In Town

I don't understand. Impeachment is a process used to remove a political office holder. Since Yingluck and all the other officials threatened with impeachment have already been removed from office, I don't see the point. Maybe the NACC should seek competent legal council.

The impeachment carries a 5 years political ban. Clearly they are scare stiff of Yingluck winning another election and they are doing their dirty best to ban her from the next election.

Possibly, but it seems a lot of work. Why not just ban her? Pretending to follow some sort of legal process just makes them look foolish and vindictive. Anyway, banning Yingluck will have little effect, as I doubt she is much interested in re-entering the political fray. Their time would be better spent trying to figure out how to prevent any PTP candidates from standing in the next election, and I think the obvious solution to that is to ban th party.

I believe she can e impeached. There is no statute of limitations in these cases, even if she is not in office.

There is no statute of limitations when you make the law as you go.

Yes, of course. It is often used to remove an official from office so that they can be prosecuted for a crime. But it is always used to remove an official from office. Crimes committed by people out of office, or committed by people while in office but discovered after they leave office, would be prosecuted through normal judicial processes. There is not need for impeachment because the person in question is not a political office holder.

On another issue, I love that Thailand has criminalised bad policy-making by politicians. This newly discovered legal principal will be so useful in many western countries.

What is done in office isn't necessarily a crime out of office, so you can't prosecute through normal judicial processes. But if a crime was committed while in office, being out of office doesn't always make that crime go away.

"Bad policy making" isn't criminalised. Turning a blind eye to corruption is.

Are you sure? Impeachment is not a synonym of "prosecution". Sometimes people in office are immune to prosecution while in office, and the process of impeachment is used to remove them from office so they can then be prosecuted.

Yes, of course. It is often used to remove an official from office so that they can be prosecuted for a crime. But it is always used to remove an official from office. Crimes committed by people out of office, or committed by people while in office but discovered after they leave office, would be prosecuted through normal judicial processes. There is not need for impeachment because the person in question is not a political office holder.

On another issue, I love that Thailand has criminalised bad policy-making by politicians. This newly discovered legal principal will be so useful in many western countries.

I don't understand. Impeachment is a process used to remove a political office holder. Since Yingluck and all the other officials threatened with impeachment have already been removed from office, I don't see the point. Maybe the NACC should seek competent legal council.

The top priority should be a plan to return to civilian government. How to get the military out of politics? Second, privatise state enterprises (when there are fewer resources for corruption corruption will decrease). Third, survey real property of government and military officials. If a colonel or a politician has a Jaguar or fancy house on a civil servant salary, then there must be a presumption of corruption. Then trials and long prison stays.

Wouldn't disagree with any of that. The problem is how do you bring that about when a government's ruling party is largely made up of businessmen with vested interests and close ties to a corrupt police force?

The answer is you remove them, and the only ones who can do that are the military.

Which is where we are at now.

There is some suspicion that there are corrupt people in the military as well, so how to deal wit them? Perhaps a five year timeout for all politicians, businessmen, police, soldiers, etc.

The top priority should be a plan to return to civilian government. How to get the military out of politics? Second, privatise state enterprises (when there are fewer resources for corruption corruption will decrease). Third, survey real property of government and military officials. If a colonel or a politician has a Jaguar or fancy house on a civil servant salary, then there must be a presumption of corruption. Then trials and long prison stays.

Chimay or Duvel by preference, but rarely available here. My favourite available beer is Paulaner Salvador.

Right. Fred cheated, and Brazil's victory in the tournament, if it happens, will be forever tarnished...

Since the ECT is a constitutionally-mandated institution then it no longer exists as well, and they certainly shouldn't be sending out any paychecks to non-existant entities...

You guys will argue about anything! Its really pointless. No one is convinced. Facts like wet fishes are slapped in faces and people turn the other cheek and keep on as if nothing happened. Elementary rules of logic or reason are violated constantly. History is history. You can learn from it or ignore it, but beware, as sometimes it doesn't ignore you!

Clearly you don't like the choice the Thai people made in the 2011 election. Tough, democracy only works if the people who lose an election accept that they lost and try to make themselves more appealing in the next election. Someone should explain that to Suthep and the Democrats, it's not a democracy if there are no elections.

Look if you want to pretend Thaksin isn't corrupt or the rice scheme wasn't riddled with corruption, or see the amnesty bill farce for what it was then you just aren't worth talking too. Did you just arrive recently or are you sitting in a dimly lit boiler room somewhere?

Transparency International, Jezuz!

I feel so sorry for all you fellows so focused on Thaksin. Do you honestly believe he is the root of all problems in Thailand, that all corruption emanates from his mysterious desert lair? This is called projection by psychiatrists. You cannot justify in your own mind your support for violence and coups and so you strap on your blinders and repeat, over and over "Its Thaksin's fault". The Cambodians do that to when they say "Pol Pot killed my family" when actually it was a guy living down the street. Its a coping mechanism. At some point to get well you will have to admit there are other sources of problems in Thailand, and if Thaksin disappeared tomorrow, they would remain. The road to recovery begins with the first step.

By the way; by any objective measure Thaksin was the most effective and loved PM in the history of Thailand.

I guess this is the article they are referring to, but it doesn't say anywhere that most Thais agree with the coup. They do mention visiting a pro-coup demonstration where participants expressed support for the coup.

I bet the people who matter, the struggling rice farmers who were ripped off by the PTP, only to be looked after by the junta, "expressed support for the coup".

I guess. But it used to be Thaksin buying votes. Now it is buying good will. Still the same Thaksin program though, that some people used to complain about.

By the way, was it not the ECT that refused permission for Yingluck to pay the farmers? And didn't the banks at that time refuse to extend loans to the gov't?

