Ball in PM’s court on petitioning court: Abhisit

[webfact]

Ball in PM’s court on petitioning court: Abhisit

By Jakkawan Salaetoo 
The Nation

 

 

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has the power to petition the Constitutional Court for its interpretation on the controversial MP election bill and also ensure the election is held as specified in the road map, Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said on Thursday.
 

“It’s not a case of whether he can or cannot do. He has absolute power and the question is what he chooses to do,” said Abhisit.

 

The MP election bill was submitted to Prayut on Monday. He will have five days to consider whether or not to petition the court for an interpretation and ruling on the bill, as empowered by the law.

 

The bill is among the two that are controversial with regard to their constitutionality despite being passed by the National Legislative Assembly and even reviewed by the joint law review committee to settle differences that arose after the NLA’s approval.

 

The Constitutional Drafting Commission (CDC) still disagrees with some of the bill’s contents that were endorsed by the committee and the NLA, citing they would contradict the Constitution.

 

In the Senate selection bill, the CDC pointed out that the origin of the senator candidates, which includes those coming from professional associations, may go against the charter.

 

In the MP election bill, the CDC was concerned that the assistance provided to the disabled by officials at polling centres would go against the principle of direct and secret voting specified in the charter.

 

Some NLA members decided to petition the court to rule on the point raised in the Senate bill, but not those in the MP election bill, saying this would affect the election road map.

 

The PM, hence, would have the option of petitioning as stipulated in the charter.

 

Prayut, however, said on Tuesday he would not intervene in the issue, leaving it to the NLA to solve the problem.

 

Abhisit said the issue arose because concerned parties were unsure of what they had decided.

 

However, he said the issue should be clarified by the court so that problems would not arise later.

 

What people fear is that if the MP election bill is promulgated in this form, affected parties would petition the court to nullify the election.

 

Abhisit said Prayut is in a position to help solve this problem, while ensuring the election road map remains intact.

 

Abhisit projected that the election could still be held around February, and the Democrat Party was ready for it.

 

He declined to confirm if the Democrats would join other parties in proposing Prayut to be the PM after the election, saying he would consider whether their policies were in line with those of his party.

 

The Democrat leader said he would elaborate his directives as well as other party administrative work on April 1, when existing political parties are allowed to start administrative work.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30341515

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-03-23

[YetAnother]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Abhisit said the issue arose because concerned parties were unsure of what they had decided.

not the premier trait our lawmakers should possess

[gabruce]

I like this objection too: "In the MP election bill, the CDC was concerned that the assistance provided to the disabled by officials at polling centres would go against the principle of direct and secret voting specified in the charter. "

No special treatment in general. Is it better though that if someone is disabled in some fashion that they need assistance to vote that instead of getting assistance they not vote?

 

Edited March 23, 2018 by gabruce

[coulson]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

on April 1, when existing political parties are allowed to start administrative work

Unless the lifting of ban is a hoax, that is

 

[rkidlad]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

“It’s not a case of whether he can or cannot do. He has absolute power and the question is what he chooses to do,” said Abhisit

Yes, exactly. Every time he blames someone else, or says he didn't know, etc, it all boils back down to this. He can do whatever he wants to and he has no one but himself to blame. 

[Srikcir]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

“It’s not a case of whether he can or cannot do. He has absolute power and the question is what he chooses to do,”

 

10 hours ago, webfact said:

He will have five days to consider whether or not to petition the court for an interpretation and ruling on the bill, as empowered by the law.

No, it's not the case where Prayut has absolute power that Abhisit seems so enamored with to make a decision.

It's a case of Prayut as Prime Minister doing his job as PM as empowered by the law!

Following the law is something that both Abhisit and Prayut seem mostly ambivalent about.