Constitution Court Acquits Thai Democrat

[Asa]

After the long waiting, case preparing, witness calling, video clip showing, judge resigning. And on the judgement day, we got this? gosh!

[animatic]

4-2? not exactly a resounding endorsement is it? at least 2 had the balls to support the EC which is there to ensure 'fair play'.

Or, alternatively, 4 judges had the balls to stand up to the red shirt threats.

anyway bring on an election and stop all this nonsense - case dimissed on a technicallity not aquitted - this does not help national unity

There was never going to be national unity if they were convicted either.

This was not about tit for tat bannings to create national unity,

but about pure power politics to get at the trough of cash via mega projects.

And to removed permanently the most organized opposition to the Thaksin' cliques

quest for a return to power.

I would not want to bet against the EC reluctantly forwarding the case because of Arrisamans threats, but purposely adding a 'poisoned pill' to the case so it would fail, but they still look like they did their pressured hack n slash job anyway.

[Thai at Heart]

Is there an extended verdict, or is it simply a case of case dismissed? Fascinating system.

Would love to understand how on a black and white issue of the case being submitted correctly under law, 2 judges managed to disagree. As a suggestion, verdicts like this should probably be kept as state secrets for 30 years just to stop the controversy. Letting the people know that 2 out of 6 voted against simply shows how apparently divided the judiciary is. All we need to know is that the result is guilty, not guilty or case dismissed.

If this was politics, 2 out of 6 voted against the Dems. Probably about representative of the country

There will be a full written explanation of the verdict. There always is. However when it reaches English who knows. However, remember which law to use was moot and it is likely here the disagreement occurred.

All very possible. So the judges may not have even been in agreement about which law to use?

Well, and there I was thinking the system just made it up as it went along. To be serious, what I read about it, showed that it should be treated as a non-case, with a fine if anything at all. However, this is the mess that the country has got itself into. Mis-invoicing something like this shouldn't get a party banned, but then we need to have another debate about whether having an executive proven to do something wrong should lead to a party being banned. These are very real issues.

The lines of responsibility in the country are becoming blurred so badly between the EC, the NCC and the Constitution Court, that I don't think anyone will be able to unravel it for a long time. Working for these organisations will become very dangerous for one's health in the long run I think. This isn't helped by the obvious issue of the videos showing the court in anything but a good light. Will anyone quit over this? No they will sue to protect their un-empeachable reputation.

So a judgement of a sort has been made, and it was a split as the country. Hardly reassuring for a smooth future.

[Roadman]

Thankfully for the future of Thailand the Court gave a good decision, and Abhisit can take a lot of confidence in. I wish luck to him and his team in the next elections. The more seats the Democrats can seal without doing deals will be for the benefit of all of Thailand.

Edit: for Democrats spelling

Edited November 29, 2010 by Roadman

[diehard60]

Abhsit haters will decry this, but the man is the best PM we've had in 10 years, and (while not perfect by a long shot), is a hell of a lot better to any PTP mouthbreather as PM (or Sanan, or Sanoh, or any of the other marshmellows).

Oldest party keeps getting older. Look for house dissolution in April, and current coalition wins majority and is back until at least 2014. :jap:

Well i don;t know about that. The best PM in 10 years? NO! What has he done? Nothing.

[diehard60]

Thankfully for the future of Thailand the Court gave a good decision, and Abhisit can take a lot of confidence in. I wish luck to him and his team in the next elections. The more seats the Democrats can seal without doing deals will be for the benefit of all of Thailand.

Edit: for Democrats spelling

Don;t you mean STEAL or BUY, not SEAL

[ChiangMaiFun]

4-2? not exactly a resounding endorsement is it? at least 2 had the balls to support the EC which is there to ensure 'fair play'.

Or, alternatively, 4 judges had the balls to stand up to the red shirt threats.

anyway bring on an election and stop all this nonsense - case dimissed on a technicallity not aquitted - this does not help national unity

There was never going to be national unity if they were convicted either.

