Proposed Constitution Clears Referendum With Comfortable Margin

[Jai Dee]

Over 50% of eligible voters in nine eastern provinces showed up at referendum booths

More than 50 percent of eligible voters in the nine eastern provinces of Thailand voted in the 2007 constitution referendum yesterday (August 19th)

The Public Relations Committee for the Constitution Referendum Director, Mr. Piti Pongpanich (นายปิติ พงษ์พานิช), says 2,3338,637 out of 3,600,793 eligible voters in the nine eastern provinces, or about 64.89 percent, participated in the national referendum. 1,424,604 voted for the charter draft while 617,652 voted against it. 32,021 were voided ballot cards.

The nine eastern provinces include Chonburi (ชลบุรี), Rayong (ระยอง), Chanthaburi (จันทบุรี), Trat (ตราด), Sa Kaeo (สระแก้ว), Prachin Buri (ปราจีนบุรี), Nakhon Nayok (นครนายก), Chachoengsao (ฉะเชิงเทรา) and Samut Prakan (สมุทรปราการ).

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 August 2007

[Jai Dee]

Thailand's political climate to become more favourable

Mae Hong Son (แม่ฮ่องสอน) Governor Direk Konkleab (ดิเรก ก้อนกลีบ) believes that Thailand’s political situation will improve after the constitution draft has been accepted among the citizens.

Mr. Direk says that the charter draft will lead to early election. He furhter added that the new elected government will be able to resolve national issues. Meanwhile, people should start considering which political parties they are in favour of.

The result of the referendum in Mae Hong Son Province reports that the majority of northern residents, 69.25%, accepted the referendum, while 30.75% of northern people rejected the charter draft.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 August 2007

[Jai Dee]

Charter approved with 57.81 per cent of votes: official results

The Election Commission officially announced Monday that the draft constitution was approved by 14.727 million of voters of 57.81 per cent of voters who exercised their rights.

A total of 25,978,954 voters or 57.61 per cent of 45,093,055 eligible voters exercised their right.

A total of 10,747,310 voters rejected the draft. They were 42.19 per cent of those who cast votes.

Source: The Nation - 20 August 2007

[roietjimmy]

roietjimmy thanxs,

will be interesting to watch the D/L counter ...........

Here's another. Bottom half can be used as a "what if" test. I have done some myself as you will see. Just change the numbers in green and see the result. The non green cells are locked but you can unlock without a password. Have fun.

Vote.xls

[Jai Dee]

Thaksin politicos agree to abide by Charter, criticise process

The Thai Rak Thai Group have recognised the as yet unofficial results of Sunday's referendum as showing public support of the newly drafted constitution, which the group remarked, is to be further amended after the general election has been held.

Group leader Chaturon Chaisaeng said his colleagues, who had gathered at the IFCT building which had earlier accommodated the headquarters of the now dissolved former Thai Rak Thai Party, had agreed to recognise the outcome of Sunday's referendum which endorsed the new charter, and that the group is prepared to move on to the path to the election campaign.

However, the group of ex-TRT MPs will pledge and put forward their resolution to amend the constitution and will make it a promise to the people during their election campaign, said the former deputy prime minister.

Mr. Chaturon called the poll-endorsed constitution ''undemocratic'' and charged the Surayud government and the Council for National Security had apparently pushed for the ultimate passage of the new charter while deterring its critics from airing their opposing views to the public.

He blamed the government and the CNS for allegedly misleading the voters into believing that a general election would not follow later this year only if the new charter did not win approval in Sunday's referendum.

The people had apparently feared so much about sustained social divisions and political conflict that they chose to vote for the new charter without giving much thought to its content, according to the group leader.

Yet, Mr. Chaturon said, Sunday's referendum out in favour of the new charter was by no means a measure or underscoring of any popularity of either the dissolved TRT party or the Council for National Security.

The ex-TRT MPs not only intended to push for post-election constitutional amendments and concentrate on their election campaign nationwide, but they also plan to select a leader of the newly formed People's Power Party as well as lay out its major policies on Friday, which will be manifest during election campaign, said another group leader Suraphong Suebwonglee.

He declined to comment how many of the 300-plus ex-MPs, once led by ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, will stay with the People's Power Party and who else will switch over to other parties to contest the next election.

Source: TNA - 20 August 2007

[Guest Reimar]

SARDINES Today, 2007-08-20 12:38:12

Actually, there was an ABAC poll in the Thai media TITV showing that only about 15% of those voted in favor really did agree with the contents of the 2007 const. The rest did not have much idea of the contents of the const. but only voted in favor because, as you said, sick of the junta and everything and just wanted to get on with elections in the belief that the next government can amend what needs to be fixed (yeah, good luck!)

How many voters in percent (%) do you think in the Isaan know what the was signing for? You thing the Isaan or Nothern People are so much more educated that from Bangkok or the area to talked about?

It is wrong to believe that the people who voted with NO had known what they was voting for! I do believe the people who vote in favor was known much better and more tas the others!

[SARDINES]

SARDINES Today, 2007-08-20 12:38:12

Actually, there was an ABAC poll in the Thai media TITV showing that only about 15% of those voted in favor really did agree with the contents of the 2007 const. The rest did not have much idea of the contents of the const. but only voted in favor because, as you said, sick of the junta and everything and just wanted to get on with elections in the belief that the next government can amend what needs to be fixed (yeah, good luck!)

How many voters in percent (%) do you think in the Isaan know what the was signing for? You thing the Isaan or Nothern People are so much more educated that from Bangkok or the area to talked about?

It is wrong to believe that the people who voted with NO had known what they was voting for! I do believe the people who vote in favor was known much better and more tas the others!

Reimar,

You are correct. I had forgotten to specify that the majority of this was for central Thailand and Bangkok. North & Issarn pretty much vote along party lines of TRT and the South votes along party lines of Democratic Party.

rgds / sardines

[Jai Dee]

NLA member says referendum results was not a surprise

Member of the National Legislative Assembly Wallop Tangkananurak (วัลลภ ตังคณานุรักษ์) says the slight victory of yes votes over the no votes in the charter referendum is not surprising as the disbanded Thai Rak Thai (TRT) Party gained more than 10 millions votes in the last general election.

Mr Wallop says further that it is not easy to demolish TRT’s strongholds in the North and the Northeast. The referendum results suggest that the TRT Group and the People Power Group might gain the majority of votes in the upcoming general election. However, they might not be able to form a new government unless they invite the Matchima (มัชฌิมา) Group led by Samsak Thepsuthin (สมศักดิ์ เทพสุทิน) to join them.

Mr Wallop adds that the referendum results reflect the interim government’s failure in administration and lack of concrete achievements compared with the deposed government. He then suggests the Surayud administration to expedite laws to suppress corruption which will prevent the new government from causing damages to the country.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 August 2007

[Jai Dee]

EC reports 58.22% votes in favor of and 41.78% votes against 2007 constitution

The Election Commission of various provinces are conveying the results of the public referendum to the Election Commission of Thailand.

The Election Commission of Thailand reports that a total of 25,159,992 citizens nationwide voted in the Auguts 19th public referendum. Current vote counts indicate that 58.22 percent of voters approved and 41.78 percent of voters opposed the 2007 constitution. 1.92 percent of voting ballots were ineligible. 178 complaints related to the voting process were reported, the majority of complaints originating from Bangkok.

Meanwhile the Secretary General of the Election Commission of Thailand, Mr. Suthipol Thaweechaikarn (สุทธิผล ทวีชัยการ), expressed his belief that the reason for opposition to the 2007 constitution among a large number of northeastern province voters is due to the influence of old political elements in the region.

Election officials will conduct a meeting to announce the results of the public referendum at 16:00 today, before conveying the vote outcome to the Constitution Drafting Assembly for further evaluation.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 August 2007

[Jai Dee]

Latest unofficial vote count update of public referendum

The Election Commission of Thailand will be announcing the results of the public referendum at 16:00 today.

The Secretary Genreal of the Election Commission of Thailand, Mr. Suthipol Thaweechaikarn (สุทธิผล ทวีชัยการ ), reported that the latest unofficial vote count of the public referendum was conducted at 10:00, with election officials awaiting the vote documentation of provinces nationwide. Election officials report that 14,727,407 million voters or 57.81 percent of total voters approved of the 2007 constitution, while 42.81 percent of voters opposed the constitution.

Lamphun province had the highest voter turnout at 75.35 percent of total registered voters, while Surin province had the lowest voter turnout at 49.66 percent of total registered voters. 54.88 percent of total registered voters in the Bangkok Metropolitan area participated in the public referendum. 65.69 percent of city residents approved, while 34.31 percent of city residents opposed the 2007 constitution.

Meanwhile at 17:00 today, members of the Constitution Drafting Assembly will conduct a meeting to conclude on the public referendum outcome. An official vote count announcement will be conducted on 18:30 today.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 August 2007

[Mid]

Abhisit: Charter needs to be fixed

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva stated the current charter has flaws and needs to be amended.

As people have done their duty by voting at the national referendum, he said it is now the turn of the military government, the Council for National Security and the National Legislative Assembly to do their part in restoring democracy.

snip

(BangkokPost.com)

[Jai Dee]

Mr. Abhisit calls on all political parties to cooperate in revising 2007 constitution

The Democrat Party is adamant that the 2007 constitutional draft should be subjected to further revision in the future due to some weakness in certain amendments.

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva (อภิสิทธิ์ เวชชาชีวะ) and other leaders of the Democrat Party expressed their thanks to citizens for participating in the public referendum. Mr. Abhisit said that public approval of the 2007 constitution has shown that citizens wished for political changes, a stronger democracy, and constructive competition among political parties, in order to create positive effects for the Thai economy and the nation.

The Democrat Party is calling on the Council for National Security and the National Legislative Assembly to expedite the drafting of laws by the end of the month in order to set a clear election date for the nation. The Democrat Party also viewed that the narrow margin in which voters voted for and against the 2007 constitution clearly indicated that the charter contained weaknesses in many areas, therefore the Democrat Party is calling on all political parties and groups to cooperate in revising the constitution.

Mr. Abhisit added that the large number of voters in the northern and northeastern regions who opposed the 2007 constitution will not affect the Democrat Party's popularity in upcoming elections.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 August 2007

[Magpies13]

Maybe I am missing something here but amongst all the stats and figures I think you are all missing a rather critical point in the first paragraph of this discussion.

ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. OK handing out cash is not acceptable, but since when did handing out fliers, public speaking, throwing banquets and transporting people to vote all become illegal. I thought democracy meant just that and until it is fully recognised we are just kidding ourselves about who is really after the best for the Thai people. Once again the only real losers are the people.

[Shan]

A quick calculation tells me that of the 44 million voters 30 million rejected the new constitution (10 million) or did not vote at all (20 million). So there remains 30 million Thais of which they - the soldiers in charge - have no idea what they will vote in the next general elections. A vast majority of great uncertainty! This is not the end of all the troubles for this country!

Edited August 20, 2007 by Shan

[mitrapaap]

I'm really getting pissed of human rights groups. They don't anything other than critisize whatever is done.

If an army steps up against a questionable government and makes sure that peace is kept for a while, then that is not acceptable for them. If the same army leads the people to the first public vote in history of accepting or rejecting a constitution then that's again not okay for them, because the army did it. My goodness, when do they start looking at WHAT is done rather than WHO does it. Where is it written that people in uniforms do everything wrong, while people in business suits are always right?

Mitrapaap,

The simple truth is that the military have NO business meddling in the public affairs. Their job is to secure and defend which a clear mandate on what they are suppose to secure and defend against. They've move past their correct duties. A company's security guard doesn't go into management and kicks out he CEO and runs the company himself.

The Thai military's problem is that they believe "whatever they think is right or good for the people" is the only right thing. I have no problem with having this train of thought, but the difference is when "thinking / feeling" about it vs. acting on it by coming in, taking over because their belief that the people can't think on their own and MUST HAVE their so called "wise judgement" to tell them what to do.

rgds / sardines

I have no problem with you letting the snake bite you rather than to kill it just to avoid that the animal rights organisation come and blame you for getting rid of the poor snake before it could do any bad to you.

