Privy Council Denies Discussing Pardon Petition

[webfact]

Privy Council denies discussing pardon petition

By The Nation

The Privy Council held a weekly meeting on Tuesday but did not debate the plan by the red shirts to petition for a royal pardon as speculated in press reports, its secretariat said in a statement released on Wednesday.

The statement was reacting to news reports that privy councillors had criticised the signature campaign on behalf of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra as inappropriate.

The red-shirt movement alleged that certain privy councillors were against the petition filing because the "elitist polity" wanted to cling on to political power.

The red-shirt movement leaders Wednesday vowed to go ahead with filing the petition despite opposition from several sides, including senators and the Democrat Party.

The red-shirt leaders held a press conference at the Imperial Lard Prao department store to announce that they would go head to submit the petition with over 1 million signatures to the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary despite opposition from privy councilors.

Natthawut Saikua, one of the red-shirt leaders, said a the red-shirt movement had gathered more than one million signatures now so the petition would be submitted despite opposition from a group of elites.

-- The Nation 2009/07/29

[TAWP]

Submit it already! It's nearing the end of the month and I am running out of toilet paper.

[PoorSucker]

Can't Thaksin do it himself?

[Ferwert]

In the newpaper article, they are very carefull to avoid characterizing the pro-democracy red Shirts. They only speak in vague terms of a "Red Shirt movement" but are very careful to avoid adding any descriptive adjective that may give a hint as to what this amorphous "movement" is all about. This English media agenda which has so many Farangs ensnared, is adamantly opposed to ever suggesting, in even the tineist fraction, that there may be a "Democracy issue" here. That in spite of the primary reason for its' being - its' linkage to the Democracy issue. Same holds true for the anti-democracy "PAD/new-old paternalistic politics" characteristic. They obfuscate the real issues by focussing exclusively on superficial affinity clothing colours. This neatly side-steps the real issues at play. Wake up Farangs, especially those who come from deep democratic traditions. Know the difference!..................If I dissapear from this board, you will know why!....With regards to the 'petition', my sources in the pro-democracy Red shirts tell me that some pliable, politically influenced Proffs. from Chulalongkorn Universtity, along with some politicians gathered yesterday, and will soon issue a previously composed "solemn declaration" decrying the petition. I haven't heard anything from them about the Privy Council being involved. I think that is only speculation or a diversionary tactic by those whose interests are not well-served by this petition and everything it stands for. I also noted that the obligatory term 'fugitive' was not used.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Ferwert

[timekeeper]

.................If I dissapear from this board, you will know why!.....

please, the sooner the better.......

i do not care why

[slapout]

If rumors and unsubstantiated rumors of rumors were a basis for the disappearance of a TV member, you would have faded into the sunset some time ago, good luck in your endeavor. With your inside position and your enlightening posts to the uninformed, maybe a void/vacuum will take place.

[PeaceBlondie]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

[Ferwert]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

I do believe you and I are at opposite ends of the Thaksin love-hate spectrum Peaceblondie. I think it is much more crowded at your end then mine. The agenda-driven media is very effective............................. But I hope my posting #4 added some substance to the discussion.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Ferwert

[clausewitz]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

Perhaps the privy council should be trying to bring the criminals who overturned an elected govenrment by military coup to trial.

I think a illegally deposed leader who was brought to trial by a committe apponited by the coup leaders - and who was convicted by a court also with judges appointed by the same coup leaders - can hardly be said to be criminal.

The fact that in the land purchase the judges agreed that his wife who bought the land was fully entitled and innocent and that only thaksin - who signed the paper , which is a necessity for a husband to do, was convicted shows that the ruling was more about getting rid of their enemy than anything to do with criminality.

[PeaceBlondie]

Staying on topic, I doubt the Privy Council's duties require them to act on third-party petitions.

[Ferwert]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

Perhaps the privy council should be trying to bring the criminals who overturned an elected govenrment by military coup to trial.

I think a illegally deposed leader who was brought to trial by a committe apponited by the coup leaders - and who was convicted by a court also with judges appointed by the same coup leaders - can hardly be said to be criminal.

