Prime Minister Urges Political Parties To Propose Charter Amendments

[Pierrot]

The 2007 Constitution was approved by the whole country, via a national referendum (can we even say that about the 1997 version?). No way you could tear it up legally. Only choice is to amend the parts that people don't like. Personally, I think both version make it far to easy to amend the constitution. I think that any change should also be approved by a national referendum, after passing through the parliament. But they forgot to ask me when they were writing it...lol

This has been answered before but I guess you don't care.

Nothing personal, I understand it's just a job for you.

[LawnGnome]

The 2007 Constitution was approved by the whole country, via a national referendum (can we even say that about the 1997 version?). No way you could tear it up legally. Only choice is to amend the parts that people don't like. Personally, I think both version make it far to easy to amend the constitution. I think that any change should also be approved by a national referendum, after passing through the parliament. But they forgot to ask me when they were writing it...lol

This has been answered before but I guess you don't care.

Nothing personal, I understand it's just a job for you.

Sounded pretty personal to me...aren't you a bright ray of sunshine

[webfact]

The 2007 Constitution was approved by the whole country, via a national referendum (can we even say that about the 1997 version?). No way you could tear it up legally. Only choice is to amend the parts that people don't like. Personally, I think both version make it far to easy to amend the constitution. I think that any change should also be approved by a national referendum, after passing through the parliament. But they forgot to ask me when they were writing it...lol

You mean 65 million vote yes? I don't think so. I think only about 13 million (from my memory) vote yes, 10 million vote no.

Also, the question on the referendum is bias.

It ask the people to vote

(A..) Yes, the newly proposed 2007 constitution or

(B..) No constitution at all (because the old one has already been thorn; also imply that military continue to rule, as no fresh election can be held without constitution).

In fact, it should ask the people if they would rather want:

(A..) reinstead the existing 1997 constitution or

(B..) the newly proposed 2007 constitution.

which I am sure most people will choice (A..) (just my judgement).

I'll second that. Have marked in bold what I was told by almost every Thai (9 out of 10), I have asked about.

Edited April 20, 2009 by webfact

[Plus]

Also, the question on the referendum is bias.

It ask the people to vote

(A..) Yes, the newly proposed 2007 constitution or

(B..) No constitution at all (because the old one has already been thorn; also imply that military continue to rule, as no fresh election can be held without constitution).

You just made that up, didn't you.

[LawnGnome]

It is what it is. I don't have a dog in this fight unlike others here, apparently. The 2006 coup seems to be to have been a necessary evil. Some people would have preferred to let Thaksin continue, but I think many fail to realize the deadlock and standstill the country was in at the time of the coup. Election results thrown out, hundreds of thousands of protestors on the street, rumors that thaksin was planning a coup of sorts of his own...

Since then we have had a ineffectual appointed PM - Surayud, 2 Thaksin puppets, and the Abhisit. Based on IQ scores alone I'll take Abhisit as the best of the lot, for leading the country forward. It will be a delicate process, to be sure, and I don't see the final pathway just yet, but I know I'd much rather have him at the helm than Charlerm. Perhaps its "naive and simplistic" but those are the only two viable choices around now, and for the forseeable future.

[Plus]

I remember reading a fair assessment of Surayud's govt performance - it was very very impressive on some fronts, not PR friendly stuff but it set the country back on track, clearing Thaksin's era backlogs and debts and pushing for some very important legislation. NLA productivity was astonishing comparing to Samak era when nothing got done whatsoever. Some ministers, however were really in neutral gear, that was also true.

[LawnGnome]

I remember reading a fair assessment of Surayud's govt performance - it was very very impressive on some fronts, not PR friendly stuff but it set the country back on track, clearing Thaksin's era backlogs and debts and pushing for some very important legislation. NLA productivity was astonishing comparing to Samak era when nothing got done whatsoever. Some ministers, however were really in neutral gear, that was also true.

True, I felt Surayud was one of the few truly decent people I've ever seen near thp. He always spoke honestly, truthfully, and with compassion. Reminds me of Abhisit.

