19 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Maybe even electricity!

He is even three years older than...Trump!

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

"approved in a public referendum"

 

Let's put that part in perspective:  The approval was presented as the only option to have an election, no one was allowed to present objections to the proposed constitution, the junta used government resources to educate the people about how to vote, and, once approved, the "approved" constitution was changed to accommodate someone who can't be named.

 

There were many defenders of this fraud on ThaiVisa. 

Appears to be the running fashion here - defending fraudulent positions.

17 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

That is from the unofficial translation of Section 158. A lot will depend on what is the exact Thai word which has been translated as "term".

I'll leave that to you.

 

The term simply means eight years over one or more terms, so he's PM for 5 years, then as a result of an election, is no longer PM. He could serve second term for up to three years.

 

 

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

no one was allowed to present objections to the proposed constitution

Just to be clear, one person was allowed to change the constitution AFTER it was said to have been publicly ratified.

 

 

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

when Prayut was appointed by royal command as PM on June 9, 2019, after the general election in March that year."

I think the Constitutional Court would support this interpretation. I would too, not that it matters, as that was the intent as I understand it.

 

Until that point he was the head of the NCPO and quasi-self-appointed pm, which illegally (until they granted themselves amnesty) gained power by means of a military coup.

 

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

17 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

That is from the unofficial translation of Section 158. A lot will depend on what is the exact Thai word which has been translated as "term".

I'll leave that to you.

 

The term simply means eight years over one or more terms, so he's PM for 5 years, then as a result of an election, is no longer PM. He could serve second term for up to three years.

The word  "term" doesn't simply mean anything as the English version is unofficial and you don't know that the exact Thai word hast the same meaning.

 

Especially will some claim that the tenure as PM from 2014 to 2019 by declaration of royal appointment with no election can be considered as a 'term'.

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

The word  "term" doesn't simply mean anything as the English version is unofficial and you don't know that the exact Thai word hast the same meaning.

That's why I said I'd leave it to you.

 

But certainly we're allowed to have an opinion, right?

 

I simply shared mine.

 

 

 

 

12 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

I'll leave that to you.

 

The term simply means eight years over one or more terms, so he's PM for 5 years, then as a result of an election, is no longer PM. He could serve second term for up to three years.

 

 

Just to be clear, one person was allowed to change the constitution AFTER it was said to have been publicly ratified.

 

 

I think the Constitutional Court would support this interpretation. I would too, not that it matters, as that was the intent as I understand it.

 

Until that point he was the head of the NCPO and quasi-self-appointed pm, which illegally (until they granted themselves amnesty) gained power by means of a military coup.

 

 

 

 

 

He was endorsed as head of the NCPO in May 2014 but in August 2014 he was endorsed as Prime Minister - so this must be the applicable date

5 hours ago, SatEng said:

He was endorsed as head of the NCPO in May 2014 but in August 2014 he was endorsed as Prime Minister - so this must be the applicable date

I agree.  Prayut has been Prime Minister since he took the title of Prime Minister.  The fact that he was not appointed Prime Minister until after a questionable election in 2019 doesn't mean his years holding the title and powers of PM (along with many powers a PM shouldn't have) suddenly disappear.

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

9 hours ago, SatEng said:

He was endorsed as head of the NCPO in May 2014 but in August 2014 he was endorsed as Prime Minister - so this must be the applicable date

I agree.  Prayut has been Prime Minister since he took the title of Prime Minister.  The fact that he was not appointed Prime Minister until after a questionable election in 2019 doesn't mean his years holding the title and powers of PM (along with many powers a PM shouldn't have) suddenly disappear.

Thanks guys so that's all settled.

 

3 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Thanks guys so that's all settled.

 

In a law and order country, it should be settled. In addition, he should behind bars for illegal seizure of power from a legit elected government. 

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

In a law and order country, it should be settled. In addition, he should behind bars for illegal seizure of power from a legit elected government. 

Well if you just look at the title of this topic and some of the links apparently it isn't.

7 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Well if you just look at the title of this topic and some of the links apparently it isn't.

Actually I agree with some critics that the ruling on the Constitution Court President's term limit should have no bearing on Prayut's tenure as the 2 cases differ in details. Prayut's 8 years term is quite distinctively spelled out in the Constitution. I also think that forces behind the eventual court decision will lean favourably to set a precedent for coup leaders who have in the past tend to go beyond the 8 years tenure. There is a new sheriff in town. Well that's only my opinion.

 

Well I have no opinion or prediction -- just that there are going to be persons who will argue that Prayut has not maxed out his years in office and I just try to understand what are their bases for such arguments.

The faster they can get rid of him, the better. He is leading Thailand backwards, towards undeveloped nation status. 

 

The ruling party is despised like never before. They have richly earned that hatred and disapproval. They are thugs, drug lords, and thiefs. And add to that the dismal failure of the tax program, the inability to contain Covid, and the willful sabotage of the tourism sector, and you have all the ingredients for losing a "fair election". How far out they are willing to extend themselves to secure a stolen election, remains to be seen, and so do the repercussions for such a move. 

 

The people have to make a statement, the people have to remove the 250 crony senators, and the people have to find a way to turn this nation around, and drag it back from the stone age of dinosaur leadership. 

 

Prayuth, Pratin, Anutin, and Phiphat, must go. These guys are toxic, corrosive, corrupt, ineffective, incompetent, untrustworthy, very bad for the nation, and virtually assure a rotten future for the nation, a drop to 89th place in GDP, and increasing irrelevance. They have already turned Thailand from the tiger of SE Asia, to a sorry, rabid, whiny, anemic alley cat. 

 

Edited May 10, 20224 yr by spidermike007

Well you've already said near daily that Prayut should resign but he hasn't. So I guess they'll have to try something else.

10 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

I'll leave that to you.

 

The term simply means eight years over one or more terms, so he's PM for 5 years, then as a result of an election, is no longer PM. He could serve second term for up to three years.

 

 

Just to be clear, one person was allowed to change the constitution AFTER it was said to have been publicly ratified.

 

 

I think the Constitutional Court would support this interpretation. I would too, not that it matters, as that was the intent as I understand it.

 

Until that point he was the head of the NCPO and quasi-self-appointed pm, which illegally (until they granted themselves amnesty) gained power by means of a military coup.

 

 

 

 

 

You [et al] will be reminded that all these selections, appointments and placements require special permission and blessings from behind influential curtains - as that's how it's always been. 

Certainly, you're not of the mind that such things come about without clear strategies and agendas at hand, are ya? 

 

Almost always, the critiques and allegations are mostly pursued up the wrong tree. 

As history might tell you.

On 5/9/2022 at 7:20 AM, hotchilli said:

So why is he allowed to work well beyond the normal retirement age, are their no capable, eligible workers to take over the reigns.

Or is this just a protectionist move to secure the dynasty? 

The speaker of the house, Chuan Leekpai is 83 and still serving the government of Thailand. He is also serving the Thai people if he remembers how to do that.