Legal Problems from Disqualifications from the Right to Stand for Election as a Member of the House of Representatives According to the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560: A Case Study of Disqualifying Candidates with Final Court Judgments

Abstract

Members of the House of Representatives, as bearers of legislative authority representing constituents, must undergo initial vetting to ensure that they possess the requisite qualifications and are not subject to disqualification. This safeguard ensures that office holders maintain publicly acceptable conduct and characteristics, perform duties honestly in the public interest, free from misconduct, while upholding the dignity of the House of Representatives. Accordingly, anyone convicted by a final court judgment of offenses within the scope of disqualifications stipulated in Section 98 (10) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560 (2017) is deemed unfit to be entrusted with such a position, due to lack of assurance regarding integrity and unimpeachable conduct. However, such provisions by their nature restrict individual rights. It may be appropriate and necessary to use disqualification to select candidates suitable for assuming responsibilities in the public good by measures that partly curtail individual rights for the sake of political appropriateness. Yet the substantive criteria stipulated in the aforementioned provision remain vague and disproportionate. There is an imbalance between the broadly framed definition of disqualifying offenses and imposing an indefinite prohibition on the right to stand for election.

There are also concerns about candidates who have undergone legal rehabilitation or been pardoned. Despite such redress, under the present wording of the provision they are still considered as convicted by final judgment and falling within the scope of disqualification. As such, the provision in question results in excessive limitation on the fundamental political right to stand for election as a Member of the House of Representatives, especially when compared to other disqualification provisions of a similar nature. Therefore, to uphold human rights principles and ensure that enforcement of constitutional intent on disqualifications for candidates to public office is effective and equitable, legal provisions governing the scope of disqualification based on final court judgments should be amended and refined. Such revisions should set a clear, consistent legal standard promoting ethical, effective leadership, and ensure that relevant provisions cohere with Thailand’s current socio-economic context.