The fact that in the land purchase the judges agreed that his wife who bought the land was fully entitled and innocent and that only thaksin - who signed the paper , which is a necessity for a husband to do, was convicted shows that the ruling was more about getting rid of their enemy than anything to do with criminality.

The pro-democracy red Shirts call it a "judicial coup". I know the rules of this board wish to avoid criticisms of the court, and I abide by that. I am sure you only quote others Clausewitz. I merely report what the pro-democracy Red Shirts tell me. One of the 'double standards' issues they always talk about, regarding the land issue, is the land dealings of the ex-leader of post-coup Government (forget his name) Apparently he was able to buy land in a protected National Park, and is livng there in a splendiforous mansion......... Hmmmmmmm, buying and building in a protected National Park vs. co-signing something as required by law....Double standard...yes/no...no/yes....As my friends on the rightwing Fox channel like to trumpet...I report, You decide

[jamesjdaly]

..................If I dissapear from this board, you will know why!....

Maybe the overall spelling will improve!

[TAWP]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

I do believe you and I are at opposite ends of the Thaksin love-hate spectrum Peaceblondie. I think it is much more crowded at your end then mine. The agenda-driven media is very effective............................. But I hope my posting #4 added some substance to the discussion.

FINALLY someone that admits that more people hate Thaksin than people that loves him.

[Ferwert]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

I do believe you and I are at opposite ends of the Thaksin love-hate spectrum Peaceblondie. I think it is much more crowded at your end then mine. The agenda-driven media is very effective............................. But I hope my posting #4 added some substance to the discussion.

FINALLY someone that admits that more people hate Thaksin than people that loves him.

Yes. As an admitted Thaksin supporter, I make that claim unequivocally.. the Thaksin haters on this board vastly outnumber the others. The primary users of this board are Farangs (an assumption on my part) Their primary source of English language news is from the agenized English language media. I fully understand why Farangs draw the conclusions that they do. This agenda is couched in a balanced objective journalism mode. I dont blame Farangs for that, and hope if nothing else, I give them an alternative to consider....That said, the whole "Petition' thing will be an exciting thing for us outsider political-junkies to observe, to see how it plays out.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Ferwert

[Ferwert]

..................If I dissapear from this board, you will know why!....

Maybe the overall spelling will improve!

Stupid me...I'm such a loser!

[slimdog]

Staying on topic, I doubt the Privy Council's duties require them to act on third-party petitions.

The Privy council has no duty to act on any petition.

The problem for the Privy council is that regardless of their personel feelings, they are bound by the Constitution, not to show any loyalty or bias towards any political party. Whilst as individuals they may feel that the petition is inappropriate, the council cannot be seen in any way, to be putting any form of restriction or pressure on an individuals or groups fundamental right to petition His majesty when they feel an unjustice has been done.

In 2006, a petition was made by individuals, seeking for His Majesty to invoke Article 7 of the constitution, many people agreed with this petition, many didn't. But the petition was made, because it was their right to do so. As with the current petition many individuals expressed the view that the petition was inappropriate.

The Privy Council has a duty to render advice to the King on all matters pertaining to His functions as He may consult. As such the Privy Council will need to ensure that any advice they may be asked to give is both legally and Constitutionaly accurate.

[TAWP]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

I do believe you and I are at opposite ends of the Thaksin love-hate spectrum Peaceblondie. I think it is much more crowded at your end then mine. The agenda-driven media is very effective............................. But I hope my posting #4 added some substance to the discussion.

FINALLY someone that admits that more people hate Thaksin than people that loves him.

Yes. As an admitted Thaksin supporter, I make that claim unequivocally.. the Thaksin haters on this board vastly outnumber the others. The primary users of this board are Farangs (an assumption on my part) Their primary source of English language news is from the agenized English language media. I fully understand why Farangs draw the conclusions that they do. This agenda is promoted as balanced objective journalism. I dont blame Farangs for that, and hope if nothing else, I give them an alternative to consider....That said, the whole "Petition' thing will be an exciting thing for us outsider political-junkies to observe, to see how it plays out.