As for me, I would have voted yes, not to support the military, but to support the way back to a democratic government which will hopefully be better than the capitalistic one Thailand had before the coup. The difference between the military coup in Thailand and military coups in general is that in Thailand the military declared from the very first day on that this is temporary and that they will re-establish democracy. Usually military coups have the sole purpose of turning democracy into military dictatorship with no timely limits.

At last while everybody is commenting whether it was right or wrong based on whatever rules, I would ask the question whether it has really done any bad to the country. I don't think so. Thailand has now a chance to re-start from scratch, on a clean page. May Thai people take this chance and make their country go ahead in the right direction rather than to querel around and try to send messages to some institutions.

And last but not least, my respect to the Thai people for the way they dealt with the whole issue. The coup could have created much more turmoil.

[blaze]

I'm really getting pissed of human rights groups. They don't anything other than critisize whatever is done.

If an army steps up against a questionable government and makes sure that peace is kept for a while, then that is not acceptable for them. If the same army leads the people to the first public vote in history of accepting or rejecting a constitution then that's again not okay for them, because the army did it. My goodness, when do they start looking at WHAT is done rather than WHO does it. Where is it written that people in uniforms do everything wrong, while people in business suits are always right?

Mitrapaap,

The simple truth is that the military have NO business meddling in the public affairs. Their job is to secure and defend which a clear mandate on what they are suppose to secure and defend against. They've move past their correct duties. A company's security guard doesn't go into management and kicks out he CEO and runs the company himself.

The Thai military's problem is that they believe "whatever they think is right or good for the people" is the only right thing. I have no problem with having this train of thought, but the difference is when "thinking / feeling" about it vs. acting on it by coming in, taking over because their belief that the people can't think on their own and MUST HAVE their so called "wise judgement" to tell them what to do.

rgds / sardines

I have no problem with you letting the snake bite you rather than to kill it just to avoid that the animal rights organisation come and blame you for getting rid of the poor snake before it could do any bad to you.

As for me, I would have voted yes, not to support the military, but to support the way back to a democratic government which will hopefully be better than the capitalistic one Thailand had before the coup. The difference between the military coup in Thailand and military coups in general is that in Thailand the military declared from the very first day on that this is temporary and that they will re-establish democracy. Usually military coups have the sole purpose of turning democracy into military dictatorship with no timely limits.

At last while everybody is commenting whether it was right or wrong based on whatever rules, I would ask the question whether it has really done any bad to the country. I don't think so. Thailand has now a chance to re-start from scratch, on a clean page. May Thai people take this chance and make their country go ahead in the right direction rather than to querel around and try to send messages to some institutions.

And last but not least, my respect to the Thai people for the way they dealt with the whole issue. The coup could have created much more turmoil.

I think that this episode has been harmful in several ways.

One: the vote might well be interpreted by the military as a gesture of support for the coup. The next time there is a threat to whatever interests the military seeks to defend (its own, those of a minority of very 'important' people) the military- and in fact many in the public, will see a coup as a much more viable alternative than they would have in the years shortly after 1992. History -including the history of Thailand- shows that coups and military dictatorships are not always as benign as this one had been. There are no guarantees the next one will be either.

Two: the military has, through its appointees, put in place a constitution which permits them- through the make up of the senate to maintain a supervisory role over the direction that Thai society takes.

It also has divested power from elected officials to the appointed judiciary. While there are good people in the judiciary- of course- we need only look back at the Thaksin era to see how easily many in that auspicious calling seek to please their perceived masters. The other group that has been empowered and which does NOT have a good record in this country (as in most developing countries) is the beaurocracy. And bear in mind that one of the military's first acts was to appoint members of the military to many of the state enterprises.

Third: minority- or coalition- governments have a hard time even getting much legislation accomplished. The idea of significant changes to the constitution may be out of the question until there is a strong majority government- something that the current constitution has cleverly conspired to prevent.

Finally- whether or not one like Thaksin, he was the choice of a huge and more importantly- regionally defined segment of the population. These people had the leader of the party that they elected to represent and govern them, removed illegally. And those who did vote in favor of the consitution, may well have done so only so that they have an election soon and stick it to the Bangkok middle class who they may feel, robbed them of their party. This kind of mindset is not constructive- being based more on a desire for revenge rather than wise government.