[Plus]

Official versions:

NLA bows out after 218 laws

The National Legislative Assembly met for the last time yesterday after passing 218 laws since it was appointed on October 11, 2006, by the military junta that deposed Thaksin Shinawatra as prime minister.

Listing the legislature's achievements, Speaker Meechai Ruchuphan said the assembly had held 95 sessions, answered more than 100 enquires and passed one emergency decree during its existence.

The assembly acknowledged 100 reports from its standing committees, he added.

...

March 1, 2008

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/rea...newsid=30066931

Wallop lauds NLA, govt over performance

Published on January 20, 2008

National Legislative Assembly member and former senator Wallop Tangkananurak says the assembly and the military-appointed Cabinet were "industrious" in passing law, given their short tenures.

He said the dozens of laws passed by the assembly could be divided into groups.

The first was the seven principle and organic laws for people with disabilities. They formed a special division of the Social Development and Welfare Department to care for the disabled, and established a fund for organisations that care for them.

The assembly passed a law establishing child and youth councils at district, provincial and national levels. It will allow for the representation of young people in national issues and democracy.

Women's affairs saw a law to curb domestic violence, which prohibits the news media from inappropriately presenting news of domestic violence, and a law with a new definition of rape to cover both male and female victims.

The assembly amended and passed the Names Bill, allowing married women, as well as divorcees and widows, to choose whether to be addressed as Miss or Mrs, said Wallop.

Other important social law passed included labour-protection legislation, which was approved in December. It will come into force this year.

Its key content includes requirements for business operators hiring short-term workers to provide the same payment rates and welfare currently enjoyed by full-time employees.

It states employers who suspend business temporarily must pay workers at 75 per cent of their full rate, compared with the current 50 per cent.

It allows workers to terminate employment contracts within 30 days if employers move location, and still receive 100-per-cent payment. At present it is 50 per cent.

The Cabinet approved many social laws. A Cabinet resolution in December approved in principle a proposal allowing women civil servants and state-enterprise officials to attend religious instruction and rites for one to three months at retreats accredited by the Office of National Buddhism.

In November, the Cabinet approved in principle a decree for more tax incentives to private companies supporting education, by exempting them from certain income, value-added and specific-business taxes.

Those entitled to the exemptions, which will be announced in regulations, procedures and conditions set out by the Revenue Department, are companies that support scholarships, fund research and innovation or employ education personnel.

The donation of less than 50 rai of land to a private organisation for social

causes will be exempt from property-ownership transfer tax, while those supporting disabled people can receive up to Bt30,000 in tax rebates.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/rea...newsid=30062816

[LawnGnome]

The only thing that pops into my mind when I think of the NLA is that older, crazy looking, black toothed gentleman. He seems to block out all my other thoughts on the matter, lo

[samgrowth]

I must admit I do not like Thaksin, PAD nor UDD. I quite like Mark.

However what I cannot take is the army coming out with gun to take power when ever they do not like the exiting government (who ever that might be). Worst, burn the exiting constitution instead of attempt to amend the bad part and maintain the good part. This is not acceptable.

[LawnGnome]

I must admit I do not like Thaksin, PAD nor UDD. I quite like Mark.

However what I cannot take is the army coming out with gun to take power when ever they do not like the exiting government (who ever that might be). Worst, burn the exiting constitution instead of attempt to amend the bad part and maintain the good part. This is not acceptable.

I don't like it much either, but its the political reality of where we live. Better to find some degree of acceptance and make the best of it?

[sriracha john]

Thai PM rules out talks with exiled Thaksin

BANGKOK (AFP / 2 hours ago) — Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Monday ruled out holding any talks with exiled former leader Thaksin Shinawatra after clashes between troops and anti-government protesters last week.

His government had earlier this month raised the possibility of negotiations with the fugitive ex-premier, who was toppled in a military coup in 2006 that triggered three years of political unrest.

But on Tuesday it issued a warrant for Thaksin's arrest accusing him of inciting violence, following the storming of an Asian summit by his supporters and subsequent riots in Bangkok which left two people dead.