Reuters: Most Thais support military coup

I think Reuters trumps the Myanmmar Journalists Network and the Myanmmar Journalists Association

Would you like to provide a link to the actual Reuters article that has that headline as opposed to the report that Reuters had said that. I used the search engine on the Reuters site - Nothing.

I can't find any reference to any Reuters article claiming that "Most Thais support coup", only the National News Bureau of Thailand article claiming that.

http://thainews.prd.go.th/centerweb/newsen/NewsDetail?NT01_NewsID=WNPOL5705290010006

Perhaps you can help me, you must have seen it to post it here, surely - might lend some credence to your claim....................

Don't lots of News Agencies report articles from other sources while acknowledging the origin?

What you seem to look for is an 'editorial', the interpretation of a sourced article.

No, I said what I was looking for, it's not hard to understand - I did not mention an editorial, I'm not looking for an editorial, I want to see the original Reuters article headlined "Most Thais support the coup", how hard can that be - if it exists.

You like tangible news, I know. Well, maybe tomorrow on the Reuters site.

Maybe this will help to pass the time

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/28/us-thailand-politics-coup-supporters-idUSKBN0E80J520140528

I guess this is the article they are referring to, but it doesn't say anywhere that most Thais agree with the coup. They do mention visiting a pro-coup demonstration where participants expressed support for the coup.

You know what they all can't be wrong.

Take note of the overwhelming cry for democracy and elections ASAP.

It's about time that the elite yellows will just have accept the will of the thai people and not spit the dummy every time they get rolled at elections.

We all know the PTP will win in a landslide so the yellows should be asking themselves what can we do win over the people.

The coup is costing the Thais a lot of money and future possible investment and maybe soon even lives.

In a fair election with democrats standing in the north on equal terms they would be very close even with Thaksins bribery and corruption. But democrats are not allowed to stand - funny how the international community doesn't comment on that - do all countries in the west take their orders from Thaksin?

Maybe if they were invited over to witness peaceful men women and children protestors being blown up and shot on a daily basis they'd change their minds!!

Was it not the Democrats that prevented candidates from registering and voters from voting? Am I missing something?

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Good to see him involved. He plays by the rules and wins elections fair and square. 100 years from now his statue will be everywhere, and noone will remember, Prayuth, Abhisit, Suthep, and the rest of the democracy destroyers.

It's a mystery to me how people can call Abhisit a 'democracy destroyer'. If you study Thaksin's autocratic history; if you compare Thaksin's modus operandi to other dictators of recent years; if you look at his political connections ...........etc etc etc and if you understood all those things you certainly would not call Abhisit a 'democracy destroyer'. There is nothing in his history to even suggest that that is his game. I despair at the ignorance of some people on this forum.

Dude! Ever hear of elections? I think they have something to do with democracy, but hey, I'm ignorant.

You ever heard the comment 'democracy is more than elections'?

Yes I have, and maybe it is, but I am absolutely sure it is at least elections. No elections, no democracy.

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Great idea! Who are these non-politicians though? Suthep? How about judges or academics? None of them are political. Ya, that will be fair.

So in your opinion there are no non partisan people in Thailand .. ok then.. umm who's fault is that then? Who started colour politics?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

No. I contend there are no non partisan people in the world. Thats why we have democracy, to peacefully manage political disagreement. To believe there are, or should be, non partisan people is a bit naive.

PTP is finished, and the current proxy caretaker PM has no influence at all.

Reforms first now, before the elections.

Please specify in detail the reforms you are calling for.

The whole point and stated many times by Suthep and PDRC is that reforms would be looked at and drawn up by a reform council / committee encompassing people from all walks of life.. and then decided on by the people then elections with a time period in the region of 18-24 months. In the meantime an interim government (without politicians) would administer the country!

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Great idea! Who are these non-politicians though? Suthep? How about judges or academics? None of them are political. Ya, that will be fair.

Good to see him involved. He plays by the rules and wins elections fair and square. 100 years from now his statue will be everywhere, and noone will remember, Prayuth, Abhisit, Suthep, and the rest of the democracy destroyers.

It's a mystery to me how people can call Abhisit a 'democracy destroyer'. If you study Thaksin's autocratic history; if you compare Thaksin's modus operandi to other dictators of recent years; if you look at his political connections ...........etc etc etc and if you understood all those things you certainly would not call Abhisit a 'democracy destroyer'. There is nothing in his history to even suggest that that is his game. I despair at the ignorance of some people on this forum.

Dude! Ever hear of elections? I think they have something to do with democracy, but hey, I'm ignorant.

PTP is finished, and the current proxy caretaker PM has no influence at all.

Reforms first now, before the elections.

Wrong, PTP still has the government of Thailand. Facist movements will not be tolerated, is that not clear for you by now ?

Elections without reforms first are just a continuation of the current situation with the socalled democratic government ignoring and obstruction the opposition and even it's own voters.. It's that clear to you by now?

What country are you from? Of course the government is ignoring and obstructing the opposition. Do the Tories typically support the policies of Labour?

PTP is finished, and the current proxy caretaker PM has no influence at all.

Reforms first now, before the elections.

Wrong, PTP still has the government of Thailand. Facist movements will not be tolerated, is that not clear for you by now ?

Elections without reforms first are just a continuation of the current situation with the socalled democratic government ignoring and obstruction the opposition and even it's own voters.. It's that clear to you by now?

What country are you from? Of course the government is ignoring and obstructing the opposition. Do the Tories typically support the policies of Labour?

Rationality is a pearl beyond price.

Oh master buffalo your wisdom is truly inspiring.

I will follow you .. Please grant me the daily ration of arsenal so I can defend your dictatorship.. Erm..I mean democracy.

buffalo soldier, deadlock rasta...