Thai PM Abhisit Says Seeking Political Solution To Crisis

[clausewitz]

In his first week in power over a year ago he announced how his main goal was to find National reconciliation and how he would actively work towards this. Has he succeeded so far?

That was at the same press meeting where he vowed to bring the PAD protestors who closed the airport to justice.

In the same afternoon he announced his new Foriegn Minister would be Kasit Promiya (PAD Spokesman)

[lucjoker]

yeah why not just organise a legal vote and get over with...

because they never vote legal !

There is allways some bribe for the voter ,100bht,200bht.......They think this is legal !

So...he who bribes the most.....wins !

So Thaksin wil win again !

And than we have the yellow shirts again.............

So ,no voting!.......let the army do the job !

Or a diktator ?

[fredKroket]

If they [the UDD] continue in their unlawful terrorist actions they will leave the military and government no other choice but to act. So if Abhisit and Anupong are stalling then more power to them. But the time is running out for all parties. Tick tock, tick tock....

I'm trying to think of one major crime that has not already been committed by the UDD

- murder of Army personnel (April 10)

- intimidation of the public

- armed insurrection by commandeering police and army equipment, including weapons

- killing of citizens (BTS Sala Daeng)l

- kidnapping (EC commissioner, police at the SC Hotel fiasco)

- usurping the power of the state (stopping and searching motorists and pedestrians, preventing the police and military from carrying out their duties)

- impeding people and businesses from going about their lawful rights (such as closing down Central Chitlom, and BTS today)

- erecting barricades in public places

Given this list, I'm wondering what ELSE has to happen before the military 'have no choice'??? Haven't we already gone LONG past that point, and don't the reds already know it. Abhisit and Anupong are living in a dream world in the 11th Army Regiment barracks, hoping that if they just keep singing 'la-la-lala-la' with their eyes closed for long enough the reds will go away. It's not going to happen. The reds are going to keep provoking until they either run the country de facto by taking over the duties of the security forces or the PAD and other citizens start fighting them in the streets.

The government has already fallen. What remains to be seen is who will fill the power vacuum?

You forgot no groups of 5 people or more, but that pails into insignificance compared to the loss of life and damaged economy these idiots have caused.

[lannarebirth]

Maybe he,s killing time before the army takes action again, speical ops takes planning

I think that's it. The larger the body of well trained and loyal soldiers he can assemble, the greater the likelihood of success. Not just because of the preparation but the belief of the less rabid opposition that the government will prevail. That should send many back home.

[gotlost]

And in the mean time the government is letting Thailand slip into anarchy.

[charmonman]

Abhisit just has to swallow his pride and make way for elections.

Simple as that.

Gee, we can have an election and the people of Isaan and the North will go in droves to elect PM Chalerm. Maybe he can get one of his sons appointed to head up the police or maybe the Ministry of Justice. Or some other equally repulsive scenario. Then we would have true democracy, eh!

Thailand is broken and will be broken for a long time to come. Thaksin and his allies broke it. That is their legacy. Their followers are pissing and bleeding all over their own future. My prediction is that Thailand will be the sick man of Asia for at least the next couple of decades after all this red shirt garbage is over. Hope I'm wrong but that's the way I see it. Simple as that.

[rodcourt49]

Abhisit just has to swallow his pride and make way for elections.

Simple as that.

..Let's hope he calls an election very soon..his popularity should soar and he will get a landslide victory..

[rychrde]

OK, here comes a question... it's a long one tho...

I'm getting bored with all the hot air about whether the current government is legit or not. Let's see if we can unpick what actually went on. The Thai House of Representatives is elected in a similar way to the UK House of Commons. In Thailand there are 480 seats up for grabs of which 400 are directly elected through constituencies (like in Britain) and 80 are based on proportional representation with the MPs chosen from party lists. A look at Thailand's parliament website shows that it currently lists 475 MPs. I assume this is up to date.

So the parliament is 5 MPs short of its maximum. In the UK if an MP was unseated, for whatever reason, that seat would be contested with a local election and new MP chosen as soon as practically possible. In Thailand, this would also be the case if the MP came from a constituency. If that MP had been elected via PR from a party list then that list would be consulted again and the name at the top would become the new MP. However, if that party has no more members on that list, or if that party no longer exists then no new MP would replace the one that had stepped down. This is from the new constitution and assume I've read it correctly.

