Noppadon Announces Resignation

[A_Traveller]

^^^ That is not my understanding. The Court judgement was in two parts, firstly all the Judges found that the joint communique was equivalent to a treaty under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969. Secondly, 8 of the 9 adjudged the communique required parliament's approval before being signed under Article 190 of the charter.

On the basis of the first judgement then the joint communique would be subject to the previous constitution, since it implicitly affected the jurisdiction of the State [Article 224 of 1997]. Therefore the action itself, given the tortuous context, could, in my view be subject to constitutional challenge under the preceding constitution.

Regards

I would be most interested to read were Thailand lost any Jurisdiction.

Going from proposed joint to single listing, could in my opinion, be so forensically argued, under the 97 constitution. My view is it wrong to say that it would not have been subject to constitutional challenge under '97.

Regards

[Rtwo]

What the heck, it's just one more name to add to the list of people who've got caught up in the terrain around Vihear. I wonder now that the UN has added it to their list of World Heritage Sites does that mean that they'll erect a sign in remembrance of the hundreds of refugees that died in minefields after the Thai army forced 43,000 of them down the cliffs back into Cambodia after collecting them, from camps along the border, in the middle of that awful night, Friday, June 8, 1978? I suspect not and this incident will be forgotten just as quickly as that. Not much has changed. RIP

[deeveloper]

Thai army forced 43,000 of them down the cliffs back into Cambodia after collecting them, from camps along the border, in the middle of that awful night, Friday, June 8, 1978? I suspect not and this incident will be forgotten just as quickly as that. Not much has changed. RIP

Got a link or any info on that event please?

[A_Traveller]

I believe the post is one year out, the events occurred in 79.

It's covered in a book by William Shawcross The Quality of Mercy and there's a report by Grant Peck of AP from '99 Through the oddities of the net this version is from a Seattle Paper Link

Regards

/edit add detail//

Edited July 10, 2008 by A_Traveller

[feens]

I believe the post is one year out, the events occurred in 79.

Regards

From Wikpedia

Civil war began in Cambodia in 1970; the temple's location high atop a cliff served to make it readily defensible militarily. Soldiers loyal to the Lon Nol government in Phnom Penh continued to hold it long after the plain below fell to communist forces. Tourists were able to visit from the Thai side during the war. The Khmer Rouge captured Phnom Penh in April 1975, but the soldiers at Preah Vihear continued to hold out after the collapse of their government. The Khmer Rouge made several unsuccessful attempts to capture the temple, then finally succeeded on May 22, 1975 by shelling the cliff, scaling it and routing the defenders, Thai officials reported at the time.^[3] It was said to be the last place in Cambodia to fall to the Khmer Rouge.

Full-scale war began again in Cambodia in December 1978 when the Vietnamese army invaded to overthrow the Khmer Rouge. Khmer Rouge troops retreated to border areas. In January, the Vietnamese reportedly attacked Khmer Rouge troops holed up in the temple, but there were no reports of damage to it. Large numbers of Cambodian refugees entered Thailand after the invasion. In June 1979, Thai security forces forcibly expelled tens of thousands of them back into Cambodia in the vicinity of Preah Vihear. Unknown numbers were killed by landmines, gunfire and exposure; the government that Vietnam installed in Phnom Penh put the number of fatalities at more than 300.

[bayrider]

I think democracy is a concept that is alien to most of asia. Democracy is not a panacea that will solve all issues. I just do not see the Thais as understanding what Democracy really is? It does not mean that you throw out the government that you elected just because some minority faction want more power. It is extremely sad.

[Old Man River]

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to who will replace Noppadon?

[jumnien]

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to who will replace Noppadon?

Not sure; but I am sure that General A, General B and General C are all submitting their applications to the PAD!

[Otis]

I down and several more to go. The Thai courts are to be commended.

Who's next? shall we take a poll?

Yes, take a pol. Any of several pols will do. chewit dee, otis

[hammered]

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to who will replace Noppadon?

It will be interesting to see how extensive the cabinet reshuffle is. PPP have to be a bit careful not to blow their factional rivalry into a full scale war and with Yongyuth's demise the Chidchob clan will be looking for more influence. The coalition partners will also want to extract their pound of flesh for staying loyal. Then of course the rumours that the Japanese tunnel corruption case was pointed out to Thai journalists by a PPP insider are of course totally unfounded;) And of course nobody is noticing that it is only the most loyal to Thaksin that are being taken out by court cases will go unnoticed.

