Exit Poll Results Show PPP Wins

[sriracha john]

EC delays key decision

The Election Commission (EC) yesterday endorsed the balloting results of three winning candidates from the People Power Party, but postponed to today a crucial decision on choosing between the partial or complete endorsement of the election outcome.

The three endorsed MPs were Niyom Vechkama and Taweewat Ritruechai of Sakon Nakhon and Niramit Sujaree of Roi Et.

At this juncture, the EC has endorsed 434 House seats and is obliged to endorse a minimum of 22 more in order to achieve the 95-per-cent requirement - accounting for 456 out of 480 seats - for the opening of Parliament on Monday, its secretary-general Suthiphon Thaveechaigarn said.

The agency will consider the endorsement of the remaining MPs-elect today as it was waiting for the results of the new round of elections in Chaiyaphum and Buriram yesterday, as well as the decision of the Council of State on the EC's ruling to disqualify winning candidates Monthien and Nathana Songpracha in Chai Nat and Prasop Busarakham in Udon Thani, he said.

The EC is also waiting for the ruling of the Supreme Court's Election Division on the case Democrat candidate Chaiwat Sinsuwong filed against both advance balloting and the People Power Party. The case is very important and will affect the EC's work, Suthiphon said.

EC member Sumeth Upanisakorn said the debate had been lengthy and inconclusive on whether to endorse just 456 seats or all 480.

"In acting either way, the EC is equally prone to be targeted for litigation by rival camps," he said, adding that the five EC members needed a night to carefully consider their options and consequences.

- The Nation

=============================================================================

and one of the consequences of this rapid endorsement of candidates....

Democrat threatens to sue EC for inaction

The Democrat Party yesterday threatened to take the Election Commission to the Supreme Court for dropping complaints against certain People Power MPs-elect.

The party requested copies of the EC's rulings endorsing or disqualifying election winners. It also presented more evidence of violations allegedly committed by certain MP candidates for the EC to reconsider its decision.

If the party reads the rulings and finds the EC was not right, it will take recourse to Article 219 to seek a review by the Supreme Court, deputy party secretary-general Thaworn Senniam said yesterday.

The party's move had nothing to do with its candidate Chaiwat Sinsuwong's complaints against the People Power Party (PPP) filed with the Supreme Court, which will announced today if the PPP is the surrogate of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai Party.

The Democrats have also produced a 12-minute VCD showing that 29 people made 12 complaints against deposed prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra over the give-aways of VCDs during election campaigns.

It also explains how Thaksin was linked with PPP, how he helped PPP's rallies during the election and how PPP leader Samak Sundaravej was linked with Thaksin, he said.

The fact that Thaksin in the VCDs given to villagers called on voters to support PPP candidates showed that he was involved in the rallies even though he had been banned from politics, Thaworn said.

"Some EC members have said that distributing VCDs violates Article 53 for offering things to sway votes. Thaksin also made a deceitful statement that if voters vote for the PPP, he can return to Thailand.

"Actually he can come back anytime," he added.

- The Nation

[marshbags]

Just one more day.......

Meanwhile... PPP won again in Chayaphum (by-elections today) after its 2 candidates were "yellow carded" by the EC for... fraud.

So to sum'up : PPP wins when they're officially "cheating". And they win too when they do not cheat.

Last sunday, same punishement (by-elections in Korat).

Another humiliation for the Junta.

Why the "Junta "

This is a humiliation for " Thailand ", it,s so called vote buying elite (elite =unethical ) not the Junta.

These individuals have cheated in an election and for some bizarre reason are allowed to stand again with the obvious outcome of course.

The election laws need to be changed to deter them, " Banning them all indefinitely along with monetary penalties and jail time and strict enforcement ' ( all offenders )

The voters would and did vote same-same as is per Thai mentality in regard to cheating and it,s insignificance to those who again support money before putting the future and the interests of the country first.

There will never be any hope of moving into the 21st century while these unprincipiled, unethical self interest first merchants are allowed to pay peanuts to exploit the mindset of past generations and go on to reap the benefits their illgotten status will afford them.

Gloat if you wish, those who see this as victory for the cloned PPP and it,s sponsor in exile, you will live to rue the day if they take power and consequently carry out yet again their dishonest intentions / objectives of rewarding their self interests and diverting the bulk of the proceeds anywhere but into the Thai economy.

How very sad this is for the children of Thailand who are about to have their assets plundered once again and their future potential destroyed for years to come.

I can only hope for the sake of all of them, including my Thai family, something will change the situation for the better and stop it from happening.

marshbags. and very

For all the debate and comments that have been made that are worthy of consideration, this is what it comes down to from my perspective on what has been unfolding since the elections.