So, going back to the three governments since the 2007 election, the PPP gained 233 seats, 8 short of an overall majority. Now, what I'd like to know (yes I could research this and it would take me ages!) is how many MPs have since been kicked out of parliament, from which parties and whether they were elected by their constituency or by PR?

The importance here, I think, is that when the PPP was dissolved and then regrouped as the PTP, how were many of the vacant parliamentary seats allocated, if at all? Those PPP members elected under PR could not be replaced by PTP members as they were different parties. However, if all PPP MPs who left parliament had been elected from their constituencies, then fresh MPs with the same allegiances could have been elected and regained their coalition majority and, perhaps, an Abhisit government never formed.

The implication of all this is that governments with slim majorities can be destabilised by attacking those PR-elected MPs and that banning a whole party effectively eliminates those PR-elected members without replacement.

[RussellHantz]

In his first week in power over a year ago he announced how his main goal was to find National reconciliation and how he would actively work towards this. Has he succeeded so far?

That was at the same press meeting where he vowed to bring the PAD protestors who closed the airport to justice.

In the same afternoon he announced his new Foriegn Minister would be Kasit Promiya (PAD Spokesman)

YES

I clearly remember him saying that national reconciliation was his top priority. If he had actually meant it, he would have started negotiations looooooooooong ago. (and yes, that includes negotiations with Thaksin. but as usual, Abhisit was extremely stubborn about not negotiating with Thaksin - a big mistake as it turns out).

Now time has run out and he is scrambling. Its irresponsible.

Edited April 27, 2010 by RussellHantz

[mich]

Abhisit just has to swallow his pride and make way for elections.

Simple as that.

Are you nuts?

If he does that then any group who decides that they do not like who ever the next government is know that all they have to do is cause as much trouble and damage and acts of terrorism and they will get what the want.

The red shirts are holding the country to ransom. They are nothing less than terrorists and should be dealt with accordingly.

[bkkjames]

In his first week in power over a year ago he announced how his main goal was to find National reconciliation and how he would actively work towards this. Has he succeeded so far?

That was at the same press meeting where he vowed to bring the PAD protestors who closed the airport to justice.

In the same afternoon he announced his new Foriegn Minister would be Kasit Promiya (PAD Spokesman)

YES

I clearly remember him saying that national reconciliation was his top priority. If he had actually meant it, he would have started negotiations looooooooooong ago. Now time has run out and he is scrambling. Its irresponsible.

I see your logic. Start reconciliation on the first day of his job by calling an immediate election. Clever stuff.

[dobadoy]

If they [the UDD] continue in their unlawful terrorist actions they will leave the military and government no other choice but to act. So if Abhisit and Anupong are stalling then more power to them. But the time is running out for all parties. Tick tock, tick tock....

I'm trying to think of one major crime that has not already been committed by the UDD

- murder of Army personnel (April 10)

- intimidation of the public

- armed insurrection by commandeering police and army equipment, including weapons

- killing of citizens (BTS Sala Daeng)l

- kidnapping (EC commissioner, police at the SC Hotel fiasco)

- usurping the power of the state (stopping and searching motorists and pedestrians, preventing the police and military from carrying out their duties)

- impeding people and businesses from going about their lawful rights (such as closing down Central Chitlom, and BTS today)

- erecting barricades in public places

Given this list, I'm wondering what ELSE has to happen before the military 'have no choice'??? Haven't we already gone LONG past that point, and don't the reds already know it. Abhisit and Anupong are living in a dream world in the 11th Army Regiment barracks, hoping that if they just keep singing 'la-la-lala-la' with their eyes closed for long enough the reds will go away. It's not going to happen. The reds are going to keep provoking until they either run the country de facto by taking over the duties of the security forces or the PAD and other citizens start fighting them in the streets.

The government has already fallen. What remains to be seen is who will fill the power vacuum?

You forgot no groups of 5 people or more, but that pails into insignificance compared to the loss of life and damaged economy these idiots have caused.

