webfact Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Jatuporn's MP status validated: Natthawut Incoming MP Natthawut Saikua on Wednesday argued that his fellow red shirt Jatuporn Promphan already had his MP status validated by the official vote outcome. The Election Commission announcement on the balloting outcome was the confirmation of the Pheu Thai victory and the validation of Jatuporn as a party-list MP, he said. "By releasing the offical vote count, the EC has implicitly endorsed Jatuporm as MP," he said. -- The Nation 2011-07-06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Surely they mean complicit not implicit, which could be said of a few others too I'll warrant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Nice to see the new administration's highest priority is special treatment for its buddies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) The EC released the vote count, but not yet the official validation of each elected MP. Just Nuttawat trying to pre-empt the EC in pubic perceptions. This is his opinion, and nothing else. Edited July 6, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 "By releasing the offical vote count, the EC has implicitly endorsed Jatuporm as MP," he said. k. Natthwut seems to forget that the EC is still looking into 190+ cases of irregularities. k. Jatuporn's case is amongst those as far as I know. Official result with some caveat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) "By releasing the offical vote count, the EC has implicitly endorsed Jatuporm as MP," he said. k. Natthwut seems to forget that the EC is still looking into 190+ cases of irregularities. k. Jatuporn's case is amongst those as far as I know. Official result with some caveat Official results subject to Red Cards in the coming weeks. No doubt some complaints are doubled in certain races, and not 190 separate MPS in question. The EC has showed no reluctance to be specific about meeting requirements, red carding across all party lines. Edited July 6, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The EC have said that PTP have received 61 (I think that's the number) party list seats. They haven't confirmed WHICH party list MPs have got their seat. If Jatuporn drops of the list because he's not eligible, then the 62nd person on the list gets a seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted July 6, 2011 Author Share Posted July 6, 2011 EC endorses Jatuporn's MP status but says House speaker should ask Constitution Court to rule whether he can still be MP when he's jailed /TAN_Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Why do they need a court to interpret the legislation over a matter they are supposed to administer? It's straightforward: Locked up, no vote, no vote, no MP. This is a pathetic case of buck-passing and arse covering. And it bodes very poorly for the future of governance under this administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomTumTiger Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Well, if it's any question, Jatupon's douchebag status was validated a long long time ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Definitely buck passing. Force the courts to answer the questions since they get the blame and have no where to deflect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Why do they need a court to interpret the legislation over a matter they are supposed to administer? It's straightforward: Locked up, no vote, no vote, no MP. This is a pathetic case of buck-passing and arse covering. And it bodes very poorly for the future of governance under this administration. The rules say he couldn't vote. He had 1 week from the election to notify the EC of WHY he couldn't vote. It isn't "no-vote=no-MP status" as much as I wish it was. If the EC has ruled on his incarceration due to violating bail conditions (but not yet convicted of crimes --- again as much as I wish he were) then that's the ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpoint Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 No doubt Nattawut will now deny having said this and the PTP will hold a press conference to back him up. A number of gullible red members will then be on here frothing at the mouth and demanding the Nation be shut down for publishing what he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted July 6, 2011 Author Share Posted July 6, 2011 Poll Panel Endorses Jailed Red-shirt MP's Status The poll panel has endorsed the status of jailed red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan as a Pheu Thai party-list MP before forwarding the matter to the House speaker and the Constitution Court to decide whether he would be disqualified for not voting. Election Commissioner in charge of political party affairs Sodsri Sattayatham said that the Election Commission, or EC, has validated the status of jailed red-shirt leader Jatuporm Promphan as Number Eight party-list MP-elect of the Pheu Thai Party. Sodsri said the EC agreed with its legal division on that according to Article 101 of the Constitution's organic law on political party, Jatuporm has lost his membership of the Pheu Thai Party since July 3 after he failed to turn up to vote. However, no law gives the poll panel nor the Supreme Court an authority to withdraw his candidacy . Sodsri went on to say that the EC has approved the election result for Jatuporn and will forward the matter to the House speaker after July 12. The House speaker will have to pass on the case to the Constitution Court to consider whether Jatuporn's MP status should be terminated in line with Article 10 of the Constitution's organic law on the Election Commission. -- Tan Network 2011-07-06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted July 6, 2011 Author Share Posted July 6, 2011 Criminal court dismisses bail for Jatuporn /TAN_Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Criminal court dismisses bail for Jatuporn /TAN_Network What does that mean? Will we get a follow up clarification from the TAN_Network? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Sodsri said the EC agreed with its legal division on that according to Article 101 of the Constitution's organic law on political party, Jatuporm has lost his membership of the Pheu Thai Party since July 3 after he failed to turn up to vote. He is no long a party member because he did not vote. He was ONLY elected, after the polls closed, since that is not possible to be elected while the polls are still open. From the moment the polls closed and he had not voted, he was no longer a PTP party member... So how can he be elected on the PTP Party List, when his membership in the party ended the moment the polls closed? Catch-22. Still the EC is nowpassing the buck to courts to determine 'at what moment he ceased to be a Party Member.' Yes he was far enough up the list to get elected, but only as long as he remains a legitimate party member. Edited July 6, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) So if I understand correctly k. Jatuporn would be a non-party member AND party list MP (apart from still being in jail)? Is that legal? Probably one of those crazy combinations never envisioned when the Election Law was written (edit: add: what takes precedence, non-party member, or party-list MP?) Edited July 6, 2011 by rubl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzieman05 Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 No doubt Nattawut will now deny having said this and the PTP will hold a press conference to back him up. A number of gullible red members will then be on here frothing at the mouth and demanding the Nation be shut down for publishing what he said. Red Shirts haven't committed a crime. What they did was fail to comply with the law." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
princejohnjay Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 There are presidents of other countries that won an election while in jail and yet were never disqualified for not voting. Jatuporn gave a good reason why he couldn't vote before the election and i remember the EC saying that any candidate that couldn't turn up to vote on the election day and wishes to keep their MP status should inform the EC with good reason why they couldn't vote. That was the EC's word and they should keep to it and don't need any constitutional court to determine anything again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) There are presidents of other countries that won an election while in jail and yet were never disqualified for not voting. Jatuporn gave a good reason why he couldn't vote before the election and i remember the EC saying that any candidate that couldn't turn up to vote on the election day and wishes to keep their MP status should inform the EC with good reason why they couldn't vote. That was the EC's word and they should keep to it and don't need any constitutional court to determine anything again. They would mean in the hospital with a broken back, heart attack, travel accident preventing return with a note from his mother. etc. This list would not include in jail for bail violations while charged with insulting the monarchy onstage, terrorism and inciting insurrection etc. The point is though: If he didn't vote and his reason is NOT 'beyond his control' such as acts of god, floods etc, then how can he remain on a party list of a party he is not a member of anymore? Edited July 6, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 No doubt Nattawut will now deny having said this and the PTP will hold a press conference to back him up. A number of gullible red members will then be on here frothing at the mouth and demanding the Nation be shut down for publishing what he said. Red Shirts haven't committed a crime. What they did was fail to comply with the law." Perfect lawyers argument. Except ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmundi Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Weren't they terrorists anymore?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The EC's decision to defer to the courts is well founded. The EC does not have the authority to decide upon constitutional law. The EC has a mandate to comply with and enforce existing election laws. However, where there is doubt or the potential for serious conflict, it is best to allow the existing legal mechanisms to respond. The EC is doing what a responsible electoral office would do and that is to obtain a decision from the body that has the ultimate say. This is how a civil society functions. If the courts rule that the MP cannot take office, then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdinasia Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The EC's decision to defer to the courts is well founded. The EC does not have the authority to decide upon constitutional law. The EC has a mandate to comply with and enforce existing election laws. However, where there is doubt or the potential for serious conflict, it is best to allow the existing legal mechanisms to respond. The EC is doing what a responsible electoral office would do and that is to obtain a decision from the body that has the ultimate say. This is how a civil society functions. If the courts rule that the MP cannot take office, then so be it. Nope --- What the EC is doing is simply passing the buck. They could have stated that Jatuporn did not meet the conditions of membership required for political parties registered with the EC and thus ... They had the ability to not endorse him. They simply chose to abdicate that authority and leave the mess for someone else to clean up. The person affected by this would then have the opportunity to appeal to the constitution court, but since the law is clear the chances are the case would not be heard. That being said. They made their decision and it is now in other people's hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themockrat Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The EC released the