Seriously, your posts are beginning to become really boring. And your posts run in direct collision course with some of your fellow red fans that claim that every (Englishs written) magazine outside the country supports Thaksin while you here claim that they are all against him?

[Ferwert]

"ALL' as in 'most on this board Tawp, and I am sure you know what I meant. Isn't it wonderful that you have a god-given right not to read my posts and be so bored Tawp............Excellent Post 'Slimdog', with respect to the duties and obligations if the "Privy Council"...That was helpful. I hope my posting #4 was equally helpful (with Tawp's noted exception)

Edited July 30, 2009 by Ferwert

[TAWP]

"ALL' as in 'most on this board Tawp, and I am sure you know what I meant. Isn't it wonderful that you have a god-given right not to read my posts and be so bored Tawp............Excellent Post 'Slimdog', with respect to the duties and obligations if the "Privy Council"...That was helpful. I hope my posting #4 was equally helpful (with Tawp's noted exception)

Read my reply again..all [English] magazines, not all people.

TRY AGAIN!

[catmac]

"ALL' as in 'most on this board Tawp, and I am sure you know what I meant. Isn't it wonderful that you have a god-given right not to read my posts and be so bored Tawp............Excellent Post 'Slimdog', with respect to the duties and obligations if the "Privy Council"...That was helpful. I hope my posting #4 was equally helpful (with Tawp's noted exception)

Read my reply again..all [English] magazines, not all people.

TRY AGAIN!

Tawp, you have every right to hold your opinion, just as Ferwert has.

Please don't spoil your case by trying to misrepresent the points that Ferwert makes - he is, of course, specifically refering to English Language media in Thailand, i.e. the media readily available to ex-pats living here, not every English language media in the whole world. Just as silly was to imply that Ferwert's correct assumption that most posters on this forum fall into the anti-Thaksin camp, meant that he was stating that most of the Thai population did so.

[animatic]

.................If I dissapear from this board, you will know why!....

Ah, that would be the love that dare not speak it's name?

Or is it just simply being someone(s) other than who you proclaim.

Muddy the waters, and water the seed of doubt. It's a business choice I guess.

And do it with 50 cent words and JUST barely enough knowledge of them

to make most of the sentences coherent. And for all that it is JUST

a PR exercise in rewriting history on the fly.

Or singing to the choir in a greek tragedy.

Alas, alas poor Thaksin, I knew him Horatio!

[animatic]

In any case the Privy Council is irrelevant to the disposition of the ~Red Shirt Petition.

This must go to The Royal Household Bureau office. And from there to consideration

whether it should be accepted and presented. Since it is political in nature, having been

promulgated by a specific political organization, it might easily be considered political,

and not personal.

And also could easily be conisdered a form of pressure for a certain party to change

long standing norms of protocol AND ROOT BASIS CONSTITUTIONAL LAW,

for ONE politician's benefit.

And that very well could be considered LM, and a charge could be filed the same day

this document is presented to the RHB against the organizers, for LM in a quite obvious form.

[TAWP]

"ALL' as in 'most on this board Tawp, and I am sure you know what I meant. Isn't it wonderful that you have a god-given right not to read my posts and be so bored Tawp............Excellent Post 'Slimdog', with respect to the duties and obligations if the "Privy Council"...That was helpful. I hope my posting #4 was equally helpful (with Tawp's noted exception)

Read my reply again..all [English] magazines, not all people.

TRY AGAIN!

Tawp, you have every right to hold your opinion, just as Ferwert has.

Please don't spoil your case by trying to misrepresent the points that Ferwert makes - he is, of course, specifically refering to English Language media in Thailand, i.e. the media readily available to ex-pats living here, not every English language media in the whole world. Just as silly was to imply that Ferwert's correct assumption that most posters on this forum fall into the anti-Thaksin camp, meant that he was stating that most of the Thai population did so.

You are finally coming close to the core of why his argument is so silly. Sadly I was hoping he would catch on to it himself.

I.e. Most farangs here in Thailand DO NOT get their info primarily from Thai-based English written publications. In most cases we get it from out own nations publications - as they are all online!