No, I forgot the bombing of public infrastructures - power lines in Ayutthaya.

But in any case my point is this: the lunatics are running the asylum.

[elkangorito]

I offer only one (1) political solution to this crisis as follows;

The PM could instigate elections but only if 'international observers' are present to 'report on' the electoral process.

For those who are interested in a democratic Thailand, try these links:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca...gPmBMj6Phjy3Gdw

or the pdf here:

http://www.accessdemocracy.org/files/1923_...tion_102705.pdf

I previously mentioned to some Thai friends that the only way things would start to 'clear up' in Thailand was that if elections were monitored by an international body. The replies I got were something like, "The problems in Thailand can only be & must only be solved by Thais."

Egotistical pride seems to prevent one from putting up ones hand & asking, "I/we have a problem. Can you please help?"

It's very much like a Thai classroom where nobody is allowed to ask questions as this may cause a 'loss of face' to either the student or the teacher.

In summary, Thailand needs to 'eat some humble pie' & ask for outside help. Silly pride will be the downfall of this country.

[Tokay]

to the Sala Dang intersection -- and there's a lot of people down along that way. It's really a massive encampment.

I was inside this camp over the weekend. As you say, in the day most are sleeping or getting out of the sun. There is no shortage of reds there should they all be awake and ready to fight. They are literally everywhere inside and prepared with piles of rocks, clubs, wooden shields and sharpened bamboo sticks.

[RussellHantz]

Are you nuts?

If he does that then any group who decides that they do not like who ever the next government is know that all they have to do is cause as much trouble and damage and acts of terrorism and they will get what the want.

Do you realise Abhisit was calling for Somchai to resign when the yellow shirts took over the airport ?

[clausewitz]

I offer only one (1) political solution to this crisis as follows;

The PM could instigate elections but only if 'international observers' are present to 'report on' the electoral process.

For those who are interested in a democratic Thailand, try these links:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca...gPmBMj6Phjy3Gdw

or the pdf here:

http://www.accessdemocracy.org/files/1923_...tion_102705.pdf

I previously mentioned to some Thai friends that the only way things would start to 'clear up' in Thailand was that if elections were monitored by an international body. The replies I got were something like, "The problems in Thailand can only be & must only be solved by Thais."

Egotistical pride seems to prevent one from putting up ones hand & asking, "I/we have a problem. Can you please help?"

It's very much like a Thai classroom where nobody is allowed to ask questions as this may cause a 'loss of face' to either the student or the teacher.

In summary, Thailand needs to 'eat some humble pie' & ask for outside help. Silly pride will be the downfall of this country.

Actually the redshirts have already asked for the UN to come in and surely they would be the first to agree to as many UN observers as anyone wants to observe the elections.

[clausewitz]

Are you nuts?

If he does that then any group who decides that they do not like who ever the next government is know that all they have to do is cause as much trouble and damage and acts of terrorism and they will get what the want.

Do you realise Abhisit was calling for Somchai to resign when the yellow shirts took over the airport ?

In case he hasn'

t seen this:

Dispute over whether to dissolve Parliament

By The Nation Published on September 2, 2008

"During the joint sitting of the House and the Senate in Parliament on Sunday, Opposition and Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva called on Prime Minister Sama

k Sundaravej to dissolve Parliament. Sacrificing MPs would unlock the crisis and return power so voters could decide the outcome again."

http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/02/pol...cs_30082196.php

Democrats not being opportunistic by nominating Abhisit as new Thai PM

TNA 12 September 2008

Thailand's opposition Democrat Party denied being opportunistic in nominating its party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva as prime minister after the caretaker coalition government failed early Friday to appoint a new government leader due to the lack of a quorum in the House. ...

Thais are now killing each other and there are signs that more will be killed. There should be no more negotiations," Mr. Abhisit affirmed.

Asked about his response if the ruling People Power Party dissolved the House, he said

the Democrats had proposed a House dissolution from the beginning.

"How to do it depends on the situation."

http://enews.mcot.net/view.php?id=6233

Abhisit calls for House dissolution

By The Nation Published on December 3, 2008

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva on Wednesday urged for House dissolution on the ground that a snap election will allow a fresh start to form a viable government to tackle the political and economic woes. ...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingne...newsid=30090130

[OzMick]

Abhisit just has to swallow his pride and make way for elections.