Thaksin is living in exile, mainly in Dubai, to avoid a jail sentence for corruption. The government cancelled his passport earlier this week but it emerged that Nicaragua had granted him another travel document.

"I have no idea what we would talk about. The government will only talk with people who abide by the law and will not talk with people who use violence or incite violence," Abhisit told reporters when asked about talks with Thaksin.

He said any future amnesty under efforts to forge national reconciliation would only apply to political offences and not criminal violations.

Abhisit said Sunday that the government would over the next two weeks look at possible changes to the law or to a constitution adopted in 2007 under the junta that ousted Thaksin -- key demands of Thaksin's supporters.

The protesters, known as "Red Shirts" because of their colourful attire, demanded Abhisit's resignation and new elections.

[pnustedt]

Why don't they ask the people if they want to mess with consitution at all, and what they percieve as wrong with it, if they give a fuc_k.

i never thought I would agree with "Plus" but who gives a fuc_k for a constitution which the military ignores any way?

[Pierrot]

Thai PM rules out talks with exiled Thaksin

BANGKOK (AFP / 2 hours ago) — Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Monday ruled out holding any talks with exiled former leader Thaksin Shinawatra after clashes between troops and anti-government protesters last week.

His government had earlier this month raised the possibility of negotiations with the fugitive ex-premier, who was toppled in a military coup in 2006 that triggered three years of political unrest.

But on Tuesday it issued a warrant for Thaksin's arrest accusing him of inciting violence, following the storming of an Asian summit by his supporters and subsequent riots in Bangkok which left two people dead.

Thaksin is living in exile, mainly in Dubai, to avoid a jail sentence for corruption. The government cancelled his passport earlier this week but it emerged that Nicaragua had granted him another travel document.

"I have no idea what we would talk about. The government will only talk with people who abide by the law and will not talk with people who use violence or incite violence," Abhisit told reporters when asked about talks with Thaksin.

He said any future amnesty under efforts to forge national reconciliation would only apply to political offences and not criminal violations.

Abhisit said Sunday that the government would over the next two weeks look at possible changes to the law or to a constitution adopted in 2007 under the junta that ousted Thaksin -- key demands of Thaksin's supporters.

The protesters, known as "Red Shirts" because of their colourful attire, demanded Abhisit's resignation and new elections.

In clear :

Blah blah blah ... nothing new.

And you really kept the best for the end :

"The protesters, known as "Red Shirts" because of their colourful attire ..."

If you're runing for the Pulitzer, you've my vote !!!

[Pierrot]

Why don't they ask the people if they want to mess with consitution at all, and what they percieve as wrong with it, if they give a fuc_k.

i never thought I would agree with "Plus" but who gives a fuc_k for a constitution which the military ignores any way?

Because the military is less and less in a position to ignore it.

[pnustedt]

Why don't they ask the people if they want to mess with consitution at all, and what they percieve as wrong with it, if they give a fuc_k.

i never thought I would agree with "Plus" but who gives a fuc_k for a constitution which the military ignores any way?

Because the military is less and less in a position to ignore it.

Really? I must have missed something!

[animatic]

The 2007 Constitution was approved by the whole country, via a national referendum (can we even say that about the 1997 version?). No way you could tear it up legally. Only choice is to amend the parts that people don't like. Personally, I think both version make it far to easy to amend the constitution. I think that any change should also be approved by a national referendum, after passing through the parliament. But they forgot to ask me when they were writing it...lol

You mean 65 million vote yes? I don't think so. I think only about 13 million (from my memory) vote yes, 10 million vote no.

Also, the question on the referendum is bias.

It ask the people to vote

(A..) Yes, the newly proposed 2007 constitution or

(B..) No constitution at all (because the old one has already been thorn; also imply that military continue to rule, as no fresh election can be held without constitution).

In fact, it should ask the people if they would rather want:

(A..) reinstead the existing 1997 constitution or

(B..) the newly proposed 2007 constitution.

which I am sure most people will choice (A..) (just my judgement).

The USA had an early constitution of sorts, it had problems.

A new one was written up and then a

yes no vote was held for EACH state, and it was simple.

Not a :

do we go back to the last one or do we approve this one.

Sometimes things are best left simple....

It was perfectly fine for the voters to vote yes no.

If no was the answer then more drafting would have been needed.

And another vote.

But the voters said yes. Enough of the voters voted to make it valid.

It is NOW the law of the land.

I personally think modifying '97 would have been the best idea at the time.

I wasn't consulted.

[sriracha john]

Thai PM rules out talks with exiled Thaksin

BANGKOK (AFP / 2 hours ago) — Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on Monday ruled out holding any talks with exiled former leader Thaksin Shinawatra after clashes between troops and anti-government protesters last week.

His government had earlier this month raised the possibility of negotiations with the fugitive ex-premier, who was toppled in a military coup in 2006 that triggered three years of political unrest.

But on Tuesday it issued a warrant for Thaksin's arrest accusing him of inciting violence, following the storming of an Asian summit by his supporters and subsequent riots in Bangkok which left two people dead.

Thaksin is living in exile, mainly in Dubai, to avoid a jail sentence for corruption. The government cancelled his passport earlier this week but it emerged that Nicaragua had granted him another travel document.

"I have no idea what we would talk about. The government will only talk with people who abide by the law and will not talk with people who use violence or incite violence," Abhisit told reporters when asked about talks with Thaksin.

He said any future amnesty under efforts to forge national reconciliation would only apply to political offences and not criminal violations.

Abhisit said Sunday that the government would over the next two weeks look at possible changes to the law or to a constitution adopted in 2007 under the junta that ousted Thaksin -- key demands of Thaksin's supporters.

The protesters, known as "Red Shirts" because of their colourful attire, demanded Abhisit's resignation and new elections.

In clear :

Blah blah blah ... nothing new.

And you really kept the best for the end :

"The protesters, known as "Red Shirts" because of their colourful attire ..."

If you're runing for the Pulitzer, you've my vote !!!

Who is the "you" that you keep referring to?

You do realize, don't you, that I did NOT write this news article?

I merely brought it to the News Clipping Forum for posting as a news clipping. Are you not familiar with how this forum works?

While I do concede I've been to France before, I do not work for Agence France Presse, which is the news organization that produced this news article.

Perhaps you'd prefer to send your "you" comments to them in an email... their website accepts emails.

Anyway, I hope this clears up your obvious confusion.

Edited April 20, 2009 by sriracha john

[LuckyFive8888]

Maybe they could remove the bit where a government can be overthrown because the PM still does a weekly cooking show?

friend, open your mind that falls to 'confilct of interest' tho I agree that 'cooking show' is a minor offence to this but as a PM one should not have a sideline job.

[Pierrot]

Why don't they ask the people if they want to mess with consitution at all, and what they percieve as wrong with it, if they give a fuc_k.

i never thought I would agree with "Plus" but who gives a fuc_k for a constitution which the military ignores any way?

Because the military is less and less in a position to ignore it.

Really? I must have missed something!

Obviously !

[Richard W]

Some politicians are dissatisfied with an article in the current charter which provides for the dissolution of a party if its leader or executive member engages in electoral fraud. Four parties have been dissolved under the terms of this article.

Thats going to be a stumbling block. If criminal acts are committed by the few, should we punish the many? I say if the leader and executive are committing crimes without the knowledge of the many it can taint the many unfairly by association. But, in fairness we shouldn't punish those who are innocent.... should we?

Ultimately, if the political party can still hold the balance of power after the criminals are stood down they should be allowed to continue to govern for the remainder of the term.

Think back to the 2008 dissolutions. PPP became PTP, and Chart Thai became Chart Thai Pattana. The dissolution penalty is a joke, and should be dropped for that reason. Moreover, if the Friends of Newin had not broken away, the ruling PPP-led coalition could have been replaced by a ruling PTP-led alliance.

