Thailand's Democrats Seek Ban On Thaksin Party

[JAG]

I would suggest that whichever way you look at this topic, and however it may be portrayed and justified by the posters on this forum, I suspect that everyone knows deep inside that this is just an attempt by the establishment, or elements within it, to have this election result overturned, so that they can continue in power, and can continue to receive the fruits of power.

What is illuminating is how (enthusiastically) it is being received by some on this forum.

Edited July 9, 2011 by JAG

[whybother]

I would suggest that whichever way you look at this topic, and however it may be portrayed and justified by the posters on this forum, I suspect that everyone knows deep inside that this is just an attempt by the establishment, or elements within it, to have this election result overturned, so that they can continue in power, and can continue to receive the fruits of power.

What is illuminating is how (enthusiastically) it is being received by some on this forum.

Except ... that it WON'T overturn the result of this election.

It's seems that most pro-Thaksin/PTP/Red shirt posters have no idea what actually happened in 2008 when PPP was banned, or what would actually happen if PTP were banned.

Do some research peoples.

[OzMick]

I would suggest that whichever way you look at this topic, and however it may be portrayed and justified by the posters on this forum, I suspect that everyone knows deep inside that this is just an attempt by the establishment, or elements within it, to have this election result overturned, so that they can continue in power, and can continue to receive the fruits of power.

What is illuminating is how (enthusiastically) it is being received by some on this forum.

I would suggest that you look a little more deeply into the subject. As your major premise, that this is an attempt to overturn the results of the election, is false in that there is no way that this result could be achieved by this action, the rest of your post following that premise are a waste of reading time.

[noahvail]

I would suggest that whichever way you look at this topic, and however it may be portrayed and justified by the posters on this forum, I suspect that everyone knows deep inside that this is just an attempt by the establishment, or elements within it, to have this election result overturned, so that they can continue in power, and can continue to receive the fruits of power.

What is illuminating is how (enthusiastically) it is being received by some on this forum.

The results will not be overturned. None of the official leaders of the PTP are on the party list; since they are the only ones who would get banned in the event that the EC bans the party, all the MPs-elect will take their seats in parliament, under the aegis of a new party, which has already been registered.

Now, it may be that certain MPs-elect from all parties may be red- or yellow-carded by the EC based on other complaints they have received. But those are separate issues.

This is not an attempt to overturn the election. It's simply following the law to ping the PTP for having taken their marching orders from a banned politician.

[jdinasia]

I would suggest that whichever way you look at this topic, and however it may be portrayed and justified by the posters on this forum, I suspect that everyone knows deep inside that this is just an attempt by the establishment, or elements within it, to have this election result overturned, so that they can continue in power, and can continue to receive the fruits of power.

What is illuminating is how (enthusiastically) it is being received by some on this forum.

I would suggest that most posters (who are both anti-Thaksin and Pro- rule-of-law) posting about it fairly well know that even if PTP were to be disbanded that it would not nullify the elections AND that whatever Thaksin proxy-party replaced PTP would still be in control of parliament and only slightly weakened.

[473geo]

Company profits are taxed, but not every employer is a company. Small scale employers will not be paying ANY tax. ASSUMING there is sufficient tax break to cover wage increases is not very smart, or do you think that employers will voluntarily take a cut in profit margin because their employees get a wage rise (how altruistic). And now companies are going to relocate here because a tax break might offset rapidly rising wages?

Have you been taking economics lessons from Olarn?

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding minimum wage including the part about the agreed corporate tax adjustment that you stated was 'unlikely' to happen

[OzMick]

Company profits are taxed, but not every employer is a company. Small scale employers will not be paying ANY tax. ASSUMING there is sufficient tax break to cover wage increases is not very smart, or do you think that employers will voluntarily take a cut in profit margin because their employees get a wage rise (how altruistic). And now companies are going to relocate here because a tax break might offset rapidly rising wages?

Have you been taking economics lessons from Olarn?

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding minimum wage including the part about the agreed corporate tax adjustment that you stated was 'unlikely' to happen

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding the thai economy, and there is insufficient revenue to fund PTP's campaign promises BEFORE they start offering tax cuts.

[animatic]

...This study concerned two basic philosophic models of the criminal justice process (crime control vs. due process) pointed out by Packer (1968). The Crime Control Model is based on the proposition that the repression of criminal conduct is by far the most important function to be performed by the criminal process. The failure of law enforcement to bring criminal conduct under tight control is viewed as leading to the breakdown of public order and thence to the disappearance of an important condition of human freedom.The Due Process Model is based on the doctrine of legal guilt, i.e., a person is not to be held guilty of crime merely on a showing that in all probability, based upon reliable evidence, he did factually what he is said to have done. These two models comprise a continuum, with the models at the poles...

