Politicians slam NCPO plan to bar criticism

By KASAMAKORN CHANWANPEN 
THE NATION

 

File photo: Watana Muangsook, Pheu Thai Party’s former commerce minister

 

INTEGRITY OF FUTURE ELECTIONS QUESTIONED

DEFIANT politicians from major political parties have opposed a junta proposal to bar any criticism of the regime during the campaign for the next election, saying criticism was a form of freedom of expression protected by the Constitution.

 

The comments came in response to National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) leader and Deputy Prime Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan’s remarks that candidates in local elections would be asked to refrain from attacking the junta or otherwise incite conflict when the junta allows local elections.

 

Critics have expressed concern that the rule would also apply to the general election scheduled for next year.

 

Watana Muangsook, Pheu Thai Party’s former commerce minister, said the restriction was impermissible because it violated the Constitution.

 

“All Thai people have the right to expression. The junta can sue individuals for defamation but it has no right whatsoever to shut people’s mouths, unless this regime is bigger than the Constitution,” the former minister said.

 

Since the political activity ban had not been lifted despite the implementation of the political parties organic law and the Constitution, the NCPO had to answer why it was not following its “road map”, which was its own guideline that should be followed, Watana said.

 

Nipit Intrasombat, deputy leader of Democrat Party, said he also believed that the NCPO could not possibly ban people from speaking against the regime.

 

As a government funded by taxpayers, the NCPO could not just avoid public scrutiny, he said.

 

“If you are really banning people from criticising it [the NCPO], you should keep staying in power and not bother holding an election at all,” Nipit said. “That way, you could do whatever you want, including |prohibiting any criticism against yourselves.”

 

Attasit Pankaew, a political scientist at Thammasat University, said the NCPO should try to be more broad-minded in the general election.

 

At least politicians should be allowed to talk about public policies, which could involve comparing their proposals to the NCPO’s, he added.

 

Politicians must be able to give people choices, show their visions and point out differences in comparison with the NCPO, which has run the country for the past three to four years, he said.

 

If the NCPO cannot be broad-minded and allow free expression, the election will be questionable in terms of being free and fair, Attasit said.

 

In a related development, Prawit said yesterday the NCPO would decide when the local elections should take place. However, the matter had not yet been discussed and Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha had not mentioned it either, he said.

 

Prawit said that the NCPO still had to consider all the steps needed before lifting the ban on political parties’ activities.

 

Asked if the NCPO had concerns about the situation after the ban is lifted, Prawit said the NCPO would be certain that everything would be stable before it allowed the resumption of political activities.

 

Amendments needed

 

Meanwhile, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva expressed concern yesterday that it could be problematic to allow local elections while maintaining the ban on political activity. In some constituencies, local elections involved political parties, he said.

 

Abhisit questioned whether continuing the ban would cause confusion over the extent that political parties could work as they would have to be active during the local elections.

 

He added that related laws would have to be amended in line with the new charter before the next elections.

 

Meechai Ruchupan, the chief charter drafter, also said it would take at least one or two months before local elections could be held to allow for the amendment of relevant laws.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30331627

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-11-15

People forget that in terms of the Junta, they are dealing with little children with learning difficulties.  They really need to go back to the barracks, so to speak, but even that's a little scary.  Now that they've shown who they are, would you really want these people in charge of the defense of your country?  I wouldn't trust them to organize a birthday party.

I think that they are not really afraid of elections as they will stay in control whoever wins, thanks to their constitution and organic laws.

 

But they are afraid of allowing free speech because it can result in massive loss of face.

 

41 minutes ago, candide said:

I think that they are not really afraid of elections as they will stay in control whoever wins, thanks to their constitution and organic laws.

 

But they are afraid of allowing free speech because it can result in massive loss of face.

 

And expose corruption. 

A good political signal, aiming to maintain freedom of speech !

Edited November 15, 20178 yr by observer90210

So good to see them squirming and under pressure, getting caned  

Military junta / free speech. Not likely.

Politicians and general public need to learn sarcasm and irony. In my experience it flies right over their heads.

How this country should ever have free elections if the Junta intimidate all other parties and their members and the people of Thailand .....so that can't be ever free electrions....i hope the world keep an eye on it!!!!!!!!!

4 hours ago, webfact said:

DEFIANT politicians from major political parties have opposed a junta proposal to bar any criticism of the regime during the campaign for the next election, saying criticism was a form of freedom of expression protected by the Constitution.

Sorry but the Constitution is not for the elite or entitled.  It is not surprising that these tough military men hate being scrutinized as they are god like creatures who sleep in the clouds at night.  What is more worrisome about the junta, besides accomplishing nothing in three years, is that cannot defend themselves verbally.   Everything has to be done with a show of force.   The leadership is not setting a good example for the lower ranks. 

6 hours ago, webfact said:

saying criticism was a form of freedom of expression protected by the Constitution.

...but only to the extend given by the NK role model.

Maybe they're trying to add their own names into the Lese majeste laws.....

 

but wouldn't that mean to be like a member of the Royal family, which would then further place themselves as normal people trying to don a Royal position? Would that furthermore result as an insult towards the Royal family? By going through those guidelines, it wouldn't be hard to believe that the NCPO just broke one of the most basic rules they're supposed to be protecting. Would have a field day if they were to arrest themselves though. Lol 

 

｡･ﾟ･(ﾉ∀`)･ﾟ･｡

Edited November 15, 20178 yr by yosuik

12 hours ago, webfact said:

"... unless this regime is bigger than the Constitution,”

Nailed it in one.

Since 1932 the military has demonstrated its extrajudicial and extra-constitutional authority.

What it has granted to the Thai people in terms of a constitution (ie., sovereign power belongs to the people) can be altered, removed or replaced at anytime by simple edict if necessary.

As more Thais realize their existential subservience to the dark feudal society represented in part by the military, they will understand the futility of change through any "soft" democratic process. 

Harder to convince the public of the facts as they would like them perceived if there are dissenting voices pointing out flaws in the facts as presented.

 

 

1. A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections.

 

2.  The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life.

 

3.  Protection of the human rights of all citizens.

 

4.  A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens.