Democrats Concerned About Ec Case And Coalition Unity

[webfact]

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

Democrats more concerned about EC case, coalition unity

By POLITICAL DESK

THE NATION

Published on February 1, 2010

BANGKOK: -- PM's Office Minister Satit Wongnongtoey is sincere and logical about what his ruling party should fear most. Curiously, it is not a coup or Thaksin Shinawatra's red shirts.

Of all the issues facing the Democrat Party, he said, there was only one it had no control over whatsoever. The biggest potential timebomb is none other than the campaign contribution scandal, which could ultimately see the party punished by dissolution.

"When this case is concerned, we can't control anything and we can't predict anything," he told The Nation in an exclusive interview on Friday.

Critics may argue he overlooked the gossip about good relations between the Election Commission chairman and his party.

Election Commission chief Apichart Sukhagganond has been criticised by some for what they claim is a lack of significant progress. Only a few days ago he said a review of the case, in which the Democrat Party was accused of having unlawfully received a donation of Bt258 million from TPI Polene, could not be concluded before the end of February.

Apichart, the political party registrar, said the working committee he assigned to review the case had yet to find enough evidence so it would not able to resolve the matter next month.

While Satit's failure to refer to Apichart was glaring, the proclaimed biggest concern of the ruling party may be genuine. The most coalition allies can do is cause the House to be dissolved. Threats violence on the streets by the red shirts are a shared responsibility of the government and armed forces.

And according to Satit, the Democrats aren't worried about a coup. "Our party's relationship with the military is not so good historically. But if there ever was a time when the two institutions were perceived to be closer than now, I don't know when it was," he said.

And a coup could cause even less ramifications than the Democrats being dissolved, which would force party executives to leave politics for five years.

Indeed, the real crippling blow to Thaksin's parliamentary dominance was not the coup that deposed him, but a series of court rulings after he was ousted.

The second biggest threat, Satit admitted, was continuing problems with their coalition allies. It seems that conflicts over charter amendments are unlikely to be forgotten easily, so it depends on whether this seed of instability grows. In other words, the Democrats realise this "disagreement" could morph into disunity.

"When differences of opinions develop into something that threatens co-existence, that's a cause for concern," Satit said.

The third biggest threat was "external factors" taking advantage of internal problems. That is why, he said, the Democrat-led government should be very sensitive about corruption scandals. The red shirts were a cause of anxiety, but could grow into a more fearsome force if the government's legitimacy was undermined by issues like corruption.

Satit discounted alleged "disunity" within his own party, which he said had a long tradition of coping democratically with differences of opinions. "Even members of any family can't always agree on which movie to go to, so you can't expect politicians to always agree on everything," he said. "It's the way you handle the differences that count."

-- The Nation 2010-02-01

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[CLOD]

The fact that this monumental case is being philli-bustered by Appointed abisit and Military Junta appointed judiciary is a shocking inditment of abisits disgraceful human rights record.

Abisit should have this case about the 258million baht donation at the top of the judicial list.

Is the government legal?

Isnt it an affront to democracy and the people of thailand when this so important case can be ignored for so long.

Are the good people of thailand being userped by an illegal bunch of imposters masquerading as a democratically elected, lawfull, government.

Doesn't it tell a tale when the process takes this long without conclusion when the un-enelected dems are involved but is over in the shot of a gun when the democratically elected government is involved.

The courts have already shown on several occassions that they can assess all the information and evidence extremely quickly, and give their consistent judgements, so what is holding them up now?

Deep down we all know the answer to that , don't we.

[jdinasia]

The fact that this monumental case is being philli-bustered by Appointed abisit and Military Junta appointed judiciary is a shocking inditment of abisits disgraceful human rights record.

Abisit should have this case about the 258million baht donation at the top of the judicial list.

Is the government legal?

Isnt it an affront to democracy and the people of thailand when this so important case can be ignored for so long.

Are the good people of thailand being userped by an illegal bunch of imposters masquerading as a democratically elected, lawfull, government.

Doesn't it tell a tale when the process takes this long without conclusion when the un-enelected dems are involved but is over in the shot of a gun when the democratically elected government is involved.

The courts have already shown on several occassions that they can assess all the information and evidence extremely quickly, and give their consistent judgements, so what is holding them up now?

Deep down we all know the answer to that , don't we.

