PaulBax

Wrong. The law reads that a person knowing of a problem with the amendment of the charter (certain obvious types of amendment are specifically prohibited) has the right to a) bring the issue to the AGs attention *and* to lodge it with the Constitution Court.

Some people have (wilfully) misinterpreted the law to read that only the AG can bring the issue to the attention of the court, which is <deleted>.

You may note though that not many are willing to back their <deleted> and defy the CC, lest they end up with a 5 year political holiday.

Where I come from, it's called putting your money where your mouth is at.

Well let us see now that the minutes of the meeting discussing this have been bought into the public domain we can see it was agreed that all complaints had to go through the OAG. In fact there was a similar case bought to the CC during the Dems reign. The court ruled that it had to go through the office of the OAG. This is clearly inconsistent and as such parliament would be right to ignore the ruling.

Because the only thing he actually did was to sign a paper giving his wife permission to spend her own money on buying some land for herself. Part of Thai law does not allow a partner to buy land without the others permission if married. A good reason not to get married in my opinion lol

Thaksin was tried and convicted for offenses committed long before the coup and so his case is fundamentally different from that of reds and yellows who are offered amnesty for whatever they did in post coup political struggle.

He was tried and convicted for one offense.

The charge of abuse of power and the trial against Thaksin both stem from the post-coup regime. The event for which he was convicted was, indeed, necessarily prior to that.

The most cursory survey of the actual charges and the resulting conviction give ample reason to believe that it was a political conviction rather than a serious infraction of "abuse of power" ... at least in this particular case.

The land case was clear cut and no matter how you look at it, Thaksin knew his wife was buying land from a government agency, he admitted to signing it off himself many times, and this act is and was against the law regardless of the coup.

The coup allowed the case to be investigated and put before the court, that is true, but, equally, under Thaksin that was impossible as the government was in control of each and every step of this process and no one could dare to prosecute a sitting Prime Minister.

This is what the reconciliation bill counts on - although the proponents say Thaksin should be retried, the reality is that this case will never be picked up neither by investigators nor by prosecutors and will never reach the court.

Once in the court, however, the result will always be the same - the Prime Minister can't have his wife buying land from a government agency.

What you argue here is the matter of legalities and not justice.

There's also the case of 46 billion. You can argue legalities, okay, but it was blatantly obvious to anyone that Thaksin was helping out his company, I don't know of anyone who would believe Thaksin had totally separated his business and his governance.

I mean he still refers to it as HIS money - what other proof do you need? The man himself broadcasts that he lost his 46 billion invested in a company, which is illegal for a sitting PM. How else would you expect the court to rule on this any differently? Deny accused's own admission of guilt?

Again, the plan is to overturn the court ruling and make sure the case never gets to the trial again.

the land case is not a clear cut illegal act. First, the decision was 5-4 : 4 judges thought that he did not violate the law.

in addition, the PM apparently checked the details regarding the legality of the purchase and his signing before participating in the auction.

The auction company also verified that the participants were allowed to bid before the auction.

And then of course, it was an open auction and the PMs wife paid the highest bidding price.

yep - open and shut, for sure...

on top of that there were 2 constitutional court rulings from before Thaksin was in power stating that the agency was independent from government. But these were ignored and a retrospective ruling made!

As per usual the users of this forum are showing that htey have very little idea about politics and law.

What we have here is a court telling parliament what it can and cannot discuss. Anything still in the parliamentary process is not a law and thereby still subject to change! In this respect it is not the business of the constitutional court. Once a law is passed by parliament the constitutional court can rule on its legality and as we are not at that stage I will ask what business is it of the constitutional court?

The constitutional court has no rights whatsoever to tell parlaiment what it can and cannot discuss and legislate for.

What we have here is a proactive strike by people given power by the coup. Part of the bill currently reads that all agencies etc bought into being by the coup be abolished. This is blatent self interest/ self preservation and in itself should set alarm bells ringing.

