The falling from grace of Pichet Chuamuangphan, the First Deputy House Speaker, highlights a lapse in ethical standards among lawmakers.
It also raises scrutiny of Section 144 of the 2017 Constitution, written to prevent lawmakers from using public money for personal or political gain, under which he was judged.
The Constitutional Court on Friday found Mr Pichet had a role in pushing three projects to influence budget decisions for personal gain.
He used his authority as both an MP of the Pheu Thai Party and job as First Deputy House Speaker to favour voters in his constituency, despite trying his best to cover it up.
The court ordered Mr Pichet's MP status be terminated from Aug 1, and revoked his right to run in elections for 10 years.
As a result, he lost the much coveted First Deputy House Speaker post.
For the record, Mr Pichet is the first politician penalised for violating Section 144. But his transgression is not unusual among MPs and ministers.
Lawmakers are known for resorting to budget tricks to have money diverted to their constituencies. Coalition governments also tamper with the budget to finance unnecessary election promises.
This is what voters almost expect of the political and governing class, but it doesn't make it right.
Mr Pichet initiated the projects to promote democracy among the younger generation, improve public participation and empower women's rights.
The projects were to be conducted in his constituency in Chiang Rai province.
The projects look sound, yet the process for obtaining the money was not. To make sure his proposals evaded tight budget scrutiny and audit compliance, Mr Pichet ordered his adviser to revise the details.
Activities under the projects were redeveloped into 2,294 seminars for 124,700 villagers, but still attracted the scrutiny of the opposition.
This petition was brought to court by People's Party MP Bhuntin Noumjerm, joined by 120 other lawmakers from his party.
Mr Pichet's case is just a start. In the next few months, the court will decide whether the government under PM Paetongtarn Shinawatra violated Section 144 for moving 35 billion baht from state banks to fund the digital wallet handout.
Section 144 was written by a coup maker-installed charter panel to prohibit the slashing of budget allocations used to fulfil legal obligations, particularly allocations set aside for debt payment to banks under the Financial and Fiscal Discipline Act.
The decision affected several state-run banks, including the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, which lost 31.3 billion baht, the Government Savings Bank (2.68 billion baht) and the Government Housing Bank (592 million baht).
The allocations were originally intended to compensate the banks for revenue losses as a result of implementing state projects such as a debt suspension scheme for struggling farmers and a crop price guarantee project.
While supporters of Pheu Thai will label this lawsuit "lawfare", Section 144, if used fairly, will make lawmakers or the government think twice before trying to tamper with the budget to advance their own political gains.
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).