The big question I don't understand is, what happens to party executive members who are elected on the party list. How are they to be replaced if they personally are disqualified and their party is dissolved?

[monkfish]

No comment

[Plus]

Obviously !

Now it's time to enlighten us to the issues with the current constitution that the PEOPLE want to resolve.

Would it be "MPs should not be allowed to vote according to their conscience"?

Would it be "politicians should have greater leeway and not subjected to judicial review and placed clearly outside the law"?

Would it be "party executives should not be punished for the actions of selected scapegoats"?

[webfact]

AMNESTY

Lawmakers back amnesty to facilitate reconciliation but PAD sceptical

By The Nation

Published on April 21, 2009

Key lawmakers yesterday voiced support for the government's amnesty idea for political offences, although the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) remains opposed to it.

Pheu Thai Party MP Peerapan Palusuk said his main opposition party would respond favourably to Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's call for a charter rewrite and amnesty to pave way for reconciliation.

"I believe an amnesty would ease tensions, because the root cause of the turmoil is injustice inflicted by the 2006 coup," Peerapan said.

He said a review of amnesty could be carried out at the same time as the charter rewrite, which was designed to improve the political system.

Regarding the opposition's stand on constitutional amendments, he said his party wanted to restore, either partially or fully, the suspended 1997 charter, in order to use it as the model for any rewrite.

He said that certain provisions in the 2007 Constitution should be amended, because they had become a hindrance to both the political system and the country's administration.

Provisions to be amended should include Article 237 on party dissolution and Article 190 on international agreements, Peerapan said.

He said his party no longer demanded cancellation of the amnesty granted to coup leaders and coup-related activities.

"It's a moot point to argue about coup leaders now, since the lifting of amnesty cannot be enforced retroactively," he said.

Faction leader Somsak Thepsuthin of Bhum Jai Thai Party said the amnesty for banned party executives would be a step towards ending the political polarisation.

"It is futile to try and fault one another while fuelling the perception of double standards for punishing one side but not the other," he said.

Chart Thai Pattana Party leader Chumpol Silapa-archa said his coalition party soon would submit a list of charter provisions deemed in need of rewrite.

He said he wanted to improve the electoral system for MPs and senators and that the mandate for independent organisations should be reviewed with an eye to enhancing democratic principles instead of working like a bureaucracy.

Bhum Jai Thai Party leader Chaovarat Chanweerakul said he completely agreed with the prime minister about limiting the amnesty to political offences and excluding criminal wrongdoing.

Acting Puea Pandin Party leader Charnchai Chairungrueng said the coalition partners met with the prime minister last Friday and agreed to revamp the electoral system for MPs and senators.

Senate Speaker Prasobsook Boondech voiced optimism the charter rewrite would be a success and that the Senate and parties concerned could complete their recommendations on amendments within the two-week deadline.

PAD spokesman Suriyasai Katasila said the yellow shirts doubted whether the idea of a charter rewrite would be effective in forging reconciliation.

"This idea about granting amnesty to banned party executives has raised suspicions that political reform is simply a pretext to bring about self-serving gains among politicians," he said.

Suriyasai said he remained in the dark on how to distinguish political violations from criminal ones for those involved in the turmoil.

He said he suspected the amnesty, if granted, would be a first step towards demanding the expunging of criminal convictions related to the turmoil.

Election Commission member Prapun Naigowit said he attributed the turmoil to opposing views on politics as manifested by ideological and power struggles.

He said political polarisation happened as a consequence of those sorts of struggles and not because of the enforcement of charter provisions.

He called on politicians to reconcile via parliamentary means instead of taking the fight to the streets.

- THE NATION -

[samgrowth]

The 2007 Constitution was approved by the whole country, via a national referendum (can we even say that about the 1997 version?). No way you could tear it up legally. Only choice is to amend the parts that people don't like. Personally, I think both version make it far to easy to amend the constitution. I think that any change should also be approved by a national referendum, after passing through the parliament. But they forgot to ask me when they were writing it...lol

You mean 65 million vote yes? I don't think so. I think only about 13 million (from my memory) vote yes, 10 million vote no.