1) Aphisit was elected by the members of parliament, not appointed.

2) Which members of the judiciary were appointed by the "Military Junta"?

3) Aphisit's human right's record is pretty decent. There are issues with it but many (like the plight of the Rohingya) can be laid at the feet of the decisions made by Thaksin and the military

4) The courts bounced the decision back to the EC. They appear to be having difficulty finding evidence to proceed against the Dems.

5) The judiciary is not controlled by the government. That was something Thaksin tried to mess with. The checks and balances required in a democracy require an independent judiciary but you want the Dems to control the process?

6) Is the government legal? Yes

7) "un-elected dems" see #1)

finally 8) this is not in the court's hands right now it is in the hands of the EC.

ooops .. and what should have been 1) but is now 9) ---- a 'philli-buster' (SIC) I think perhaps you should look up what filibuster means.

Edited February 10, 2010 by jdinasia

[hammered]

The fact that this monumental case is being philli-bustered by Appointed abisit and Military Junta appointed judiciary is a shocking inditment of abisits disgraceful human rights record.

Abisit should have this case about the 258million baht donation at the top of the judicial list.

Is the government legal?

Isnt it an affront to democracy and the people of thailand when this so important case can be ignored for so long.

Are the good people of thailand being userped by an illegal bunch of imposters masquerading as a democratically elected, lawfull, government.

Doesn't it tell a tale when the process takes this long without conclusion when the un-enelected dems are involved but is over in the shot of a gun when the democratically elected government is involved.

The courts have already shown on several occassions that they can assess all the information and evidence extremely quickly, and give their consistent judgements, so what is holding them up now?

Deep down we all know the answer to that , don't we.

How long did it take from when the People's Network made the intial complaint about TRT did it take until they wwere disolved? When was the intial complaint made about the Dems and how long has it taken since that complaint was known. Just look ya how long it has taken for the asset seizure case to get to final court announcement and that was sdtarted long before any complaint was made against the Dems over 258 million. By the way, you may also want to without being emotive take a look at the evidence in the various cases it is not exactly on the same level slam dunk wise. But dont let facts get in the way of some fine propaganda.

[h90]

The fact that this monumental case is being philli-bustered by Appointed abisit and Military Junta appointed judiciary is a shocking inditment of abisits disgraceful human rights record.

Abisit should have this case about the 258million baht donation at the top of the judicial list.

Is the government legal?

Isnt it an affront to democracy and the people of thailand when this so important case can be ignored for so long.

Are the good people of thailand being userped by an illegal bunch of imposters masquerading as a democratically elected, lawfull, government.

Doesn't it tell a tale when the process takes this long without conclusion when the un-enelected dems are involved but is over in the shot of a gun when the democratically elected government is involved.

The courts have already shown on several occassions that they can assess all the information and evidence extremely quickly, and give their consistent judgements, so what is holding them up now?

Deep down we all know the answer to that , don't we.

1) Aphisit was elected by the members of parliament, not appointed.

2) Which members of the judiciary were appointed by the "Military Junta"?

3) Aphisit's human right's record is pretty decent. There are issues with it but many (like the plight of the Rohingya) can be laid at the feet of the decisions made by Thaksin and the military

4) The courts bounced the decision back to the EC. They appear to be having difficulty finding evidence to proceed against the Dems.

5) The judiciary is not controlled by the government. That was something Thaksin tried to mess with. The checks and balances required in a democracy require an independent judiciary but you want the Dems to control the process?

6) Is the government legal? Yes

7) "un-elected dems" see #1)

finally 8) this is not in the court's hands right now it is in the hands of the EC.

ooops .. and what should have been 1) but is now 9) ---- a 'philli-buster' (SIC) I think perhaps you should look up what filibuster means.

Thank you for writing that....It is getting boring....always before Thaksins red thugs are making the next step a couple of new user come to this forum and write one posting after the other on how great Thaksin is and how evil the Democrats are.

For many years now the same thing.......

[animatic]

He sounds more worried that someone will buy off the decision to go against

than if it would actually go against them.

Can't find enough evidence sounds pretty cut and dried.

But they must make the appearance of trying to find some.

More worrying is going down in history as the trigger for mass violence.

So the EC hems and haws.

They know how badly their futures would be with Thaksin controlling a PTP government