This was not about tit for tat bannings to create national unity,

but about pure power politics to get at the trough of cash via mega projects.

And to removed permanently the most organized opposition to the Thaksin' cliques

quest for a return to power.

I would not want to bet against the EC reluctantly forwarding the case because of Arrisamans threats, but purposely adding a 'poisoned pill' to the case so it would fail, but they still look like they did their pressured hack n slash job anyway.

My honestly held view - and it's not about scoring points - is that only a fair election will stop all this 'noise'. I, for one, if it is held fairly, will support whichever party wins. I would welcome an 'outside' intervention such as moderators - but I think there are so many elements that fear democracy that they wil lnever allow them in.

Now if there was ONE way Abhisit could impress me is to allow election monitors in

[Thai at Heart]

Thankfully for the future of Thailand the Court gave a good decision, and Abhisit can take a lot of confidence in. I wish luck to him and his team in the next elections. The more seats the Democrats can seal without doing deals will be for the benefit of all of Thailand.

Edit: for Democrats spelling

"Take a lot of confidence from it". Sounds like the current Liverpool manager explaining last nights 2:1 loss.

[ajarnmark]

When you are in power...

[webfact]

Pheu Thai spokesman says ruling not unexpected

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said Monday that the ruling of the Constitution Court in favour of the Democrat Party was not unexpected.

He said he had been monitoring the case, in which the Democrat was accused of misusing the Bt29 million party development fund, from the beginning and expected the ruling in favour of the party.

-- The Nation 2010-11-29

[uncletom]

Thailand's SET up +16.14 pt after Democrat Party survives dissolution by Constitution Court

I bet fair to presume the stock market rising was not anything to do with something like insider trading and no one from the Red or Yellow sides benefitted from the court’s decision via the stock market. This would be sacrileges if it was contrived!

Is that it or can an appeal be filed or new filing complaint be lodged that something was screwy and back to scratch one. And the bets are on...........?

Anyway, would be neat to see someone analyze the stock market activity to see who were the big winners.

uncletom

[Robby nz]

Pheu Thai spokesman says ruling not unexpected

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said Monday that the ruling of the Constitution Court in favour of the Democrat Party was not unexpected.

He said he had been monitoring the case, in which the Democrat was accused of misusing the Bt29 million party development fund, from the beginning and expected the ruling in favour of the party.

-- The Nation 2010-11-29

Of course they expected it.

Thats why they came out with the videos to try to discredit the court, the Dems and the whole process.

[hammered]

Is there an extended verdict, or is it simply a case of case dismissed? Fascinating system.

Would love to understand how on a black and white issue of the case being submitted correctly under law, 2 judges managed to disagree. As a suggestion, verdicts like this should probably be kept as state secrets for 30 years just to stop the controversy. Letting the people know that 2 out of 6 voted against simply shows how apparently divided the judiciary is. All we need to know is that the result is guilty, not guilty or case dismissed.

If this was politics, 2 out of 6 voted against the Dems. Probably about representative of the country

There will be a full written explanation of the verdict. There always is. However when it reaches English who knows. However, remember which law to use was moot and it is likely here the disagreement occurred.

All very possible. So the judges may not have even been in agreement about which law to use?

Well, and there I was thinking the system just made it up as it went along. To be serious, what I read about it, showed that it should be treated as a non-case, with a fine if anything at all. However, this is the mess that the country has got itself into. Mis-invoicing something like this shouldn't get a party banned, but then we need to have another debate about whether having an executive proven to do something wrong should lead to a party being banned. These are very real issues.

The lines of responsibility in the country are becoming blurred so badly between the EC, the NCC and the Constitution Court, that I don't think anyone will be able to unravel it for a long time. Working for these organisations will become very dangerous for one's health in the long run I think. This isn't helped by the obvious issue of the videos showing the court in anything but a good light. Will anyone quit over this? No they will sue to protect their un-empeachable reputation.

So a judgement of a sort has been made, and it was a split as the country. Hardly reassuring for a smooth future.

