of Bt191 million from its leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit to the party which may have violated the election and political party laws.

Regarding the petition made by lawyer Nuttaporn Toprayoon on June 18, accusing FWP leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, FWP secretary-general Piyabutr Saengkanokkul and four FWP board members of attempting to overthrow the democratic regime with the king as the head of state according to Section 49 in the 2017 Constitution, the court said the case had enough evidences for the trial to continue without further investigation, according to Section 58(1) of the Constitutional Court’s Trial Procedures Organic Law B.E. 2561.

The Constitutional Court therefore will continue the trial and will read its verdict on Tuesday (January 21) at 11.30 am.

Thanathorn claimed the defendants unfairly rushed the investigation of the case involving him holding shares in V-Luck Media, which has caused him damage, forcing him to lose his MP status and defaming him.

The Election Commission investigation eventually led to a Constitutional Court verdict which saw Thanathorn losing his member of Parliament status on May 23. The court found he had registered to run in the March election while holding shares in a media company, in violation of the law.

Other core Future Forward members – secretary-general Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, spokeswoman Pannika Wanich and MP Pitha Limcharoenrat – have not received any summon yet.

Officers sent a letter of request to the Parliament president to issue a warrant for both Thanathorn and Pirattachot.

Pakkapong affirmed that there is no persecution in this case.

Police have accused them of violence under the Public Assembly Act of 2015, gathering without seeking permission, blocking or obstructing people from accessing a train station, obstructing the public from using a public place or causing unreasonable inconvenience to any person, and using an electric amplifier without notifying the police.