[hammered]

I'm really getting pissed of human rights groups. They don't anything other than critisize whatever is done.

If an army steps up against a questionable government and makes sure that peace is kept for a while, then that is not acceptable for them. If the same army leads the people to the first public vote in history of accepting or rejecting a constitution then that's again not okay for them, because the army did it. My goodness, when do they start looking at WHAT is done rather than WHO does it. Where is it written that people in uniforms do everything wrong, while people in business suits are always right?

Mitrapaap,

The simple truth is that the military have NO business meddling in the public affairs. Their job is to secure and defend which a clear mandate on what they are suppose to secure and defend against. They've move past their correct duties. A company's security guard doesn't go into management and kicks out he CEO and runs the company himself.

The Thai military's problem is that they believe "whatever they think is right or good for the people" is the only right thing. I have no problem with having this train of thought, but the difference is when "thinking / feeling" about it vs. acting on it by coming in, taking over because their belief that the people can't think on their own and MUST HAVE their so called "wise judgement" to tell them what to do.

rgds / sardines

I have no problem with you letting the snake bite you rather than to kill it just to avoid that the animal rights organisation come and blame you for getting rid of the poor snake before it could do any bad to you.

As for me, I would have voted yes, not to support the military, but to support the way back to a democratic government which will hopefully be better than the capitalistic one Thailand had before the coup. The difference between the military coup in Thailand and military coups in general is that in Thailand the military declared from the very first day on that this is temporary and that they will re-establish democracy. Usually military coups have the sole purpose of turning democracy into military dictatorship with no timely limits.

At last while everybody is commenting whether it was right or wrong based on whatever rules, I would ask the question whether it has really done any bad to the country. I don't think so. Thailand has now a chance to re-start from scratch, on a clean page. May Thai people take this chance and make their country go ahead in the right direction rather than to querel around and try to send messages to some institutions.

And last but not least, my respect to the Thai people for the way they dealt with the whole issue. The coup could have created much more turmoil.

I think that this episode has been harmful in several ways.

One: the vote might well be interpreted by the military as a gesture of support for the coup. The next time there is a threat to whatever interests the military seeks to defend (its own, those of a minority of very 'important' people) the military- and in fact many in the public, will see a coup as a much more viable alternative than they would have in the years shortly after 1992. History -including the history of Thailand- shows that coups and military dictatorships are not always as benign as this one had been. There are no guarantees the next one will be either.

Two: the military has, through its appointees, put in place a constitution which permits them- through the make up of the senate to maintain a supervisory role over the direction that Thai society takes.

It also has divested power from elected officials to the appointed judiciary. While there are good people in the judiciary- of course- we need only look back at the Thaksin era to see how easily many in that auspicious calling seek to please their perceived masters. The other group that has been empowered and which does NOT have a good record in this country (as in most developing countries) is the beaurocracy. And bear in mind that one of the military's first acts was to appoint members of the military to many of the state enterprises.

Third: minority- or coalition- governments have a hard time even getting much legislation accomplished. The idea of significant changes to the constitution may be out of the question until there is a strong majority government- something that the current constitution has cleverly conspired to prevent.

Finally- whether or not one like Thaksin, he was the choice of a huge and more importantly- regionally defined segment of the population. These people had the leader of the party that they elected to represent and govern them, removed illegally. And those who did vote in favor of the consitution, may well have done so only so that they have an election soon and stick it to the Bangkok middle class who they may feel, robbed them of their party. This kind of mindset is not constructive- being based more on a desire for revenge rather than wise government.

Some in TRT and the Dems are suggesting they talk together about charter ammendments. This may in the short term be the only way to change it. It would be an irony if political party "enemies" came togther over the charter when they couldnt over most other stuff.

[MaxLee]

So.... simply put what will happen next??? What is the outcome from yesterday. Can anybody gimme the short version of this complicated political summary

[blaze]

So.... simply put what will happen next??? What is the outcome from yesterday. Can anybody gimme the short version of this complicated political summary

If you take the view that this coup was simply one in a series of attempts to return Thailand to the glory days of the early 80s when it was a quasi-democractic, promilitary feudal state- and that the military was till last year simply taking a breather, waiting to for a chance to pounce, or that the military in fact, would like nothing more than to see Thailand return to pre-1932 conditions but with a pseudo-democratic face that would be accepted beyond the borders- then you would have to predict that not much will happen in the near future. Every government now will weigh its legislation very carefully- realizing that stepping over the line will lead to another coup. Notice has been served.

