Election Commission Disqualifies 16 Senators Over Illegal Stock Shares

[sriracha john]

EC disqualifies 15 Senators for holding shares in media, concessionaire firms

The Election Commission Thursday resolved to disqualify 15 Senators for holding shares in some media firms or firms, which are concessionaires of the state.

The EC decided that the Senators violated either Article 48 or Article 265 of the Constitution.

-- The Nation 2009-06-19

Edited June 18, 2009 by sriracha john

[timinchina]

America...corrupt...well I never!

[sriracha john]

* Mods: With this later news (there's 16 Senators involved plus the Constitution Court is the authority to do the actual disqualification of a Senator), please amend thread title to read:

Election Commission Moves To Disqualify 16 Senators Over Unlawful Stock Shares

Thank you...

* I hate the font that makes typing a capital I followed by two lower case L's end up looking like a roman numeral 3. Sorry to have forgotten that when original titling was done.

EC calls for dismissal of 16 Senators

Sixteen Senators are facing disqualification after the Election Commission found they are in breach of the constitution by holding stakes in media organisations and companies doing business with the state. The EC initially investigated 37 Senators. The poll agency found 17 of the 37 Senators guilty of violating the charter, but Thippawan Samuttharak later resigned as a Senator.

The other Senators are Truengjai Buranasompob, Thavorn Lenuttapong, Boonchai Chokwattana, Pichai Utamapinan, Pornpan Boonyarattanapan, Somchai Sawangkarn, Worawut Rojanapanit, Sitthisak Yontrakul, Supoj Liadprathom, Pikulkaew Krairiksh, Charan Jungrungreangkit, Pol Gen Kowit Pumpakdi, Narumol Siriwat, Jittipot Viriyaroj, Somchart Pannapat and Atchara Tejrittipitak.

The EC launched the investigation into the Senators after complaints were made by Puea Thai Party Spokesman Supachai Jaisamut and Senator Ruengkrai Leekitwattana. EC Secretary-General Suthiphon Thaveechaiygarn said the majority of the commissioners yesterday ruled that the 17 members of the upper house be disqualified.

He said the EC would forward its recommendation to the Constitution Court on whether to disqualify them.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/1872...-of-16-senators

-- Bangkok Post 2009-06-19

Edited June 18, 2009 by sriracha john

[Mobi]

SJ, have you any idea where these senators' political affiliations lie and in particular, do they mainly support the government or opposition on key issues?

[sriracha john]

The Senators are all non-partisan.... 76 elected and 74 appointed. I don't know the Senate well enough to say which group the majority of the 16 involved were.

Edited June 19, 2009 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

We now have the break-down of the elected versus appointed satus of the 17 Senators now.... it's 8 and 9, respectively...

EC Disqualifies 17 Senators

The Election Commission has resolved to disqualify 17 Senators for holding shares in firms. Meanwhile, 3 of the dismissed Senators will defend themselves before the Constitutional Court.

The Election Commission has ruled to disqualify 17 Senators who hold shares in media firms or firms that were concessionaires of the state.

The 17 Senators have been found to have violated Article 48 or Article 265 of the constitution. The 17 Senators include:

1.SOMCHAI SAWAENGKARN

2.NARUEMOL SIRIWAT

3.TRUENGJAI BURANASOMPOP

4.POL GEN KOWIT PHAKDEEPHUM

5.THAWORN LEENUTPONG

6.BOONCHAI CHOLWATTANA

7.PHICHAI UTTAMAPINAN

8.PORNPHAN BOONYARATPHAN

9.WORAWUT ROJANAPHANIT

10.SITTHISAK YONTRAKUL

11.SUPOJ LIADPRATHOM

12.PHIKULKAEW KRIRIRK

13.JARAL JUENGYINGRUENGROONG

14.JITTAPOJ WIRIYAROJ

15.SOMCHART PHANPAT

16.ASSOC PROF ATCHARA SETTHARITPITHAK

17.THIPPAWAN SAMUTHARAKS

The EC will send its decision to the Senate Speaker in order to seek the final ruling from the Constitutional Court on the status of the 17 Senators.

