Not following Junta plan could soon be a crime - for 20 years

[holy cow cm]

Here comes one of the last strategic final blows being implemented by them. No chance of change or going against the butt cheek winds they are putting in place. If one starts to question and move another direction, the person or persons will be immediately arrested. No wiggle room. No one has a chance to change anything as it will go against the Junta's 20 year slavery rule. 

[KiwiKiwi]

Unbelievable in the 21st Century that a group of unelected officials, fat cats and corrupt power-hungry narcissists who grabbed power at the point of a gun could behave in this manner.

 

I think very poorly of Thais in general (which I'm sure has been obvious), yet somehow, Prayuth and his band of thieves seem to have an even lower opinion of them if they expect them to need or want this nonsense.

 

It's just the landed gentry making a final play for their wealth in perpetuity, and assuming that they won't have to fights a civil war to do so. That's all. They understand the Thai people pretty well, after all, they've been a party to exploiting them for several decades. Them and others.

 

One sure way of seizing back power is for Thais to disband the armed forces, fire all the police and start again, and sack all the senior civil servants and judges. Plus, introduce a super tax on the wealthy. 95% of all wealth and assets, payable immediately. Don't like it? Leave.

 

That's would be a good start. I believe that those measures would resolve 80% of Thailands problems.

 

Edited June 12, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[Eric Loh]

More confusion. Just this year junta deputy spokesman, NLA and Strategic plan member Adm Pallop NLA categorically said there is no need to follow the plan. 

 

https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/thai/strategic-plan-06262017133442.html

 

Another deputy spokesman Weerachon said this March that the plan when finalized need public hearing before it can become law.

 

What the hell is happening? This junta government is just so disorganized that it is frightening. 

 

 

[AGareth2]

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

More confusion. Just this year junta deputy spokesman, NLA and Strategic plan member Adm Pallop NLA categorically said there is no need to follow the plan. 

 

https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/thai/strategic-plan-06262017133442.html

 

Another deputy spokesman Weerachon said this March that the plan when finalized need public hearing before it can become law.

 

What the hell is happening? This junta government is just so disorganized that it is frightening. 

 

 

a way to delay any election

[KiwiKiwi]

It seems to me the first job of an incoming government would best be to arrest all member of the NLA, all army generals, all judges and all ministers then put them in a specially designed black site, far away from what passes for civilisation in this place.

 

Confiscate wealth and assets immediately.

 

Yes, draconian, but this Gordian Knot needs to be sliced asunder, as quickly as possible.

[Eric Loh]

7 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

a way to delay any election

Maybe but technically unlikely to derail the legal progression to the election. My take that this was just a personal comment and I wouldn't take him seriously. Until the NLA gone through the process of making this plan a law, I will discard what he said. 

[bheard]

I believe it was never really here in the first place. (Democracy). There has always been a form of Thai democracy but it was hardly a full version of democracy with real checks and balances.
 
The 20 year plan is crazy if its too strict, though planning a bit further ahead would not be a bad thing for stuff like watermanagement (Prayut has neglected it). Seems like every government comes up with new plans for the flooding but it never survives a next government. These kind of things should be in such a plan.  What Prayut puts into it is just too restrictive.
 
It would be nice if they could decrease army spending and abolish the draft as been suggested. 

How can you have democracy if you don't have free speech? As you say, it's never been here anyway, and the upcoming election won't change that.

Sent from my E5823 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[tomta]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

If they get enough votes they can amend the constitution ? Did YL not try something similar ? 

 

Or does the senate with its part appointed senators is too powerful to ever overcome ? 

Fully appointed senate now.

[tomta]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

If they get enough votes they can amend the constitution ? Did YL not try something similar ? 

 

Or does the senate with its part appointed senators is too powerful to ever overcome ? 