I myslef have no problem with Thaksin getting convicted if it is done fairly. When he was convicted the court discarded two previous rulings and made a retrospective ruling. This is why no country will assist in arresting Thaksin. Wait! you all scream the rest of the world does not understand Thailand! Perhaps not but the rest of the world understands institutional malfeasance extremely well. Whilst we have one political grouping remaining completely unchecked and not taken to account for anything illegal they have done we do not have equality or fairness in law. Until all are treated equally and fairly under the law there can be no peace or reconcilliation in Thailand. The longer the will of the people is usurped by non elected self interested groups the closer we move towards civil war!

I stopped reading at:

"As per usual the users of this forum are showing that htey have very little idea about politics and law.

What we have here is a court telling parliament what it can and cannot discuss."

As obviously you have very little idea about Thailand.

The court did not tell the parliament that it can't discuss anything.....

So I didn't read the rest of that posting.

so there is no order from the constitutional court telling parliament to cease work on the reconciliation bill? something that if is passed at a 3rd reading has to be sent to the constitutional court for a ruling on legality before it can be sent for royal assent!

But Thaksin has only been convicted of one trumped up charge and that is why the rest of the world refuses to help Thailand!

You lot really can't understand that Thaksins only real crime, in the Thai scheme of things, was to remove power from Bangkok and this is still the only reason whilst he is still being shouted about from every elitist orifice available. Ladies and gentlemen you have been conned because of you lack of understanding of Thai politics and have a general lack of intelligence: I know it but you don't! That makes me far superior and intelligent

If you shout something often enough and loud enough there will be people who believe you but those capable of independent, rational, and critical thought will not fall for it!

The bill before parlaiment is to set up a committiee to consider constitutional changes only.

I fail to see any reason whatsoever why the court should be involved or even accept anything for consideration until a royal assent has been signed.

The misinformation being spread is all to do with the government accepting an academic report the Democrats(sic) did not like: at present the democrats and yellows are protected by the courts so they do not want the scrapping of all political charges. Put the ones that deserve to be in prison away and their stance will almost certainly change.

We are a long long way away from anything being passed into law and I suspect there will be a public referendum on any constitutional changes.

The only reason he was found guilty of 1 charge is that he ran away. Took the coward's option after promising to respect the verdict

Sent from my dog.

only a fool would believe that!

Someone who spends so much time rewriting history to praise Thaksin shouldn't call other people fools.

why don't you show me where i praise Thaksin or rewrite history?

But Thaksin has only been convicted of one trumped up charge and that is why the rest of the world refuses to help Thailand!

You lot really can't understand that Thaksins only real crime, in the Thai scheme of things, was to remove power from Bangkok and this is still the only reason whilst he is still being shouted about from every elitist orifice available. Ladies and gentlemen you have been conned because of you lack of understanding of Thai politics and have a general lack of intelligence: I know it but you don't! That makes me far superior and intelligent

If you shout something often enough and loud enough there will be people who believe you but those capable of independent, rational, and critical thought will not fall for it!

The bill before parlaiment is to set up a committiee to consider constitutional changes only.

I fail to see any reason whatsoever why the court should be involved or even accept anything for consideration until a royal assent has been signed.

The misinformation being spread is all to do with the government accepting an academic report the Democrats(sic) did not like: at present the democrats and yellows are protected by the courts so they do not want the scrapping of all political charges. Put the ones that deserve to be in prison away and their stance will almost certainly change.

We are a long long way away from anything being passed into law and I suspect there will be a public referendum on any constitutional changes.

You must be watching a different move to the rest of us.

There are 4 bills seeking to whitewash Thaksin and friends

And plan B is an amendment to the constitution to acheive the same end

i refer you to section 141 of the constitution

Whatever for?

Sent from my dog.

read it and see. it states all laws passed by parilament must be checked by the constitution court for legality before proceeding to the royal assent.

But Thaksin has only been convicted of one trumped up charge and that is why the rest of the world refuses to help Thailand!