Edited January 18, 2008 by marshbags

[ando]

A mantra that has lost its meaning

Reconciliation... No offence, gentlemen, but I wish everyone would stop talking about national reconciliation. Not that I want all the factions in our society _ rich against poor, urban against rural or Democrat against People Power _ to battle it out until blood floods up to the tummy of an elephant, as they express it in Thai. ''Reconciliation'' is a loaded and empty word at the same time. And there is no point, really, in repeating it over and over when we don't have the fuzziest what exactly we want it to mean, or how to make it come true in the current context. The new government is all but formed, between the mainstay PPP and five other parties, some of which had declared not too long ago they would never work with the winning party. It's in the spirit of reconciliation, isn't it? Like child's play. You kiss and make up. You are reconciled. Can we say the country is on course towards reconciliation, now that we are about to have a new democratically-elected government? Can we say that we will all be conciliated under the leadership of new Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej? Will all of us become reunited when Thaksin Shinawatra comes around again to shop at Siam Paragon? Unfortunately, the rift in this country runs deeper and wider than the bruised egos of some politicians. It can't be appeased by the incessant chanting of the reconciliation mantra.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Jan2008_news22.php

(Atiya Achakulwisut is Editorial Pages Editor, Bangkok Post)

The calls for national reconciliation and national unity from politicians and others in power are nothing more than empty political rhetoric when those calling for such a thing make no attempt to compromise. The call for national unity and reconciliation is an often abused ploy which in fact is a call for the poor rural class voters to cease their push for a better deal in life and accept the status quo that has operated so well for centuries.

With 50% of the population (agriculture) sharing 10% of GDP its a terrible waste of the countries human resources and a terrible ethical and moral state of affairs which benefits only the urban upper class elite. Only a true democracy can bring about a more equitable, productive and fairer society in Thailand.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...os/th.html#Econ

Thailand is in a transitional stage whereby the old feudal system which benefits the old elite ruling class is on the way out and democracy, which favours the poor majority, is on the way in. Thaksin, for all his faults and mistakes was smart enough to realize that the way to gain political power was through the democratic system by appealing to the majority of voters who just happen to be the poor. Nothing is going to stop this transition now. Not even military coups, martial law, a judiciary stacked with officials from the elite ruling class and media censorship.

The poor rural class peasants are certainly NOT in any position to mount an armed revolution of any kind as they are widely disbursed and more intent on day to day survival with their meagre share of the countries wealth. However, the emergence of democracy does arm the peasants with the collective power of their individual votes. And that's how this slow but steady revolution in Thailand is taking place right now. A slow but steady change from rule by a minority privileged elite into a true democracy. Certainly a painful transition, (and fiercely opposed), for the elite class who stand to lose. But a transition welcomed by those who have been severely disadvantaged for so long.

Nothing is going to hold back the tide of change now. The ruling class have perhaps one more coup left in them to stall the transition to a true democracy.

Thaksin was perhaps a little ahead of his time in pushing democratic change along so fast and upsetting the status quo enjoyed by the elite ruling class. And perhaps Samak is not the best choice to step into his shoes. But the transition will continue over the coming years even if it means one step back and two steps forward for a time. Sooner or later another charismatic and smart leader like Thaksin will emerge and pull the country together to release its full potential.

The old ruling class will still enjoy their money and wealth (much like the old British aristocracy), but they will no longer have the power to meddle in the peoples politics.

[ando]

Isn't it obvious that word has come down from the top to give the PPP the chance to form government?

Of course the problem for the EC now is to make it look all legal and above board. The dam Democrats are going to get another shot at things soon enough when the PPP coalition falls over. One would think they would have the smarts to keep their mouth shut and take the future opportunity being served up to them rather than trying to create an electoral gridlock right now. I guess it shows that the Democrats are not under the control of the powers to be who are running this show. Which is really a good thing, even if they are on the wrong course for long term victory.

[ando]

A very good column.

"And where will the money come from? From taxpayers, mostly members of the middle-class, who will inevitably ask why do they have to pay for a government many of them do not support _ to sponsor policies that benefit them much less than they do the rural poor? "

I think he is absolutely correct- and this not only portends woe to any government which might seek to level the playing field- but also for the very prospects of democracy ever being embraced by the middle class.

But does it work any differently in any other functioning democracy?

Perhaps a 10% Vat is in order.

[John K]

Just one more day.......

Meanwhile... PPP won again in Chayaphum (by-elections today) after its 2 candidates were "yellow carded" by the EC for... fraud.

So to sum'up : PPP wins when they're officially "cheating". And they win too when they do not cheat.

Last sunday, same punishement (by-elections in Korat).

Another humiliation for the Junta.

It would seem keeping a copy of this question handy to re-post every time someone brings up the junta again. I notice that it has yet to be answered by anyone ranting against the junta.

So anyway, cclub75....Is that the Thaksin hand picked caretaker government or the elected government that Thaksin dissolved in early 2006 that you are referring to that was removed by the Junta?

[younghusband]

A very good column.

"And where will the money come from? From taxpayers, mostly members of the middle-class, who will inevitably ask why do they have to pay for a government many of them do not support _ to sponsor policies that benefit them much less than they do the rural poor? "

I think he is absolutely correct- and this not only portends woe to any government which might seek to level the playing field- but also for the very prospects of democracy ever being embraced by the middle class.