I would think it is time to do away with complete party disolutions but ban polticians found guilty of electoral fraud etc forever and fine them like millions of baht and make them do hundreds of hours of community service working on farms in the blazing sun with it publically televised at their expense. I wouldnt even jail them. Party disolution doesnt even work because they are all back at it a few days later or sending their braindead sons to do it. Anyway enough of silly ideas

[jdinasia]

Hmmmm Myth ---- try sticking to the facts .....

PPP was not banned over 3000 baht. Samak was tossed out of the PM position for lying about working another job. NOTHING happened to PPP over that. In fact, Samak could have been voted back in the very next day as PM (but Thaksin wanted his brother-in-law to step up as PM.

The issue that was facing the Dems today was a case involving making campaign signs that were a tiny bit outside of the set limits. (I think they were too small, but to be honest I would have to go back to check.) The EC failed to meet the obligations of filing the case against the Dems in a timely manner so the court decided that any findings would be moot. (In Thailand precedence is not required so why go to the effort of deciding something that was moot? It couldn't be used as precedence for a next case.)

The TPI case is still outstanding ----- with MANY cases to be decided ahead of that.

Edited November 29, 2010 by metisdead
Removed quotes which are negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

[whybother]

Pheu Thai spokesman says ruling not unexpected

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said Monday that the ruling of the Constitution Court in favour of the Democrat Party was not unexpected.

He said he had been monitoring the case, in which the Democrat was accused of misusing the Bt29 million party development fund, from the beginning and expected the ruling in favour of the party.

-- The Nation 2010-11-29

Of course they expected it.

Thats why they came out with the videos to try to discredit the court, the Dems and the whole process.

and Chalerm has come out with a statement saying that it will make their election campaign easier. I'm sure they'll be shouting "double standards" from the roof tops.

[jdinasia]

Constitution Court president among two minority judges in Democrat's case

Constitution Court President Chat Chonlaworn was among the two judges who voted against the Democrat Party in the dissolution case.

The other judge is Udomsak Nitimontree.

The four other judges, who voted in favour of the Democrat, are Boonsong Kulbuppha, Jaral Phakdeethanakul, Supoj Khaimuk and Nurak Praneet.

-- The Nation 2010-11-29

4-2? not exactly a resounding endorsement is it? at least 2 had the balls to support the EC which is there to ensure 'fair play'.

66% is fine for a court case.

That the EC was threatened by the reds with death before putting a case forward is of pretty vital interest to the story. Then again some people think that violence is necessary in one sentence and then say they are against violence in another.

The assumption that the 2 dissenting judges would have at any point voted in ANY specific way over the facts of the case itself is simply speculation. The decision today was that the case was not validly submitted. Any further ruling could have simply not gone the red's way too.

[jdinasia]

Now all we need is for Jataporn's bail to be withdrawn to make it a perfect day.

I actually would have preferred a real verdict today.

Jatuporn's bail being revoked WOULD be a great capper to a good day though! Today was the official closing date of this session of parliament and thus Jatuporn no longer can claim parliamentary immunity.

[Roadman]

Thankfully for the future of Thailand the Court gave a good decision, and Abhisit can take a lot of confidence in. I wish luck to him and his team in the next elections. The more seats the Democrats can seal without doing deals will be for the benefit of all of Thailand.

Edit: for Democrats spelling

"Take a lot of confidence from it". Sounds like the current Liverpool manager explaining last nights 2:1 loss.

Aghh no!!! He won by twice the margin of the loss you relied on for your confort. Winners are grinners, and he is slowly doing just that. Listen to what your granny would have told you when you were a little nipper..."Honesty eventually will win through".

Edited to add: Just clicked as a soccer fan of Spurs many years ago... well see everything is just peachy

Edited November 29, 2010 by Roadman

[millwall_fan]

This judgement should surprise nobody. And bear in mind that the Democrat party has not been vindicated. They got off on a technicality and the President of the Constitutional Court thought they did have a case to answer. One questions whether political considerations have influenced the 4 judges who voted not to allow the case to proceed.

