CMU faculty withdraw their lawsuit after the Chiang Mai University Council agreed to amend the text that violates the rights and freedoms. In the case of recruiting a new Chancellor of Chiang Mai University
On January 6, Assoc. Prof. Somchai Prichasilpakul, Lecturer of the Faculty of Law, Chiang Mai University published the progress. Suing the Chiang Mai University Council to the Administrative Court Recently, the lawsuit has been withdrawn. because the Chiang Mai University Council has issued regulations repealed the statement that violated the said freedom, stating:
To friends, relatives, sisters, brothers and sisters who pushed forward the selection of the Chancellor of Chiang Mai University regarding the withdrawal of the lawsuit against the Chiang Mai University Council.
After we (255 people) together wrote to the chairman of the Chancellor’s Selection Committee of Chiang Mai University regarding the regulations for the selection of presidents. contrary to the freedom of expression under the Constitution including a part (13 people) filed a lawsuit against the Chiang Mai University Council as the issuer of such regulations
The University Council A meeting was held on December 30, 2021. Regulations (No. 4) were issued with the abolition of statements that violate freedom of expression, a key issue of the dispute. The new regulations contain only “In nomination of a list of candidates for the position of President at every step of the process, consultation methods shall be used. and not to proceed by electoral method” and cut off the original content that states that “It shall not be carried out by electoral or voting method. If there is evidence that any applicant or nominee directly or indirectly supported or accepting an electoral or voting method Let the committee cut names from the recruiting process. and if there is a university worker participating in the operation or supporting it, it shall be considered a disciplinary offense.”
Such amendment shall result in the settlement of disputes which we have contested. As it is now no longer an offense to offer an opinion on an election or to vote for a presidential nomination. In such a case, it is deemed that the University Council has rapidly amended the regulations after being filed with the Administrative Court All disputes were settled.
to show that the prosecution occurred It simply requires that the recruitment process be conducted transparently, honestly and with broad community involvement. We therefore filed an application to withdraw the lawsuit on January 6, 2022, in the hope that this recruitment process would be able to recruit talented and responsible people to serve as the university president.
Although it is regrettable that the University Council instead view our actions as “Intentionally exercising dishonest rights” (p. 14 of the testimony). Arguing with reason is something that can be done. especially in the university community, which is considered a leading educational institution. In this case When there is a difference of opinion, the rights are clearly exercised in accordance with the legal process. If it remains to be seen that the enacted regulations are legal, then why were they revised so quickly? This would reflect that the regulations were clearly in error.
Hopefully, this change will be the starting point for a transparent presidential recruitment process. community participation And it’s a sensible decision.