....Thus, the concept of rule of law is a broad generic one. It can be stated in many terms, but one's acceptance of a set definition will depend upon his own personal biases and prejudices. Ultimately, then, it may be better to let rule of law itself be operative rather than leave its interpretation to each separate practitioner....

...This judge and jury role assumption’on their part was far above their right “to do so. The violation of the rule of law is paramount when it reaches this proportion. Skolnick (1975) concludes that the “standards for applying the rule of law’ are developed by the courts in the setting of specific practices” [p". 17]. Neverthe-less, he also realistically concludes that “… appli-cations of the rule of law as well as conceptions of order will vary” ...

Thaksin Shinawatra.

http://asiancorrespo...ns-ph-d-thesis/ AKA Bangkok Pundit

Interesting juxtaposition of his situational ethics and true ethics.

It explains a lot. If he even wrote this himself.

Edited July 9, 2011 by animatic

[473geo]

Company profits are taxed, but not every employer is a company. Small scale employers will not be paying ANY tax. ASSUMING there is sufficient tax break to cover wage increases is not very smart, or do you think that employers will voluntarily take a cut in profit margin because their employees get a wage rise (how altruistic). And now companies are going to relocate here because a tax break might offset rapidly rising wages?

Have you been taking economics lessons from Olarn?

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding minimum wage including the part about the agreed corporate tax adjustment that you stated was 'unlikely' to happen

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding the thai economy, and there is insufficient revenue to fund PTP's campaign promises BEFORE they start offering tax cuts.

Well they just did offer corporate tax cuts so I'll go with fact not conjecture, I don't recall stating all PTP promises would be met

[OzMick]

Company profits are taxed, but not every employer is a company. Small scale employers will not be paying ANY tax. ASSUMING there is sufficient tax break to cover wage increases is not very smart, or do you think that employers will voluntarily take a cut in profit margin because their employees get a wage rise (how altruistic). And now companies are going to relocate here because a tax break might offset rapidly rising wages?

Have you been taking economics lessons from Olarn?

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding minimum wage including the part about the agreed corporate tax adjustment that you stated was 'unlikely' to happen

Perhaps you should read the other thread regarding the thai economy, and there is insufficient revenue to fund PTP's campaign promises BEFORE they start offering tax cuts.

Well they just did offer corporate tax cuts so I'll go with fact not conjecture, I don't recall stating all PTP promises would be met

As a govt has not been formed, nor any ministers appointed, who is they? Confusion Still Reigns Over Incoming Thai Govt's Economic Policy

Edited July 9, 2011 by OzMick

[ozzieman05]

How stupid can you get. Being banned means they cannot serve in office. It doesn't mean they have to wear muzzles on their mouths.

Being banned means that they can't be INVOLVED in politics, NOT only that they cannot serve in office.

They also can not VOTE, finance a party, nor dictate the members on partylists, and who is to be proposed as PM.

I will repeat, having an mandate or winning a majority in an election does NOT absolve a party from responsibility for crimes committed in getting elected.

Thaskin knew the risks

But know only to him is why he did it knowing the eventual out come

Could it be he does not want peace in Thailand

[473geo]

OZMick - try the Revenue department - countries are run by civil servants

Edited July 9, 2011 by 473geo

[Wallaby]

Why don't the members of the PTP all resign from that party now and sit as members of that pre registered party. The EC would have no investigation to complete as the party no longer exists. Not much good disbanding a party that no longer existed.

[ozzieman05]

And to think this party calls itself "Democrat." They have absolutely no grasp of the term.

They lost, Puea Thai won with a true voting mandate. Move on.

So if I steal your car, you will accept it, because I was elected properly? If I am your elected mayor, and I kill your grandmother, its ok because I was elected? The tyranny of the majority - I see.

Quite frankly, I think they should Phuea Thai let govern the country. The first to suffer from their silly policies are the poor. It's time the poor and the reds get a real feel of what Phuea Thai is, otherwise they will never realize the truth. The workers are already calling for the 300 Baht wage raise, the reds are already calling for seats in Parliament and ministeries. Phuea Thai fed them with promises, now they are hungry and want the meat to be delivered. Raise the wages and let smaller factories go bankrupt so those workers will get jobless and end up having no income at all, let larger factories lay off people to cope with the increased cost and let those who remain work harder. Give tablets to all students so they don't do anything more than sitting around with their dammed tablets playing games, or eventually throwing them in a corner becase the parents can't afford the internet connection. Why get them banned and be the bad guy again? Let Phuea Thai govern and fail.