I read my morning paper online each day, and then continue onto some of the major news-outlets.

So Ferwert is again barking up the wrong tree. But I am sure he would be much happier if we all just read one magazine soon, just if he could pick which one...as soon as it goes to print...

[Ferwert]

.................If I dissapear from this board, you will know why!....

Ah, that would be the love that dare not speak it's name?

Or is it just simply being someone(s) other than who you proclaim.

Muddy the waters, and water the seed of doubt. It's a business choice I guess.

And do it with 50 cent words and JUST barely enough knowledge of them

to make most of the sentences coherent. And for all that it is JUST

a PR exercise in rewriting history on the fly.

Or singing to the choir in a greek tragedy.

Alas, alas poor Thaksin, I knew him Horatio!

HUH?

[Ferwert]

In any case the Privy Council is irrelevant to the disposition of the ~Red Shirt Petition.

This must go to The Royal Household Bureau office. And from there to consideration

whether it should be accepted and presented. Since it is political in nature, having been

promulgated by a specific political organization, it might easily be considered political,

and not personal.

And also could easily be conisdered a form of pressure for a certain party to change

long standing norms of protocol AND ROOT BASIS CONSTITUTIONAL LAW,

for ONE politician's benefit.

And that very well could be considered LM, and a charge could be filed the same day

this document is presented to the RHB against the organizers, for LM in a quite obvious form.

"Political in nature?"...HUH? ..........It is dealing with court charges and decisions. What does politics have to do with it. Or do I misread you Animatic. Are you saying that these court charges and decisions have a political element? Who knew!

Edited July 30, 2009 by Ferwert

[animatic]

Would you mis-read me to fit your political biases?

Who would think such a thing? < irony inserted.

The Red Shirts are the street wing of the PTP, they acknowledge that,

with several of the SAME members as leadership.

They say quite clearly:

Thaksin is the head of their party (PTP), even if still banned,

and that they are trying to Bring Back Their Leader (Red Shirts).

So by not going by normal channels and acting like ALL OTHER convicts,

and having his political party, and his party's street political arm doing the signature gathering,

and their planning to circumvent long standing procedures, makes it squarely political.

The charges he is convicted of are 'cut and dried breaking of the laws

from BEFORE THE COUP', so he can't argue political bias there.

He got 2 years not 20.

He is convicted and sentenced; plain and simple,

based on laws on the books at the time of the infraction when HE was national leader,

and CONVICTED when his own proxy party was running government.

So playing politics is his side in the petition matter.

Edited July 30, 2009 by animatic

[hammered]

Staying on topic, I doubt the Privy Council's duties require them to act on third-party petitions.

The Privy council has no duty to act on any petition.

The problem for the Privy council is that regardless of their personel feelings, they are bound by the Constitution, not to show any loyalty or bias towards any political party. Whilst as individuals they may feel that the petition is inappropriate, the council cannot be seen in any way, to be putting any form of restriction or pressure on an individuals or groups fundamental right to petition His majesty when they feel an unjustice has been done.

In 2006, a petition was made by individuals, seeking for His Majesty to invoke Article 7 of the constitution, many people agreed with this petition, many didn't. But the petition was made, because it was their right to do so. As with the current petition many individuals expressed the view that the petition was inappropriate.

The Privy Council has a duty to render advice to the King on all matters pertaining to His functions as He may consult. As such the Privy Council will need to ensure that any advice they may be asked to give is both legally and Constitutionaly accurate.

The article 7 petition was never answered if I remember correctly. If the current petition is seen as contentious maybe a similar fate awaits it.

It is all about politics and propoganda anyway and always has been. Tactics and strategies to reach an end

[Oberkommando]

I.e. Most farangs here in Thailand DO NOT get their info primarily from Thai-based English written publications. In most cases we get it from out own nations publications - as they are all online!

Beg to differ, most of the current affairs news articles are solely published in the Thai-based media.

They never make the major networks, let alone the minor ones from our home countries.

This story certainly didn't, along with 99% of the other political news items posted on this board.