I could be wrong about this but as I remembered Pheau Thai proposed to reinvent the fully elected senate instead of the 50% appointed senate which the 2006 army constitution put in place. The COnstitution Court rejected this as an un1onstitutional law because in some way it would undermine the "democracy with the monarch as head of state". So finally we end up with the army's 100 % appointed senate. Obviously, much more democratic and constitutional. The thing is Robblok, if you are part of the wrong team, it doesn't matter how many votes you get you can't do anything - you can't change the constitution, you can't pass bills that the yellows don't like, you can't appoint your own governmental advisors (Yingluck was fired by the CC for doing that), you can't govern in the way you want because you'll be stymied by a coup if you try

[robblok]

Just now, tomta said:

I could be wrong about this but as I remembered Pheau Thai proposed to reinvent the fully elected senate instead of the 50% appointed senate which the 2006 army constitution put in place. The COnstitution Court rejected this as an un1onstitutional law because in some way it would undermine the "democracy with the monarch as head of state". So finally we end up with the army's 100 % appointed senate. Obviously, much more democratic and constitutional. The thing is Robblok, if you are part of the wrong team, it doesn't matter how many votes you get you can't do anything - you can't change the constitution, you can't pass bills that the yellows don't like, you can't appoint your own governmental advisors (Yingluck was fired by the CC for doing that), you can't govern in the way you want because you'll be stymied by a coup if you try

Your actually wrong, as i recall this too. They could do it they just could not replace the whole constitution in one go. There were ways to change part of the constitution.

 

The YL case and the adviser had a little bit more to it but not going to argue that as you seem to be happy with your interpretation.

 

I seem to recall YL her goverment got plenty done and so will a next government whoever comes to power. It is bad that its hard to change some things but its not impossible. 

 

[sjaak327]

I disagree about checks and balances being in place and that Thailand its democracy was mature like western ones. You are just deluding yourself to even think this way. But i said it again lets agree to disagree as we will never see eye to eye here.
 
Many law makers felt as long as the government was in place they could revive it so your opinion was not 100% shared, and its a peoples right to protest and thankfully it brought down the Shins. You do remember how miraculously his name appeared between readings while it was assured he would stay out of it. Does not sound much like a real democracy, and governments that pull that kinds of stunts cant be trusted hence nobody believed them they would not revive the amnesty. They made the coup possible far easier as it ever has been there have even been news articles with PTP figures where they admitted so.
 
The coup was indeed for what you say it was for but PTP made it easy created the perfect situation for it too happen. I mean if your enemy has a gun you don't have to load it for him and place it at your head to make things easier. 
 
I agree that for most things 20 years is too long and that this plan is only for the junta's benefit, but i disagree that 20 year plans don't have their value, especially for water management. I said it before each goverment is constantly changing the plans of the last and in the end nothing happens. A 20 year plan would take care of that and save the people (and me) from some flooding. So yes I am for those kind of 20 year plans. The same can be said for garbage problems, it takes longer then 4 years so master plans can be useful.

They were unable to revive the amnesty, as the house was already dissolved. The only way to revive it was a renewed mandate. Thailand had a mature democracy, the only problem is a small group of people that never supported democracy because it ends their control of the country and it's resources. No delusion, facts that is supported by undisputable evidence.

As to 20 year plans, you are wrong, nobody can forsee circumstances 20 year in advance and that includes water management. Take the Netherlands, any suggestion that future governments should follow a 20 year plan (drafted by whom I wonder) would be laughed away. As it is simply ridiculous.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

[Baerboxer]

16 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

So even with a valid and solid mandate, any government is still bound to a twenty year road map drafted by people who lack such mandate and broke the law to be in this position.

Does anyone believe democracy will return to Thailand...

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk
 

 

Don't think democracy ever actually existed here. 

 

But this idea of elected future governments having to work to the rules and plans laid down for 20 years is Orwellian and somehow makes me think of Franco!

 

 

[sjaak327]

Yes then if you got some fanatic supporters of the army your screwed. I do see logic in 20% of oposition MP's but in this case its a hurdle. 

