Wissanu defends Prayut, stresses ‘state employee’ not the same as ‘state authority’

[webfact]

Wissanu defends Prayut, stresses ‘state employee’ not the same as ‘state authority’

By The Nation

 

 

Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam defended Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha during the first day of the policy debate on Thursday after an opposition MP said Prayut was not qualified to contest the post of prime minister.

 

The debate started by Wan Yubamrung, a Bangkok MP with the Pheu Thai party, on the subject of Prayut’s qualifications prompted several coalition-leader Phalang Pracharat MPs to protest that Wan’s statement was irrelevant to the policy debate.

 

Wan argued that the debate was relevant because Prayut should not enforce government policies as premier because he had not been qualified to become the Phalang Pracharat’s candidate for prime minister in the first place because he fell into the category of “other state authorities”.

 

Wan noted that the constitution prohibited state and other state authorities from becoming a prime ministerial candidate in general elections.

 

Wan also cited a ruling by the Supreme Court which convicted a group of coup protesters for violating state employee orders. Wan also told the meeting that a group of 110 opposition MPs has filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court, asking it to disqualify Prayut as the prime minister and Prayut should therefore not be in Parliament delivering the government policy statement.

 

Wan was occasionally interrupted by protesting Phalang Pracharat MPs, leading Parliament President Chuan Leekpai, who was chairing the meeting, to remind Wan to adhere to government policies, instead of attacking the prime minister. Chuan also told Wan not to mention the case which is ongoing in the Constitutional Court.

 

After Wan ended his speech, Wissanu, who supervises legal affairs, rose to explain that the government submitted a written defence to the Constitutional Court on Thursday, insisting that Prayut is not unqualified as alleged by the 110 MPs.

 

Wissanu noted that the Supreme Court’s ruling that convicted protesters for violating the order of the chief of the National Council for Peace and Order did not state that Prayut was a “state authority” as alleged by Wan. Instead, the ruling stated that the protesters were guilty of violating an order of a “state employee”.

 

“I hereby affirm that state employee is different from state authority. In a 2011 ruling on embezzlement by a temple abbot, the defence pointed out that the abbot was not a state authority so he should not be regarded a state employee.

 

“The court said in the ruling that an abbot is regarded as a state employee according to secular law pertaining to the monkhood but he is not a state authority under other laws. I hereby affirm that the Supreme Court’s ruling [against the protesters] did not mention that Prayut was a state authority. But the Constitutional Court will be the one to decide whether Prayut as the NCPO chief at that time was a state authority under other laws or not,” Wissanu said.

 

After Wissanu finished his speech, Prayut rose to explain that he respected the judicial system and accepted that the complaint against him has entered the judicial process. Prayut said he would accept any ruling on his qualifications by the Constitutional Court.

 

Source: https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30373694

 

-- © Copyright The Nation Thailand 2019-07-26

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Thaiwrath]

Mr P after yesterdays events !

[Hayduke]

 

That should earn him a pat on the head....and maybe even a tasty biscuit.

 

 

[FarFlungFalang]

Wissanu is now using previous court decisions as a precedence in his defence of Prayuth but denied the same use of precedence in the case of the accused MP's media shares case.Seems like a blatant case of hypocrisy to me. 

[Denim]

Well.....Mr Petulant must have taken a huge dose of valium before the session since so far he has not bitten back.

 

Pity, I was really looking forward to seeing bananas fly left right and center. 

[holy cow cm]

7 minutes ago, Denim said:

Well.....Mr Petulant must have taken a huge dose of valium before the session since so far he has not bitten back.

 

Pity, I was really looking forward to seeing bananas fly left right and center. 

You obviously didn't see the Thai news where he was standing and became unhinged a few times.

[Denim]

1 minute ago, holy cow cm said:

You obviously didn't see the Thai news where he was standing and became unhinged a few times.

 

No....missed that. What a shame.

[holy cow cm]

My family and I were eating dinner and watching the news when they focused on some times he had his moments.. We all laughed as he just can't contain himself sometimes.

Edited July 26, 2019 by holy cow cm

[tracker1]

who selects the members of the Constitutional Court ? just wondering

[BobbyL]

He walked out according to another report I read. 

[colinneil]

My wifes comment on little Ps performance was..... This is much better than any soap opera on tv.

[FarFlungFalang]

50 minutes ago, tracker1 said:

who selects the members of the Constitutional Court ? just wondering

So according to Wasn'tyou Prayuth was employed by the state to seize total control of Thailand and become the sole "AUTHORITY" for five years so can't be found to not be qualified to be PM because he was not an "AUTHORITY" because he was employed by the state.

   Wasn'tyou has been consuming to many magic mushrooms and is tripping.  

[sammieuk1]

Its an odds on bet that everything falls into the category of “other state authorities"????

[yellowboat]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Wissanu defends Prayut, stresses ‘state employee’ not the same as ‘state authority’

A treasonous coup leader is an employee.  A country with little dignity. 

[Chang_paarp]

An interesting piece of legal pretzel making. I wonder at what stage did Prayut stopped being a "state employee"?

It seems former state employees are OK in the parliament. Lots of those scattered through the chamber most spent some time between retiring and finding a new career as a politician.

 

Was it when he "retired" from the army?

He was definitely a state employee when he was a soldier, otherwise no pay.

 

Was it when he took over as PM?

He was still in the army then and spent a lot of time telling us he was not a politician (currently proving himself correct) but a servant of the people, which, given who was paying him, makes him a state employee. We have to assume he was paid to run the country for the past five years and it was not out the goodness of his heart or just his pension as a former soldier that kept the wolf from the door. If it was some benevolent third party, that would open a very large can of worms.

 

So when did he stop being a state employee?

[hotchilli]

7 hours ago, holy cow cm said:

My family and I were eating dinner and watching the news when they focused on some times he had his moments.. We all laughed as he just can't contain himself sometimes.

I was eating dinner while watching TV when they aired footage of this debacle.. I switched the set off,

Gives me indigestion.

[maxcorrigan]

On 7/26/2019 at 9:10 AM, Hayduke said:

 

That should earn him a pat on the head....and maybe even a tasty biscuit.