Also, the question on the referendum is bias.

It ask the people to vote

(A..) Yes, the newly proposed 2007 constitution or

(B..) No constitution at all (because the old one has already been thorn; also imply that military continue to rule, as no fresh election can be held without constitution).

In fact, it should ask the people if they would rather want:

(A..) reinstead the existing 1997 constitution or

(B..) the newly proposed 2007 constitution.

which I am sure most people will choice (A..) (just my judgement).

The USA had an early constitution of sorts, it had problems.

A new one was written up and then a

yes no vote was held for EACH state, and it was simple.

Not a :

do we go back to the last one or do we approve this one.

Sometimes things are best left simple....

It was perfectly fine for the voters to vote yes no.

If no was the answer then more drafting would have been needed.

And another vote.

But the voters said yes. Enough of the voters voted to make it valid.

It is NOW the law of the land.

I personally think modifying '97 would have been the best idea at the time.

I wasn't consulted.

I agree with you. That is the way to go. Suggest changes, and let vote yes or no. If "No" vote, the current one is still running.

However what I mean to say is that the army already burn the 1997 constituation in the 2006 coup. A "No" vote will lead to "No" constitution.

[Plus]

"I believe an amnesty would ease tensions, because the root cause of the turmoil is injustice inflicted by the 2006 coup," Peerapan said.

That's a nice way to sidestep the issue of Thaksin's corruption that kicked off mass protests that led to the coup. It didn't come out of the blue.

Provisions to be amended should include Article 237 on party dissolution and Article 190 on international agreements, Peerapan said.

Less punishment for electoral fraud, less scrutiny for backroom reals involving international relations. And they call it democracy.

...the mandate for independent organisations should be reviewed with an eye to enhancing democratic principles instead of working like a bureaucracy.

What does that mean? That independent bodies should be subjected to review by elected bodies they are supposed to oversee? That politicians should have control of the election commission and counter corruption commission?

Is there anything here proposed in the interests of the public and not politicians?

It looks like there's going to be a parliamentary revolution where politicians exonerate themselves from all previous and future sins, without any consult with the public. It would be a gentleman's agreement among thieves that robbed publid would be forced to follow.

That would bring reconciliation alright.

[sriracha john]

Thaksin's cases 'not negotiable'

Criminal charges against former premier Thaksin Shinawatra must not be included in any plan to allow amnesty for politicians banned from politics, Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon said on Tuesday.

The charges against Thaksin must be handled by the courts, he said.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/14...-not-be-cleared

[321niti123]

Maybe they could remove the bit where a government can be overthrown because the PM still does a weekly cooking show?

Actually the law is that a PM cannot be an under the employment of a person or company. But i still think its stupid to kick out a PM cuz he cooks on TV

[Plus]

He received payment for his services, he wasn't simply a guest there.

Not to mention that his show was called "Cook and complain", offering comments on everything under the sun.

What did it, in my view, was that he denied he was paid and produced forged documents as evidence.

[hammered]

Obviously !

Now it's time to enlighten us to the issues with the current constitution that the PEOPLE want to resolve.

Would it be "MPs should not be allowed to vote according to their conscience"?

Would it be "politicians should have greater leeway and not subjected to judicial review and placed clearly outside the law"?

Would it be "party executives should not be punished for the actions of selected scapegoats"?

I seriously doubt the "people" have any overall feel as to what should be in a constitution. We can probably assume they would like it be good for them whatever that means.

I remember when they had publci consultations last time I asked my wife if she was going to go as one was local and she said they dont care what people like me think and that public consultations were for groups and people of influence. Interestingly she said it was the same for the public consultation for 1997 -groups and influentials.

That however, is probably the reality of many consitutions. Those of a certain level write them and then the people get to ratify them (if lucky) or if not a state body. There is also the story of how the Pennsylvania ratifying convention was quorated. Not even the most famous constitution of all has been adopted that smoothly.