I do not, and so should no Democrat. In normal democracies to change the constitution, a realistic high turnout is needed, in quite a few it is 2/3 or 67%. Even if it is just 20% of the opposition, a government with say 70% of the seats, would still be unable to amend the constitution..

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

They were unable to revive the amnesty, as the house was already dissolved. The only way to revive it was a renewed mandate. Thailand had a mature democracy, the only problem is a small group of people that never supported democracy because it ends their control of the country and it's resources. No delusion, facts that is supported by undisputable evidence.

As to 20 year plans, you are wrong, nobody can forsee circumstances 20 year in advance and that includes water management. Take the Netherlands, any suggestion that future governments should follow a 20 year plan (drafted by whom I wonder) would be laughed away. As it is simply ridiculous. 

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk
 

Your wrong about the Netherlands there are quite a few projects that take longer governments, other governments honor this unlike here where things get scrapped all the time. YL had a water plan but far too late it never started, now Prayut scrapped YL her plan made an other one and still nothing has been done, guess what the next government will do with the water plan. (unless its a junta government). Here you need to put something in law otherwise it wont survive a new government. In a mature democracy like the Netherlands you don't have problems like that, so yes they would laugh about it because its not an issue. Here however things are different. 

 

Thailand had a mature democracy.. good to see many people here in the topic don't agree with you.. so as I said lets agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye. In a mature democracy you don't send everyone home and hold secret votes at 4:30 am. In a mature democracy you don't let others vote for you (remember the PTP MP's caught voting for each-other and their pitiful excuses), i could go on but you would not agree anyway so i save my energy.

[robblok]

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

I do not, and so should no Democrat. In normal democracies to change the constitution, a realistic high turnout is needed, in quite a few it is 2/3 or 67%. Even if it is just 20% of the opposition, a government with say 70% of the seats, would still be unable to amend the constitution..

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk
 

I agree a government with 70% of the seats should be able to change the constitution. I was talking about changing the constitution with lower numbers then it seems logical that you will have t convince some of the opposition. 

[Baerboxer]

9 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

They were unable to revive the amnesty, as the house was already dissolved. The only way to revive it was a renewed mandate. Thailand had a mature democracy, the only problem is a small group of people that never supported democracy because it ends their control of the country and it's resources. No delusion, facts that is supported by undisputable evidence.

As to 20 year plans, you are wrong, nobody can forsee circumstances 20 year in advance and that includes water management. Take the Netherlands, any suggestion that future governments should follow a 20 year plan (drafted by whom I wonder) would be laughed away. As it is simply ridiculous.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk
 

 

Thailand have never had a mature democracy. The number of coups since 1932 would indicate otherwise, as would the non existence of an independent, fair to all, unbiased robust justice system, complete with the necessary checks and balances which are enforced fairly, to all without any selectivity. A democracy isn't just about voting once every few years.

 

PTP and their opponents were in a headlong rush to get control. PTP contrived to get Thaksin an amnesty. First they cheated the parliamentary process, which they didn't have to as they had a majority lo! But they probably suspected the likely massive public outcry. Yingluck claimed all versions, and there were several, had been withdrawn. She lied. The one that benefited Thaksin hadn't been withdrawn when the senate voted against it. If PTP had kept power, either through not dissolving parliament or be gaining re-election then the bill would have returned to the lower house and been put into law, or re-introduced with a new mandate justification. That, together with the refusal to stop the attacks on protesters by their supporters was enough of an excuse for the coup, for which some had been itching.

 

The small group of people that vie for control and enjoy fabulous wealth included the  Shiniwattra family and the group that supports them as well as their opponents.

 

 

[Dave67]

3 hours ago, candide said:

I don't see by which legal mechanism they can do it.

