Thai Constitutional Court Plays Whack-A-Mole On Popular Party

This previous post posed the question - can Thailand move forward following the electoral victory of the Move Forward Party?

It seems not.

The recent Constitutional Court decision to dissolve the MFP over its election platform advocating reform of the lese-majeste provision under Thailand’s Criminal Code sends a clear message.

Reforming this provision to prevent its misuse as a political tool was only part of MFP’s bold plan to shake up the institutions of power in Thailand.  Their plans received broad electoral support, including winning all except one seat in Bangkok in the May 2023 election.

The Constitutional Court has now ruled that the reforms pose a threat to both the monarchy and the democratic form of government with the monarch as head of state.

The Court also imposed a 10 year ban on 11 members of the Party’s executive team.  Each remaining MFP MP must join another political party within 60 days or lose their status. (MFP was outmaneuvered following the 2023 election by Thaksin’s Pheu Thai Party and military aligned and other minor parties who formed the requisite majority.  Around this time, Thaksin returned to Thailand, ending 15 years in exile.)

A new successor party has quickly been established, the People's Party, which plans a similar reform platform ahead of the 2027 election.

The lese-majeste provision has been interpreted very broadly by Thai courts.  There have been examples where even a like on Facebook or a simple comment - ‘yeah’ (in Thai) in response to a social media post have fallen foul of the provision.  Lengthy jail terms have ensued.  Often, prosecutions have also involved a provision under the Computer Crime Act - entering false data in a computer system - effectively doubling the jail term.

Fourteen million Thais voted for MFP in the 2023 election, with broad support in Bangkok.  Voter reaction to the Constitutional Court’s decision remains unclear. However, any stumbles or overreaching by the Government may bring protesters back to the streets.  The Constitutional Court engaging in a game of whack-a-mole for every MFP successor party may have a similar effect.

Disbanded Thai Opposition Party Rebrands as ‘People’s Party’

August 2024

© PELEN 2024

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Can Thailand Move Forward?

The aptly named Move Forward Party has claimed victory in the recent Thai national elections.

But the biggest question is whether MFP and their coalition partners will be allowed to govern for a full term or will Thailand be subject to yet another military coup?

MFP's platform includes revision of the Lese Majeste laws often used as a political weapon to stifle dissent. It is not clear how quickly they will move on this reform and how it will be viewed in the corridors of power. The appointed members of the Senate under the most recent military-backed Constitution further complicate matters, including the appointment of MFP's nominee as Prime Minister.

Thailand has been the subject of many coups over the years. There's a running joke that, at some point, the Thai Navy should be allowed to mount a coup as the army takes the lead each time.

The most recent coups have been preceded by mass protests by rival groups wearing colours signifying support for their side of politics.

In 2006, yellow shirts protested the Thaksin Shinawatra government. The protests appeared to have run out of steam before Thaksin sold his stake in AIS mobile business to Singapore's Temasek Holdings after enacting a new law which increased the sector's foreign ownership limit from 25% to 49%. He also insisted no capital gains tax was payable on the approx. USD 1.88b sale proceeds. He was ousted in a coup in September 2006 and lives in exile in Dubai, periodically promising to return.

The shadow of Thaksin Shinawatra hung over the 2023 election with his daughter nominated as a Prime Ministerial candidate under the Pheu Thai banner.

In 2008, the yellow shirts blockaded Suvarnabhumi Airport, stranding many travellers. It was surreal travelling the empty highways at night to U-Tapao Airport near Pattaya which became the de facto international airport for rescue flights.

In 2010, the red shirts blockaded parts of central Bangkok. The military crackdown on 19 May saw the military use live fire to quell the protests. The dead included a Japanese journalist. Numerous buildings were set alight that day, including Central World shopping complex near the centre of the protests.

19 May was probably the only time a colleague will ring me early in the morning to let me know that she wanted to go to work that day but there was a tank outside her home.

2013 saw the yellow shirts back on the streets protesting the government led by Thaksin's sister, Yingluck. Once again, parts of central Bangkok were blocked. Protests continued in various forms until 22 May 2014 when another coup was launched. Yingluck also now lives in exile in Dubai.

The 2023 election result showed voters rejecting parties affiliated with the military, including those headed by the current PM and Deputy PM. The country wants to move forward but it is not clear whether the institutions of power will permit it.

MFP attention turns to Senate

May 2023

© PELEN 2023

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Australian PM's WeChat account hijack highlights risk in Asia dealings

News reports indicate that Prime Minister Scott Morrison's WeChat account - more likely his China Mainland Weixin account - has been hijacked.

As is often the case in Asia, everything is not always what it seems.

The PMs account appears to be a Weixin account, registered using a China Mainland mobile number. The registrant, a Mr Ji, seems to have been operating the account for the PM, a fairly common practice to circumvent Weixin user rules.

Mr Ji is alleged to have transferred the account (with its 75,000 followers) to Fuzhou 985 Information Technology in breach of Weixin rules. Tencent Weixin doesn't seem to care.

So, it seems it was never PM Morrison's account and he relied on Mr Li operating the account in good faith in accordance with his wishes.

Restrictions on foreigners doing business in Asia often requires the use of corporate structures or nominees to deliver control of an asset - whether a company or a social media account. The use of a bare nominee sits at the riskier end of the asset control spectrum, as PM Morrison seems to have found out.

With a bare nominee arrangement, the foreigner is reliant on the nominee acting in accordance with their wishes (usually for a fee), knowing that legally, in many Asian countries, there is no recourse if the nominee suddenly decides to act as if the asset (in this case, a social media account) is their own property to use or sell.

This issue often arises with shareholdings or land purchases. When things go wrong, the foreigner is unable to bring local court proceedings as they would need to rely on an illegal arrangement to prove their ownership.

Typically, the use of corporate structures with different voting rights delivers control while not offending local foreign ownership legislation which often focuses on shareholding percentages, and not control, as the determining factor.

However, this is less useful with social media accounts where a local phone number is required for registering the account. Key in these circumstances would be control of the phone number.

Chinese businessman reveals why he bought Scott Morrison's WeChat account

January 2022

© PELEN 2022

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.