But does it work any differently in any other functioning democracy?

Perhaps a 10% Vat is in order.

Perhaps it's worth pointing out that national resources are already skewed towards the relatively well off urban middle class - health, education,infrastructure - at the expense of the rural majority.

[Jai Dee]

Chart Thai and Pua Paendin announce allegiance to PPP

Leaders of both the Chart Thai and Pua Paendin parties including party heads Banharn Silapa-archa (บรรหาร ศิลปอาชา) and Suwit Khunkitti (สุวิทย์ คุณกิตติ) met yesterday for a brief dinner at the Nai Lert (นายเลิศ )Park Hotel to discuss their political stances. Pua Paendin party has previously announced that it would join the People’s Power Party in forming a coalition government.

After discussing the issue for only half an hour the heads of both parties held a joint press conference declaring that Chart Thai party would also be joining in the coalition government. The parties gave reasons indicating their decision would insure stability in the government and also entice trust from the international community. The Chart Thai party affirmed that the Democrat Party would understand its decision to side with the People’s Power Party as it would benefit the nation and democracy.

Both parties stated though that the issues of ministerial positions was not discussed as of yet. Chart Thai and Pua Paendin stated that they were not hoping to take high ranking ministerial positions but avowed to work hard for the benefit of the nation nonetheless.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 18 January 2008

[Jai Dee]

EC affirms Parliament will convene

Secretary-General of the Election Commission (EC) Suthipol Taweechaikarn (สุทธิพล ทวีชัยการ) revealed that the EC yesterday (January 17) had discussed 29 issues concerning the approval of members of parliament. The EC will also receive results from the Buriram province by-election which it will add to its roster of cases.

Mr. Suthipol stated that at the moment over 434 MP’s have been approved to take their positions in Parliament. The EC is considering approving all MP’s within the day to allow for the needed 456 members, or 95 percent of the Parliament to be ready to convene for the Parliament’s first official meeting.

The EC has the ability to approve the MP’s first and consider them within a longer time frame after the first meeting.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 18 January 2008

[Jai Dee]

Matchima Thipathai party takes Buriram by-election

The Public Relations Department of Buriram province has disclosed unofficial election results from the province’s by-election which places Matchima Thipathai as an expected winner.

An estimated 162,717 citizens in Buriram’s constituency 1 participated in the voting process from a total of 324,854 eligible voters calculated as a greater than 50 percent turn out. Over 8000 voters chose to abstain from voting and there were 4,829 voided ballots.

Matchima Thipathai showed a clear lead from initial counts with three of its candidates taking the top spots. Matchima Thipathai candidate 3 Somnuek Hengvanich (สมนึก เฮงวาณิชย์) gained 94,209 votes, candidate 2 Manoch Hengyosmak (มาโนช เฮงยศมาก) took 70,895 votes and candidate 1 Nutthawut Sukasem (ณัฐวุฒิ สุขเกษม) gained 66,190 votes.

The party was distantly followed by candidates in the Pua Paendin party.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 18 January 2008

[chownah]

So.....in the rerun elections the PPP has recaptured EVERY seat that they were yellow carded for and allowed to run....AND....they even picked up one seat from another party!!!!....and all of this is presuambly without any buying of votes or other electoral irregularities!!!!

Well well well it seems clearer and clearer all the time that the voters who elected PPP candidates initially were actually sincere in their voting and the voting irregularities were not the deciding factor. I applaud the EC for calling these rerun elections since whenever a vote is suspicious it is good to vote again with a higher level of scrutiny so that the true intent of the voters can be known and acted upon. If the EC had not called the rerunning of these elections we might have fallen prey to the false doctrine of those whose views were that PPP was not in the hearts and minds of the voters.....because the reruns WERE held we now know that the voters do of their own will support the PPP candidates and it is not an artifact of irregularities or bribes.

Chownah

[hammered]

An interesting concept would appear if the court actually did find the PPP as acting as a proxy for the non-existent TRT. Since it is impossible to act as a proxy for a political party that no longer exists, any guilty verdict would therefore be a bogus finding against the PPP only for adopting a "political ideology" the same as, or near to, that of the now defunct TRT. The PPP is guilty of adopting the political ideology of the now defunct TRT and nothing else, -- there could certainly be no law against that in any democratic nation.

Disbanding a political party because the court doesn't like their particular brand of political ideology (and especially the most popular brand of political ideology in the country), would make an open farce of the whole legal and political system in Thailand. Well, even more of a farce than it already is anyway.

For this reason it is certain that the courts wouldn't embarrass themselves and bring themselves into international disrepute with an adverse finding against the PPP in this matter.

And in any case it appears that those in high places who are pulling the strings have decided to call the dogs off and allow the PPP to form a government for the time being at least. So its all go for the PPP for now at least until the coalition crumbles. Then its back to square one. All in all, the wisest strategy for the elite power brokers as a stumbling, fragmented PPP will be much easier to defeat next time round than a PPP that had power stolen from them through dodgy court rulings.