You have to admit he has a good point

There is more than 1 way to skin a rabbit

But do you really believe they will take the responsibility for this

Or will it all be so they can say

We need Thaskin back

He is the only person who can fix it

[ozzieman05]

So, here they go again? Can't win at the ballot box, let's get the winning party banned in the courts? Do they have an aversion to being in opposition?

If they're successful, what will they say to the Thai people? "We know you didn't vote for us, but we didn't like the results of the election, so we changed it?"

Democrats? In name only!

Here here.

Bloody Dems don't give up do they?

They don't realize that their populist policies aren't as popular as the others.

Or maybe they are saying

We have laws in Thailand they may not be that good but no one is above the law

So do the crime and do the time

[tlansford]

regarding corruption in gov't & elections, perhaps we as westerners should remember that :

4 of the last 7 governors of Illinois have been convicted of crimes.

Most all of the US States (47 of 50) allow redistricting of their election districts to ensure re-election.

Jacques Chirac was to be indited for crimes committed while mayor of Paris and benefited from immunity because he was then the President of the republic.

DSK - the former head of the IMF and French presidential hopeful is now under house arrest in the US for allegedly sexually assaulting hotel staff.

Multinational corporations in the US can now spend unlimited amounts of money on elections because they have been granted the same free-speech rights as individuals.

etc, etc, etc, ...

Before we all pile on the Thai people for their elections and corruption, we should remember that where ever we live and come from, there are always problems to solve and that there, too, money & graft rules the world.

Good luck to the Thai people and their new government. They have much work to do.

[lungmi]

And to think this party calls itself "Democrat." They have absolutely no grasp of the term.

They lost, Puea Thai won with a true voting mandate. Move on.

So if I steal your car, you will accept it, because I was elected properly? If I am your elected mayor, and I kill your grandmother, its ok because I was elected? The tyranny of the majority - I see.

Quite frankly, I think they should Phuea Thai let govern the country. The first to suffer from their silly policies are the poor. It's time the poor and the reds get a real feel of what Phuea Thai is, otherwise they will never realize the truth. The workers are already calling for the 300 Baht wage raise, the reds are already calling for seats in Parliament and ministeries. Phuea Thai fed them with promises, now they are hungry and want the meat to be delivered. Raise the wages and let smaller factories go bankrupt so those workers will get jobless and end up having no income at all, let larger factories lay off people to cope with the increased cost and let those who remain work harder. Give tablets to all students so they don't do anything more than sitting around with their dammed tablets playing games, or eventually throwing them in a corner becase the parents can't afford the internet connection. Why get them banned and be the bad guy again? Let Phuea Thai govern and fail.

You have to admit he has a good point

There is more than 1 way to skin a rabbit

But do you really believe they will take the responsibility for this

Or will it all be so they can say

We need Thaskin back

He is the only person who can fix it

yes, Tkaksin is the master to skin rabbits in all ways. He proved it already.

[jdinasia]

Why don't the members of the PTP all resign from that party now and sit as members of that pre registered party. The EC would have no investigation to complete as the party no longer exists. Not much good disbanding a party that no longer existed.

Won't work. They are elected as MP's as a party. Only the execs will be banned if the party is dissolved, we can assume that BJT will be dissolved. There is nothing holding the elected MP's to the new party when it steps up.

If they freed the MP's now .... it would be as disastrous as when Thaksin called early elections to try and clear himself and TRT. It would also be an admission of guilt. They will do better in the eye of the public to play the long suffering martyr.

[Britannia]

Surprise,surprise!

The people have had their say, hopefully he courts will throw this out before it even gets off the ground.

Upholding anything like this would probably be the simple way to allow the military to do exactly what they said they won't on the basis that they would be intervening in a potential civil war.

Let the democratically elected government to get on with their job, if they fail the people will have an opportunity to go to the polls again in the future.

So you are in favour of any wrong-doing by the winning party being overlooked because they won?

Personally my hope is that laws are not thrown out the window, but abided by, and that it can be shown that Puea Thai did. If they didn't, well then they get what's coming.

It’s Thailand and they have their laws, but I find it difficult to understand how Farang can call themselves democratic and support such actions.

How Farang can support actions that could result in Civil war, I am gob-smacked

Do you really want to see blood on the streets, be honest do you?.

For sure it would not happen in England, if you voted for a loony who called himself loony, if he got the votes, then that is that, he is in, no one can say but he is a loony he should be disqualified.

Anyone who should be disqualified should be so Before the voting not after so not to waste the Electra’s vote

[themockrat]

Are the Democrats also seeking to ban themselves and Abhisit? Because they should, as this photo was taken during this election campaign:

[rubl]

So you are in favour of any wrong-doing by the winning party being overlooked because they won?

Personally my hope is that laws are not thrown out the window, but abided by, and that it can be shown that Puea Thai did. If they didn't, well then they get what's coming.