A cabinet reshuffle in a country where cabinet seats go on quota and come with big budgets is always a potential source of friction. That one is forced to happen now with the PPP internally quarelling - at least according to those I know - makes it even riskier. I would guess a limited reshuffle is the only option, but that wont impress the media who sense blood.

Noppadol may actually end up leading a far happier life over the next few months than if he had stayed.

[Old Man River]

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to who will replace Noppadon?

It will be interesting to see how extensive the cabinet reshuffle is. PPP have to be a bit careful not to blow their factional rivalry into a full scale war and with Yongyuth's demise the Chidchob clan will be looking for more influence. The coalition partners will also want to extract their pound of flesh for staying loyal. Then of course the rumours that the Japanese tunnel corruption case was pointed out to Thai journalists by a PPP insider are of course totally unfounded;) And of course nobody is noticing that it is only the most loyal to Thaksin that are being taken out by court cases will go unnoticed.

A cabinet reshuffle in a country where cabinet seats go on quota and come with big budgets is always a potential source of friction. That one is forced to happen now with the PPP internally quarelling - at least according to those I know - makes it even riskier. I would guess a limited reshuffle is the only option, but that wont impress the media who sense blood.

Noppadol may actually end up leading a far happier life over the next few months than if he had stayed.

In other words, you don't want to hazard a guess.

Your friends who tell you the PPP is quarreling internally will have also told you that this has been the case since Samak first said he would change the constitution near the end of the 4th year, not immediately as instructed. Yet, he still is in power. This guy is a survivor, which is why his appointments of vacated positions will be very interesting.

[dominique355]

Maybe Noppadon quit because Thaksin needs a new lawyer. His previous one was caught delivering a lunch box to the Court. Now Noppadon might just go back to represent his old client's interests. Oops, he did that all the time already. So maybe now he will get paid better.

[FrugalTurtle]

This may be a little off-topic but it's my understanding is that Preah Vihear Temple is only accessible from Thailand, unless you are able to climb the cliffs, is this correct? If this is true then why is Preah Vihear Temple not part of Thailand? Can someone explain or direct me to a credible source regarding this issue?

Thank you.

[Chaimai]

I still think it belongs to Cambodia - they built it, after all.

(It is a beautiful site, with excellent views over Cambodia and Laos)

[geriatrickid]

Bit odd these reactions. A Thai foreign minister takes the diplomatic approach, the peaceful route and agrees to support Cambodia's request to classify the location as a world historical site, while still leaving the border delineation open for further discussion. Hardly the act of a tyrant or a despotic government.

Then, from the crevices and rocks come farangs that are the first to lament the evils of Thai nationalism, to vilify and denigrate the foreign minister. In a world filled with petty arguments, the Thai FM showed some intelligence on this issue, while not giving in on Thai sovereignty. I suppose if the Thai FM had ratcheted up the tensions and sent armed forces to occupy the ground that would have satisfied the farang naysayers. Then they'd be able to accuse the Thais of being warmongers. It's only been designated a site of historical value. There was no capitulation.

[Plus]

A Thai foreign minister takes the diplomatic approach, the peaceful route and agrees to support Cambodia's request to classify the location as a world historical site...

The main question is not whether Noppadon was right or wrong - he had no authority to sign the agreement in the first place.

Who told him to agree with Cambodians and keep it secret? He had to bring this communique to the parlament by law.

But of course we know who - his previous employer, he is suspected to gain most from this agreement.

It was a long standing Thailand's policy not to budge an inch over Preah Vihear. Cambodians tried to list it since 1991, after all.

>>>>

From the Nation:

..the 1997 Constitution did not require the submission of all binding documents to parliamentary consideration. Its Article 224 said His Majesty the King had authority to make agreements with foreign countries or international organisations.

The second paragraph of the article said that any treaty that could make changes to territory or sovereignty, or need internal laws for ratification, required the approval of Parliament...

..Article 224 of the 1997 Constitution and Article 190 of the current charter share a common spirit and intention: any agreement which makes significant changes in sovereignty or has implications for the country must get the people's mandate through the Parliament.