The problem for PPP is not the TRT link but the recorded Samak-Thaksin one in which Samak admits being a proxy of Thaksin or in other words legally acting as a banned politician. That legally pretty much only gives one outcome as at least lawyers I have talked to are willing to admit. Of course politcally as you mention that seems out of the question as legally then the only outcome is disolution, so how does the court come to a non-proxy conclusion without making itself seem compromised legally. That is the interesting part of this case. imho

The way the EC are going easy on vote buying cases as outlined by the respected P-Net and neutral ANFREL does indicate some deal, so we can probably expect a court verdict that will be of interest legally.

I concur that the outcome does seem to be pretty much obvious although I think PPP will go for a raft of quick populist polices and a 111 forgiveness followed by another electuion soon which they will ocntrol the interior ministry for and then get a new big mandate before the economic problems begin to bite with a vengeance. If the Dems are playing a long game they are lucky not to be in power the economy could well make delivering anything difficult.

[sriracha john]

Banharn for PM has fizzled.... so, barring PPP dissolution, it's Samak as PM... Lord help us..

Banharn, daughter will not take Cabinet seat: Kanchana

Chart Thai Party deputy leader Kanchana Silapa-archa said Friday that she and her father will not take any cabinet seat.

"I hereby affirm that the people will not see my name and my father's name in the Cabinet lineup. We won't even accept the post of education minister," Kanchana said.

"I don't want any position. Being an MP is already hard enough for me."

- The Nation

Edited January 18, 2008 by sriracha john

[hammered]

A mantra that has lost its meaning

Reconciliation... No offence, gentlemen, but I wish everyone would stop talking about national reconciliation. Not that I want all the factions in our society _ rich against poor, urban against rural or Democrat against People Power _ to battle it out until blood floods up to the tummy of an elephant, as they express it in Thai. ''Reconciliation'' is a loaded and empty word at the same time. And there is no point, really, in repeating it over and over when we don't have the fuzziest what exactly we want it to mean, or how to make it come true in the current context. The new government is all but formed, between the mainstay PPP and five other parties, some of which had declared not too long ago they would never work with the winning party. It's in the spirit of reconciliation, isn't it? Like child's play. You kiss and make up. You are reconciled. Can we say the country is on course towards reconciliation, now that we are about to have a new democratically-elected government? Can we say that we will all be conciliated under the leadership of new Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej? Will all of us become reunited when Thaksin Shinawatra comes around again to shop at Siam Paragon? Unfortunately, the rift in this country runs deeper and wider than the bruised egos of some politicians. It can't be appeased by the incessant chanting of the reconciliation mantra.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Jan2008_news22.php

(Atiya Achakulwisut is Editorial Pages Editor, Bangkok Post)

A very good column.

"And where will the money come from? From taxpayers, mostly members of the middle-class, who will inevitably ask why do they have to pay for a government many of them do not support _ to sponsor policies that benefit them much less than they do the rural poor? "

I think he is absolutely correct- and this not only portends woe to any government which might seek to level the playing field- but also for the very prospects of democracy ever being embraced by the middle class.

This does also highlight another issue. Ok its right now to spread a major part of the tax to the poorer rural elements in society, but at what point do these people reach the point where their incomes should be taxed and how will this be be done in actuality and fairly and of course transparently. And another question is raised of how much of the tax redistributed to the "poor" actually ends up rooted to thos ewho dont need it - I think Daniel Ten Kate did a piece on how this was a very high number under TRT - and of course how much tax wil minister sand their wealthy backers pay. These are all real issues that need answering over time if anyone is actually concerned with social harmony which I have my doubts about. And ion the current climate of which horse do you support there is little chance these will even be addressed.

[blaze]

A mantra that has lost its meaning

Reconciliation... No offence, gentlemen, but I wish everyone would stop talking about national reconciliation. Not that I want all the factions in our society _ rich against poor, urban against rural or Democrat against People Power _ to battle it out until blood floods up to the tummy of an elephant, as they express it in Thai. ''Reconciliation'' is a loaded and empty word at the same time. And there is no point, really, in repeating it over and over when we don't have the fuzziest what exactly we want it to mean, or how to make it come true in the current context. The new government is all but formed, between the mainstay PPP and five other parties, some of which had declared not too long ago they would never work with the winning party. It's in the spirit of reconciliation, isn't it? Like child's play. You kiss and make up. You are reconciled. Can we say the country is on course towards reconciliation, now that we are about to have a new democratically-elected government? Can we say that we will all be conciliated under the leadership of new Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej? Will all of us become reunited when Thaksin Shinawatra comes around again to shop at Siam Paragon? Unfortunately, the rift in this country runs deeper and wider than the bruised egos of some politicians. It can't be appeased by the incessant chanting of the reconciliation mantra.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/18Jan2008_news22.php

(Atiya Achakulwisut is Editorial Pages Editor, Bangkok Post)

A very good column.

