Zolt

Lots of calls for reform flying around in all directions this season. It's got to be bold and it's got to be grand, and it's got to be right now. And no, we have no idea about specifics.

If you did not know it (or just pretend to not know it), the people of Thailand are protesting because:

1. They no longer want corrupt politicians that rob and rape their country.

I'm trying to get a mental image of Yingluck raping the country... and failing.

From a legal point of view, highly questionable.

Usually there is a complaint and a Prosecutor's assigns investigations.

An executive body (Police) then determines.

It comes at a due process in court.

The court shall issue a judgment.

But in this Case the DSI acts like investigators and judges in one body.

This kind of police behaviour reminiscent of dark periods in Germany.

I think it's more a case of abuse of language than lack of due legal process.

When they report "the DSI froze xx's bank account" it actually means "the DSI got a warrant from a judge to freeze his account". It simply wouldn't be possible otherwise.

To get a 'clearer' picture how the Thaksin-Regime actually works ?

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/12/03/338078/thai-regime-not-democratically-elected/

a "must-read" for good men !

Interesting read, it's written in typical conspiracy theory style with verifiable facts paired with unverifiable conclusions, but having noted the misleading pro-Thaksin information purported by the foreign media, I wouldn't be all that surprised if much of it turns out to be true.

I stopped reading at the point where they described him using a dozen cellphones - why would he need more than one? I mean, I have no doubt that Thaksin is every bit as bad as they say, but if the writer needs to make up stuff like that it casts in doubt the credibility of the whole article.

Was Arisman's bank account frozen after he threatened to burn down Bangkok ??? I am going out on a limb

and guess it was not.... The double standards being applied here are becoming simply unbelievable...

Point of fact, the DSI froze a LOT of accounts during the 2010 protests to try and stop financing of the protests... several protest leaders and PTP executives close to the big T had their accounts frozen - and that was long before any buildings burned down. Also the whole drama around Thaksin's frozen assets played out around the same time.

Also, contrary to Suthep, they did make an actual attempt to arrest Arisman during the protests (didn't wait until he was no longer busy). That led to a hilarious scene where he clumsily rappelled his way out of a Bangkok hotel.

There seems to be no clear direction for anybody involved with politics in Thailand, all are making policy on the run , changing the goal posts at every whim, there needs to be a committee formed, from various institutions of respect, (not political parties), this committee has a mandate to bring about proper democratic reform , this is then handed to the elected government, who then acts on these recommendations , and that is where the stumbling block will be , politicians with no other agenda but their own , till this mind set changes ,Thailand will always be a basket case where politics are concerned.

And their mandate comes from? A few thousand protesters? That's not enough.

Here's a more reasonable way to initiate reform.

- The country goes ahead with the elections on Feb 2, because they don't have a choice, and because that's way too short a deadline to implement true reform. Even the year or so proposed by Suthep is too short for that, but way too long to go without an elected government.

- Before the elections, both parties make a strong commitment to reform: To not undertake any charter reform bill or amnesty bill unilaterally, and to go ahead with a major overhaul of the charter per the following rules:

- After the election, both the majority and the opposition get together to hash out how the charter reform committee will be set up: not just the few haphazard ideas thrown around by Suthep but an actual, detailed and transparent plan for how the committee will be selected, what rules they will work under, the main objectives of the charter reform. Both the majority and the opposition should agree on the final methodology. If they fail to do so within 9 months, have a referendum decide which plan will be used. Absolute majority (50% of votes) needed to go ahead.

- Once a plan is selected, the committee is set up and gets to work on drafting the new constitution, while the elected government handle the day to day affairs of the country. Give them about a year and half then have a referendum on the new charter. If it fails half the committee is dismissed and new members are appointed, and they submit a new proposal one year later.

Basically, we shouldn't expect a solid and comprehensive reform effort to take anything less than the full term of the next government. Anything shorter will just be a rush job and lead towards more instability.

Well, I'm glad I'll be out on holidays, even though I doubt he'll get the same number as before the house got dissolved. I'm guessing he'll have less than half the numbers from last week, so 60-70k at most, although he'll claim several millions.

She already started campaigning?

1 month and half away from elections, politicians normally campaign. So?

I'm not sure if this is a translation or reporting issue, or if she really said that, but that whole headline is just wrong.

If PT fails to win the elections, then her term as caretaker PM will end and a new government will be chosen by the House instead. No "stepping down" decision involved.

Basically all she's saying is she'll just hang on until the elections.