[Ferwert]

Regarding Post #23, I'm glad you brought up the matter of the foreign Press Tawp. Gives me an opportunity to expand on my previous characterizations of the "inconsequential foreign media" with respect to Thai political affairs. They are inconsequential for a number of reasons, and they are not particularly blameworthy for it. They are often linguistically challenged and have limited resources to work with #1. They are all Bangkok based, and for them, if it doesn't happen in Bangkok, it doesn't happen. Evidence of this is their reporting on pro-democracy red Shirt events, which as you know I am a part of and monitor closely. All major RS Bangkok rallies were interspersed by similar rallies in major regional centers, followed by another BKK event. The foreign media will report the second BKK event as "the return of the Red Shirts" As far as they know, the RS were dormant between BKK events. Like I said, for them, "if its' not happening in BKK. its not happening" I acknowledge that the agenized domestic Thai media also do this. But they do it in support of their agenda, whereas the foreign media do it because they just don't know. #2. Their audiences are not Thai Politics aficionados, and the superficiality of their reporting reflect this fact #3. The foreign media most often make no distinction between the PAD and RS's. other than their affinity clothing colours. They seldom reference any tensions between pro-and anti-democracy factions here #4. They frequently will quote Thai newspapers implying that these papers are independent journalistic entities and giving them unwarranted credibility. This is of necessity because of their limited resources, especially outside BKK. If I "hurt my head and think really hard", I could come up with other reasons why the foreign media is inconsequential. I dont believe they have made one utterance about the "petition", but I stand corrected on that. They will breathlessly report on any overt activity that may be evident during its' presentation, but will mostly comment on what is visible, of people on the street or at the gates, or whatever, but will give very little indepth insight as to "why" it happens. Many foreign reporters have a limited understanding of why it happens and little incentive to find out, because their international audience don't care. They have political intrigue of their own. After stating all this, I hasten to add this is an overgeneralization - but not very much. I have seen some excellent, in-depth, knowledgable foreign media reporting about Thai politics....I am speaking of the day-to-day, pedestrian type reports. It is my humble opinion that the foreign media are not a counterweight to the agenized domestic media. Their reporting is just not in-depth enough for that.

Edited July 30, 2009 by Ferwert

[hammered]

Does the Privy Council have certain limited duties? Does that include receiving penitent beggings directly from convicted criminals admitting their crimes and pleading for mercy to be graciously granted by We-Know-Whom? Do the Council's duties require them to waste time on an irrelevant issue raised by sycophant supporters of a defiant criminal/revolutionary?

Perhaps the privy council should be trying to bring the criminals who overturned an elected govenrment by military coup to trial.

I think a illegally deposed leader who was brought to trial by a committe apponited by the coup leaders - and who was convicted by a court also with judges appointed by the same coup leaders - can hardly be said to be criminal.

The fact that in the land purchase the judges agreed that his wife who bought the land was fully entitled and innocent and that only thaksin - who signed the paper , which is a necessity for a husband to do, was convicted shows that the ruling was more about getting rid of their enemy than anything to do with criminality.

The pro-democracy red Shirts call it a "judicial coup". I know the rules of this board wish to avoid criticisms of the court, and I abide by that. I am sure you only quote others Clausewitz. I merely report what the pro-democracy Red Shirts tell me. One of the 'double standards' issues they always talk about, regarding the land issue, is the land dealings of the ex-leader of post-coup Government (forget his name) Apparently he was able to buy land in a protected National Park, and is livng there in a splendiforous mansion......... Hmmmmmmm, buying and building in a protected National Park vs. co-signing something as required by law....Double standard...yes/no...no/yes....As my friends on the rightwing Fox channel like to trumpet...I report, You decide

I would genuinely be interested in knowing what version of democracy the red shirts support. We all know democracy is more than just elections with the government then doing anything they want. The election bit seems clear but I would like to know more details on the other facets that are usually associated with democracy. Responsibilities too would be interesting. I am sure that the red shirts must have some information on this - things like seperation of power, protection of minorities, formal equality etc etc just the basics.