Thailand’s Constitutional Court suspended Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra from office on Tuesday pending an investigation over a leaked phone call with a senior Cambodian leader.
The judges voted unanimously on Tuesday to take the petition accusing her of a breach of ethics and voted seven to two to suspend her from duty as prime minister. The court gave Paetongtarn 15 days to give evidence to support her case, according to the South China Morning Post.
Paetongtarn has faced growing dissatisfaction over her handling of the latest border dispute with Cambodia, involving an armed confrontation on May 28 in which one Cambodian soldier was killed.
The leaked phone call while she engaged in diplomacy over the border dispute set off a string of complaints and public protests.
“The ruling has come out and I accept the court’s decision,” Paetongtarm told reporters at Bangkok’s Government House after the court order. “I’d like to reiterate that it’s always been my intention to do the best thing for my country.”
The Constitutional Court’s decision meant that Paetongtarn was temporarily suspended from her duties as prime minister, said Purawich Watanasukh, a political scientist at the Thammasat University in Bangkok.
“An acting prime minister will assume her duties until the court delivers its final ruling, which may take some time,” he told This Week in Asia.
“In the longer term, the government’s stability is likely to become even more fragile due to the uncertainty surrounding Paetongtarn’s situation.”
It was expected that Deputy Prime Minister Suriya Jungrungruangkit would become the acting prime minister following Paetongtarn’s suspension, although there was no immediate official confirmation.
The Constitutional Court last year removed her predecessor, Srettha Thavisin, over a breach of ethics. Thailand’s courts, especially the Constitutional Court, are viewed as a bulwark of the royalist establishment, which has used them and nominally independent agencies such as the Election Commission to cripple or sink political opponents.
Purawich said the petition submitted to the Constitutional Court against Paetongtarn was based on the same ethical grounds that led to the disqualification of Srettha by the court last year.
Earlier on Tuesday, King Maha Vajiralongkorn had endorsed a cabinet reshuffle forced when a major party left Paetongtarn’s coalition government over the leaked phone call.
The reshuffle replaced former deputy prime minister Anutin Charvirakul, leader of the Bhumjaithai Party, which had held several cabinet positions in her government.
Paetongtarn took the position of culture minister in addition to prime minister in the new cabinet. She said she wanted to promote Thai culture on a global scale. It is unclear if she can take the oath to remain in that role.
Paetongtarn also faces investigations over an alleged breach of ethics by the Office of the National Anti-Corruption Commission, whose decision could also lead to her removal.
Outrage over the call mostly revolved around Paetongtarn’s comments towards an outspoken regional army commander and her perceived attempts to appease Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen to ease tensions at the border.
Thousands of conservative, nationalist-leaning protesters rallied in central Bangkok on Saturday to demand Paetongtarn’s resignation.
Separately on Tuesday, her father Thaksin Shinawatra arrived at a criminal court in Bangkok to face accusations of breaching strict lèse-majesté laws used to shield Thailand’s king from criticism.
The allegations stem from a 2015 interview he gave to South Korean media and he faces up to 15 years in jail if convicted. The trial is set to last for weeks, with a verdict not expected for at least a month after that.
A court official confirmed the trial began on Tuesday morning with Thaksin in attendance but said the media would not be allowed in.
“I can’t speak on his behalf about how he feels, but I think he seems chill,” his lawyer Winyat Chatmontri said outside court.
Thai political analyst Thitinan Pongsudhirak said “there is a direct undeniable linkage between the two cases” as the brand of the Shinawatra family faces “a critical dilution”.