"And where will the money come from? From taxpayers, mostly members of the middle-class, who will inevitably ask why do they have to pay for a government many of them do not support _ to sponsor policies that benefit them much less than they do the rural poor? "

I think he is absolutely correct- and this not only portends woe to any government which might seek to level the playing field- but also for the very prospects of democracy ever being embraced by the middle class.

This does also highlight another issue. Ok its right now to spread a major part of the tax to the poorer rural elements in society, but at what point do these people reach the point where their incomes should be taxed and how will this be be done in actuality and fairly and of course transparently. And another question is raised of how much of the tax redistributed to the "poor" actually ends up rooted to thos ewho dont need it - I think Daniel Ten Kate did a piece on how this was a very high number under TRT - and of course how much tax wil minister sand their wealthy backers pay. These are all real issues that need answering over time if anyone is actually concerned with social harmony which I have my doubts about. And ion the current climate of which horse do you support there is little chance these will even be addressed.

This is the same dillema that most countries, developing as well as developed, face. At what point does investing in the well being of the poor cease to provide sustainable benefits to the nation as a whole? How best to finance social programs?... how to develop a fair and equitable tax system?- But unlike Thailand, most countries do not choose to address the issues by having tanks bowl it out of sight. Or garlanding those tanks when they take down the government run by the party that we didn't vote for. And without a commitment to that basic rule in democracy- that one accepts defeat at the polls, the days of coups to the "rescue" are not over.

Edited January 18, 2008 by blaze

[Jai Dee]

PPP Deputy Secretary-General says his party will take the defence ministerial post

Deputy Secretary-General of the People Power party (PPP), Noppadol Pattama (นพดล ปัทมะ), says the party will have the defence minister post in the new government as well as other key posts.

PPP and the other five political parties will hold a news conference tomorrow to officially announce the coalition government formation. As for each of the parties’ quota for ministerial posts, the deputy secretary-general says the matter will be clarified after the news conference.

Mr Noppadol adds that he cannot say whether the new defence minister will be a person outside the coalition.

The deputy secretary-general says further that the Puea Pan Din party’s decision to join the coalition is the party’s consensus. As for rumors of conflicts between executives of the Puea Pan Din, he says they will not affect the formation of the new government.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 18 January 2008

[Old Man River]

The dam Democrats are going to get another shot at things soon enough when the PPP coalition falls over. One would think they would have the smarts to keep their mouth shut and take the future opportunity being served up to them rather than trying to create an electoral gridlock right now. I guess it shows that the Democrats are not under the control of the powers to be who are running this show. Which is really a good thing, even if they are on the wrong course for long term victory.

Their intent continues to be to push for fair and free elections in Thailand. While this may not be possible, they feel that wrongdoings should not be pushed under the carpet and forgotten about either. Hence, when they have proof of wrongdoings and believe the government commission that is supposed to act on this is not, then they take it as their responsibility to their millions of supporters to submit the proof to the courts to get a fair hearing.

[hammered]

So.....in the rerun elections the PPP has recaptured EVERY seat that they were yellow carded for and allowed to run....AND....they even picked up one seat from another party!!!!....and all of this is presuambly without any buying of votes or other electoral irregularities!!!!

Well well well it seems clearer and clearer all the time that the voters who elected PPP candidates initially were actually sincere in their voting and the voting irregularities were not the deciding factor. I applaud the EC for calling these rerun elections since whenever a vote is suspicious it is good to vote again with a higher level of scrutiny so that the true intent of the voters can be known and acted upon. If the EC had not called the rerunning of these elections we might have fallen prey to the false doctrine of those whose views were that PPP was not in the hearts and minds of the voters.....because the reruns WERE held we now know that the voters do of their own will support the PPP candidates and it is not an artifact of irregularities or bribes.

Chownah

There is also a new factor in the reruns. That is the electorate now know who has won and it could possibly be argued that this will affect how they vote

It is also a shame on the reruns that the abentee voters are disenfranchised and the turnouts so low.

That said yes of course the PPP has a certain level of popularity. The whole thing about vote buying is more to do with how it affects close races and the overall picture plus of course it is illegal in Thailand and so should not be excused even if the EC has been doing so according to ANFREL and P-Net.

But we have to bear in mind this all about power at the end of the day.

Of course we can all draw whatever conclusion we want depending on what horse one favours. However the main thing now is to move on. By whatever means anyone wants to think (and virtually nobody is going to change their opinion), PPP are going to form the government that is reality (barring a totally unexpected decision in the courts), and even considering the weaknesses of the Thai system that is right as there is no altrenative short of another coup (no thank you) or the continuation of the awful geriatric government with a slate of technicalities used to keep parliament from forming. There will be populist polices. There will be controversies. There is the economy to worry about. There are court cases against their "man" etc. It is in all of this and how they handle it that they should be judged, and of course how they will handle democratic demonstrations if they occur.

[hammered]

The dam Democrats are going to get another shot at things soon enough when the PPP coalition falls over. One would think they would have the smarts to keep their mouth shut and take the future opportunity being served up to them rather than trying to create an electoral gridlock right now. I guess it shows that the Democrats are not under the control of the powers to be who are running this show. Which is really a good thing, even if they are on the wrong course for long term victory.

