5 hours ago, robblok said:

YL was brought down because she wanted to bring back a convicted criminal and pardon around an other 30.000 cases many of them corruption cases. Don't mixup your story, the people came out when they found out Thaksin would be under the amnesty too.

 

It was the good people student and so on who started it and later Suthep joined in. But it did not start like that it started with students and normal people who just could not stand such injustice of granting an amnesty to that crook. Also the way it was done was of course not the way a democratic country works. Secretly between readings adding his name.

 

 

What nonsense.

https://www.iseas.edu.sg/images/pdf/ISEAS_Perspective_2013_41.pdf

22 minutes ago, pornprong said:

What nonsense.

https://www.iseas.edu.sg/images/pdf/ISEAS_Perspective_2013_41.pdf

No nonse

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/11/thailand-protests-amnesty-bill

3 hours ago, pornprong said:

What nonsense.

https://www.iseas.edu.sg/images/pdf/ISEAS_Perspective_2013_41.pdf

Indeed.

10 hours ago, pornprong said:

What nonsense.

Among the several aspects in your cite that point to the Constitutional Court's ineffectiveness at best and junta collaboration at worst:

 

"The court found that, as the 2007 constitution had been adopted by means of a national referendum, the authority to convene an assembly to draft a new constitution must also derive from another referendum to determine whether Thais favoured a new constitution."

 

But when the Prayut junta came to power it unilaterally abolished the 2007 constitution and through its unelected Five River surrogates drafted a new one without public approval. It then passed a Referendum Act to forbid any public discussion as to its proposed rewrite in order to validate the constitution.

• Where was the Constitutional Court to protect the Thai People's 2007 Constitution?
• Where was the consistency of the Court's ruling that any amendment to the Constitution required a referendum?
• Where was the Constitutional Court to assure Thais were represented in a completely new constitution, not just amendments, and their subsequent fair and open participation in its validation?

The Constitutional Court is not the Thai People's court. It appears its loyalty belongs elsewhere.

 

On 3/11/2018 at 6:37 AM, YetAnother said:

trying to defend or even make sense of thailand's legal system is a tough one

 

Rule-by-law.

 

This is a feature and not a bug.

 

This is why the Constitution, with it's 279 "articles" is a bit of a joke. It really doesn't guarantee much in the way of individual rights when those rights are subject to both "interpretation" by the "authorities: (CC) and over-ruled by "organic" laws.