Latest hurdle for Thai election winner centers on media shares

By Patpicha Tanakasempipat Bloomberg News

A s the leader of the Move Forward party tries to rally support for his coalition, a saga around his alleged ownership of media shares has gripped the nation, stoking speculation about whether the 42-year-old Harvard graduate will be disqualified for breaching election rules. The dispute comes on top of Pita’s struggle to get members of the military-appointed Senate to support his premiership, with his alliance still short of the 376 votes needed from both houses of parliament to choose the next leader. At the same time, Pita has stuck to a campaign vow to try to amend Article 112 of Thailand’s criminal code, which punishes criticism of the king and other top royals by up to 15 years in prison. That stance has riled the royalist military and political establishment. Here’s what you need to know about this saga:

What’s it all about?

JUST days before Thailand’s elec- tion, political activist Ruangkrai Leekitwattana lodged a complaint with the Election Commission, seeking a Constitutional Court ruling on whether Pita had violated a provision of the Thai charter that forbids anyone who holds shares in or owns a media company from seeking to take part in an election to parliament.

Ruangkrai alleged that Pita held 42,000 shares in long-defunct broadcaster ITV Pcl and argued that such ownership was grounds for disqualification.

In response, Pita downplayed the issue, calling the complaint a politically motivated effort to hinder Move Forward’s rise. He said he was legally prepared to clarify the issue if summoned by the Election Commission. Pita also said he didn’t own the shares but only managed them as part of an estate left behind by his father, who passed away in 2006.

How has Pita reacted recently?

AFTER Pita’s party beat pre-elec- tion expectations and won the most seats in the May 14 vote, Ruangkrai didn’t stop. He kept filing what he claimed to be more evidence that showed Pita violated the charter. Meanwhile, the Election Commission remained largely silent on whether it would accept or dismiss the complaints.

L ast week saw a shift in Pita’s tone when he announced he had transferred the ITV shares to another family member. That move, he said, wasn’t an admission of guilt but meant to pre-empt what he called efforts to “revive” ITV to be an active media company in order to disqualify him.

Pita also insisted ITV couldn’t be considered a media company since it hasn’t operated since 2007, when its government contract was ended and it lost access to its radio frequency.

Is ITV a media company?

DEBATE is still raging over this question. ITV started its television operation in 1995 under a 30-year government contract but went into a legal battle with the Prime Minister’s Office in 2002, causing its contract to be terminated in 2007.

A separate legal battle over the termination of the contract has continued to this day. In its 2022 annual report, ITV said it “used to” operate a television station and “had to cease” that operation in 2007. The company was de-listed from the Stock Exchange of Thailand in 2014.

Most legal experts have said ITV’s annual reports and financial documents showed the company is not in operation and not deriving revenue from media operations, and therefore can’t still be considered a media business. But Pita’s rivals say that as long as the company hasn’t formally closed, then it is still a media venture.

What are the latest developments?

IN the latest twist, local television show 3 Miti News had broadcast a report showing discrepancies between what was said at ITV’s annual general meeting in April and what was written in the subsequent meeting minutes. According to the publicly available meeting report, one shareholder asked if ITV was operating in the media space and Kim Siritaweechai, the president at parent company Intouch Holdings who chaired the meeting, said yes.

However, parts of the video recording of the meeting, which the local outlet said it obtained from a shareholder, showed Kim also saying no and citing the ongoing legal battle as a reason. Intouch Holdings has since told the stock exchange it will “investigate the facts of these issues.”

L ater on Monday, Move Forward’s secretary-general claimed foul play, alleging an intricate plot to thwart Pita that began before the election and involving what he called a falsification of the ITV meeting report. He pointed to “irregularities” in ITV’s 2022 financial statement that differed from submissions in previous years by stating its business as media and its product as advertising—a move made on the same day as Ruangkrai’s original complaint.

What has the Election Commission said?

LAST week, local media reported that the six-member Election Commission threw out Ruangkrai’s media shares complaint alongside two others and instead said it would pursue its own probe to determine whether Pita had applied to take part in the May 14 election despite knowing he was not eligible. If found guilty, Pita could face a penalty of as much as 10 years in prison and a ban from politics for 20 years.

What does this mean for Pita and his coalition?

IT’S not clear if the Election Commission will formalize a case against Pita after its investigation. Cases under Article 151 of Thailand’s election law are tried in criminal courts, not the Constitutional Court. Those procedures can take months or years, and the case could be dismissed at a number of different stages before it even reaches the judges.

Th at means that Pita could be certified as a member of parliament by next month and still be nominated by his coalition to serve as prime minister.

For now, Pita’s potential disqualification can’t be ruled out. Another article in the constitution allows the Election Commission or a group consisting of 10 percent of lawmakers in either chamber to ask the nation’s top court to determine whether a particular legislator is ineligible to hold office and to order his or her tenure terminated.

Th at’s a low bar in the 500-member lower house, where the conservative parties now hold 188 seats. Such a petition can be submitted as soon as a new house speaker is chosen and before the selection of prime minister.

Pita’s troubles are growing. He has yet to muster enough support to become prime minister while he faces potential legal challenges that could keep him from ever rising to or holding on to power.