Their intent continues to be to push for fair and free elections in Thailand. While this may not be possible, they feel that wrongdoings should not be pushed under the carpet and forgotten about either. Hence, when they have proof of wrongdoings and believe the government commission that is supposed to act on this is not, then they take it as their responsibility to their millions of supporters to submit the proof to the courts to get a fair hearing.

It is good to see the Democrats take their own position for their own electorate and not get caught in shoddy back room deals. That the EC has been criticised by P-Net and ANFREL for inaction over vote manipulation does indicate there are probably cases that are being ditched in the interests of what I dont quite know, but I would guess there are layers of the Junta supported group now switiching sides and doing deals, which may include not exactly being principled in what they are meant to do, which of course is disturbing if there are provable cases of manipulation, which it seems both P-Net and ANFREL think there are/were - I dont include trumped up stuff in this.

[Old Man River]

The dam Democrats are going to get another shot at things soon enough when the PPP coalition falls over. One would think they would have the smarts to keep their mouth shut and take the future opportunity being served up to them rather than trying to create an electoral gridlock right now. I guess it shows that the Democrats are not under the control of the powers to be who are running this show. Which is really a good thing, even if they are on the wrong course for long term victory.

Their intent continues to be to push for fair and free elections in Thailand. While this may not be possible, they feel that wrongdoings should not be pushed under the carpet and forgotten about either. Hence, when they have proof of wrongdoings and believe the government commission that is supposed to act on this is not, then they take it as their responsibility to their millions of supporters to submit the proof to the courts to get a fair hearing.

It is good to see the Democrats take their own position for their own electorate and not get caught in shoddy back room deals. That the EC has been criticised by P-Net and ANFREL for inaction over vote manipulation does indicate there are probably cases that are being ditched in the interests of what I dont quite know, but I would guess there are layers of the Junta supported group now switiching sides and doing deals, which may include not exactly being principled in what they are meant to do, which of course is disturbing if there are provable cases of manipulation, which it seems both P-Net and ANFREL think there are/were - I dont include trumped up stuff in this.

My guess is that they are being ditched for expediency more than anything. The EC just wants the whole thing to go away. Everyone is tired of years of chaos and people just want an elected government (regardless of how the government is elected). That is, except for the Demo's who think someone should be opposing this even if it drags things on. My view is that the junta are really only concerned about Thaksin as it relates to the thing we cannot discuss and are willing to back off on the PPP to concentrate on Thaksin only.

[sriracha john]

Three red cards confirmed against two Chart Thai and one People Power candidates

The Council of State on Friday confirmed three red cards issued against two Chart Thai candidates from Chai Nat and one People Power candidate in Udon Thani.

"The Election Commission followed prescribed steps to ensure legality and fairness in disqualifying the three candidates," Council of State deputy secretary general Atchaporn Charuchinda said.

The three disqualified candidates are Nanthana Songpracha and Monthien Songpracha of Chart Thai and Prasop Busarakham of People Power.

The revote is slated for next Sunday.

- The Nation

[sriracha john]

The results of the Buriram by-election may be scrapped and done over again...

All three MP candidates of the Matchima Thippataya Party have won the Buriram’s by-election for the constituency 1 yesterday. However, the Buriram Provincial Election Commission reveals that there may be another round of by-election as two complaints on electoral fraud have been made to the local poll panel.

The Buriram Provincial Election Commission in conjunction with the Buriram Provincial Police have revealed an official result of the by-election for the constituency 1 which consists of 639 polling station in nine districts of Buriram province.

All three MP candidates of the Matchima Thippataya Party, Somnuek Hengwanit, Manote Hengyosmak and Nattawut Sukkasem have come in the first top three spots of yesterday’s by-election.

Chairman of the Buriram Provincial EC Kasem Wattanatham revealed that the Buriram Provincial EC has received two complaints on electoral fraud yesterday and the matter is being investigated.

Kasem discloses that the Buriram Provincial EC’s initial examination found that the two complaints have grounds of possible violation of the Electoral Law.

However, further investigation will be carried out and if the evidence shows apparent wrongdoings, there may be a second round of the by-election in Buriram province.

- Thailand Outlook

[ando]

An interesting concept would appear if the court actually did find the PPP as acting as a proxy for the non-existent TRT. Since it is impossible to act as a proxy for a political party that no longer exists, any guilty verdict would therefore be a bogus finding against the PPP only for adopting a "political ideology" the same as, or near to, that of the now defunct TRT. The PPP is guilty of adopting the political ideology of the now defunct TRT and nothing else, -- there could certainly be no law against that in any democratic nation.

Disbanding a political party because the court doesn't like their particular brand of political ideology (and especially the most popular brand of political ideology in the country), would make an open farce of the whole legal and political system in Thailand. Well, even more of a farce than it already is anyway.