Meanwhile, Somchai Sawaengkarn, Naruemol Siriwat, and Phikulkaew Kririrk, three of the dismissed Senators, will present their positions to Constitutional Court.

Somchai will explain to the Constitutional Court his position regarding holding shares in Thai Oil Company. He affirmed that Thai Oil is only a general oil production company not a concessionaire of state, and his shares in the company do not violate the constitution.

Additionally, Uttaradit Senator Naruemol Siriwat declared that it was her husband who held some 10,000 shares in TPI, which generated one baht per share. She will also defend her position before the Constitutional Court, and she said she will accept the result.

Phitsanulok Senator Phikulkaew Kririrk said her husband held shares in iTV station, but sold them a while ago. She said she will wait for the Constitution Court's ruling.

-- Tan Network 2009-06-19

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

17 SENATORS DISQUALIFIED BY ELECTION COMMISSION

1.SOMCHAI SAWAENGKARN, SELECTED SENETOR

2.NARUEMOL SIRIWAT, UTTARADIT SENATOR

3.TRUENGJAI BURANASOMPOP, SELECTED SENATOR

4.POL GEN KOWIT PHAKDEEPHUM, ANGTHONG SENATOR

5.THAWORN LEENUTPONG, SELECTED SENETOR

6.BOONCHAI CHOLWATTANA, SELECTED SENATOR

7.PHICHAI UTTAMAPINAN, SELECTED SENATOR

8.PORNPHAN BOONYARATPHAN, SELECTED SENATOR

9.WORAWUT ROJANAPHANIT, SELECTED SENATOR

10.SITTHISAK YONTRAKUL, KALASIN SENATOR

11.SUPOJ LIADPRATHOM, TRAD SENATOR

12.PHIKULKAEW KRIRIRK, PHITSANULOK SENATOR

13.JARAL JUENGYINGRUENGROONG, SARABURI SENATOR

14.JITTAPOJ WIRIYAROJ, SISAKET SENATOR

15.SOMCHART PHANPAT, NAKHON PATHOM SENATOR

16.ASSOC PROF ATCHARA SETTHARITPITHAK, SELECTED SENATOR

17.THIPPAWAN SAMUTHARAKS, SELECTED SENATOR (LETTER OF RESIGNATION SUBMITTED)

[sriracha john]

*bump and thread title edited further*

* Mods: With this later news (there's 17 Senators involved plus the Constitution Court is the authority to do the actual disqualification of a Senator), please amend thread title to read:

Election Commission Moves To Disqualify 17 Senators Over Unlawful Stock Shares

Thank you...

* I hate the font that makes typing a capital I followed by two lower case L's end up looking like a roman numeral 3. Sorry to have forgotten that when original titling was done.

[slimdog]

Just for Info...

1) Somchai Sawaengkarn...................Selected (Professional Sector)

2) Pornphan Boonyaratphan................Selected (Professional Sector)

3) Assoc Prof Atchara Settharitpithak..Selected (Professional Sector)

4) Truengjai Buransomphop................Selected (Academic Sector)

5) Thaworn Leenutpong......................Selected (Private Sector)

6) Boonchai Chokwattana...................Selected (Private Sector)

7) Phichai Uttamapinan......................Selected (Private Sector)

8) Worawut Rojanaphanit...................Selected (Other Sector)

9) Thippawan Samutharaks................Selected (Other Sector)

10) Naruemol Siriwat...........................Elected (Uttaradit)

11) Pol Gen Kowit Phakdeephum........Elected (Anthong)

12) Sitthissak Yontrakul.....................Elected (Kalasin)

13) Supoj Liadprathom.......................Elected (Trat)

14) Phikulkaew Krirrirk...................... Elected (Phitsanulok)

15) Jaral Juengyingruengroong........... Elected (Saraburi)

16) Jittapoj Wiriyaroj..........................Elected (Si Sa Ket)

17) Somchart Phanpat.......................Elected (Nakhon Pathom)

Edited June 19, 2009 by slimdog

[monkfish]

PM: Replacements will be found if ministers are guilty

By: Bangkok Post.comPublished: 19/06/2009 at 02:35 PM Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said on Friday he would have no choice but to abide by the law and find replacements if the Constitution Court convicts and disqualifies any cabinet ministers for wrongfully holding shares in companies dealing with the state.

