More than one month has passed since the May 14 general election, and yet Move Forward Party (MFP) leader Pita Limjaroenrat's future is still hanging in the air as the controversy over his iTV shares, among other things, may nullify his bid to become prime minister.
The lingering uncertainty over the premiership and the formation of a coalition government is bad news, not only for politics but for the economy. Yet the Election Commission (EC) has played along with the game set by the conservatives, shrugging off concerns by local and international investors over the potentially adverse impact this may have.
Mr Pita and the MFP sympathisers will have to keep holding their collective breath, given signs that the pro-establishment factions are defiantly refusing to throw the towel -- despite their loss in the general election. The iTV share controversy that erupted just days before the election is one of those signs.
Whistleblower Ruangkrai Leekitwattana, a former member of the Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP), broke the news to the public just days before the election, with the apparent aim of shooting down the MFP. Yet his effort backfired as the party won a huge victory.
MFP opponents were well aware of Mr Pita's potential vulnerability relating to his alleged ownership of iTV shares, given its grey status as a media company. The businessman-cum-politician took the baton from Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit of the now-dissolved Future Forward Party (FFP), who was deprived of his MP status over what was seen by the charter court as his ownership of media shares, shortly after he was sworn into parliament.
While Mr Pita's iTV shares -- which he claims he was only holding as the executor of his father's estate, and which he has since transferred to relatives -- and Mr Thanathorn's V-Luck shares differ in details, the MFP leader may end up facing the same fate as his predecessor.
The 2017 constitution prohibits a shareholder of a media business from running in an election in order to prevent politicians from influencing media coverage.
It could be said the iTV case is unfolding in favour of Mr Pita and the MFP, as recent reports show there is a discrepancy in the official minutes of an iTV shareholders' meeting and a video clip of the event that took place on April 26.
The deliberate discrepancy attests to the fact that some political elements, apparently unnerved by the MFP's bold policies, want to boot the MFP leader out of the political realm at all costs.
Mr Pita decided to offload the shares to his kin late last month, in what he explained was a preemptive move citing possible attempts by others to revive iTV as a media agency in order to strengthen the case against him. If he loses, it would be a political death sentence for the 42-year-old who otherwise looks poised to govern the country.
The truth is that even a young child would understand Mr Pita does not directly benefit from the iTV shares in any way. The term "ownership" is up for debate, as Mr Pita said the shares were inherited from his late father over a decade ago, and he was only the executor of the estate. Moreover, the 42,000 shares -- 0.0035% of all iTV shares -- are too minuscule for him to wield any control over the agency. On top of this, iTV's news station has been dormant for over a decade. The agency stopped broadcasting in 2007, and it lost its bandwidth licence to Thai PBS.
But Mr Pita and the MFP have every reason to be concerned due to what is known as the "judicialisation of politics". This has given rise to the rigid interpretation of the letter, rather than the spirit, of the law that has led to the early demise of politicians who challenged the establishment. Mr Thanathorn and his V-Luck shares are a prime example of this.
But this is Thailand. It's an open secret that the legal restrictions for politicians regarding media shares are just a paper tiger. Some politicians, through nominees, have de facto control over major media channels through their spouses or parents. Yet they remain free from the hands of the law.
As the iTV debate drags on, some optimists believe the Constitutional Court will just disqualify Mr Pita as an MP, forcing him to step aside for Srettha Thavisin, one of Pheu Thai's candidates for prime minister. But if so, would Mr Pita keep his party in the coalition? If so, the MFP leader could instead assume a position in the cabinet, possibly as foreign minister. That would allow him to maintain his excellent track record while waiting to return as a PM candidate in the next election.
This scenario is possible as pro-establishment factions find Pheu Thai less of a threat. The coalition of eight parties led by the MFP is still short of 60-70 votes to make Mr Pita the premier. Yet he still has a 50:50 chance of being prime minister, while Mr Srettha and Pheu Thai remain on standby in case of an upset.
But this is all just speculation. The MFP continues to fight on recklessly in the hope of keeping the option of Mr Pita's premiership bid alive. The party is well aware that it cannot expect any favours either from the court or from the pro-military Senate.
But to maximise its political gains, the MFP must do its best to have Mr Pita's candidacy proposed in parliament before its opponents can petition the Constitutional Court. With such a strategic move, the party would effectively kick the ball into the Senate's court, forcing the Upper House to confront the MFP's backers, whose patience is getting thin.
This scenario would enable the MFP to cash in on the Upper House's awkwardness, gaining more sympathy from the public for its next political battle with the conservatives.