The same "Legal framework" The Junta used to take over a democratically elected Government

[Baerboxer]

39 minutes ago, tomta said:

I could be wrong about this but as I remembered Pheau Thai proposed to reinvent the fully elected senate instead of the 50% appointed senate which the 2006 army constitution put in place. The COnstitution Court rejected this as an un1onstitutional law because in some way it would undermine the "democracy with the monarch as head of state". So finally we end up with the army's 100 % appointed senate. Obviously, much more democratic and constitutional. The thing is Robblok, if you are part of the wrong team, it doesn't matter how many votes you get you can't do anything - you can't change the constitution, you can't pass bills that the yellows don't like, you can't appoint your own governmental advisors (Yingluck was fired by the CC for doing that), you can't govern in the way you want because you'll be stymied by a coup if you try

 

PTP also wanted to scrap the time limits senators could serve, and the rules about close family members all being elected. So some people could be effectively doing the job for life, and scrutinizing bills that their husband, brother, sister, cousin etc had proposed. Providing they got elected, of course.

 

YL fired someone purely because she wanted to move someone into that role so she could put a relation into a strategic role. All very Borgiaesque. But she didn't correctly follow the rules, or her advisers and minions didn't.

 

Although there are plenty of loopholes that these hisos can exploit there are also it seems, plenty of little rules that can be used to get rid when required. Minefield. and deliberately created to be.

[tomta]

2 minutes ago, Dave67 said:

The same "Legal framework" The Junta used to take over a democratically elected Government

Yes, that's what I was thinking. Ironic. The next PT or Future Party leader will need to have a self-coup, amnesty, interim constitution. How far would they get with that? One never knows. Certainly, I think they have got to come in after the election and throw their weight around, sack generals and civil servants, generally create mayhem. Yingluck tried softly softly and it didn;t work. Hang a few generals pour encourager les autres

[KiwiKiwi]

15 minutes ago, tomta said:

Yes, that's what I was thinking. Ironic. The next PT or Future Party leader will need to have a self-coup, amnesty, interim constitution. How far would they get with that? One never knows. Certainly, I think they have got to come in after the election and throw their weight around, sack generals and civil servants, generally create mayhem. Yingluck tried softly softly and it didn;t work. Hang a few generals pour encourager les autres

 

Agreed. Sow a little mayhem and discourage another coup by making examples of those who led this one. When Himself interferes, ignore it, the country can no longer afford him and many would argue do not even want him.

[toybits]

Repackaging of the LM law.

 

[mtls2005]

In a pinch, the PTB can find at least one "law" with which to charge those it finds objectionable, aka "show me the man and I'll show you the crime".

 

This 20-year mandate is really just another attempt to control the pesky politicians who might want to help the masses and to reduce the number of military take-overs, which make the country look banana-republic-ish. 

[Eric Loh]

28 minutes ago, tomta said:

. Hang a few generals pour encourager les autres

Actually there really no need for extreme. Just change the military promotion committee to have a better representation for selection and denied those incumbents committee members selecting their own people. Base on merits and loyalty to the country rather than loyalty to their factions like the Burapha or Wongthewan. Just as important is to change the Commander of the 1st Army which is based in Bangkok and have been the fore front of most coups. The 1st Army commander tend to become Army Chief and that’s not by merits or coincidence.

[Redline]

Easy, rewrite the constitution.  Let the military come back, and see how that goes over.  We love China

[chama]

23 hours ago, sjaak327 said:

So even with a valid and solid mandate, any government is still bound to a twenty year road map drafted by people who lack such mandate and broke the law to be in this position.

Does anyone believe democracy will return to Thailand...

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk
 

Hopefully a group and its leadership will come into power with some sense and enough political savvy to undo this foolishness without facing a penalty. Once out of power the Junta's teeth will be fairly well dulled.

[sjaak327]

 

Thailand have never had a mature democracy. The number of coups since 1932 would indicate otherwise, as would the non existence of an independent, fair to all, unbiased robust justice system, complete with the necessary checks and balances which are enforced fairly, to all without any selectivity. A democracy isn't just about voting once every few years.