The Election Commission is expected to next week examine a complaint that as many as 85 MPs, including cabinet ministers, are in breach of the constitution by holding stakes in media organisations or companies doing business with the state.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/1...rs-found-guilty

Is this related?

[sriracha john]

PM: Replacements will be found if ministers are guilty

By: Bangkok Post.comPublished: 19/06/2009 at 02:35 PM Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said on Friday he would have no choice but to abide by the law and find replacements if the Constitution Court convicts and disqualifies any cabinet ministers for wrongfully holding shares in companies dealing with the state.

The Election Commission is expected to next week examine a complaint that as many as 85 MPs, including cabinet ministers, are in breach of the constitution by holding stakes in media organisations or companies doing business with the state.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/1...rs-found-guilty

Is this related?

Related in that they are similar accusations, but this thread concerns Senators and the article is about MP's... and as they will probably follow separate paths for the the two different groups, probably best to keep them separate. Can you start a new thread on the MP's?

[sriracha john]

EC cites Article 265 of the Constitution to justify its decision on equity rules

The Election Commission has based its majority decision on the charter's Article 265 to disqualify 16 Senators for violating the ban on equity rules, EC member Prapun Naigowit said on Friday.

"Article 265 directly prescribes the ban for MPs and Senators from holding equity stakes linked to state concessions before and after assuming office," he said in reference to the Thursday's ruling.

Prapun said the majority made a strict legal interpretation of the ban while the dissenting opinion ruled for an acquittal on the ground that equity stakes in question did not constitute the controlling interest.

He explained that according to the EC investigation, there were 14 listed companies linked to state concessions.

The investigation report excluded shares from Thai Airways International due to the fact that the national carrier has no monopoly on the market, he said.

He admitted about the intense debate on whether to penalise for equity violations which did not constitute the controlling interest. He said he sided with the minority to prescribe no punishment.

He said the National Anti Corruption Commission once explained the equity rules to lawmakers that they did not need to relinquish their stakes in such listed companies as PTT Plc, THAI Airways, and Bangkok Espressway.

The NACC said the retail transaction of the equity stakes could not be construed as having the control nor the influence over the business, he said.

He said he expected the EC ruling next week for 28 MPs would be based on the same legal interpretation as the decision on the 16 Senators.

-- The Nation 2009-06-20

[Soutpeel]

May be we should send the Election Commission to the UK and get them to disqualify a few British MP's as well while they are at it....

[sriracha john]

Trouble looms for Upper House

The Upper House will cease to function if 16 of its members are disqualified over their shareholdings, said Senate Speaker Prasobsuk Boondej. Turmoil may be looming large for the Senate after the Election Commission found 16 Senators were in danger of being removed for holding shares in businesses or enterprises which receive state concessions.

Article 265 states that the firms or enterprises in question must deal in business of a monopolistic nature with the state. This law bans politicians and Senators from having shares in such firms and enterprises. Article 48 prohibits holders of political office from owning shares in the print or broadcast media, as well as telecom businesses.

The 16 Senators, or their spouses, are suspected of having breached either or both of the two laws. Mr Prasobsuk said the EC will ask the Constitution Court to clarify whether the Senators' shareholdings were in violation of the laws. Queries have emerged regarding the term "monopolistic." Some observers say that no company or enterprise retains such a relationship with the state because they all have competitors.

The Senate Speaker voiced his concerns that a mass disqualification of 16 Senators could leave the senate unworkable. For the Senate to remain functional, it must have at least 95% of the members, he said. There are currently 150 senators, both elected and appointed. A void of 16 seats would render the chamber "out of order," he said.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/1880...for-upper-house

-- Bangkok Post 2009-06-20

[sriracha john]

Parliamentarians anxiously await court ruling

MPs and Senators are anxiously waiting on the Constitution Court to rule whether they are fit to keep their jobs after they were found to hold shares in prohibited companies. Election Commissioner Prapun Naigowit talks to Mongkol Bangprapa about the laws that will be used to decide their fate.