Simple as that.

Definitely simple!

[elkangorito]

Actually the redshirts have already asked for the UN to come in and surely they would be the first to agree to as many UN observers as anyone wants to observe the elections.

I think you need to find out the role of the UN. The 'redshirts' don't understand it & neither do you.

I still maintain that part of any political solution to this debacle, must involve international observers.

Edited April 27, 2010 by elkangorito

[RussellHantz]

Are you nuts?

If he does that then any group who decides that they do not like who ever the next government is know that all they have to do is cause as much trouble and damage and acts of terrorism and they will get what the want.

Do you realise Abhisit was calling for Somchai to resign when the yellow shirts took over the airport ?

In case he hasn'

t seen this:

Dispute over whether to dissolve Parliament

By The Nation Published on September 2, 2008

"During the joint sitting of the House and the Senate in Parliament on Sunday, Opposition and Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva called on Prime Minister Sama

k Sundaravej to dissolve Parliament. Sacrificing MPs would unlock the crisis and return power so voters could decide the outcome again."

http://nationmultimedia.com/2008/09/02/pol...cs_30082196.php

Democrats not being opportunistic by nominating Abhisit as new Thai PM

TNA 12 September 2008

Thailand's opposition Democrat Party denied being opportunistic in nominating its party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva as prime minister after the caretaker coalition government failed early Friday to appoint a new government leader due to the lack of a quorum in the House. ...

Thais are now killing each other and there are signs that more will be killed. There should be no more negotiations," Mr. Abhisit affirmed.

Asked about his response if the ruling People Power Party dissolved the House, he said

the Democrats had proposed a House dissolution from the beginning.

"How to do it depends on the situation."

http://enews.mcot.net/view.php?id=6233

Abhisit calls for House dissolution

By The Nation Published on December 3, 2008

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva on Wednesday urged for House dissolution on the ground that a snap election will allow a fresh start to form a viable government to tackle the political and economic woes. ...

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingne...newsid=30090130

Thanks for that.

[Leesoi2]

When Abhisit did try negotiations the Reds were not known to be terrorist but now they are known to be. Negotiations with terrorist cannot be made as it will set precedence for others to become terrorist to make political change. That must be the end of talks. The only way forward will be many Reds arrested and much bloodshed and mess to clean up. I believe it will happen but the government forces are trying to make sure they are as ready as possible.

[JacknDanny]

to the Sala Dang intersection -- and there's a lot of people down along that way. It's really a massive encampment.

I was inside this camp over the weekend. As you say, in the day most are sleeping or getting out of the sun. There is no shortage of reds there should they all be awake and ready to fight. They are literally everywhere inside and prepared with piles of rocks, clubs, wooden shields and sharpened bamboo sticks.

And yet there are you, in the midst of all this, in their camp!!!

I am sorry, but any Westerner who feels that its ok to mill around with these idiots, or wants to take some tourist photos back home, should have their heads examined.

You know the sh!t could hit the fan at any time, and yet every day I see posters telling stories of what its like with the reds in their camp!!

The mind boggles

[elkangorito]

What the mind boggles about is people not commenting on the OP.

[caf]

OK, here comes a question... it's a long one tho...

I'm getting bored with all the hot air about whether the current government is legit or not. Let's see if we can unpick what actually went on. The Thai House of Representatives is elected in a similar way to the UK House of Commons. In Thailand there are 480 seats up for grabs of which 400 are directly elected through constituencies (like in Britain) and 80 are based on proportional representation with the MPs chosen from party lists. A look at Thailand's parliament website shows that it currently lists 475 MPs. I assume this is up to date.

So the parliament is 5 MPs short of its maximum. In the UK if an MP was unseated, for whatever reason, that seat would be contested with a local election and new MP chosen as soon as practically possible. In Thailand, this would also be the case if the MP came from a constituency. If that MP had been elected via PR from a party list then that list would be consulted again and the name at the top would become the new MP. However, if that party has no more members on that list, or if that party no longer exists then no new MP would replace the one that had stepped down. This is from the new constitution and assume I've read it correctly.

