Thai Election Announcement 'May Be Delayed'

[webfact]

Thai election announcement 'may be delayed'

BANGKOK, May 4, 2011 (AFP) - Thailand could put off announcing its first election since last year's deadly protests by several days to allow authorities to approve constitutional laws, the deputy prime minister said on Wednesday.

Suthep Thaugsuban said the timetable for dissolving the lower house of parliament ahead of an anticipated late June or early July poll could be altered because three election laws have yet to be finalised.

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had been widely expected to call the election on May 6, but his deputy said the dissolution may be put on hold until after the Constitutional Court considers the laws on Monday, May 9.

"The goal is still unchanged. I think that if the date is changed by one or two days it will make no difference," he told reporters.

Suthep admitted that he was not certain of the precise dissolution date.

"One minister asked the prime minister last night at the cabinet meeting when he will dissolve the house and he told him to listen to the announcement on the radio," Suthep said.

The laws have already been adopted by both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Thailand's election is expected to be close-fought and comes at a time of heightened political sensitivity for the country, which remains deeply divided a year after opposition rallies by the "Red Shirt" movement.

The protests sparked the worst political violence in decades, leaving more than 90 people dead in clashes between demonstrators and armed troops in Bangkok.

Thailand is also embroiled in a tense border dispute with neighbouring Cambodia. The conflict, which appears to be calming, has killed 18 people and caused thousands to flee their homes for several days.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2011-05-04

[ib1b4]

The goal is still unchanged, but we need more time to allow us to move the goal posts.

[geovalin]

"Uncle Prayuth, Uncle Prayuth, please tell me when I can go."

"You could go now but I like to embarrass you. If you tell -this week-, I'll not allow -this week-."

[aaacorp]

surprising no?

[whybother]

surprising no?

Not really surprising.

We'll see what happens once the Constitution court approves the new election laws.

Of course, the PM hasn't said that it will be delayed ...

[ianf]

The goal is still unchanged, but we need more time to allow us to move the goal posts.

Cynical rabbit

[dunkin2012]

how many elected governments had been through the 4 year term?

Taksin's is one.

and not many others ....

seems that people here are fed up with 'em..(no doubt_)

whatta waste!!!!!

[webfact]

House dissolution may be delayed: Deputy PM Suthep

BANGKOK, May 4 - Thailand's Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban on Wednesday said a delay in dissolving Parliament would not be a problem if only for a few days to wait for the ruling of the Constitution Court on three organic laws.

The deputy premier made the statement after Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the House dissolution might be put off.

Mr Suthep reaffirmed there would be no problem with a possible delay of the planned House dissolution as all concerned parties are now gearing up for the coming general election. The cabinet has also approved a budget for the Election Commission to organise the election.

"Now we are awaiting the ruling of the Constitution Court on the organic laws," Mr Suthep said. "We hope that the court decision and the laws will be promulgated on time for the House dissolution."

"I think there are some reasons why the House dissolution may be delayed for a while. Personally I don't see any difference if Parliament is dissolved a day or two later than the anticipated schedule, but that depends on the prime minister," he said.

The deputy prime minister cautioned that what he said did not mean that the the exact date of the House dissolution would be in the second week of May. The premier may have to look at legal concerns and the timeframe before making any decision, he indicated, but the premier is still following his plan.

The prime minister earlier announced that he would dissolve the lower House in the first week of May and the general election should be held in June or early July.

House Speaker Chai Chidchob said on Tuesday that the premier has already submitted a royal decree of the dissolution of the parliament to His Majesty the King, but Mr Abhisit dismissed the claim. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2011-05-04

[webfact]

House dissolution delayed a few days: Suthep

By The Nation

The plan to dissolove the House will likely be postponed for a few days pending the appointment of the Senate speaker, Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said on Wednesday.

"It is good if the House dissolution happens after completing all the transitional steps," he said.

Suthep said he did not anticipate any problems to arise from a delay.

The appointment process for the Senate speaker is in the final step for the issuing of a royal command, he said, explaining that the newly-appointed speaker will be concurrently work as the interim president of Parliament pending the general election.

He also noted that the completion of the enactment process for the three organic laws on the revamped electoral system would ensure a smooth supervision of the balloting. The Constitution Court is expected on Monday to issue its ruling on the constitutionality of the three laws, a final step before enforcement by a royal command.

The Senate voted on April 22 to elect appointed-senator Teeradej Meepien as the speaker. His name is being submitted for royal endorsement.

-- The Nation 2011-05-04

[Buchholz]

surprising no?

Not for anyone that's been following the election laws and the timeline as they've worked their way through the House and Senate.

It's absolutely necessary that the Court approve of them and its been expected all along that the election will wait for their permission.

It's absolutely worth a 76 hour delay to avoid the possibility of pushing them through without the court's approval and risk having the election subsequently annulled.

I do realize that it's much more exciting to jump and down and shout Prayuth... as the reality is much more mundane.

[BuckarooBanzai]

I would be interested in knowing about 1 of the 3 laws that has to do with reducing elected members and increasing appointed members for parliament or something like that. Taking power away from the electorate always gives me heeby geebies.

[whybother]

I would be interested in knowing about 1 of the 3 laws that has to do with reducing elected members and increasing appointed members for parliament or something like that. Taking power away from the electorate always gives me heeby geebies.

The current set up is 400 constituency MPs (ie voted for the individual in a single electorate) and 80 party-list MPs (ie voted for the party nationally and allocated proportionally).

The new set up will be 375 constituency MPs and 125 party list MPs.

The only "appointing" that is done, is appointing who gets onto each party's party-list, which of course is done by each party.

Then it's up to the voters to vote for the party to see how many party-list MPs get proportionally allocated.

Edited May 4, 2011 by whybother

[NCFC]

surprising no?

Not for anyone that's been following the election laws and the timeline as they've worked their way through the House and Senate.

It's absolutely necessary that the Court approve of them and its been expected all along that the election will wait for their permission.

It's absolutely worth a 76 hour delay to avoid the possibility of pushing them through without the court's approval and risk having the election subsequently annulled.

I do realize that it's much more exciting to jump and down and shout Prayuth... as the reality is much more mundane.

Really, do the courts have to approve the laws before they become effective? Or do you mean receiving the Royal Assent?

[BuckarooBanzai]

I would be interested in knowing about 1 of the 3 laws that has to do with reducing elected members and increasing appointed members for parliament or something like that. Taking power away from the electorate always gives me heeby geebies.

The current set up is 400 constituency MPs (ie voted for the individual in a single electorate) and 80 party-list MPs (ie voted for the party nationally and allocated proportionally).

The new set up will be 375 constituency MPs and 125 party list MPs.

The only "appointing" that is done, is appointing who gets onto each party's party-list, which of course is done by each party.

Then it's up to the voters to vote for the party to see how many party-list MPs get proportionally allocated.

Thank you for the explanation. I guess I am just not used to this type of electoral set up.

[whybother]

Really, do the courts have to approve the laws before they become effective? Or do you mean receiving the Royal Assent?

I think it's only because these particular laws (organic laws) relate to the constitution then Constitution Court needs to review them to make sure they're ok.