A Move Forward Party (MFP) MP has taken responsibility for a physical brawl in a Bangkok restaurant on Friday night in Bangkok, but claims he was defending a harassed woman. A video that went viral on social media shows Chorayuth “Tonkla” Chaturapornprasit arguing with another man inside an eatery in Bangkok’s Ekamai district.
As the man begins to harass a woman, the MP for Bang Kholaem-Yannawa steps in to intervene. The harasser had encroached on her personal space and even put his hand around her neck.
Before the scenario progressed, Mr. Chorayuth can be seen moving the man’s arm away from the woman, speaking to him, and then getting struck by him.
Karoonpon Tieansuwan, a Move Forward spokeswoman, said on Saturday that the other man had earlier harassed Mr. Chorayuth’s associates and smacked another person in the face before turning his attention to the MP.
According to Mr Karoonpon, the man tripped and fell on his own during the subsequent confrontation and was already attacking Mr Chorayuth’s group before their bodyguards and restaurant personnel interfered.
Both sides have decided not to take any further action.
Mr. Chorayuth stated on X (previously Twitter) that he would accept responsibility and apologies to the public. Despite this, the MP stated that he was only protecting the woman in the video and did not start the brawl.
While apologizing for his use of violence and calling the incident a valuable life lesson, the 33-year-old MP said that certain news sources published the story without contacting him, resulting in a distorted version of the occurrence.
He praised the media outlets that had covered his statement and invited those that hadn’t to contact him for clarification.
Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court has agreed to extend the deadline for Move Forward Party leader Pita Limjaroenrat to submit documents in response to an allegation that their proposal to amend the lèse majesté law amounts to an attempt to overthrow the country’s democratic system with the King as head of state.
Worawit Kangsasitiam, the court’s president, stated today (Saturday) that the party had requested an extension of the 15-day deadline, stating that they needed more time to collect papers.
He clarified that the court’s approval to extend the deadline for submitting papers is standard procedure and does not constitute a privilege.
He further stated that the legislation does not define how many extensions the court can allow and that it can use its judgement in determining whether the extension requested is meant to postpone the case.
Worawit went on to say that if it can be proven that the Move Forward party or its leader used their liberties to overthrow the democratic system, as accused, the Constitutional Court can at the very least order them to stop.
He stated that the court is not entitled to dissolve the party under these conditions, and that party dissolution must be resolved by the Election Commission and then forwarded to the court for finalisation.
In other news, Mr. Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, former secretary general of the dissolved Future Forward party, has urged the Move Forward party to proclaim openly and promptly that it will lead the opposition in parliament, saying that delay will be interpreted as weakness, indecision, and a lack of courage.
“There has already been enough ambiguity.” “Enough of party members expressing their own views without the party making a formal decision,” he declared in a lengthy Facebook post on Thursday.
He warned that playing the victim in order to elicit public sympathy may work temporarily, but in the long run, people will become bored and regard the party as weak.
According to Piyabutr, the secretary general of the Progressive movement, which was formed following the dissolution of the Future Forward party, it is now clear that the Move Forward party is disliked by the majority of the parties with representation in parliament, including Pheu Thai, Bhumjaithai, United Thai Nation, Palang Pracharath, Chartthaipattana, and others.
He asserted that those who voted for or against the Move Forward party appreciate the difficulties the party faced in forming a new administration, but acknowledge that the party did its best, although unsuccessfully.
“Why does the party not take a stand and become the opposition, using its 151 votes in the House and the 14.4 million votes of its supporters to perform its duties in parliament?” he said.
He also urged the party to abandon its hopes of being called to join the administration, noting that, while the party lacks allies in parliament, it still has a large number of supporters outside.
“The party may lose today, but it may win tomorrow,” he reflected.