The communique could have been challenged under 1997 edition, but which way the ruling would eventually go is anybody's guess.

>>>

The International Court ruled in favor of Cambodians because they used old French maps Thailand had never objected to. On those maps the temple is in Cambodia, the hill is in Thailand, and the surrounding area has still not been demarkated.

>>>

Somewhere I saw the quesiton - what does Thaksin stand to gain from this, investment is investment, Cambodians wouldn't refuse the money, would they?

I think the answer is in conditions attached - tax breaks, commitments to develop the infrastructructure and so on. Maybe Cambodians promised to build him an airport, or even a landing strip for private jets, maybe they simply gave him no tax for five years deal. Possibilities for trade of over Preah Vihear are endless.

Now there's a talk about joint seven nations management of the temple, and possibly surrounding area - I bet Thais won't hear any of it and Noppadon would be a boogie man for decades to come.

[Shah Jahan]

A little off topic here as it probably doesnt have anything to do with the subject being discussed....

but has Dr. Thaksin recently been granted any important business concessions in Cambodia - I seem to remember something about him just being granted permission to develop a casino/mega-city on the Thai/Cam border.

Maybe someone with more information can bring light on the subject.

[sriracha john]

A little off topic here as it probably doesnt have anything to do with the subject being discussed....

but has Dr. Thaksin recently been granted any important business concessions in Cambodia - I seem to remember something about him just being granted permission to develop a casino/mega-city on the Thai/Cam border.

Maybe someone with more information can bring light on the subject.

More info on the Thaksin Thai Taxpayer Highway in Cambodia that leads to the Golden Square Head Casino and Resort:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=1982358

and also info on Thaksinville, Cambodia which seems to be near Sihanoukville:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thaksin-land...t&p=2000909

[massein]

This is off specific topic, but i have long been interested in the English Translations of the names of Thai politcal parties

In the Nation News and article stated that the PPP already had plans for a new party if it waqs desolved

( Puea Thai ) can anyone tell me the meaning of Puea ? also any of the other party names

Bye the way prehaps Thaksins daughter will run for political since she just graduated with a BA in Political Science. At

least there is no dought she attended the university.

[geriatrickid]

How many of you read the actual UNESCO document that shows the agreement? It is not a treaty, nor is it a legal contract. All it was was an agreement that the site had importance. There is no discussion or agreement of ownership. Despite the assumptions of some, this agreement was public and was not secret. I think if people dig deep enough they will see some pressure brought to bear by academics and religious figures in an attempt to protect what is a remarkable artifact. The UNESCO designation will allow funds to be given to preserve the site. This could not be achieved without the agreement. Those are the rules. Continued bickering would have meant a deterioration of the temple beyond preservation thresholds.

I have to wonder how many people arguing this decision appreciate the cultural aspect of the temple. It is a Khmer themed temple dedicated to the Hindu deity Shiva, the destroyer. Although there are many statues and temples that feature shiva in Thailand, none are as intertwined in the Cambodian culture nor date date back as far as this temple.

Decision Text -The World Heritage Committee

1. Having examined Documents WHC-07/31.COM/8B and WHC-07/31.COM/INF.8B.1,

2. Having taken note of the following statement by the Chairperson of the World Heritage Committee which has been agreed to by the Delegation of Cambodia and the Delegation of Thailand:

"The State Party of Cambodia and the State Party of Thailand are in full agreement that the Sacred Site of the Temple of Preah Vihear has Outstanding Universal Value and must be inscribed on the World Heritage List as soon as possible. Accordingly, Cambodia and Thailand agree that Cambodia will propose the site for formal inscription on the World Heritage List at the 32nd session of the World Heritage Committee in 2008 with the active support of Thailand.

They also agree that the site is in need of urgent attention and requires international financial and technical assistance and close cooperation between them.

They further agree that it is essential to strengthen conservation and management at the site including by the development of an appropriate management plan, as required under paragraph 108 of the Operational Guidelines, that will ensure the future protection of this property.

They understand, following consultation with the World Heritage Centre, that financial and technical assistance for the development of a management plan will be available through the World Heritage Centre's International Assistance programme."