vote count, but not yet the official validation of each elected MP. Just Nuttawat trying to pre-empt the EC in pubic perceptions. This is his opinion, and nothing else. You're wrong. They just did. Check the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 The EC released the vote count, but not yet the official validation of each elected MP. Just Nuttawat trying to pre-empt the EC in pubic perceptions. This is his opinion, and nothing else. You're wrong. They just did. Check the news. In a few hours lots of things can happen these days. Be right one moment, and wrong the next. Imagine, waiting one day before posting, how many posts could be left unwritten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tominbkk Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 Good to see that they support the terrorist Jatuporn in his time of need. Never know when you will require an experienced rabble rousing arsonist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themockrat Posted July 6, 2011 Share Posted July 6, 2011 (edited) Good to see that they support the terrorist Jatuporn in his time of need. Never know when you will require an experienced rabble rousing arsonist! Jatuporn is a terrorist? He's an accused terrorist, not convicted of anything. The Abhisit government hasn't been able to convict him on terrorism charges for over a year, so its doubtful anyone ever. And considering that the Abhisit-appointed EC members just approved his MP status, I think that says a lot ... The regime established by the coup is falling apart and the rats are leaving the sinking ship Even Sonthi, the coup-maker, wants to part of the Puea Thai government. Edited July 6, 2011 by themockrat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted July 6, 2011 Author Share Posted July 6, 2011 MP ELECT EC wants court to rule on Jatuporn's qualification By THE NATION The Election Commission (EC) yesterday endorsed Pheu Thai candidate Jatuporn Promphan as a party-list MP, leaving the question about his qualification to the Constitution Court. EC member Sodsri Satayathum said the agency had no authority to rule on his qualifications and would instead seek a judicial review on the matter. "According to the legal advisers, the EC has no mandate to rule on Jatuporn's qualification," she said. Sodsri said the EC would begin endorsing the MPs-elect, including Jatuporn, on July 12, the date that will effectively activate the parliamentary immunity. Jatuporn is being remanded pending trial on terrorism charges in connection with last year's unrest and rioting. Along with the endorsement of Jatuporn, the EC will also notify the House speaker about the doubts on his qualification and request the Constitution Court to review the matter. Jatuporn's qualification is being questioned because he failed to cast his ballot on Sunday due to his remand. Under Article 100 of the Constitution, any person being detained by a warrant of the court or by a lawful order on the election day is disenfranchised. According to the Political Parties Act, Jatuporn has lost his party membership and thus his qualification to contest the election as he was put in court-sanctioned custody weeks before the election. Fellow red-shirt leader and incoming MP Natthawut Saikua yesterday argued that Jatuporn already had his MP status validated by the official vote outcome. He said the EC announcement on the balloting outcome was confirmation of Pheu Thai's victory and the validation of Jatuporn as a party-list MP. "By releasing the official vote results, the EC has implicitly endorsed Jatuporn as MP," Natthawut said. He said complaints about Jatuporn's job qualifications should be settled by a judicial review, and not by an EC decision. Democrat Party MP-elect Boonyod Sukthinthai yesterday threatened legal action against the five election commissioners for failing to perform their duty in a straightforward manner. He said that he was disappointed with the EC decision to endorse Jatuporn's election despite questions about his qualification. "I am disappointed with this group of election commissioners. Common sense calls for the EC to work independently and straightforwardly in considering the candidates' qualifications. They have the law on their side but instead they opted to pass the buck to the Constitution Court," Boonyod said. He added he would consult with Democrat legal advisers whether action should be taken against the election commissioners for dereliction of duty. In a related development, the Department of Special Investigation yesterday agreed to postpone the indictment of 19 red-shirt leaders, including Jatuporn, for lese majeste and sedition in connection with his speech at the red shirts' April 2 rally. "The defence has sought and received the DSI's permission for additional time to collect evidence for rebuttals," DSI director-general Tharit Pengdit said yesterday. Tharit said the indictment date would be rescheduled within a month. Even though Jatuporn and seven of the other 19 suspects have been elected as MPs in the Sunday's vote, the legal proceedings would continue despite their parliamentary immunity, he said. Regarding the possible surrender of fugitive red-shirt leader Arisman Pongruangrong, the DSI chief said Arisman's lawyer had made a telephone inquiry about procedures on reporting and facing terrorism-related charges but had not set a date for his surrender. However, Arisman yesterday told Nation Channel he had no intention of surrendering to the authorities. "I will not surrender now. I wonder if I did anything wrong. As a citizen, I joined the protest to call for democracy," he said in a phone interview. "I am sure I didn't do anything bad to the country." His whereabouts remained unknown after he managed to escape after the red shirts' rally was dispersed in May last year and the protest leaders gave themselves in to the authorities. He was earlier rumoured to have fled to Cambodia. -- The Nation 2011-07-07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now