bradiston

I'm not sure there are any plans for them. They will become obsolete at the end of their current term. The senate was set up by Prayut's administration. They are supposed to be non-partisan. They were all appointed by the Royal Thai military. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_Thailand Like the dinosaurs, they will become extinct, just like that, if they haven't had the decency to fall on their swords before that.

It's far from irrelevant. The senate will be disbanded I imagine, unless it is reconstituted as an elected body. Course, a lot depends on how much MFP, and their allies, assuming they finally make it into government with Pita at their head, wish to, and are able to, rewrite the inherited laws from the previous 9-90 years.

No, their term ends in March 2024. The UK has an unelected upper house, made up of government appointees, hereditary peers and peeresses, judges and senior clergy. But they very, very rarely vote against the lower house. They can send bills back for amendment however. But nothing like this. And they have absolutely no say in the selection of the PM, who is by default the leader of the majority party.

So he has 6 days to talk them round. He has options, but if he dumps the lèse majesté review proposal, he'll risk losing a lot of his supporters. Hmmm. Which way to go? Can't see MFP voting for PT. Just too many abstentions. Or resort to tried and trusted system offering posts in the next government in exchange for votes. Whatever. Yeah, but some votes. There's a novel idea for Thailand. Anyway, it happens in every democracy in the world.

Not sure if it was the senators. I didn't get the final breakdown.

I don't think so. They haven't got a consensus. And it looks like there's a load of votes missing. A possible new vote until they get a result. Otherwise, what?

Oh yes, of course. Nominated by the ruling junta, how could they possibly not be independent?

Pita needs to do some rapid negotiations.

He got 321. 182 against. 198 abstentions. Chaos! Nothing adds up!

They cannot have been members of a political party throughout the preceding 5 years! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_of_Thailand

I don't understand. They're way over 500 votes already. Are they doing the senate at the same time? Ah. The senators are voting at the same time. They're marked as ส.ว. The MPs are ส.ส. He's got 10 senators and 260 MPs right now. And counting!

Not looking good. He's only got 182 so far. There are 106 abstentions! 94 against.

Ah, I see. ???????????? So we can forget for instance, the Romans, the Vikings, the Anglo Saxons, the Normans, Shakespeare, Chaucer, Henry 1 to 8, Elizabethan England, the Renaissance in Italy, Cromwell, the Civil War here, Newton? Nothing to do with the shaping of society? So how do you see society being taken apart?

I reread Prayut 's Wikipedia entry. It's really quite staggeting how he got away with it. Meet The Joker. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prayut_Chan-o-cha

Ah, I get it. Degenerate in the sense of ruled by an old and verging on the senile, decrepit, uninspiring, old guard who, despite their military background, probably never saw action. Yes, that could seriously drag a country down and cause chaos and disorder. Of course, any movement away from that would appear dangerous and a threat. To some.

They'd better stop interfering with democracy and locking up young people if they want western tourists. Even then....

A quote from Roger Scruton on AN. That's got to be a first. And "collectively", meaning, in reality, for the chosen few. Who benefits from 112? A marketplace some would say is the ONLY test in a democracy, but what was on offer was still down to choice. No amount of regulation will change people's minds. I really don't buy that stuff about the guardians of the "inherited good things". Like privilege, Eton College, inherited wealth? That's Scruton to a tee. Spent much of his life in Peterhouse College, Cambridge, then writing for The Spectator. I bitterly object to that Tory philosophy that suggests there is a superior race of beings destined to secure the future of mankind. Neo nazism. Utter crap, but at the heart of the Rees Moggs of this world. And why do I keep reading about "social degeneracy"? What golden era are you harking back to that was regenerative?

The intent was not to abolish 112 but to amend it. As far as I know, that's as far as it's got. The CC will be asking Pita what exactly his intention is. That's their concern. If Pita can satisfy the court the intention is in no way to harm the monarchy or the constitution, they might go on to want to know the finest details. But they're not going to approve anything that could come back to bite them. I can't see him scrapping the whole idea, but who knows? It's a total disgrace how the CC is interfering in the democratic process, but if that's the only way through, then maybe that's the way to go. I don't think the MFP has done or is doing anything illegal in putting it in their manifesto. Where's the law that says they can't? Putting it on the agenda, and then millions voting for it, how can that be against the law? Why was nothing said before? Why was voting for a party that is putting this forward not outlawed? It's been many months since. They simply can't deal with the support it got. So now, as I see it, they have 15 days in which to prepare their arguments/defense. We don't know the charges yet, or if there are any even. 15 days? Plenty of time, surely, to cover your bases.

From the Thai PBS article above: "The Move Forward party leader and prime ministerial candidate said that, during the past four years as an MP, he has consulted both the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the EC about his shares in iTV and they all assured him that there is no problem." It would be useful if he had these assurances on record.

Yes, and it is the second which really takes my breath away. This was filed by "activist lawyer" Theerayut Suwannakaysorn, accusing the MFP of attempting to overthrow the democratic system, based on the MFP's declared aim of attempting to amend Section 112 of the criminal code. Only in the Thai version of democracy could this happen for reasons we are not allowed to mention. But there we have it. Without amending 112 it seems there will never be an end to this, nor a way forward for democracy in Thailand.

Hey, wait a minute. Owning shares in a media company and publishing a book are 2 very different things. Anyone who has ever had an article published in a newspaper, and there must be hundreds of politicians who have, would be at risk of accusations otherwise. Or giving an interview on TV.

Facebook posts! Social media - that's publishing media, no? There's no end to this utter tomfoolery. Wasting the court's time, but I guess they have nothing better to do. I can't understand the legal procedure here. Surely Pita's lawyers should have had an opportunity to petition the court for "No case to answer" or some such before it was kicked upstairs? Something radically wrong with the legal process.

Not if the CC says so.

Yes, I get that. But no mention has been made as to whether Pita's father's will was still in probate. Did the shares have Pita's name on them? In fact, no details as far as I know have been released at all to the public, yet Mr Ruangkrai and the EC and presumably the CC, all appear to be privy to its contents. There's a lot we're not being told. But there again, this is really a private family matter, so in a sense, what business is it of ours? Well, simply put, the future of Thai democracy would appear to hinge on various obscure legal arguments. In a closed court.

Pita can still be PM without being an MP.