So, going back to the three governments since the 2007 election, the PPP gained 233 seats, 8 short of an overall majority. Now, what I'd like to know (yes I could research this and it would take me ages!) is how many MPs have since been kicked out of parliament, from which parties and whether they were elected by their constituency or by PR?

The importance here, I think, is that when the PPP was dissolved and then regrouped as the PTP, how were many of the vacant parliamentary seats allocated, if at all? Those PPP members elected under PR could not be replaced by PTP members as they were different parties. However, if all PPP MPs who left parliament had been elected from their constituencies, then fresh MPs with the same allegiances could have been elected and regained their coalition majority and, perhaps, an Abhisit government never formed.

The implication of all this is that governments with slim majorities can be destabilised by attacking those PR-elected MPs and that banning a whole party effectively eliminates those PR-elected members without replacement.

the uk military do not get involved in formation of coalitions

[dominique355]

What could possibly come from new elections?

- Scenario 1: The Red Shirts and PTP win and build the government. The constitution is amended and all former PPP and TRT members including Thaksin are given amnesty. Thaksin is again PM. The PAD has been closely monitoring the whole thing and also know from previous experience that whatever they do, no-one will ever be prosecuted. So they start again their rallies. Until the "new"government is forced out. Back to square 1.

- Scenario 2: The Democrats and their allies win and Abhisit is again PM. Thaksin and his cronies and the Red Shirt know by now that whatever they do, there will be no consequences, no one will be held responsible. So they go out again and call the "new"government illegal. Back to square 1.

- Scenario 3: The Military step in and stage a coup, all in the name of - you know who - and of course democracy. And we are again where we were in September 2006. Back to square 1.

What's the consequence of this? Yielding to pressure and blackmail, giving in to terrorist and negotiating with them will never solve any problem. It will only give other groups the idea and the appetite to do the same. The only language these people understand is the language of authority and force. Unfortunately this should have been done at the time of the airport occupation. Is it too late now? I am afraid so.

Law and order and government authority are key factors for a peaceful democracy. Double standards as we have seen too much now, must stop.

After having re-established law and order and applied one single standard (to all colors), we can start talking and listening.

[TheBarbarian]

Never mind what this man says about the legitimacy of his government, he should realize that not all media can be controlled. Of course he will claim that he is legitimate. But what he forget to mention is that numerous elected representatives have shown the utmost disregard for their voters by switching alliances under pressure of the army. CNN works with a army controlled station, so it is neither independent nor willing to ask the right questions. Compared with the BBC he is let off the hook easily. The right questions should have been:

1. Why is he not living up to his promise of reconciliation

2. Why is he damaging the countries name by using the word terrorist, while his government holds a mammasan as minister of commerce and a Foreign minister who is himself under investigation for the airport occupation. The precise term that the prosecuting office was using is" Economic Terrorism".

3. How come they assigned a such important post (PM) to a man, who has no experience whatsoever in leading a city, province or anything of any importance, let alone a country in trouble.

He should also explain to the world why he has ordered to use of the army in 2009 and 2010, damaging the country's image. When he came out with the same pre-cooked answers in an earlier BBC interview the interviewer was quick to counter his arguments, Abhisit looked helpless and at a loss.

According the economist today foreign diplomats ask the same question. What the hel_l is an unexperienced man doing here and especially at this moment. Learning at the job is fine, but not after Sonthi has raped democracy. Last but not least, there was a vote about the constitution. It was narrowly won, because people were tired. But if you take all the no show voters into account it was clearly defeated with over 75% of the people either not voting or voting no.

The NLD even came out with a statement from aung Suu Kyi which mentioned the Thai constitution as a example why constitutions dictated by an army are worthless. Do not tell it to the opportunists in Thailand though. Banharn and family, newin and family and others had no problem changing their alliance and rubber stamping legislation which was retroactively imposed on people. I do not think you can even find in Africa countries where this is happening. It says a lot about this government. Just as it says a lot that they flout one baseless accusation after another. More news for Abhisit: If he thinks that he has the situation in the provinces under control he should change his local newspaper subscription for a foreign one and download Sopcast (although blocked in Thailand) in order to see more than one point of view.

