Jump to content

Wissanu: No law can require Gen Prayut to resign as NCPO chief


webfact

Recommended Posts

Wissanu: No law can require Gen Prayut to resign as NCPO chief

 

PNPOL610930001000301.jpg

 

BANGKOK, 1 October 2018 (NNT) – Deputy Prime Minister for Legal Affairs Wissanu Krea-ngam has confirmed that Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha is not obligated to step down as head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). 

Asked about Gen Prayut’s future after declaring his interest in politics, DPM Wissanu said Gen Prayut doesn’t have to resign as NCPO chief whether he wishes to join a political party or decides to run in the forthcoming election. 

He added that Gen Prayut’s interest in politics doesn’t come as a surprise because the premier has always cared about the country’s future and the wellbeing of Thai citizens. 

Similarly, Wissanu said other cabinet members are allowed to join a party or stay on as a political office holder. 

He also declined to comment on whether or not he will join the next elected government if invited, but said he doesn’t see himself as a party member.

 
nnt_logo.jpg
-- nnt 2018-10-01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Gen Prayut doesn’t have to resign as NCPO chief whether he wishes to join a political party or decides to run in the forthcoming election. 

 

Well, the constitution specifically states that no member of the NCPO can run in the election, which is why they were trying to go the whole "outsider PM" route.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Wissanu: No law can require Gen Prayut to resign as NCPO chief

Of course not. You have not written such a law, therefore such a law can not apply. Because it does not exist. QED, dodo.

And just for giggles:

If you had written such a law, Prayut could use his Article 44 to amend, distort, bend, torque and twist it to suit his goals. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SABloke said:

 

Well, the constitution specifically states that no member of the NCPO can run in the election, which is why they were trying to go the whole "outsider PM" route.

I couldn't find any constitutional provision that "specifically" bars any of the six members of the NCPO from running in the first election. Do you have a constitutional article/section in mind?

 

Irrespective -

The Constitution actually allows itself to be legally overruled under Article 265 wherein it recognizes NCPO's absolute power to take whatever actions it decides as legal. NCPO's power remains in place until AFTER royal endorsement of the newly elected government.

 

The "whole outsider PM route" I thought was intended as a backup in the event that Prayut nor anyone else isn't directly elected by a constitutional majority of the newly elected NLA ministers. Then the NCPO-appointed Senators can add their 250 votes to the election of the PM. Prayut can then likely be elected no matter whether he ran as a party nominated leader or not (the "outsider").

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jimbo in Thailand said:

 

 

So many great comments in this thread.  Wonder when the locals are finally going to see this thing for what it really is... the early stages of a dictatorship—elections or not. 

 

And folks, we ain't seen nothin' yet.  If you've been paying attention you already know that Fearless Leader P has been slowly but surely tightening the anti-freedom screws on everyone living here since the coup.  If you've had to deal with government agencies here, like I have, you'll notice an elevated paranoia and state of fear among employees.  Many are terrified of making a mistake so aren't about to stick their necks out by making a decision on their own.  The 'best' is yet to come folks. :shock1:

 

Will the locals ever wake up?

I believe the locals are awake to what this junta is.

They just lack the necessary huge guts to do anything about it.

It's basically as simple as that. Take away the guns and threats of imprisonment - and the bulk of the Thai people would kick out this bunch of autocrats tomorrow. They see through them.

 

But risking their neck for their children's future liberty and political dignity - is not something that most Thais have the mettle to do. Maybe a younger generation will ...

 

Edited by Eligius
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, zzaa09 said:

That is, unless an incoming opposing government decides to dissolve NCPO and other purely rhetorical associations. 

I guess, in theory, this could come about.

The only way you could repeal the NCP at this stage, is to have another coup.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

I couldn't find any constitutional provision that "specifically" bars any of the six members of the NCPO from running in the first election. Do you have a constitutional article/section in mind?

 

Irrespective -

The Constitution actually allows itself to be legally overruled under Article 265 wherein it recognizes NCPO's absolute power to take whatever actions it decides as legal. NCPO's power remains in place until AFTER royal endorsement of the newly elected government.

 

The "whole outsider PM route" I thought was intended as a backup in the event that Prayut nor anyone else isn't directly elected by a constitutional majority of the newly elected NLA ministers. Then the NCPO-appointed Senators can add their 250 votes to the election of the PM. Prayut can then likely be elected no matter whether he ran as a party nominated leader or not (the "outsider").

 

 

 

I can't point you to an article/section, but I clearly remember reading many articles stating that Prayuth would have to resign by so-n-so a date, because the members of the NCPO couldn't run in the election. Here are two, for example. 

 

"Technically Prayuth cannot stand for election under the constitution, because he would have needed to have resigned from his post since 2017 to do so."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics/thai-pm-sets-sept-deadline-to-decide-on-role-in-politics-ahead-of-election-idUSKBN1KZ10P

 

"While Prayuth cannot technically run for election, as to do so he would have had to resign by July,..."

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2017/09/thailand-election-2/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, z42 said:

So in essence, the rules can be interpreted however those illegally in power currently spin it.