3. Recognizes that the Sacred Site of the Temple of Preah Vihear is of great international significance and has Outstanding Universal Value on the basis of criteria (i), (ii) and (iv), agrees in principle that it should be inscribed on the World Heritage List and notes that the process for inscription is in progress;

4. Requests the State Party of Cambodia to strengthen conservation and management at the site by making progress in developing an appropriate management plan, which progress will enable its formal inscription by the Committee at its 32nd session in 2008;

5. Further requests the State Party of Cambodia to submit a progress report to the World Heritage Centre, by 1 February 2008.

Edited July 11, 2008 by geriatrickid

[Plus]

1. It was not the Unesco document that was ruled unconstutional, but Thai Cambodian communique.

2. Details of the Cabinet meeting where this communique was signed were never made public. No one knows which ministers were even present.

[A_Traveller]

^^ Yes I did read those contemporaneously and the supporting documentation from the previous listing requests. How many here recall the concerns raised last year about listing discussions? The reality here is that this site, still contested in Thai minds, and a 'useful' drum beat for nationalists of all persuasions, means that an entirely sensible approach, which should have been the case years ago as an example of cooperation was a non starter.

Thaksin comments aside, I really don't know what possessed anyone {MFA?} here to think that such a declaration would go unchallenged, and given the resultant of the communiqué itself, the probability of a constitutional challenge {'97 or 06}. In all other discussions about this over the years the Thai position has been immutable.

One could create a endless chain of Machiavellian intent here, Thaksin {favour} -> Samak {light bulb} ->FM is an amateur -> 'Re-shuffle ->reduce the loyal brethren -> juggle partners -> maintain power -> reduce targets for dissent -> reduce Thaksin clout behind the scenes.

Regards

[dr_Pat_Pong]

We'll all miss Khun Noppadon.

[A_Traveller]

^ Just have to improve our aim then.

Regards

[Heng]

Not a bad windfall for a couple of month's "work."

[sriracha john]

1. It was not the UNESCO document that was ruled unconstitutional, but Thai Cambodian communique.

2. Details of the Cabinet meeting where this communique was signed were never made public. No one knows which ministers were even present.

resulting in....

Democrat member Suthep explains why he could not file impeachment against PM

The Democrat Party Secretary-General Suthep Thuagsuban, says the Opposition could not file an impeachment motion against the Prime Minister and Defense Minister Samak Sundaravej.

Mr. Suthep explained that the Opposition could not gather sufficient information related to the Preah Vihear issue from the past Cabinet's resolutions [notes].

However, Mr. Suthep says it is quite strange that other facts and information, besides the Preah Vihear case, are available on the website of the Government House.

He says the government previously claimed that it has kept the Cabinet's resolution [notes] concerning the Preah Vihear controversy.

He says it is unusual for such an important agenda to be left out in the government's memorandum [notes], and thus, he could not exercise the Information Act in order to file an impeachment motion against the Prime Minister.

- ThaiNews / 11-07-08

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

In the smoky backrooms where these deals are hammered out, the lighting is often poor which precludes the writing of even rudimentary note-taking.

Edited July 11, 2008 by sriracha john

[slimdog]

How many of you read the actual UNESCO document that shows the agreement? It is not a treaty, nor is it a legal contract. All it was was an agreement that the site had importance. There is no discussion or agreement of ownership. Despite the assumptions of some, this agreement was public and was not secret. I think if people dig deep enough they will see some pressure brought to bear by academics and religious figures in an attempt to protect what is a remarkable artifact. The UNESCO designation will allow funds to be given to preserve the site. This could not be achieved without the agreement. Those are the rules. Continued bickering would have meant a deterioration of the temple beyond preservation thresholds.

Geriatrickid

The Constitutional court ruled treaties are defined by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, which states:

“treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed

by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and

whatever its particular designation;

My understanding of this definition is that any agreement which Thailand makes with another country, regardless of what it is about, e.g Territorial, Jusidictional, Economic, Commercial etc is regarded as a treaty, and as such will have to in future go before Parliament and if voted in favour of, presented to the King for signature.

A_Traveller

The reason I believe that Noppadon signed the original "Treaty" in Paris, was that to not do so would have been unconstitutional. This (I believe) is because the previous government had agreed in Principle to UNESO tosupport Cambodia's application. So refusing to support it may well have contravened Article 82 of the present Constitution.