It will be a day of celebration when the clique around Abhisit will be banned too for the next 5 years.

[danc]

OK, here comes a question... it's a long one tho...

I'm getting bored with all the hot air about whether the current government is legit or not. Let's see if we can unpick what actually went on. The Thai House of Representatives is elected in a similar way to the UK House of Commons. In Thailand there are 480 seats up for grabs of which 400 are directly elected through constituencies (like in Britain) and 80 are based on proportional representation with the MPs chosen from party lists. A look at Thailand's parliament website shows that it currently lists 475 MPs. I assume this is up to date.

So the parliament is 5 MPs short of its maximum. In the UK if an MP was unseated, for whatever reason, that seat would be contested with a local election and new MP chosen as soon as practically possible. In Thailand, this would also be the case if the MP came from a constituency. If that MP had been elected via PR from a party list then that list would be consulted again and the name at the top would become the new MP. However, if that party has no more members on that list, or if that party no longer exists then no new MP would replace the one that had stepped down. This is from the new constitution and assume I've read it correctly.

So, going back to the three governments since the 2007 election, the PPP gained 233 seats, 8 short of an overall majority. Now, what I'd like to know (yes I could research this and it would take me ages!) is how many MPs have since been kicked out of parliament, from which parties and whether they were elected by their constituency or by PR?

The importance here, I think, is that when the PPP was dissolved and then regrouped as the PTP, how were many of the vacant parliamentary seats allocated, if at all? Those PPP members elected under PR could not be replaced by PTP members as they were different parties. However, if all PPP MPs who left parliament had been elected from their constituencies, then fresh MPs with the same allegiances could have been elected and regained their coalition majority and, perhaps, an Abhisit government never formed.

The implication of all this is that governments with slim majorities can be destabilised by attacking those PR-elected MPs and that banning a whole party effectively eliminates those PR-elected members without replacement.

That's the clincher for me in my own attempt at rational explanation of the perception of legitimacy. You can understand the above and for that, you are a better person than me, as I do not for one moment doubt its veracity. However, do you really expect an international audience to grasp it or if not your particular points, then those that mean this government is not slightly muddied how it sitting where it is today, i.e as the incumbent power? Unfortunately for Abhisit and his colleagues, the soundbite bought by the international audience is that this government came into power sometime after a military coup in 2006 that removed the elected prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra. It does not matter one jot about the minutiae of legitimacy that we debate endlessly with far greater or lesser knowledge - that is the bit that has stuck and will not un-stick itself. That is why the western press harp on about battles for democracy, as they do not like military coups, period. It does not matter if Abhisit is indeed the right man for the job, the least corrupted, he is forever sullied and in politics, on the world stage, that is a very difficult reputation to shed. All articles that I have read on this subject in press outside of Thailand always at some point refer to the coup and to this government taking power sometime after said coup. I do not write them but I will also not deny them. I feel that Abhisit knows this very well - educated outside of Thailand as he is and I also feel that it goes someway to explaining his inaction and indecision. He knows very well that, at present, were he to move on the protestors and there was a bloodbath (an almost certain outcome), the outcry internationally would sink this country for many many years to come. I think he also knows that this perception is unlikely to change and so he has literally nowhere else to turn. He is damned to some extent nationally if he doesn't and damned internationally if he does. As to the answer, I will let others postulate.

[thaihome]

OK, here comes a question... it's a long one tho...

I'm getting bored with all the hot air about whether the current government is legit or not. Let's see if we can unpick what actually went on. The Thai House of Representatives is elected in a similar way to the UK House of Commons. In Thailand there are 480 seats up for grabs of which 400 are directly elected through constituencies (like in Britain) and 80 are based on proportional representation with the MPs chosen from party lists. A look at Thailand's parliament website shows that it currently lists 475 MPs. I assume this is up to date.

So the parliament is 5 MPs short of its maximum. In the UK if an MP was unseated, for whatever reason, that seat would be contested with a local election and new MP chosen as soon as practically possible. In Thailand, this would also be the case if the MP came from a constituency. If that MP had been elected via PR from a party list then that list would be consulted again and the name at the top would become the new MP. However, if that party has no more members on that list, or if that party no longer exists then no new MP would replace the one that had stepped down. This is from the new constitution and assume I've read it correctly.