 

There is no law that says a coup is illegal if the coup was successful.  It's only the unsuccessful coups that are sanctioned. :whistling:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jimbo in Thailand said:

 

 

So many great comments in this thread.  Wonder when the locals are finally going to see this thing for what it really is... the early stages of a dictatorship—elections or not. 

 

And folks, we ain't seen nothin' yet.  If you've been paying attention you already know that Fearless Leader P has been slowly but surely tightening the anti-freedom screws on everyone living here since the coup.  If you've had to deal with government agencies here, like I have, you'll notice an elevated paranoia and state of fear among employees.  Many are terrified of making a mistake so aren't about to stick their necks out by making a decision on their own.  The 'best' is yet to come folks. :shock1:

 

Will the locals ever wake up?

 

They have been acting a bit strange: I recently applied for a re-entry permit and they (2 IO's) had a long chat over my passport - the one was asking the other one why I was flying around the world for only 3 nights - none of their business, I say. Then, upon leaving, the IO at passport control questioned me about a 3 week extension I got from Chaengwattana. I told her that that CW had suddenly made up new rules and added documents (Police Clearance) to my required list for my work extension and so they "graciously" gave me 3 weeks to get it (I say graciously because the requirement does not exist on any piece of Immigration Police literature so unless you know, you don't - so they gave me 3 weeks). So then she left with my passport and came back 5 minutes later, apologized and let me leave. Finally, upon returning to Thailand, the IO asked me all sorts of questions regarding my current employer, previous employer, length of current contract and length of future contracts. 10 years crossing all my T's and dotting my I's and yet she's questioning me when I'm re-entering (already jumped through all the hoops getting my extension done, so don't see why the border patrol are suddenly so interested in my comings and goings)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SABloke said:

 

I can't point you to an article/section, but I clearly remember reading many articles stating that Prayuth would have to resign by so-n-so a date, because the members of the NCPO couldn't run in the election. Here are two, for example. 

 

"Technically Prayuth cannot stand for election under the constitution, because he would have needed to have resigned from his post since 2017 to do so."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics/thai-pm-sets-sept-deadline-to-decide-on-role-in-politics-ahead-of-election-idUSKBN1KZ10P

 

"While Prayuth cannot technically run for election, as to do so he would have had to resign by July,..."

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2017/09/thailand-election-2/

However a good number of us know / knew they will simply ignore the law / rules / constitution if any or all of them cause the junta the slightest inconvenience...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SABloke said:

 

I can't point you to an article/section, but I clearly remember reading many articles stating that Prayuth would have to resign by so-n-so a date, because the members of the NCPO couldn't run in the election. Here are two, for example. 

 

"Technically Prayuth cannot stand for election under the constitution, because he would have needed to have resigned from his post since 2017 to do so."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thailand-politics/thai-pm-sets-sept-deadline-to-decide-on-role-in-politics-ahead-of-election-idUSKBN1KZ10P

 

"While Prayuth cannot technically run for election, as to do so he would have had to resign by July,..."

https://asiancorrespondent.com/2017/09/thailand-election-2/

As we've seen with previous PM's, they did not have to resign as PM to engage in the national election. But they had to place the executive into "caretaker" status which among other things places limits on a PM's executive power. Yingluck did not resign for the snap elections.

 

In any case the Reuter's article (the Asian article doesn't lend much towards the issue of a PM having to resign) makes the statement,

"Technically Prayuth cannot stand for election under the constitution, because he would have needed to have resigned from his post since 2017 to do so."

There is no elaboration. With regard to timelines, the NCPO follows its own "roadmap" timelines which provide for unspecified delays that are not constitutionally identified nor mandated. As such the article may be misleading as to when Prayut would have to resign from "his post."

Furthermore, with regards to "his post," Prayut serves in two posts: PM and Chief of the NCPO. Which singular post does Reuters address? My guess is PM.

 

The challenge at hand is the statement that Prayut must resign as Chief of the NCPO as a prelude to the general election. I find nothing in the Constitution that requires his resignation as Chief of NCPO except after endorsement of the new government.

 

Reuter's reference to "technically" may be misleading as well. There is in practice two constitutions within the 2017 Constitution. One represents what I'd call the normal course of government affairs and one that represents the transition period to the next installed government. Articles 262 through 279 describe those "Transitory Provisions." NCPO's use of absolute power lies in those transitory provisions under Article 265 for example. So I'm not sure that Reuters understood that until a newly elected NLA and Executive branches of government are installed, the transitory provisions apply and would overrule any technical provisions preceding Article 262.

 

Two years after the drafting of the 2017 Constitution, the Thai people are now only beginning to understand the complex barriers it places against the Thai people's sovereignty as the nation transitions from a military government to a democratic government. Based on recent polls it would seem a majority of the polity still isn't ready to fully grasp the "governance trap" that the junta has placed them in.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2018 at 7:36 PM, Cadbury said:

Even if there was such a law PM Prayut could use his self mandated Article 44 to remove it from the statutes; or easier still just ignore it.

This is the real issue...and if he were to use Article 44 would there be a reaction at the polls? One can only hope the Thais are fed up with the heavy armed politics being exercised for the past 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...