You lot really can't understand that Thaksins only real crime, in the Thai scheme of things, was to remove power from Bangkok and this is still the only reason whilst he is still being shouted about from every elitist orifice available. Ladies and gentlemen you have been conned because of you lack of understanding of Thai politics and have a general lack of intelligence: I know it but you don't! That makes me far superior and intelligent

If you shout something often enough and loud enough there will be people who believe you but those capable of independent, rational, and critical thought will not fall for it!

The bill before parlaiment is to set up a committiee to consider constitutional changes only.

I fail to see any reason whatsoever why the court should be involved or even accept anything for consideration until a royal assent has been signed.

The misinformation being spread is all to do with the government accepting an academic report the Democrats(sic) did not like: at present the democrats and yellows are protected by the courts so they do not want the scrapping of all political charges. Put the ones that deserve to be in prison away and their stance will almost certainly change.

We are a long long way away from anything being passed into law and I suspect there will be a public referendum on any constitutional changes.

The only reason he was found guilty of 1 charge is that he ran away. Took the coward's option after promising to respect the verdict

Sent from my dog.

only a fool would believe that!

But Thaksin has only been convicted of one trumped up charge and that is why the rest of the world refuses to help Thailand!

You lot really can't understand that Thaksins only real crime, in the Thai scheme of things, was to remove power from Bangkok and this is still the only reason whilst he is still being shouted about from every elitist orifice available. Ladies and gentlemen you have been conned because of you lack of understanding of Thai politics and have a general lack of intelligence: I know it but you don't! That makes me far superior and intelligent

If you shout something often enough and loud enough there will be people who believe you but those capable of independent, rational, and critical thought will not fall for it!

The bill before parlaiment is to set up a committiee to consider constitutional changes only.

I fail to see any reason whatsoever why the court should be involved or even accept anything for consideration until a royal assent has been signed.

The misinformation being spread is all to do with the government accepting an academic report the Democrats(sic) did not like: at present the democrats and yellows are protected by the courts so they do not want the scrapping of all political charges. Put the ones that deserve to be in prison away and their stance will almost certainly change.

We are a long long way away from anything being passed into law and I suspect there will be a public referendum on any constitutional changes.

You must be watching a different move to the rest of us.

There are 4 bills seeking to whitewash Thaksin and friends

And plan B is an amendment to the constitution to acheive the same end

i refer you to section 141 of the constitution

If it is proposed it does not exist: if that to difficult for you to understand?

We have a contistution that was imposed by the military. Part of the legislation for the constitutional vote stated that the military resterves the right to impose whatever they like should they lose the vote!

What you are saying that the constitution cannot be changed!

Once again i ask you to refer to the will of the people and their elected representatives not to the will of non elected corrupt officials.

Did you mean non elected and corrupt fugitives from the law aka Thaksin Shinawat who was convicted of breaking a law that had been in existence since 1997?

The man who was convicted under a government run by his brother in law not under the Democrats or the military.

i think you will find that Thaksin was elected more than once and was the first ever Thai prime minister to serve a full term! And you have very little understanding of Thailand if you think that the object of the coup was not to keep all future governments weak! samak was being told no by the military and was himself proving to be weak so Thaksin was dealt with. What the military did not count on was the overwhelming support for Thaksin and his offspring would continue after the childish democrats were got rid of.

The only reconciliation should be to put any and all criminals on trial, including additional charges against TS, terrorism & treason to name just two.

I would in Thaksin´s case include genocide.

if there is transparent and fair law for all I would have no problem with any charges for anyone!

secton 68

Section 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

In the case where a person or a political party has committed the act under paragraph one, the person knowing of such act shall have the right to request the Prosecutor General to investigate its facts and submit a motion to the Constitutional Court for ordering cessation of such act without, however, prejudice to the institution of a criminal action against such person.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes a decision compelling the political party to cease to commit the act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order the dissolution of such political party.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes the dissolution order under paragraph three, the right to vote of the President and the executive board of directors of the dissolved political party at the time the act under paragraph one has been committed shall be suspended for the period of five years as from the date the Constitutional Court makes such order.

Section 141. Before presenting the organic law bill as approved by the National Assembly to the King for His signature, it shall be submitted to the Constitutional Court for considering of its constitutionality and, it such case, the Constitutional Court shall have a decision thereon within thirty days as from the date of receiving thereof.