The real test of course will be in April or May or November or however long the Democrats can put off the inevitable election that Peua Thai will win. Then watch for lots of court cases against PT MP's who give a couple of bags of rice to impoverished voters during the election campaign. I wonder if the constitutiuonal court will find technical flaws in the case against them. I think not!

Double Standards!

[dominique355]

Democrats Acquitted on Technicality

The court reasoned their acquittal on the fact that the Election Commission did not file the charges in accordance to Article 93 of the Constitution.

-- Tan Network 2010-11-29

Art. 93 of the Constitution? Really? The actual constitution?

Because Art. 93 of the present Constitution deals with the establishment of the House of Representatives.

Section 93. The House of Representatives consists of four hundred and eighty members, four hundred of whom are from the election on a constituency basis and eighty of whom are from the election on a proportional representation basis.

The election of members of the House of Representatives shall be by direct suffrage and secret ballot and, for this purpose, one ballot card shall be used for each category of members of the House of Representatives.

Rules and procedures for the election of members of the House of Representatives shall be in accordance with the Organic Act on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives and the Acquisition of Senators.

In the case where the office of a member of the House of Representatives becomes vacant for any reason and an election

of a member of the House of Representatives has not been held to fill the vacancy, the House of Representatives shall consist of the existing members of the House.

Subject to section 109 (2), in the case where there occurs, during the term of the House of Representatives, any cause resulting members elected from the election on a proportional representation basis being less than eighty in number, members from the election on a proportional representation basis shall consist of the existing members.

In the case where, in any general election, there occurs any event resulting in members of the House of Representatives being less than four hundred and eighty in number but being not less than ninety five percent of the total number of members of the House of Representatives, it shall be deemed that members in such number duly form the House of Representatives, provided that action shall be taken for achieving such number of member of the House of Representatives as provided in this Constitution within one hundred and eighty days and such members shall hold office for the remaining term of the House or Representatives.

Did I miss something?

[Thai at Heart]

Thankfully for the future of Thailand the Court gave a good decision, and Abhisit can take a lot of confidence in. I wish luck to him and his team in the next elections. The more seats the Democrats can seal without doing deals will be for the benefit of all of Thailand.

Edit: for Democrats spelling

"Take a lot of confidence from it". Sounds like the current Liverpool manager explaining last nights 2:1 loss.

Aghh no!!! He won by twice the margin of the loss you relied on for your confort. Winners are grinners, and he is slowly doing just that. Listen to what your granny would have told you when you were a little nipper..."Honesty eventually will win through".

Edited to add: Just clicked as a soccer fan of Spurs many years ago... well see everything is just peachy

In a judicial sense, 4:2 is hardly a win, and the case was dismissed not won. The mere fact that it was 4:2 causes its own long term problems for the election. He will battle on to the election, but if you honestly believe that the Dems on their own will win too many opposition seats, I think you are sadly mistaken.

The seats are so entrenched, I fully expect virtually the same result as last time.

[animatic]

Pheu Thai spokesman says ruling not unexpected

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said Monday that the ruling of the Constitution Court in favour of the Democrat Party was not unexpected.

He said he had been monitoring the case, in which the Democrat was accused of misusing the Bt29 million party development fund, from the beginning and expected the ruling in favour of the party.

-- The Nation 2010-11-29

Which goes a way to explain their attempts to harass and coerce the courts.

Their own advisers didn't think the case could pass muster either.

[Markaew]

So if someone disagrees with you, they are Red?

As Gomer Pyle said - Surprise Surprise!!! What did Thailand expect? Sour grapes from the Reds and another waste of Admin and legal resources apart from taxpayers money!

Let's wait for the next bitch session from the Reds.... it'll come.

[Buchholz]

one party get banned over 3,000 Bht

No party got banned over 3,000 baht, Samak had to resign as PM over payment for cooking shows, but he had the right to stand again for PM, which he did, but Thaksin betrayed him and ordered his MPs to vote for Somchai instead.