What is your opinion on Articles 48 and 256 of the constitution?

They need a clear interpretation. The articles prohibit them (parliamentary members) from holding shares in telecom businesses and companies or enterprises holding state concessions. But for me, I would rather look at their intention and action to see whether it could lead to a conflict of interest. We've found that many had held the shares before assuming their political posts and their shareholdings are so small that they have no administrative control of the entities.

You were among the experts who drafted the constitution. What have you to say about the articles?

These articles also existed in the abrogated 1997 charter. We only added a few clauses to govern the print and broadcast media and the telecom companies, extending the ban to cover the wives and children of politicians.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/1...it-court-ruling

-- Bangkok Post 2009-06-29

Edited June 29, 2009 by sriracha john

[animatic]

With so little forethought in writing laws here it seems there is a continuous chain of re or mis interpretations,

when they find the original written text is too broad or too narrow, and causes drastic repercussions,

unforeseen at time of drafting. So then it goes to the courts who get labeled as 'political' for

definitively reading a law and creating a specific meaning and then enforcing that meaning.

It seems the lawyers in the legislative bodies have as poor lingustic skills as the hoey paloey

legislators without a legal degree. Of course enshrining the INTENT of the law into practice for

the long run is subject to political whims on a daily basis.

Edited June 29, 2009 by animatic

[hammered]

All the messes that every ruling creates within the parliamentary system enhances calls for ammendments and for New politics. Be interesting to see which way it goes. Soon the whole system could be completley inoperable with a few more rulings.

Something is needed to break the logjam anyway.

[Plus]

Thai state, in general, is incapable of writing a waterproof constitution even if they get a gist right. There's too much pressure and zero trust between all participating parties, and no agreement even on long term goals, and at any moment political situation can explode and everything will need to be started from square one, like NGV buses or mass-transit lines.

[hammered]

At some point the warring parties will have to find an agreement. Nobody is going to get a total win and a drawn out war of attrition just leaves everybody further damaged.

When they reach a set of things they can agree on we get the new rule book known as the constitution and it will last until they fall out again and someone decides a new set are needed. This seems to be the history of Thailand. Maybe the country would be better off without any form of constitution as the variety produced to date have been tossed on a more regular basis than most normal laws.

Failing that a minimalist constitution with very little in leaving most things to be codified by laws that the politcal classes can manipulate and change and reverse to their hearts desires without resorting to extreme measures that disturb people.

[sriracha john]

Senate Speaker waiting on EC report to expel 16 Senators

BANGKOK, 15 July 2009 (NNT) - The Senate Speaker said he had yet to receive a report from the Election Commission (EC) on unlawful stock holdings by 16 Senators.

Senate Speaker, Prasopsuk Boondet, remarked that the EC had yet to forward any documentation on the matter to him, resulting in the current delay. The Election Commission previously declared the disqualification of 16 Senators, citing that their stock holdings were in violation of the Constitution.

The 16 held shares in companies in the journalism, radio broadcast and television broadcast industries as well as other concessionary businesses in violation of Article 265.

Meanwhile, the Secretary-General of the EC said the commission had concluded the case and that the documentation will reach the Senate Speaker in 1-2 days.

-- NNT 2009-07-15

[Thai at Heart]

Ho hum..

This will really set the cat among the pigeons. In many respects, I agree since rules are rules. It is preferable that senators don't have shares in organisations that are connected with the government. I don't see what is so hard for senators to understand about it.

[sriracha john]

EC: the disqualified MP and Senator should not resign

BANGKOK, 18 July 2009 (NNT) – A member of the Election Commission (EC) suggested the disqualified politicians not resign until the Constitutional Court rules on their cases.

A member of EC, Mr. Prapan Naikowit, who was in charge of election administration said that the Members of Parliament and Senators, who were judged to be disqualified by the EC, could disagree with the judgment, but he considered that those disqualified MPs, and Senators were not necessary to resign from their posts now, because the by-elections would cost more budget.

They should wait until the legal process ended when the Constitutional Court had a verdict on this issue.

