Constitutional Court dismisses three petitions related to Senate election

The Constitutional Court on Thursday dismissed three petitions related to the controversial Senate election held last year. The court’s decision followed discussions among the nine judges, who concluded that the petitions did not meet the criteria for review or that the petitioners were not legally qualified to seek the court’s ruling.

Pinyo Boonruang’s Petition

The first complaint was submitted by Pinyo Boonruang, who opposed the Constitutional Court’s order on October 22, 2024, which had rejected his previous petition to annul the Senate election results. On Thursday, the court resolved that Pinyo’s new petition was effectively an appeal against the previous decision.

The judges pointed out that both the charter and the Organic Act on Procedures of the Constitutional Court B.E. 2561 (2018) prohibit appeals against the court’s rulings. Consequently, Pinyo’s new petition was dismissed.

Thanachoke Chavavit’s Petition

The second petition was lodged by Thanachoke Chavavit, who requested the Constitutional Court to rule that the Election Commission had committed malfeasance by allowing certain groups of senatorial candidates to collude in voting.

However, the judges determined that Thanachoke had filed the complaint with the wrong court. They explained that complaints regarding the results of the senatorial election should have been filed with the Supreme Court’s Election Division. Therefore, the court dismissed Thanachoke’s petition.

Kamrob Panyakaew’s Petition

The third petition was filed by Kamrob Panyakaew and associates, who sought to oppose the Constitutional Court’s earlier dismissal of their complaint. In their previous complaint, Kamrob and his associates had asked the court to disqualify Chattrawat Saengphet and others from being senators.

The court had previously ruled that Kamrob and his associates were not directly affected parties, and therefore, not qualified under the charter to submit the complaint.

On Thursday, the court reaffirmed its decision, stating that Kamrob and his associates were not qualified to file the complaint.

Additionally, the judges found that the new petition was an appeal against the earlier ruling, which is not permitted, and thus dismissed it.