EC’s decision to give every party a chance raises concerns

By The Nation

 

THE Election Commission (EC) revealed on Friday that it will calculate MP-seat allocation based on a formula that will allow more than 25 parties to be present in the Lower House. This decision was made after different interpretations of the law were debated extensively.

 

The agency’s public relations team said the commissioners will stick to the formula proposed to them by the now-defunct charter drafting team. This formula was based on stipulations in the Constitution and the MP election laws, they said. “The aim is to give importance to every vote,” they explained. “The agency has already consulted with commissioners and they agree on this.” 

 

This calculation method will have party-list MPs come from at least 25 parties, the agency said, despite concerns that a multi-party government will be unstable. 

 

Concerns are also looming that of these 25 parties, some had only won a little over 30,000 votes, when initial calculations showed that parties need roughly 70,000 votes to be allocated one seat. 

 

However, the EC pointed out that this was only an initial calculation and that official results will only be ready once all the re-counts and re-elections are completed. 

 

While the EC insists this calculation allows every vote to truly count as intended by the Constitution, experts are worried that this may also be unconstitutional, considering the law that says parties should not be given seats they were not apportioned.

 

Meanwhile, despite fierce criticism against its questionable performance, the EC has gone ahead and filed defamation lawsuits against political activist Nuttaa Mahuttana and political critic Sirote Klampaiboon.

 

In a Facebook post on Friday, Sirote said he had received summonses demanding that he and Nuttaa report to police on April 11. The complaint against the pair had been filed by the EC’s legal chief Nawat Boonsri, accusing them of jointly defaming the EC. 

 

Sirote, perplexed about what he had done to defame the EC, also said this is the first time in his life that he has received a summons from the police. 

 

Nuttaa said on Facebook that the charge against her may have stemmed from a special news programme the two of them hosted on election day. Both have promised to report to police as ordered.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30367261

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2019-04-07

3 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

Meanwhile, despite fierce criticism against its questionable performance, the EC has gone ahead and filed defamation lawsuits against political activist Nuttaa Mahuttana and political critic Sirote Klampaiboon.

blame game and the idiotic defamation following their own incompetence; classic thai

The EC simply does not have the credibility to conduct the election anymore; proof is an announcement on how they will count votes/allocate seats occurring many days after the election itself.

 

The election, on the surface, was designed to restore some legitimacy to the Thai government following the latest coup; this thin veneer has already been wiped away. Unfortunately, Thailand does not have many strong institutions upon which to fall back on in times of dispute, and thus doesn't have an agreed upon dispute-resolution mechanism. And, when there isn't an agreed upon dispute-resolution mechanism, bad things happen.

 

Batten down the hatches everyone; things are going to get... interesting.

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 20197 yr by Samui Bodoh

27 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

However, the EC pointed out that this was only an initial calculation and that official results will only be ready once all the re-counts and re-elections are completed. 

And if that initial calculation doesn't achieve the desired results for the junta then the EC could always have ongoing reinterpretations of what appears to be very flexible Rafferty's Rules.

In short, there is no mathematical formula. They just decided to give a seat to parties that have too few votes.

6 minutes ago, candide said:

In short, there is no mathematical formula. They just decided to give a seat to parties that have too few votes.

"Good People" though I am sure, all of them. Not one seditious foreign educated traitor amongst them...

2 hours ago, rooster59 said:

EC’s decision to give every party a chance raises concerns

Somewhat like the Thai education examination system where every participant, including the class dunce, gets a pass mark. 

Have to take the shoes off for this one!

5 hours ago, Cadbury said:

Somewhat like the Thai education examination system where every participant, including the class dunce, gets a pass mark. 

 

That's simply not true!

8 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

The EC simply does not have the credibility to conduct the election anymore; proof is an announcement on how they will count votes/allocate seats occurring many days after the election itself.

 

The election, on the surface, was designed to restore some legitimacy to the Thai government following the latest coup; this thin veneer has already been wiped away. Unfortunately, Thailand does not have many strong institutions upon which to fall back on in times of dispute, and thus doesn't have an agreed upon dispute-resolution mechanism. And, when there isn't an agreed upon dispute-resolution mechanism, bad things happen.

 

Batten down the hatches everyone; things are going to get... interesting.

 

 

 

What the Thai people have been grudgingly granted in their "free" vote is democracy in a straitjacket. This has been o the cards ever since the junta pushed through a new constitution which entrenches military control at the expense of political parties.

 

Under its terms, it was virtually impossible for a single party to win a majority in the 500-member lower house. This gives the 250 junta-selected senators a critical role in parliament - including choosing a prime minister (guess who) who will no longer be required to be an elected member of parliament.

 

The NCPO is empowered to reserve Senate seats for its key members, including the permanent secretary of defense; the supreme commander-in-chief; the commanders-in-chief of the army, navy, and air force; and the police commissioner-general. 

 

The icing on the cake for the junta is that the constition binds both the new government and parliament to implementing their “20-year reform plan.” Effectively, the generals have highjacked Thailand's democratic and economic future.

Edited April 7, 20197 yr by Krataiboy

9 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

The EC simply does not have the credibility to conduct the election anymore; proof is an announcement on how they will count votes/allocate seats occurring many days after the election itself.

 

The election, on the surface, was designed to restore some legitimacy to the Thai government following the latest coup; this thin veneer has already been wiped away. Unfortunately, Thailand does not have many strong institutions upon which to fall back on in times of dispute, and thus doesn't have an agreed upon dispute-resolution mechanism. And, when there isn't an agreed upon dispute-resolution mechanism, bad things happen.

 

Batten down the hatches everyone; things are going to get... interesting.

 

 

 

Not entirely correct, there is a dispute-resolution mechanism, it's tied in with brown envelopes and/or who has the biggest guns. 

 

But you are correct, no real rule of law - the main reason Thailand is still 3rd world. 

Edited April 7, 20197 yr by Artisi

And once the concerns are voiced they will be accused of crimes and removed from the political stage. Good plan...not entirely ethical but it is entirely in keeping with the EC behavior.