Plus

My reason for stating that it was not unconstitutional under the 1997 Constitution was due to a statement in the Thai press by Meechai Ruchuphan, which stated the clause 190/5 as the only reason for the unconstitutional verdict in the court. As that clause was not in any previous constitutions. Maybe your understanding of the Constitutions of Thailand is better than mine, in which case I appologise for saying you were wrong...

OMR

You asked about who people think will be the next Foreign Minister?

Banharm Silpa_Archa, is perhaps a long shot but would serve Samak's needs. Love or hate him, the vertically challenged one has held most of the top positions in this country, Prime Minister, Interior Minister even Finance Minister. The Democrats would be hesitant about attacking him, Thailand would have someone of stature (figuratively speaking) during the ASEAN meetings, he is not under any legal problems, other than Party dissolution, but even that would not bar him from being in the Cabinet.

[A_Traveller]

slimdog

The reason I believe that Noppadon signed the original "Treaty" in Paris, was that to not do so would have been unconstitutional. This (I believe) is because the previous government had agreed in Principle to UNESO to support Cambodia's application. So refusing to support it may well have contravened Article 82 of the present Constitution.

I believe that is in error, since certainly the Thais lobbied at the UNESCO meeting in '07 in New Zealand for joint listing or nothing, and the Cambodian listing attempt failed. Indeed after the '07 meeting UNESCO implied that they preferred to see a joint application. The only extant agreement prior to the communiqué was the MoU of 2000 which in brief said neither side should change anything. By the by, as late as January '08, the MFA spokesman Tharit Charungvat referred back to the MoU as, to paraphrase him, the status quo.

Regards

Edited July 11, 2008 by A_Traveller

[Old Man River]

OMR

You asked about who people think will be the next Foreign Minister?

Banharm Silpa_Archa, is perhaps a long shot but would serve Samak's needs. Love or hate him, the vertically challenged one has held most of the top positions in this country, Prime Minister, Interior Minister even Finance Minister. The Democrats would be hesitant about attacking him, Thailand would have someone of stature (figuratively speaking) during the ASEAN meetings, he is not under any legal problems, other than Party dissolution, but even that would not bar him from being in the Cabinet.

Banharn's name will come up often, but it will never be in any context other than the one he covets the most (i.e. PM).

I don't have a clue as to who the new foreign minister will be. On the re-shuffle, I think they will want to keep Mingwan around only because he is not a political threat to anyone and given his gift for gab, the foreign ministry might be a place to stick him. I realize it will be an embarrassment to Thailand if this happens, but really how could things be any more embarrassing than they already are?

[Meerkat]

I believe that is in error, since certainly the Thais lobbied at the UNESCO meeting in '07 in New Zealand for joint listing or nothing, and the Cambodian listing attempt failed. Indeed after the '07 meeting UNESCO implied that they preferred to see a joint application. The only extant agreement prior to the communiqué was the MoU of 2000 which in brief said neither side should change anything. By the by, as late as January '08, the MFA spokesman Tharit Charungvat referred back to the MoU as, to paraphrase him, the status quo.

Regards

It's not just the UNESCO document itself that implies that the Surayud government was (begrudgingly) OK with a sole-listing. From TNA at the time:

Gen. Surayud said he had once told his Cambodian counterpart Somdej Hun Sen that a solution to the dispute must lead to a win-win situation for both sides.

The Thai prime minister said his government would not insist that Preah Vihear is partly owned by Thailand, but should the mountain be declared a UNESCO world heritage site, the move must benefit both countries.

and from The Nation:

"We have no objection to Preah Vihear shrine being a World Heritage Site. We support in principle Phnom Penh's request. We hope that the unsettled issues can be solved and the request be put forward for approval again next year," Foreign Ministry spokesman Tharit Charungvat said yesterday.

I think the junta realised that Cambodia's lobbying over the years would lead to a sole listing this year, and was resigned to the fact that Thailand's best option was to try and get at least some concessions from the matter. The largest "unsettled issue" to the listing was of course the disputed area (in fact by the UNESCO convention that shouldn't be an obstacle anyway), but by limiting the map this time to boundaries within the 1962 ruling it put sovereignty beyond question. With that important change it was - as we have now seen - almost a certainty that Cambodia would get its sole listing.