If the Constitutional Court decides that the provisions of an organic law bill are contrary to or inconsistent with the Constitution, such provisions shall lapse and if the Constitutional Court decides that such provisions are the essential element thereof or the organic law bill is enacted inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution, such organic law bill shall lapse.

In the case where the decision of the Constitutional Court resulting in the lapse of the provisions which are contrary to or inconsistent with the Constitution under paragraph two, such organic law bill shall be returned to the House of Representatives and the Senate respectively for their reconsideration. In such case, the House of Representatives or the Senate shall make an amendment to the organic law bill for its constitutionality by through the votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of each House and the Prime Minister shall then proceed further under section 90 and section 150 or section 151, as the case may be.

So once again i ask why get involved now? The bill would have to go to the court anyway!!!!

The court is throwing down a challenge and i suspect it will be met!

But Thaksin has only been convicted of one trumped up charge and that is why the rest of the world refuses to help Thailand!

You lot really can't understand that Thaksins only real crime, in the Thai scheme of things, was to remove power from Bangkok and this is still the only reason whilst he is still being shouted about from every elitist orifice available. Ladies and gentlemen you have been conned because of you lack of understanding of Thai politics and have a general lack of intelligence: I know it but you don't! That makes me far superior and intelligent

If you shout something often enough and loud enough there will be people who believe you but those capable of independent, rational, and critical thought will not fall for it!

The bill before parlaiment is to set up a committiee to consider constitutional changes only.

I fail to see any reason whatsoever why the court should be involved or even accept anything for consideration until a royal assent has been signed.

The misinformation being spread is all to do with the government accepting an academic report the Democrats(sic) did not like: at present the democrats and yellows are protected by the courts so they do not want the scrapping of all political charges. Put the ones that deserve to be in prison away and their stance will almost certainly change.

We are a long long way away from anything being passed into law and I suspect there will be a public referendum on any constitutional changes.

If it is proposed it does not exist: if that to difficult for you to understand?

We have a contistution that was imposed by the military. Part of the legislation for the constitutional vote stated that the military resterves the right to impose whatever they like should they lose the vote!

What you are saying that the constitution cannot be changed!

Once again i ask you to refer to the will of the people and their elected representatives not to the will of non elected corrupt officials.

As per usual the users of this forum are showing that htey have very little idea about politics and law.

What we have here is a court telling parliament what it can and cannot discuss. Anything still in the parliamentary process is not a law and thereby still subject to change! In this respect it is not the business of the constitutional court. Once a law is passed by parliament the constitutional court can rule on its legality and as we are not at that stage I will ask what business is it of the constitutional court?

The constitutional court has no rights whatsoever to tell parlaiment what it can and cannot discuss and legislate for.

What we have here is a proactive strike by people given power by the coup. Part of the bill currently reads that all agencies etc bought into being by the coup be abolished. This is blatent self interest/ self preservation and in itself should set alarm bells ringing.

I myslef have no problem with Thaksin getting convicted if it is done fairly. When he was convicted the court discarded two previous rulings and made a retrospective ruling. This is why no country will assist in arresting Thaksin. Wait! you all scream the rest of the world does not understand Thailand! Perhaps not but the rest of the world understands institutional malfeasance extremely well. Whilst we have one political grouping remaining completely unchecked and not taken to account for anything illegal they have done we do not have equality or fairness in law. Until all are treated equally and fairly under the law there can be no peace or reconcilliation in Thailand. The longer the will of the people is usurped by non elected self interested groups the closer we move towards civil war!

Thank you TV for the excellent service today!

Does anyone know what is the definition of high ground (how high above sea level is minimum) and how far inland these things can go?