I don't anticipate any massive protest. Crumbs will be tossed to the poor and to the middle class. The capitalists will be at the mercy of the beaurocrats- and overseeing all- the senate with its abnormally stong powers. The wild card will be the South. And that could provide the pretext for a return to blatant military rule very soon. Especially if Samak and the Dems get it into their head to mess with the constitution in any manner that could substantially return power to the people.

Here's something to play with: an unlikely coalition of polititians dedicated to the notion of stong government and stable platform driven parties is elected in Dec. They immediately begin to make plans to decrease the power of the senate and to strengthen the hand of the government. Suddenly a few bombs go off in Bangkok- but this time to much deadlier effect. The army explains that the southerners might have been responsible this time (having learned how to use the BTS which apparantly was beyond their capablities last NY). Then a long period of ISOC/Military emergency rule. And forget the niceities of senate reform.

Edited August 20, 2007 by blaze

[Mid]

Comfortable ............................

Sonthi admits result lower than expected

August 20, 2007 : Last updated 07:42 pm

Junta chief General Sonthi Boonyaratglin Monday conceded a lower-than-expected referendum outcome for the charter although he was satisfied with the vote.

"I previously expected a majority vote of 60 to 65 per cent but in a democracy, a majority of one vote indicates a passage of the charter," he said in reference to the referendum victory of 57.81 per cent.

Sonthi spoke in an interview aired by Channel 9 morning news programme as he was in Kuala Lumpur on an official visit.

The Nation

[hammered]

So.... simply put what will happen next??? What is the outcome from yesterday. Can anybody gimme the short version of this complicated political summary

If you take the view that this coup was simply one in a series of attempts to return Thailand to the glory days of the early 80s when it was a quasi-democractic, promilitary feudal state- and that the military was till last year simply taking a breather, waiting to for a chance to pounce, or that the military in fact, would like nothing more than to see Thailand return to pre-1932 conditions but with a pseudo-democratic face that would be accepted beyond the borders- then you would have to predict that not much will happen in the near future. Every government now will weigh its legislation very carefully- realizing that stepping over the line will lead to another coup. Notice has been served.

I don't anticipate any massive protest. Crumbs will be tossed to the poor and to the middle class. The capitalists will be at the mercy of the beaurocrats- and overseeing all- the senate with its abnormally stong powers. The wild card will be the South. And that could provide the pretext for a return to blatant military rule very soon. Especially if Samak and the Dems get it into their head to mess with the constitution in any manner that could substantially return power to the people.

Here's something to play with: an unlikely coalition of polititians dedicated to the notion of stong government and stable platform driven parties is elected in Dec. They immediately begin to make plans to decrease the power of the senate and to strengthen the hand of the government. Suddenly a few bombs go off in Bangkok- but this time to much deadlier effect. The army explains that the southerners might have been responsible this time (having learned how to use the BTS which apparantly was beyond their capablities last NY). Then a long period of ISOC/Military emergency rule. And forget the niceities of senate reform.

Agree with the basis of paragraphs one and two. I dont think three will come about as that would almost certainly need a strong PPP-Dem alliance, which is highly questionable and if you can think of it I am sure there are those with power ploting right now to make sure the unlikely alliance becomes even less likely. By the way we get the parliamentary vote in Dec or Jan but when is the senate vote? Without a senate how can legislation be passed? Genuine question.

[blaze]

So.... simply put what will happen next??? What is the outcome from yesterday. Can anybody gimme the short version of this complicated political summary

If you take the view that this coup was simply one in a series of attempts to return Thailand to the glory days of the early 80s when it was a quasi-democractic, promilitary feudal state- and that the military was till last year simply taking a breather, waiting to for a chance to pounce, or that the military in fact, would like nothing more than to see Thailand return to pre-1932 conditions but with a pseudo-democratic face that would be accepted beyond the borders- then you would have to predict that not much will happen in the near future. Every government now will weigh its legislation very carefully- realizing that stepping over the line will lead to another coup. Notice has been served.