Suthep is cunning. He's very good at rabble-rousing (a veritable Thai linguist).

He knows he cannot force Yingluck to step down as caretaker PM, nor can he postpone the elections, nor was he successful in provoking the Reds to start violence, and he failed to get the army to stage a coup.

Therefore he has a new ulterior motive. His sabre-rattling nowadays is NOT directed at PTP.

Instead, it is in fact to intimidate his former boss, Abhisit, to not contest the 2/2 polls. Very Machiavellian in its deviousness.

This is his only hope to prolong the chaos and save some face.

Abhisit does not appreciate this at all, as the Democrats fear losing the support from Suthep's followers.

I feel sorry for the Democrats, they don't deserve to be tarred by the same brush as Uncle Suthep.

I think you might be reading this right. Except there never really was much pretense of Abhisit being Suthep's boss when they were in power.

A clear-thinking Thai political scientist suggested that amendments to the Constitution require a super majority (2/3) to enact changes (which will prevent future abuses like the boondoggle amnesty bill). He also suggested that key legislation that cross a certain thereshold in cost follow the same requirements, which will make Easter eggs like the rice-pledging scheme a tragi-comedy neither side will be able to repeat, and the annual budget would become a shared process.

I was told neither side liked his idea (the idea of sharing power) and that both sides reserve the right to abuse the system when they are in charge. Sadly, I was not surprised.

As you describe it, that change wouldn't do anything for the rice pledging bill or the amnesty bill, as they aren't amendments to the constitution.

If you were to require a supermajority for all budget policy decisions you would essentially make the country ungovernable as the opposition will always block whatever the government tries to do.

To be honest the current system in the 2007 constitution isn't all that bad. With 50% of senators appointed and the opposition holding at least 1/3 of the rest by proportional vote, any bill that's really harmful ought to be blocked there. Definitely voting rules should be made stricter so that the top party can't sneak a vote through in the middle of the night. Require a quorum of at least 2/3rds of senators, that ought to do it. No more than that otherwise the opposition could filibuster any bill they want by just walking out.

Curious to see what the attendance figure will be now that the house has been dissolved. Suthep might be setting himself up for a big flop.

Then again, maybe not, there's a large bunch of people behind him who won't stop until they've seen democracy abolished and their privileges restored.

I sincerely hope the dems will participate. Things can only get uglier if they don't.

He is threatening children? Open auction? Wat about the other dozen cases against Thaksin.

You think Thaksin would ever admit any guilt let one come back and serve his prison sentence?

Where do you think the rise losses are going? Hint, Chinese trading companies owned by...

Actually I haven't heard of any other open court case against Thaksin since the courts ruled on his frozen assets, and the Rachada land deal. Care to specify?

Suthep's exact words:

Scum. He just went down another notch in my esteem from "as bad as Thaksin" to "even scummier than Thaksin".

Is this perchance one of the half finished police stations Suthep had built around 2010?

..we are on the side of the people

does Anupong refer to the 15,000,000 PTP voters or the 91 PTP supporters who were murdered on his watch. Care for the people...my tradesmans entrance

Actually Anupong's name isn't anywhere on that communique. It comes from four different and rather more obscure retired generals.

As for the forum that nobody is attending, how were the Dems going to attend anyway as they have all resigned?

*Facepalm* Just because they have resigned as MPs (a few hours before the house got dissolved anyway, so as of now there ARE no MPs) doesn't mean they can't attend a public forum that has nothing to do with parliament and to which they were specifically invited.

... the rich élite are worth a lot more they pay more tax...

Citation needed.

Not just the amount of tax you pay. Education level should be incorporated in to the voting system using an exponential system

Eg. Educated less than or equal to secondary school = 50% vote.

Bachelor Degree from non famous university = 75% vote

Bachelor Degree from Chula, Thamasart, overseas = 125% vote

Master = 400% vote

pHd = 1600% vote.

How about no, no no just hell no!

Democracy with one man one vote is note a good system of government. It will keep producing greedy and corrupt politicians, and that's not unique to Thailand at all.

The only thing is, every other system that's been tried is demonstrably worse. Much worse. And the technocracy that you're proposing ranks right down there with the worst of them. Not only it's ridiculously arbitrary, it's equivalent to giving a giant Fu_ck you to about 95% of the population that would get less than 100% voting rights. You think they would take it well? If the current system is making 40% of the population unhappy, do you think making 95% unhappy would be an improvement?