For this reason it is certain that the courts wouldn't embarrass themselves and bring themselves into international disrepute with an adverse finding against the PPP in this matter.

And in any case it appears that those in high places who are pulling the strings have decided to call the dogs off and allow the PPP to form a government for the time being at least. So its all go for the PPP for now at least until the coalition crumbles. Then its back to square one. All in all, the wisest strategy for the elite power brokers as a stumbling, fragmented PPP will be much easier to defeat next time round than a PPP that had power stolen from them through dodgy court rulings.

The problem for PPP is not the TRT link but the recorded Samak-Thaksin one in which Samak admits being a proxy of Thaksin or in other words legally acting as a banned politician. That legally pretty much only gives one outcome as at least lawyers I have talked to are willing to admit. Of course politcally as you mention that seems out of the question as legally then the only outcome is disolution, so how does the court come to a non-proxy conclusion without making itself seem compromised legally. That is the interesting part of this case. imho

The way the EC are going easy on vote buying cases as outlined by the respected P-Net and neutral ANFREL does indicate some deal, so we can probably expect a court verdict that will be of interest legally.

I concur that the outcome does seem to be pretty much obvious although I think PPP will go for a raft of quick populist polices and a 111 forgiveness followed by another electuion soon which they will ocntrol the interior ministry for and then get a new big mandate before the economic problems begin to bite with a vengeance. If the Dems are playing a long game they are lucky not to be in power the economy could well make delivering anything difficult.

A proxy is a person or agency legally authorized to act for another. In the literal sense of the term, Samak can not be a proxy for Thaksin unless Thaksin legally authorizes him to act on his behalf. And Thaksin hasnt done that. All Thaksin has said is that he is finished with politics and would act as an adviser if asked. That does not legally constitute Thaksin appointing Samak as a proxy. Its not up to Samak to declare he is Thaksins proxy. Only Thaksin can appoint a proxy. All Samak has got to say is that he was using the term figuratively to indicate he supported political ideals rather than literally to indicate that Thaksin had appointed him as his official proxy. You cant just assume proxyship for someone else without their legal consent (or consent granted by the court).

Agreeing with someone else's political ideals does not make you a proxy.

No genuine court could possibly convict Samak on the basis of the evidence that's been bandied about publicly. Thaksin himself would have to give evidence confirming he had appointed Samak as a proxy to make anything stick. Its a pretty airy-fairy charge in the first place, designed purely to tie up the opponent in legal proceedings and slow down the electoral process. In my view the complainant should be charged with making a malicious complaint.

[sriracha john]

Where's slimdog for a quote of the specific law in the new constitution covering this?

Is the wording such that it is the same legal-eze interpretation for "proxy" as that for say, a "power of attorney" as the above post interprets it, or for example the other legal use of the term "proxy" for say, a stock market transaction?

OR ...

is it more of a broadly-based meaning... such as someone standing in for someone else.

Edited January 18, 2008 by sriracha john

[Ricardo]

The point is, the EC felt that a result was unsafe, so they re-ran the election, and the same people won again. Which rather disproves any theory, which was widely promoted a week ago, that there was blatant gerrymandering by the EC going on here.

That was the nonsense, and a mountain of evidence was built up, to demonstrate this.

So.....in the rerun elections the PPP has recaptured EVERY seat that they were yellow carded for and allowed to run....AND....they even picked up one seat from another party!!!!....and all of this is presuambly without any buying of votes or other electoral irregularities!!!!

Well well well it seems clearer and clearer all the time that the voters who elected PPP candidates initially were actually sincere in their voting and the voting irregularities were not the deciding factor. I applaud the EC for calling these rerun elections since whenever a vote is suspicious it is good to vote again with a higher level of scrutiny so that the true intent of the voters can be known and acted upon. If the EC had not called the rerunning of these elections we might have fallen prey to the false doctrine of those whose views were that PPP was not in the hearts and minds of the voters.....because the reruns WERE held we now know that the voters do of their own will support the PPP candidates and it is not an artifact of irregularities or bribes.

So thanks to the EC, and their task to run a fairer election than in 2006, we shall see a PPP-led coalition-government, which reflects much more accurately the actual votes. Not a landslide or any gerrymandering - just a truer election-result. And with the worst cases of vote-buying seen to be punished, to encourage the others next time round.

Well done - the EC !

[Sandstone Art]

Just one more day.......

Meanwhile... PPP won again in Chayaphum (by-elections today) after its 2 candidates were "yellow carded" by the EC for... fraud.

So to sum'up : PPP wins when they're officially "cheating". And they win too when they do not cheat.

Last sunday, same punishement (by-elections in Korat).

Another humiliation for the Junta.

They were 'caught' and / or implicated during the first time in Dec 07. Maybe they thought that they have lots of support and strings to pull from everywhere. But that was not the case.

Last sunday by-election and other by-election elsewhere, they appeared to be 'clean'

Do you think that they will repeat the same mistake?

They need to be extremely 'discrete' and very careful in whatever they intend to do or actually doing it.