 

PTP and their opponents were in a headlong rush to get control. PTP contrived to get Thaksin an amnesty. First they cheated the parliamentary process, which they didn't have to as they had a majority lo! But they probably suspected the likely massive public outcry. Yingluck claimed all versions, and there were several, had been withdrawn. She lied. The one that benefited Thaksin hadn't been withdrawn when the senate voted against it. If PTP had kept power, either through not dissolving parliament or be gaining re-election then the bill would have returned to the lower house and been put into law, or re-introduced with a new mandate justification. That, together with the refusal to stop the attacks on protesters by their supporters was enough of an excuse for the coup, for which some had been itching.

 

The small group of people that vie for control and enjoy fabulous wealth included the  Shiniwattra family and the group that supports them as well as their opponents.

 

 

They did dissolve the house, so the bill could only have been passed by a renewed mandate. Considering the outcry, such mandate would certainly legitimize their efforts. But I understand the Thai electorate is of no consequence.

 

again a small part of the Thai citizens cannot handle democracy, it is the same group of people that is behind the coups and has a lasting influence in the justice system l. Time for these people to stop the

 

There never is a justification for a coup. The amnesty had nothing to do with it. Remember the amnesty that actually became a reality? How stupid people can be, unbelievable.

 

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[humbug]

all the treasonous members of this cartel should be thrown into jail and all assets taken. 

 

But with the slippery democrats around and the senators then this 20 year strategy will be here to stay like  a straightjacket. 

 

Until the next world financial crisis and whilst they've all got their greedy snouts in the cookie jar the country will be in deep crisis and that will hasten the Revolution.

[JAG]

10 hours ago, candide said:

See my post #51. Actually, Suthep will be able to block any amendment through his party, without needing to protest.

That's why the Junta decided  very tough laws against protests. The yellows will not need to protest any more as there are several mechanisms in place to legally achieve their aims. Only people opposed to the army will need to protest as the constitution locks nearly everything in.

I see what you mean. Messy looks more and more likely, once the realisation sinks in...

[JAG]

8 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

YL fired someone purely because she wanted to move someone into that role so she could put a relation into a strategic role. 

She fired a national security advisor or similar, yes?

Hadn't he gone public with something along the lines of not liking Pheu Thai, not approving of their policies, and was therefore not prepared to co operate with or work with them?

It's the oversimplification of these fairly critical points which rather weakens your campaign to justify the coup and the forestalling of an elected government.

As you said elsewhere on this thread "democracy is not just having an election every few years." You are right, but without having an election every few years you cannot have a democracy, using the military to stage a coup to prevent an election is the absolute antithesis of democracy, and that, let us be realistic, is what you persistently attempt to justify.

[sjaak327]

Your wrong about the Netherlands there are quite a few projects that take longer governments, other governments honor this unlike here where things get scrapped all the time. YL had a water plan but far too late it never started, now Prayut scrapped YL her plan made an other one and still nothing has been done, guess what the next government will do with the water plan. (unless its a junta government). Here you need to put something in law otherwise it wont survive a new government. In a mature democracy like the Netherlands you don't have problems like that, so yes they would laugh about it because its not an issue. Here however things are different. 
 
Thailand had a mature democracy.. good to see many people here in the topic don't agree with you.. so as I said lets agree to disagree because we will never see eye to eye. In a mature democracy you don't send everyone home and hold secret votes at 4:30 am. In a mature democracy you don't let others vote for you (remember the PTP MP's caught voting for each-other and their pitiful excuses), i could go on but you would not agree anyway so i save my energy.

Oh please I live in the Netherlands. There is a difference between voluntarily honoring plans put in by previous governments and being forced to do so by law.

Let alone a 20 year road map, there is no such thing there, water management isn't even the responsibility of the government, we have separate branch of local government handling this, and they don't use plans 20 years old.

Sent from my SM-J730GM using Tapatalk