I don't anticipate any massive protest. Crumbs will be tossed to the poor and to the middle class. The capitalists will be at the mercy of the beaurocrats- and overseeing all- the senate with its abnormally stong powers. The wild card will be the South. And that could provide the pretext for a return to blatant military rule very soon. Especially if Samak and the Dems get it into their head to mess with the constitution in any manner that could substantially return power to the people.

Here's something to play with: an unlikely coalition of polititians dedicated to the notion of stong government and stable platform driven parties is elected in Dec. They immediately begin to make plans to decrease the power of the senate and to strengthen the hand of the government. Suddenly a few bombs go off in Bangkok- but this time to much deadlier effect. The army explains that the southerners might have been responsible this time (having learned how to use the BTS which apparantly was beyond their capablities last NY). Then a long period of ISOC/Military emergency rule. And forget the niceities of senate reform.

Agree with the basis of paragraphs one and two. I dont think three will come about as that would almost certainly need a strong PPP-Dem alliance, which is highly questionable and if you can think of it I am sure there are those with power ploting right now to make sure the unlikely alliance becomes even less likely. By the way we get the parliamentary vote in Dec or Jan but when is the senate vote? Without a senate how can legislation be passed? Genuine question.

Good question. I would assume that the vote and appointments would follow the election- or would they be concurrent with it? Beats me.

[khunmarc]

Gen. Sonthi welcomes voters' decision

Council for National Security chairman Sonthi Boonyaratkalin welcomed the majority of voters’ decision to accept the military-backed draft charter in Sunday’s national referendum.

He praised voters for being able to make their own political decision and not allowing their votes to be influenced.

“Most of them knew what they wanted. That can be considered as a new chapter for our democratic country,” he said.

More from the Bangkok Post here.

new constitution article # 1 right to get the tanks out of the barracks anytime the old guard doesnt like whoever was elected..... wait a minute ......sounds just like the OLD one LOL

[Adichai]

Gen. Sonthi welcomes voters' decision

Council for National Security chairman Sonthi Boonyaratkalin welcomed the majority of voters’ decision to accept the military-backed draft charter in Sunday’s national referendum.

He praised voters for being able to make their own political decision and not allowing their votes to be influenced.

“Most of them knew what they wanted. That can be considered as a new chapter for our democratic country,” he said.

More from the Bangkok Post here.

Yea, right. So that's what the 25% hike in military budget was for - to buy votes. Thailand a democracy? Who's kidding whom.

[bingobongo]

well done junta, well done.....

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displa...amp;top_story=1

[farangsay]

Excuse me but which particular agenda would you be pushing sir ?

I personally am unsure that the Economist has it's finger on the Thai political pulse.

Junta.

What a word to conjure with !

[mrtoad]

Excuse me but which particular agenda would you be pushing sir ?

I personally am unsure that the Economist has it's finger on the Thai political pulse.

Junta.

What a word to conjure with !

The Economist, hardly a reputable source is it?

[Jingthing]

I think the Economist is a fantastic source. What source do you suggest, Mr Toad?

Anyway, I am intrigued by this part:

People’s Power Party (PPP), which is courting Samak Sundaravej, a fiery right-winger and former governor of Bangkok,

Can someone define what right wing means in Thailand?

I know what it means in the US or Europe, but not Thailand.

[ColPyat]

I think the Economist is a fantastic source. What source do you suggest, Mr Toad?

Anyway, I am intrigued by this part:

People’s Power Party (PPP), which is courting Samak Sundaravej, a fiery right-winger and former governor of Bangkok,

Can someone define what right wing means in Thailand?

I know what it means in the US or Europe, but not Thailand.

In terms of Samak, of Village Scout/Navapol fame - it means that he was involved in a major role in the killing of hundreds of students at the Thammasat Massacre on 6th October 1976.

He is way beyond the average Thai right winger/nationalist/royalist.

But yes, the economists articles on Thai politics have been rather spot on.

Edited August 20, 2007 by ColPyat

[Jingthing]

Thanks Col, and I understand what you are saying. I read the "book". Strange times ....