The STAKE is too high for them to repeat the same mistake. Those at the TOP will certainly not want to be caught yet again.

[sriracha john]

the court rulings for today are starting to come in now.... first one up...

Supreme Court rules in favour of early voting

The Supreme Court Friday ruled that the early voting held on December 15 and 16 was not unconstitutional.

The court ruled that the Election Commission had held the advanced voting on the two days in line with provision of the Constitution and the MPs Election and Senator Selection Act of B.E. 2550 as well as the EC Act of B.E. 2550.

The suit against the advance voting was filed by failed New Aspiration Party candidate Sarawut Thongpen.

- The Nation

[ando]

Where's slimdog for a quote of the specific law in the new constitution covering this?

Is the wording such that it is the same legal-eze interpretation for "proxy" as that for say, a "power of attorney" as the above post interprets it, or for example the other legal use of the term "proxy" for say, a stock market transaction?

OR ...

is it more of a broadly-based meaning... such as someone standing in for someone else.

I think the above post indicates the ambiguity of the way the term "proxy" has been used, or rather abused for political purposes.

What exactly is the "more broadly based meaning" of proxy? Someone standing in for someone else, sort of, but not really in all contexts?

Someone standing in for someone else in a specific function or duty which could include political roles?

I think that's what the claim comes down to. And even then, no one can act as a proxy for someone else without their specific knowledge and consent.

Merely sharing political ideologies does not constitute being appointed as a proxy. And merely claiming to be a proxy in generic common language terms does not make one so. Unless it can be proved that Samak was appointed by Thaksin as his political proxy, and that Samak has no free will of his own in these matters and is acting entirely on Thaksins instructions, there is no case to answer. Certainly there is no case to answer and never has been. Even if it can be shown that Samak sought advice from Thaksin, that does not, and could never constitute being a proxy. The case will be dumped for sure. I think even the most desperate elite power brokers would not want to hang their future on this one while there are better opportunities ahead in the coming months or years.

This is a really dumb case that has no chance of winning and brought about purely and simply with the intent of stalling the electoral process and buying time for further politically motivated challenges. It really is a shame that some bad losers have put their own personal and political interests ahead of those of the country in bringing up such frivolous charges. Still, I suppose that if it looked like the Democrats were going to carry the day its quite possible the courts would have approved the charges in the interests of political expediency. As it stands now with the PPP ready to take charge, the courts would not dare to try and bring down the future elected government on such a flimsy and unfounded charge. Such a move would be rightly seen as tantamount to a "coup" by the judiciary.

Edited January 18, 2008 by ando

[sriracha john]

Throughout the hundreds of declarations, did Thaksin ever deny that Samak was his proxy or that Samak had no authority to make such claims?

[hammered]

Where's slimdog for a quote of the specific law in the new constitution covering this?

Is the wording such that it is the same legal-eze interpretation for "proxy" as that for say, a "power of attorney" as the above post interprets it, or for example the other legal use of the term "proxy" for say, a stock market transaction?

OR ...

is it more of a broadly-based meaning... such as someone standing in for someone else.

I think the above post indicates the ambiguity of the way the term "proxy" has been used, or rather abused for political purposes.

What exactly is the "more broadly based meaning" of proxy? Someone standing in for someone else, sort of, but not really in all contexts?

Someone standing in for someone else in a specific function or duty which could include political roles?

I think that's what the claim comes down to. And even then, no one can act as a proxy for someone else without their specific knowledge and consent.

Merely sharing political ideologies does not constitute being appointed as a proxy. And merely claiming to be a proxy in generic common language terms does not make one so. Unless it can be proved that Samak was apointed by Thaksin as his political proxy, and that Samak has no free will of his own in these matters and is acting entirely on Thaksins instructions, there is no case to answer. Certainly there is no case to answer and never has been.

This is a really dumb case that has no chance of winning and brought about purely and simply with the intent of stalling the electoral process and buying time for further politically motivated challenges. It really is a shame that some bad losers have put their own personal and political interests ahead of those of the country in bringing up such frivolous charges. Still, I suppose that if it looked like the Democrats were going to carry the day its quite possible the courts would have approved the charges in the interests of political expediency. As it stands now with the PPP ready to take charge, the courts would not dare to try and bring down the future elected government on such a flimsy and unfounded charge. Such a move would be rightly seen as tantamount to a "coup" by the judiciary.

There is one other issue on this. there isnt a Thai person I have met who doesnt think PPP is a proxy party and that includes all the PPP voters and people I know who to a large degree voted for it for that reason.

Can a court rule it is not a proxy without becoming a complete laughing stock?

My interest is how the court can get out of a position of acute embarrassment. By the way lawyers (3) I have talked to seem to think the proxy line and what it construes is far stronger than you analyse it. Then again knowing lawyers it is no doubt possible to find a divergent view, and nobody is going to do anything to dislolve an incoming government when it has just been elected (maybe later). This in many ways is repeat of 2001 but with a huge number of people (probably a very large minority of the adult population) now on the other side.