The Constitutional Court has upheld the law governing the privatisation of state enterprises, dealing a major blow to opponents of the sell-off. The court ruled yesterday that the State Enterprise Corporatisation Act was not unconstitutional. The decision clears the way for the government to press ahead with the privatisation of enterprises deemed a financial burden on the state. Undaunted by the ruling, hardline leaders of state enterprise unions vowed to continue their protest against privatisation. Constitutional Court president Chao Saichua said the majority decision was not influenced by pressure from the government. The court took eight months to arrive at the ruling because it had to listen to all parties, he said.
The constitutionality of the Act was contested by 114 opposition MPs who demanded the court rule on three specific aspects: Article 27, Article 24, and Articles 13, 16 and 19. Article 27 empowers the cabinet to issue a royal decree to dissolve a state enterprise set up by virtue of an act or an executive decree. The opposition argued an enterprise set up by an act or an executive decree could not be dissolved by a royal decree, only by an act requiring parliamentary approval.
The court ruled that Article 27 was constitutional by eight votes to five. The eight votes in support were cast by Mr Chao, Chumphol na Songkhla, Lt-Gen Jul Atirek, Preecha Chalermvanich, Suvit Thirapong, Anant Katewong, Issara Nitithunpraphas and Ura Wang-omklang. The majority reasoned the cabinet did not dissolve an enterprise. The dissolution was a result of the royal decree. The decree was issued by virtue of the Act and was, therefore, valid. Cabinet was required to report to the Senate and the House about the promulgation of the decree.
Article 24 states the Finance Ministry will continue to guarantee the debts of an enterprise even if privatised. The opposition held that this was unfair as the ministry should not have shouldered the debt burden. With the exception of Chai-anan Samudvanija, the court agreed that the article was constitutional. Mr Chai-anan felt the ministry's continued guarantee of the debts incurred by a state enterprise constituted a privilege extended to a privatised enterprise.
Articles 13, 16 and 19 were challenged on the ground they went against Article 87. Mr Chai-anan thought the three articles did not serve the national interest. Article 87, according to Mr Chai-anan, required the state to protect public interest under a free economy.
Saneh Tantisanoh, secretary-general of the Federation of State Enterprise Labour Relations, said an urgent meeting of the federation committee would be held on Monday to discuss the court's ruling and to map out new strategies to fight against the privatisation law. "We respect the court's ruling, but the court cannot stop us from protesting against the law because it is our right to do so," Mr Saneh said. The ruling was a blessing in disguise as it would encourage state enterprise workers to unite more firmly,. "If we do not fight now, it will be difficult for us to fight in the future if state enterprises are already privatised," he said. Another labour leader said unions would put pressure on the prime minister to dissolve the parliament in the hope that the new government would review the privatisation policy.
State enterprise workers were urged to wear black in protest against the Constitution Court ruling which clears the way for the sell-off policy. The State Enterprise Relations Confederation called on the employees to gather in front of the Constitution Court on Monday to lay a wreath. The confederation decided yesterday to step up its campaign after the court rejected its challenge to the State Enterprise Corporatisation Act. Saneh Tantisanoh, the secretary- general, said the confederation would gather public support for its campaign and petition His Majesty the King for the establishment of a panel to examine details of the policy.The confederation would also seek assistance from Chai-anan Samudvanija, the dissenting judge.
Krit Nontharit, leader of Tourism Authority of Thailand workers, said the confederation had to protect the national interest. Mr Krit also voiced suspicions about the delay in the consideration and ruling process, saying the court was supposed to consider the issue on Nov 4. The ruling should not be treated as valid because the vote had not been unanimous, he said. The challenge came as the opposition accused the government of offering bribes to certain court members.
Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, the New Aspiration leader, said the government had offered to support some judges in the senate election if they ruled the Act to be constitutional. Ekkaporn Rakkuamsuk, a New Aspiration MP for Sakon Nakhon, said the first enterprises to be sold off included the national airline and power and telephone agencies. Under pressure from the International Monetary Fund, the government planned to turn a number of profitable agencies into public companies and then allow their takeover by foreigners, he said.
