Thailand's Supreme Court has accepted an ethics case against 44 former Move Forward Party lawmakers who attempted to amend the kingdom's strict lèse majesté law, but declined to suspend the 10 who now serve as People's Party MPs—a decision that suggests judicial restraint after years of aggressive party dissolutions.
The court's April 23 decision, reported by Thai PBS World, allows the MPs to continue performing their duties while the National Anti-Corruption Commission's case proceeds. The case stems from the lawmakers' 2021 effort to reform Article 112 of Thailand's criminal code, which punishes perceived insults to the monarchy with up to 15 years in prison per offense.
That the court did not suspend the MPs is the news. After the Constitutional Court dissolved the Move Forward Party in August 2024 for the same lèse majesté reform campaign—ruling that even proposing amendments constituted an attempt to overthrow the constitutional monarchy—many observers expected the Supreme Court to sideline the rebranded People's Party's current legislators immediately.
Instead, the court is allowing the case to proceed without preemptive punishment, a departure from recent precedent. The Move Forward dissolution followed the 2020 disbanding of Future Forward Party on a technicality about a loan from its founder. Before that, Thai courts dissolved Thai Raksa Chart in 2019 for nominating a princess as prime ministerial candidate.
The People's Party, which won the most seats in the 2023 general election before being blocked from forming a government by the military-appointed Senate, now faces the same legal threat that killed its predecessor. But the court's decision not to suspend MPs suggests at least some recognition that Thailand's decade-long cycle of voting for reformist parties only to see them judicially eliminated cannot continue indefinitely.
For the 10 current MPs, the reprieve is temporary. The ethics case will proceed, and Thailand's courts have shown little hesitation to rule against parties that challenge royal prerogatives. But in a political system where court decisions have become the primary check on electoral outcomes, not suspending legislators is, paradoxically, a form of progress.
