A Palace Protection Committee has criticized Move Forward and Pheu Thai leaders for calling for the Privy Council's dissolution, arguing their statements undermine the monarchy and threaten democratic governance.
At 11:30 a.m. on May 26, 2569 at Parliament, General Yuthana Thaiplit, a senator and chair of the Special Committee for the Protection and Veneration of the Monarchy under the Senate, led the committee in expressing opposition to statements by Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, secretary-general of the Move Forward Party, who called for the dissolution of the Privy Council. This followed the emergence of photos showing nine Privy Councillors meeting with the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, accompanied by a Facebook post from Pheu Thai claiming the government acted improperly and violated democratic principles.
Meanwhile, Nattapon Rueangpanyawit, list-based MP and Pheu Thai Party leader and opposition leader in Parliament, made statements in the case noting that Prime Minister Anutthin Charnvirakul should not exert political pressure. Nattapon further claimed that the call to dissolve the Privy Council contradicts democratic governance principles.
According to the Constitution, Article 10 grants the King authority to appoint the Privy Council and the duty to advise the monarchy. Article 11 specifies that selection, appointment, and removal follow the King's discretion. Article 12 stipulates that Privy Councillors must not hold political positions, be civil servants, or royal civil servants. Councillors also represent the King in royal affairs and monitor development projects benefiting the public before reporting to the monarchy. The Privy Council represents an ancient tradition.
The committee characterized Pheu Thai and its leaders' conduct as dangerous to democratic governance, attempting to misrepresent the Privy Council's role with intent to destabilize the monarchy institution. The committee noted this continues a pattern from Move Forward Party's previous proposals to amend Article 112 of the Criminal Code, which the Constitutional Court ruled aimed to diminish and reduce protection of the monarchy, constituting undermining that could lead to overthrowing democratic government.
The committee therefore called for accountability and urged against attacking or inciting misunderstandings about the institution.
Police Colonel Chaturvej Saengphet, serving as vice chair of the committee, stated that such actions do not constitute normal criticism but rather attempts to undermine public confidence in the nation's pillars and to insinuate connections to people around the institution, allowing society to draw hidden implications. He questioned whether such conduct amounts to insulting the monarchy or represents an indirect attempt to evade Article 112 charges.
He emphasized the committee's concern that the misrepresentation of the Privy Council as interfering and issuing unlawful government orders aims to make the public reject the council, leading to calls for its dissolution—an overstep of the monarchy institution that clearly demonstrates intent affecting the King.
The committee called on independent organizations and relevant agencies to consider such conduct and take appropriate action within their authority.
"I am concerned that such conduct by Pheu Thai leaders may impact the consideration of the 44-MP case currently in the Supreme Court, and the court did not previously order them to cease duties. Moreover, the court imposed conditional orders prohibiting repeated actions," Chaturvej said.