So, going back to the three governments since the 2007 election, the PPP gained 233 seats, 8 short of an overall majority. Now, what I'd like to know (yes I could research this and it would take me ages!) is how many MPs have since been kicked out of parliament, from which parties and whether they were elected by their constituency or by PR?

The importance here, I think, is that when the PPP was dissolved and then regrouped as the PTP, how were many of the vacant parliamentary seats allocated, if at all? Those PPP members elected under PR could not be replaced by PTP members as they were different parties. However, if all PPP MPs who left parliament had been elected from their constituencies, then fresh MPs with the same allegiances could have been elected and regained their coalition majority and, perhaps, an Abhisit government never formed.

The implication of all this is that governments with slim majorities can be destabilised by attacking those PR-elected MPs and that banning a whole party effectively eliminates those PR-elected members without replacement.

29 constituency MP's lost their seats as a result of the disolution of the parties. A by-election was held on Jan 11, 2009. The coalition parties gained 20 of the 29 seats, increasing the majority in the House.

TH

[rayw]

Abhisit just has to swallow his pride and make way for elections.

Simple as that.

Simple to you. Not simple to people who have done any thinking about what an election at the current time would actually be like. It would be like trying to light a match under the ocean.

Jeez as I keep stating elections will not solve anything UNLESS they are fairly and honestly monitored elections by an independent and unbiased external body like the UN. Without that no election result will be accepted as an honest result by the losing side and these problems will just carrhy on and get worse. Too much history of vote rigging and vote buying here and why democracy cannot work until that is firmly stopped.

Abhist under the current Thai constitution, (which is a similar set up to the UK and Australia), is completely legally in the PM seat as he was elected by the current and also publicly elected (whether by an honest last election or not) parliamentary members, same as Gordon Brown in the UK was rightfully and lawfully elected to the PMs office by the publicly elected parliamentary party members, so stop this crap about unlawful Government because that is clearly and factually not true. The UK and Thailand are NOT presidencies so do not publicly elect their PM, the ruling majority party, or coalition parties, do that as has been the case here with Abhist and they can likewise majority vote for his removal too if he was not doing his job. Quite frankly I think Abhist is doing bloody well in such tough circumstances even though I am not an elitist party supporter and support the main Red Shirt political philosophy of people power not the elite ruling classes running their lives any more. But I hugely despise and totally disrespect that elitist crook weasel Thaksin and his bully boy corrupt cronies who are 100% responsible for the terrible and sad deaths and injuries in Bangkok this month, so the Reds need to ditch those evil men form their following and form their own respectable and legitimate honest political party NOT led or run by anyone who is a wealthy and selfish elitist.

So once again the late Autumn is soon enough to arrange an independent external election monitoring team and indeed for the Reds to get themselves organised with a good man as leader and get rid of Thaksin and the a'holes who do his dirty work. So the decent ordinary folk in the Red Shirt camp need to disperse and leave the crooks and bully boy misguided leaders in Bangkok to be arrested and tried for crimes committed. I will throw a party too on the day that Thaksin is locked up in a secure jail or executed if honourably found guilty of perpetrating murders and treason. Justice MUST be seen to be done. I am truly an open minded and honest guy and see no evidence to show Thaksin was not guilty as charged, in act each month it becomes more and more 100% sure he was guilty of even more crimes he has not yet been tried for. Why cannot the Red supporters see that too and get on with what is needed and form an honest non Thaksin peoples party, are they blind to the certain facts that have been proved. All this turmoil is totally unnecessary IMHO if only folk would open their eyes and concentrate on what is needed to really change things for the better, the true honourable Reds need a few good and honest men/women to lead them on the correct path to make it really work for them, I truly hope that happens as I love this country and most of its decent people and where I chose to retire and live in.

[mitrapaap]

Abhisit just has to swallow his pride and make way for elections.

Simple as that.

Been saying that for months.All of this could have been avoided. What is he afraid of?

So every time some jerks come out to the streets the government just steps down, resolve parliament and holds new elections. Doesn't sound very realistic, does it?