The Constitutional Court has ordered not to accept the petition challenging the Prime Minister and Cabinet's referendum question on constitutional amendment, alleging it violates the court's ruling and constitutes an attempt to overthrow the government. The court noted the petition did not meet the required criteria and was merely an expression of opinion.
24 June 2026 GMT+7 The Constitutional Court unanimously resolved not to accept the petition for consideration. In the case where Ms. Natthida Nikrothangkul petitioned the Constitutional Court under Section 213 of the Constitution, she claimed that the Prime Minister and Cabinet organized a referendum on 8 February 2026 with the question, “Do you approve of drafting a new constitution?” which did not align with Constitutional Court ruling 18/2568 dated 10 September 2025. She argued this was a failure to perform duties according to Section 3, paragraph two of the Constitution and constituted an act leading to overthrowing the government through the referendum under Sections 49 and 50(7) of the Constitution.
The Constitutional Court found that the facts and supporting documents did not show the petitioner suffered direct infringement of rights or freedoms or was harmed by the actions of the respondents. It was merely the petitioner’s expression of opinion. Since the petition did not comply with the criteria, procedures, and conditions under Section 46, paragraph one of the Constitutional Court Procedure Act of 2018, the petitioner was therefore ineligible to file the petition under Section 213 of the Constitution.
Regarding the petitioner’s claim that the respondents’ actions amounted to overthrowing the government through the referendum under Sections 49 and 50(7) of the Constitution, the court noted that the facts and supporting documents did not show the petitioner had submitted a request to the Attorney General to ask the Constitutional Court to order cessation of such actions, as required under Section 49, paragraph two of the Constitution. Therefore, the petitioner could not file the petition under Section 49 of the Constitution.