This earthquake is about 50% of 2004 and of a different type. The limits of 2004 should see you safe in all eventualities.

while 50% is overstating i suspect it was a lesser quake in Richter terms where magnitudes increase logarithmically, meaning the energy increases 10 times for each magnitude number.

the difference between 1-2 is negligible, but from 8 to 9 is vast. This is an 8.5 compared to what i believe was a 9.1 Also as has been said the mechanics differ in our favour this time.

i only quoted a scientist from Southampton university on BBC world news. I personally have no idea of the mechanics of the Richter scale.

from wiki

9.2 950 megatons 4.0 EJ Anchorage earthquake (Alaska, USA), 1964

Sumatra-Andaman earthquake and tsunami (Indonesia), 2004 8.5 85 megatons 360 PJ Sumatra earthquake (Indonesia), 2007 8.6 - - Sumatra earthquake (Indonesia), 2012 8.7 170 megatons 710 PJ Sumatra earthquake (Indonesia), 2005

All i know htere is a huge difference 8.7 = 170 mega tons and 9.2 (2004) = 950 megatons and a vertical shift rather than horizontal shift.

I am thankful i have never been in a quake and will be thankful if i am never in one or its aftermath.

Thank you TV for the excellent service today!

Does anyone know what is the definition of high ground (how high above sea level is minimum) and how far inland these things can go?

This earthquake is about 50% of 2004 and of a different type. The limits of 2004 should see you safe in all eventualities.

wow bangkok felt the quake? amazing mother earth.

Here in Bangkok we didn't feel anything. And we have a lot steel that isn't screwed together good....at least we would have heard it....But nothing.

normally there is a slight swaying of the high rises that is about all.

Assuming the BBC's map is accurate, most of southern Thailand (and all of Malaysia) will be shielded from any tsunami by the island of Sumatra.

I would still get the hell out until it was 100% sure

Nation is reporting water receding in Krabi.

the tide is going out low tide is at 19.30

It is wise to move people away from costal areas but not to lie!

So far there is no evidence of a Tsunami anywhere and I hope it stays that way!

Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Department warns tsunami to hit southern coast at 5:09 pm

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Department has issued an urgent warning for people living on the coast of six southern provinces to evacuate, the areas would be hit by tsunami starting from 5:09 pm.

Anusorn Kaewkangwal said residents of Ranong, Phang Nga, Phuket, Satun, Krabi and Trang were told to clear the coastal areas before 5 pm.

He said Koh Miang of Phang Nga would be the first to be hit by tsunami at 5:09 pm.

Then, the giant waves would hit Karon and Patong beaches in Phuket and Phi Phi isalnd in Krabi and Jao Mai and Paliang beaches in Trant. Ranong and Satun would be hit by the giant waves later, Anusorn said.

-- The Nation 2012-04-11

Wow they know something nobody else does? but no reports of any tsunami so far

Someone in here asked for a balloon sign and which station.

Don't worry , I will look for it and find it and post a picture of it here, but it's not that important is it .

All stations have "Flammable goods" signs, and as we all know , balloons can be flammable.

Clothes are flamable!

I dont understand why so many defend this Irish "gentleman" .

He is a guest in this country and he attacked not only one but several Thai security guards , that was a wrong thing to do and now he must take the penalty.

.

Yes nasty Irish man headbutting very expensive equipment, and soiling their fists

Thank god many of the posters on here are not in any position of authority!!!!!

The word "lynch mob" come to mind where the majority are prepared to condem a person without being in possesion of the facts!

Remember you reap what you sow and when you are on the wrong side of a beating you shoud remember that you said it was OK to use violence instead of reasonable behaviour!

listen to a thai man in a uniform? so you are saying that you do what every person tells you because generally they all have uniforms!

There are police who have the right to tell you what to do on occasion, soldiers in a state of emergency and judges but nobody else! except the wife of course.

seems to me that most have been totally brainwashed into being sheep regardless of right after all that is the Thai way!

I dare any of you to suggest that you would act rationally if you had just been whacked on the head hard enough to give you stitches!

Acting rationaly whould have been to listen to the man in uniform. I repeat myself once again, if the man in uniform had been a policeman, I am practicably sure Mr. Behan had listened.

But he was not a policeman! Everyone and their dog wears a uniform in Thailand! you think you should obey them all?