Meanwhile some of the disqualified who would like to sue the EC to the Administrative Court had the right to do so and the EC had the duty to explain.

Regarding the resignation from Surat Thani MP post of the Deputy Prime Minister in charge of security affair Mr. Suthep Thuagsuban, the by-election had to be organized within 45 days or before August 30.

Next week the EC would have a meeting about by-election decree and would coordinate with the Surat Thani EC for holding the by-election.

-- NNT 2009-07-18

[sriracha john]

PM encourages lawmakers not to resign

Lawmakers facing Election Commission charges over illegal share holdings should not resign, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva says. Mr Abhisit yesterday said those facing charges should wait for the final ruling by the Constitution Court. MPs and Senators whose status was rejected by the EC for holding shares in businesses prohibited by the 2007 constitution should remain in parliament because the court might rule later in their favour, he said.

Early resignations could lead to unnecessary by-elections.

Mr Abhisit also said he did not agree with his Deputy Suthep Thaugsuban's decision to resign as an MP following the EC's ruling on his status last Thursday. He said he understood Mr Suthep had stepped down because he did not want to become tied up with his defence in court while he was Deputy Prime Minister.

Mr Abhisit's spokesman, Thepthai Senpong, yesterday said that although the shareholding issue might affect the status of 16 MPs in the coalition government,

the government would still have more votes than the opposition. The government has 276 votes in the House while the opposition has 200.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/2...s-not-to-resign

-- Bangkok Post 2009-07-20

[Old Man River]

Ho hum..

This will really set the cat among the pigeons. In many respects, I agree since rules are rules. It is preferable that senators don't have shares in organisations that are connected with the government. I don't see what is so hard for senators to understand about it.

What is so hard about it is that the EC initially interpreted the rules that office holders can't purchase the shares after they had assumed office, then once these Senators and MP's were in office, ruled that they have changed their position and these office holders should have sold their shares prior to taking office.

OK, their new approach makes sense, but not after the fact.

[hammered]

Ho hum..

This will really set the cat among the pigeons. In many respects, I agree since rules are rules. It is preferable that senators don't have shares in organisations that are connected with the government. I don't see what is so hard for senators to understand about it.

What is so hard about it is that the EC initially interpreted the rules that office holders can't purchase the shares after they had assumed office, then once these Senators and MP's were in office, ruled that they have changed their position and these office holders should have sold their shares prior to taking office.

OK, their new approach makes sense, but not after the fact.

If that is the case then the court could well overturn it

[Thai at Heart]

Ho hum..

This will really set the cat among the pigeons. In many respects, I agree since rules are rules. It is preferable that senators don't have shares in organisations that are connected with the government. I don't see what is so hard for senators to understand about it.

What is so hard about it is that the EC initially interpreted the rules that office holders can't purchase the shares after they had assumed office, then once these Senators and MP's were in office, ruled that they have changed their position and these office holders should have sold their shares prior to taking office.

OK, their new approach makes sense, but not after the fact.

Very odd interpretation indeed. I would imagine the idea of the law is that they don't hold these shares while they are in office. i wonder if it is sophisticated enough that they aren't allowed to buy shares one minute after they resign also.

This rule actually is a very strong rule and goes a lot further than many such types of rules in other countries. I can see the logic of declaring a significant shareholding, but if they want ZERO holdings, then ZERO it is.

[Old Man River]

Ho hum..

This will really set the cat among the pigeons. In many respects, I agree since rules are rules. It is preferable that senators don't have shares in organisations that are connected with the government. I don't see what is so hard for senators to understand about it.

What is so hard about it is that the EC initially interpreted the rules that office holders can't purchase the shares after they had assumed office, then once these Senators and MP's were in office, ruled that they have changed their position and these office holders should have sold their shares prior to taking office.

OK, their new approach makes sense, but not after the fact.

Very odd interpretation indeed. I would imagine the idea of the law is that they don't hold these shares while they are in office. i wonder if it is sophisticated enough that they aren't allowed to buy shares one minute after they resign also.

This rule actually is a very strong rule and goes a lot further than many such types of rules in other countries. I can see the logic of declaring a significant shareholding, but if they want ZERO holdings, then ZERO it is.