It doesn’t help that Thailand has a history of disqualifying lawmakers and disbanding pro-democracy parties. Move Forward’s predecessor, Future Forward, was disbanded after the 2019 election. Its leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, then prime-minister candidate of the opposition bloc, was disqualified after the Constitutional Court found him guilty of holding media shares on the date he registered his candidacy.

Pita reiterated on Tuesday that Move Forward has anticipated every scenario to block his path to power and is prepared to fight any challenges. “ We have prepared evidence and legal arguments and we’re ready to fight when we really have to enter the process,” said Pita.

What’s the fuss about bringing Afghans to the Philippines?

Continued from A1 standing tradition of providing humanitarian assistance to people who are being persecuted.

The Philippines had hosted refugees fleeing war such as the 30,000 European Jews during World War II, South Vietnamese during the Vietnam War, 30,000 Kuomintang members during the Chinese Civil War, and “White Russians” during the Socialist Revolution in 1917.

What’s the fuss?

TWO major considerations were raised during the interagency meetings and Senate hearings:

1. Security issue

Vice President and Education Secretary Sara Duterte, the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (Nica), the National Bureau of Investigation and the National Commission on Muslim Filipinos “vehemently opposed” the proposal for Afghans to be temporarily housed in the Philippines. The NBI and Nica think there may be “sleeper terrorist cells” among the Afghan communities and may be activated while here in the Philippines. The NCMF, meanwhile, thinks chances of “sleeper cells” among the SIV applicants are little. But they fret that sympathizers among the Muslim rebel groups in the Philippines may feel that their Afghan Muslim brothers and sisters would be discriminated against by restricting their movements.

“We are not particularly concerned about sleepers, but more of being targets of an attack,” Atty.

Manggay Guro Jr., NCMF chief of staff, said. “As much as we like to welcome the Afghans, because they are brothers and sisters in faith, but with the discussions ongoing, we are not sure about their protection.”

2. Sovereignty and visa policy

Vice President Duterte thinks allowing the US to solely vet the integrity of the Afghan applicants may impinge on the sovereignty of the Philippines.

“It seems that the vetting process may be done by the US. We think it is interference to our exclusive determination of who can enter into our country,” Michael Wesley Poa, DepEd Undersecretary and chief of staff, told senators, quoting the position paper signed by Vice President Duterte.

Foreign Affairs Undersecretary

Ma. Teresa Lazaro said the initial US proposal is for the Afghan refugees to be flown directly from Kabul to the Philippines. But this setup may be another major logistical concern for the Philippine government because of its visa policy.

Cu rrently, the Afghans are considered Category A or restricted nationals. This means they must be interviewed face-to-face by the Philippine consul.

Since there is no Philippine Embassy in Afghanistan, they would need to be flown to the Embassy that has jurisdiction over Afghanistan—in Islamabad, which has a very limited number of consular staff.

Manalo stressed that the US and the Philippines have not entered into a negotiation yet. These issues, among other things, are still subject to interagency approval.

Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro said at the Senate hearing that while he was still new in office, he felt that the issue might put the Philippines in a very precarious damned-if-you-do-damned-if-youdon’t situation.

There are ways to make things legally permissible, but we have to anticipate the what-ifs,” Teodoro said. “We have to bring on the other side [US] and be certain that they are ready, willing and able to execute their undertakings.”

• Editor: Vittorio V. Vitug

By Samuel P. Medenilla

PRESIDENT Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. said the country is expected to produce better farm outputs this year with the distribution of 20,000 metric tons of urea fertilizer donated by China.

T he government received the 400,000 bags of fertilizers in a turnover ceremony attended by Marcos and Chinese ambassador to the Philippines Huang Xilian at the National Food Authority warehouse in Valenzuela City last Friday.

T he fertilizer will be distributed to 160,000 rice and corn farmers in Regions 1, 2, 3, 4A, and in Bicol via vouchers to be issued by local government units (LGU).

“It will tremendously aid our efforts to boost agricultural production, our nation’s pursuit of food security,” Marcos said in his speech during the event.

Value of relationship

HE said the donation was part of the commitment of Chinese President Xi Jinping during their meeting in Beijing in January amid rising fertilizer prices worldwide.

T he President thanked China for the fertilizers as well as its recent P4 million worth of donated rice for relief goods for evacuees in the Mayon Volcano area.

China sent the donations with the commemoration of the 48th anniversary of the formal Philippines-China diplomatic relations.

“These generous acts symbolize the value of the relationship between our two countries. We must continue to nurture. We must continue to care for that, through acts of mutual assistance and of constant and amicable dialogue,” Marcos said.

Structural changes

THE President said he hopes to maintain agricultural partnerships with China as he implements structural changes in the Department of Agriculture (DA).

Mar cos, the concurrent DA secretary, assured he will put in place measures that can guarantee supply and affordable prices of food and help farmers make more profit before he considers a new head for the department.

Some of the structural changes, he said, were already put in place, which helped the country’s “food supply crisis” earlier this year.

Due to the pending reforms, he said, none of the current senior DA officials have volunteered to become the new agriculture secretary.

“So until we can complete [those structural changes], I suppose you will have to put up with me as DA Secretary,” Marcos told reporters in an interview last Friday.