Thai Constitution Court Has Little Time Left To Restore Its Credibility

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME

Court has little time left to restore its credibility

By Tulsathit Taptim

The Nation

A new week, a new video clip. And we can, with almost absolute certainty, expect some more, since the latest clip points to at least two others that we haven't seen yet. The Constitution Court has been fighting a rearguard battle over the past month, and the countdown to the verdict on the Democrat Party dissolution case promises to be as tumultuous as they come.

Again, the impact of the latest clip has been cushioned by a natural disaster. Just as the flood crisis in the Northeast and central provinces began to ease, storms battered the country's South, and waters swamped the region. The Constitution Court was just saved by the bell. But it isn't the last round yet.

Now, the very institution that let Thaksin Shinawatra off the hook in 2001, albeit with different names on the panel, will be heading toward the conclusion of another political mega case with its own reputation under the public spotlight. If you believe in conspiracies, whoever was behind the video clips nearly achieved their goal.

The conspiracy theorists see the video clips as someone's "last card". This scenario has the court leaning toward acquitting the Democrats, so the only way to discredit a "not guilty" verdict is to discredit those who issue it. But such a scheme, if it is real, is threatening to backfire. The situation could get so out of control that either way the verdict goes - "guilty" or "not guilty" - it will become unacceptable.

The first publicised clips, which purportedly expose inappropriate contact between a Democrat representative and court officials, were meant to pressure the judges so that there would be only one way the verdict could go - this according to conspiracy theorists. Such a ploy made sense politically, until the second set of clips was released. The new blow was aimed at the court directly, and this one has landed hard on the target.

Judges being caught on tape discussing a case and, allegedly, appearing out for one side is bad. Judges being filmed talking about an exam fraud that some of them might have been involved in is arguably worse. The first video clips had to do with something that was still transpiring; the second set seek to expose what has already happened, albeit allegedly.

The exam fraud video clips feature a discussion on how to contain the possible damage caused by a more incriminating clip, still unseen by the public and allegedly now in the hands of the Pheu Thai Party. The existence of the exam fraud video series prompted speculation that the whole thing could have begun as internal power struggle, with the dirty linen somehow landing as a windfall in Pheu Thai laps.

We can speculate all we like, but as has been said, 100 cameras following all judges around the clock will be worthless, and the judges will not have to defend themselves against anything if there is nothing to defend against. If the cameras that taped the secret conversations were dirty, they may have caught something fishy. The Constitution Court's task is not to discredit the cameras, but to refute the content of the film.

The public is not so eager to know who shot the clips or who paid him or her to do so. The bigger question on everybody's mind is whether the Constitution Court is still an institution we can trust. Distancing oneself from Pasit Sakdanarong, secretary to the Court's president, is a good tactical move, but people are expecting much more.

Were exam papers leaked to a select few who had close relations with powerful people in the Constitution Court? We want to know the answer, or see serious efforts to reveal the truth. "Political fairness" is something relative, meaning that a pro- or anti-Democrat sees what happens to the party differently. A staff recruitment exam, in which thousands took part, is different; it involves fairness or unfairness to real people.

The judges can't say such scrutiny is not fair. They can't point to, say, the Interior Ministry and claim that what happens there is no different or even worse when it comes to staff recruitment. They are supposed to set an example of real justice - which is supposed to be the norm at all levels of the institution under their watch.

If this whole thing is a conspiracy, the perpetrators must be very close to their objective. "Discredit" is a strange term, often used in desperation. The Constitution Court perhaps should distance itself from that word and use what little time it has left before the Democrat Party ruling to rebuild its true credibility.

-- The Nation 2010-11-03

[yellow1red1]

The situation could get so out of control that either way the verdict goes - "guilty" or "not guilty" - it will become unacceptable.

seriously? """could get""""!?

The reds were all ready to accept a not guilty and the yellows a guilty, B4 these tapes???

don't theenk so senor..

note to OP

take a precis writing course!!!

Why use 1000 words to say 100 words?

[whybother]

The situation could get so out of control that either way the verdict goes - "guilty" or "not guilty" - it will become unacceptable.

seriously? """could get""""!?

The reds were all ready to accept a not guilty and the yellows a guilty, B4 these tapes???

don't theenk so senor..

note to OP

take a precis writing course!!!

Why use 1000 words to say 100 words?

"Why use 1000 words to say 100 words?" That's how they get paid.

"The reds were all ready to accept a not guilty and the yellows a guilty, B4 these tapes???" The Yellows would have accepted a guilty verdict, they just wouldn't have accepted what MAY have followed. And anyway, they are too busy trying to make war with Cambodia at the moment.

[yellow1red1]

The situation could get so out of control that either way the verdict goes - "guilty" or "not guilty" - it will become unacceptable.

seriously? """could get""""!?

The reds were all ready to accept a not guilty and the yellows a guilty, B4 these tapes???

don't theenk so senor..

note to OP

take a precis writing course!!!

Why use 1000 words to say 100 words?

"Why use 1000 words to say 100 words?" That's how they get paid. OH

"The reds were all ready to accept a not guilty and the yellows a guilty, B4 these tapes???" The Yellows would have accepted a guilty verdict,don't theenk so senor they just wouldn't have accepted what MAY have followed. And anyway, they are too busy trying to make war with Cambodia at the moment.

While Cambodia is 'something', the outcome of the Dem dissolution case is a bigger something, as are the next elections, and a COUPLE of other things.

There are trigger points, lit fuses, for escalation and increased turmoil built right into future events.

It;s lose/lose situations, just hang on and see..............trigger points ,,, fuses

How the OP can think, let alone write it "could get out of control" is beyond the pale.

Did he just land on EartH???

HAS GOT! has got

[Piengrudee]

Not little time, but no time left. Even with the youtube block. คำสารภาพคนโกงข้อสอบ

[hammered]

The situation could get so out of control that either way the verdict goes - "guilty" or "not guilty" - it will become unacceptable.

seriously? """could get""""!?

The reds were all ready to accept a not guilty and the yellows a guilty, B4 these tapes???

don't theenk so senor..

note to OP

take a precis writing course!!!

Why use 1000 words to say 100 words?

The yellows couldnt give a toss if the Dems get disolved. There are a lot more than 2 sides in this game. This is pure Thaksin versus Dems event.

[silp1979]

this is just hilarious lol the highest court in the country a bunch of cheaters

if these videos would have been taken in Europe they would all be looking for a new job, instead they hire a lawyer lol the constitution court hires a lawyer lol

[SkyHigh]

this is just hilarious lol the highest court in the country a bunch of cheaters

if these videos would have been taken in Europe they would all be looking for a new job, instead they hire a lawyer lol the constitution court hires a lawyer lol

They even blocked youtube ! I guess that means 'a must see' to the public.

If they did nothing wrong, so what the hel_l the would be ashame of ?

This is just ridiculous.

And now they hire lawyer ??

So the judge actually hire lawyer ?? ???? LOL

[silp1979]

this is just hilarious lol the highest court in the country a bunch of cheaters

if these videos would have been taken in Europe they would all be looking for a new job, instead they hire a lawyer lol the constitution court hires a lawyer lol

They even blocked youtube ! I guess that means 'a must see' to the public.

If they did nothing wrong, so what the hel_l the would be ashame of ?

This is just ridiculous.

And now they hire lawyer ??

So the judge actually hire lawyer ?? ???? LOL

yeah the judges hire a lawyer to press charges against the up loader of the videos.....i would say banana republic but this is not a republic ...

I wonder if they can be judges in there own case??? saves money on bribes LOL