Thank you for busting this myth for what seems like the 20th time that I've read it.

It's a shame you need to be so persistent to discount this deceiving fable so often, but it's a good and necessary thing that you do.

Thank you.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Buchholz

[ernesto1]

This judgement should surprise nobody. And bear in mind that the Democrat party has not been vindicated. They got off on a technicality and the President of the Constitutional Court thought they did have a case to answer. One questions whether political considerations have influenced the 4 judges who voted not to allow the case to proceed.

The real test of course will be in April or May or November or however long the Democrats can put off the inevitable election that Peua Thai will win. Then watch for lots of court cases against PT MP's who give a couple of bags of rice to impoverished voters during the election campaign. I wonder if the constitutiuonal court will find technical flaws in the case against them. I think not!

Double Standards!

Being a Millwall fan and a Red/Thaksin supporter seems to go well together. A good fit as they say!

[Pib]

The court said that the EC's procedure concerning the resolution case was unlawful and the submission of the petition was beyond the 15-day deadline.

Seems the court should have known/seen this technicality before accepting the case, which would have been reason not to accept the case/reject the petition.

[Ponbkk]

On a different note, I bet the speed of this has taken many reporters by surprise

That they actually announced it in under an hour? or that it took 4 years (by some reckonings)?

[chevykanteve]

This judgement should surprise nobody. And bear in mind that the Democrat party has not been vindicated. They got off on a technicality and the President of the Constitutional Court thought they did have a case to answer. One questions whether political considerations have influenced the 4 judges who voted not to allow the case to proceed.

The real test of course will be in April or May or November or however long the Democrats can put off the inevitable election that Peua Thai will win. Then watch for lots of court cases against PT MP's who give a couple of bags of rice to impoverished voters during the election campaign. I wonder if the constitutiuonal court will find technical flaws in the case against them. I think not!

Double Standards!

"..or however long the Democrats can put off the inevitable election that Peua Thai will win."

Burma, post the soldier/coup leader Ne Win, should provide a history rich enough to address the consequences of historical issues such as these.

[rubl]

Thankfully for the future of Thailand the Court gave a good decision, and Abhisit can take a lot of confidence in. I wish luck to him and his team in the next elections. The more seats the Democrats can seal without doing deals will be for the benefit of all of Thailand.

Edit: for Democrats spelling

"Take a lot of confidence from it". Sounds like the current Liverpool manager explaining last nights 2:1 loss.

Aghh no!!! He won by twice the margin of the loss you relied on for your confort. Winners are grinners, and he is slowly doing just that. Listen to what your granny would have told you when you were a little nipper..."Honesty eventually will win through".

Edited to add: Just clicked as a soccer fan of Spurs many years ago... well see everything is just peachy

In a judicial sense, 4:2 is hardly a win, and the case was dismissed not won. The mere fact that it was 4:2 causes its own long term problems for the election. He will battle on to the election, but if you honestly believe that the Dems on their own will win too many opposition seats, I think you are sadly mistaken.

The seats are so entrenched, I fully expect virtually the same result as last time.

In a judicial sense 4:2 is a decision which caused the case brought for judgment to be dismissed. It would be incorrect to talk about win or loose since the case is dismissed.

The 'he' who battles on is probably a reference to k. Thaksin or his frontmen in PTP ? The coming by-elections will be interesting, but more for the PTP-BJT battle than anything else. Maybe also for the correctness it will proceed with as all of us hope.

[philw]

Pheu Thai spokesman says ruling not unexpected

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said Monday that the ruling of the Constitution Court in favour of the Democrat Party was not unexpected.

He said he had been monitoring the case, in which the Democrat was accused of misusing the Bt29 million party development fund, from the beginning and expected the ruling in favour of the party.

-- The Nation 2010-11-29

Of course they expected it.

Thats why they came out with the videos to try to discredit the court, the Dems and the whole process.

The videos hardly lend credence to to the court, do they ?