Meechai seeks to ease concern over calculation method for MPs

[webfact]

Meechai seeks to ease concern over calculation method for MPs

By The Nation

 

Meechai Ruchupan, head of the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC)

 

Meechai Ruchupan, head of the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), on Monday gave an assurance that the formula for the calculation of MP seats would not be so complicated that it affected the announcement of general election results.

The formula has been devised by the Election Commission (EC) itself, he said, adding that the agency would be in charge of the whole election process.

 

His remarks came after the CDC and the EC last Friday held a press conference explaining how the calculation for establishing the number of seats each party had in the House of Representatives worked.

 

This prompted concern that the sophisticated method devised by the electoral agency could cause confusion and have a negative impact on the national poll.

 

Some people have also raised the issue of instability in the next government as a result of the calculation method.

 

As the mixed-member apportionment or single-ballot system would make it difficult for any party to be an outright winner, a coalition government formed after the election could be weak, observers fear.

 

Meechai, however, dismissed such speculation, insisting that if a party managed to win masses of votes, they would have a bigger share of seats in the House.

 

However, he acknowledged that in the event that the leading party already had more constituency MPs than its apportioned share, then its party-list MPs would not have any seats in the House.

 

The CDC chief insisted that the new election system would truly reflect the people’s wishes.

 

In any constituency where the majority of voters abstained, the poll would be null and void, and all candidates would be banned from recontesting in that constituency, he added.

 

The chief charter-drafter also said the organic bill on MPs, which deals with the new election method, had not yet been completed.

 

It is being deliberated alongside the organic bill on the Senate in order to ensure that the provisions in the two pieces of legislation are properly coordinated and do not pose practical problems when they are enacted, he explained.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30332066

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-11-20

[candide]

56 minutes ago, webfact said:

In any constituency where the majority of voters abstained, the poll would be null and void, and all candidates would be banned from recontesting in that constituency, he added

So if the Democrat Party decides again to boycott elections it cannot win, it will this time result in banning candidates from other parties who have decided to contest elections!

Quite smart!

 

[Eric Loh]

Only in Thailand that election laws reward the political party that boycott elections and voters who abstained from voting. Eligible voters who participate are the losers in Meechai's weird and confusing MMA system. 

[robblok]

So if the Democrat Party decides again to boycott elections it cannot win, it will this time result in banning candidates from other parties who have decided to contest elections!
Quite smart!
 

Seems a bit overkill should only punish those boycotting.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[Samui Bodoh]

2 hours ago, candide said:

So if the Democrat Party decides again to boycott elections it cannot win, it will this time result in banning candidates from other parties who have decided to contest elections!

Quite smart!

 

Monsieur Candide, I don't think that you have that right.

 

I am guessing that in this case, it would be if a majority of voters positively voted to abstain (not just boycott), then the election would be null and void.

 

I think that your interpretation is too extreme even for the cheaters making the rules. If you are correct, then any candidate in any constituency could invalidate the election in any constituency at any time. It just does not make sense; its too much.

 

But, I think Meechai has a few screws loose, so maybe...

 

[Sid Celery]

Ha. You've got to admire the old sod, he's right in there, up to his authoritarian elbows, still trying to polish the terd.

 

A real daisy on the manure pile, sucking all that nutrient right up... slurping noises and all.

 

Parasite.

[candide]

40 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Monsieur Candide, I don't think that you have that right.

 

I am guessing that in this case, it would be if a majority of voters positively voted to abstain (not just boycott), then the election would be null and void.

 

I think that your interpretation is too extreme even for the cheaters making the rules. If you are correct, then any candidate in any constituency could invalidate the election in any constituency at any time. It just does not make sense; its too much.

 

But, I think Meechai has a few screws loose, so maybe...

 

The OP may not show a good translation of the original statement in Thai. But as far as I know, when people don't go to vote, it's called abstention. Otherwise it should be called blank vote.

But you may be right if the statement was badly translated.

[Get Real]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

the formula for the calculation of MP seats would not be so complicated that it affected the announcement of general election results.

That man can´t even spell complicated!

 

[mok199]

AMUSING THAILAND

[Srikcir]

11 hours ago, candide said:

when people don't go to vote, it's called abstention. Otherwise it should be called blank vote.

Section 85 of the 2017 Constitution*:

Election of members of the House of Representatives on a constituency basis shall be by direct suffrage and secret ballot, and there shall be one member of the House of Representatives in each constituency. An eligible voter shall have the right to cast ballot for one candidate or not to cast ballot for any candidate in his or her constituency.**

 

Obviously if one does not vote, it does not legally count as any kind of vote.

I expect another organic law would be required to provide for abstention or null vote on the ballot, its recordation and meaning with regard to candidate votes. From the junta's perspective such additional provisions likely adds nothing to election of pro-military/royalist candidates - so won't happen unless the provisions will reduce large party candidate vote count in some manner.

 

* Unofficial English translation provided as a public service through a collaboration of: Institute for Democracy for Electoral Assistance, International Commission of Jurists and Office of the United Nations Resident Coordinator in Thailand.

** Contrast with the 2011 Constitution, Section 72 wherein "Every person shall have a duty to exercise his right to vote at an election. The person who .... fails to attend an election for voting without notifying the reasonable cause of such failure shall be entitled to .. lose the right as provided by law." (Unofficial translation by the Foreign Law Bureau, Office Of The Council Of State)

 

[Happyman58]

Ok u silly farang The election works like this Hope you understand this time? Why you not as smart as Thai people and accept? General from Junta gets 20 votes  Opposition party member gets 20,000 votes General wins Why does General win? We have found some  mistakes in the voting system and 19,981 who voted should not have been allowed to vote  because they were drunk when they turned up to vote therefore they did not know who they were voting for All of them have said sorry and will be re-educated 

 

Therefore to save Thai people money and not have another election we declare General the winner  See we show the world we democratic country