Yes, if they want ZERO holdings (in SOE's etc.), but they should say they want zero holdings before the current group takes office. Apparently, they didn't bring up this change until they were declaring these guys guilty. The published comments by the EC representative was that the EC had interpreted things much more lenient in the past. This past was not the distant past.

It will be an interesting court case for the Constitutional Court.

[LawnGnome]

If it is against the law and they took office without addressing the issue, then they are guilty and should be kicked out. Seems like stock holdings always get these morons in trouble.

[sriracha john]

EC lobbied by disqualified Senators

Election Commissioner Sodsri Satthayatham has admitted she was lobbied by some of the 16 Senators disqualified by the Election Commission (EC) for holding shares in firms prohibited to parliamentarians by the 2007 Constitution. “The Senators asked me to help get the EC members to review the ruling to disqualify them.

''I told them that the EC will not change its ruling and that they should prepare their cases to prove their innocence in court,” Ms Sodsri said on Wednesday. Asked about Senate Speaker Prasopsuk Boondej's delay in forwarding the EC's ruling to the Constitution Court, claiming he had to scrutinise the documents, Ms Sodsri said it was the responsibility of the complainant in the shares case, Senator Ruangkrai Luekijwattana, to file a complaint against Mr Prasopsuk for negligence.

Ms Sodsri insisted that the EC will exercise the same legal standard used to disqualify the 13 Democrat MPs in considering whether to disqualify another 44 MPs, members of the coalition partners and of the opposition Puea Thai Party, facing the same charge.

Continued:

-- Bangkok Post 2009-07-22

[sriracha john]

Senators lobbied EC over ruling

Certain Senators accused of having shareholdings contrary to limits in the Constitution have been lobbying the Election Commission to reverse its ruling to disqualify them, EC member Sodsri Sattayatham said yesterday.

Some 16 Senators were disqualified by the EC for having stakes in firms that have state concessions or stakes in media outlets. The EC ruling is in the process of being forwarded to the Constitution Court for a legal review.

"The EC has done its job and will not review its decision," Sodsri said, who confirmed that the ruling had been forwarded for a judicial review via the Office of the Senate Speaker.

She said Senators concerned should prepare to present their defence to the high court rather trying to "fix" such matters.

The EC hoped the judicial review would be completed in a speedy manner in order to give a clear guideline about the legal interpretation of the issue, she said.

The EC had a legal interpretation but the case was unprecedented, hence precedents set by the judiciary would be welcomed by parties concerned, she said.

In regard to the decision on a similar case involving 44 MPs, she said the EC was unlikely to debate or form a judgement on the matter today, as had been speculated.

The inquiry report had not been completed since six MPs had yet to give their statements and investigators were still verifying information from the Commerce Ministry and stock exchange, she said.

Reacting to her remarks about the lobbying, Senator Somchai Sawaengkan said Sodsri should have been specific instead of making a blanket accusation. "The way Sodsri commented about the lobbying taints the reputation of the entire Senate; she should have named the people to dispel doubts," he said.

Senate Speaker Prasopsuk Boondet said he was making copies of the 3,000-page case so the 16 accused Senators could prepare a legal defence.

Once copies were made and distributed to the Senators, the case would be submitted to the Constitution Court, he said.

-- The Nation 2009-07-23

[Old Man River]

If it is against the law and they took office without addressing the issue, then they are guilty and should be kicked out.

It is not this easy. It seems this easy and one of my first posts on this subject said what you have put above. However, it has since been reported that these guys took office with shareholdings based on what the EC allowed in the past. The current EC, according to what has been reported, are saying that they interpreted the law more leniently in the past, but are now interpreting it differently.

From what I understand in the past the EC was comfortable as long as members of the Senate and House didn't acquire related shares after they took office. Now, after these guys have assumed their positions, from what is being reported, the EC are interpreting the law saying the Senate and House shouldn't own these shares at all while in office.

While we can argue what is the right thing to do for members of the Senate and House, to me it doesn't seem fair to interpret the laws one way and then after members of the Senate and House take office, switch and interpret the laws a different way.