It’s Thailand and they have their laws, but I find it difficult to understand how Farang can call themselves democratic and support such actions.

How Farang can support actions that could result in Civil war, I am gob-smacked

Do you really want to see blood on the streets, be honest do you?.

For sure it would not happen in England, if you voted for a loony who called himself loony, if he got the votes, then that is that, he is in, no one can say but he is a loony he should be disqualified.

Anyone who should be disqualified should be so Before the voting not after so not to waste the Electra’s vote

Dear Brittania, just because Thailand has laws and because lots of farang call themselves democratic they support the 'rule of law' and a perfectly legal request towards the EC to look into certain irregularities. The Election Law calls for it, the EC has asked 'please report to us'.

It would indeed be nice if anyone who should be disqualified would be before the elections, but things don't work that quickly. We had 47 days from House dissolution to Elections, doesn't leave much time. Some irregularities reported before are still under investigation, imagine.

As for blood on the street, we had that last year when some protesters didn't get what they wanted. Should we let a mob rule? Is that what you are saying ?

[noahvail]

Are the Democrats also seeking to ban themselves and Abhisit? Because they should, as this photo was taken during this election campaign:

I'll assume you're alluding to the EC complaint that Yingluck cooked and served noodles during a campaign stop, which is a violation of election laws. If you do your homework, you'll see that the EC itself filed the complaint. Neither Abhisit nor the Democrats pinged her for that.

It's a whole lot different from having a banned fugitive from justice making all the decisions and policies for the PTP before and during the run-up to the election.

Of course, if any Thai national were so inclined, they could have made a complaint to the EC. Maybe someone has.

[Heng]

The better people are allowed to be hypocritical.

The 3/5 person concept might be helpful here, but unfortunately for the Dems, they'd probably still lose.

Would 1/3 a vote per person be too much of a slap in the face from the powers that be?

[sjaak327]

The Reds will not accept this objection on the grounds that whatever laws were put into effect by those who put Abhisit into power are null, and for the very same reasons. They never considered Abhisit to have come into a position of power by legitimate means. Thaksin was ousted by a military coup, and after Samak, who came into power via democratic process, was declared to have conflicting interests (the prime minister had his own TV show), Abhisit was appointed -- by the same political regime that came into power through military force. Therefore, any laws passed during that time by that regime would be considered undemocratic and thus, illegitimate.

I would have thought that the restriction on banned MPs being involved in election campaigning was in the 1997 ("Peoples") constitution.

Ah you mean the constitution that was abolished so that the masterminds behind the coup would never have to face justice?

[rubl]

Are the Democrats also seeking to ban themselves and Abhisit? Because they should, as this photo was taken during this election campaign:

Do you want to suggest that even die-hard Democrat supporters would risk their lives trying to eat kanoom prepared by k. Abhisit?

I don't think k. Abhisit prepared food for all, he just asked a vendor 'is it difficult to do?"

Anyway find a Thai citizen, or legal entity and have them investigate this possible irregularity and breach of the Election Law. Hurry though, you may have less than three hours to do so

Edited July 9, 2011 by rubl

[themockrat]

Are the Democrats also seeking to ban themselves and Abhisit? Because they should, as this photo was taken during this election campaign:

I'll assume you're alluding to the EC complaint that Yingluck cooked and served noodles during a campaign stop, which is a violation of election laws. If you do your homework, you'll see that the EC itself filed the complaint. Neither Abhisit nor the Democrats pinged her for that.

It's a whole lot different from having a banned fugitive from justice making all the decisions and policies for the PTP before and during the run-up to the election.

Of course, if any Thai national were so inclined, they could have made a complaint to the EC. Maybe someone has.

The article says that a Democrat filed the complaint, not the EC. I did my homework. You apparently didn't.

A Democrat member has also lodged a complaint against premier-in-waiting Yingluck Shinawatra -- Thaksin's youngest sister -- accusing her of giving away free noodles during campaigning in an attempt to buy votes.

[noahvail]

Are the Democrats also seeking to ban themselves and Abhisit? Because they should, as this photo was taken during this election campaign:

I'll assume you're alluding to the EC complaint that Yingluck cooked and served noodles during a campaign stop, which is a violation of election laws. If you do your homework, you'll see that the EC itself filed the complaint. Neither Abhisit nor the Democrats pinged her for that.

It's a whole lot different from having a banned fugitive from justice making all the decisions and policies for the PTP before and during the run-up to the election.

Of course, if any Thai national were so inclined, they could have made a complaint to the EC. Maybe someone has.

The article says that a Democrat filed the complaint, not the EC. I did my homework. You apparently didn't.

A Democrat member has also lodged a complaint against premier-in-waiting Yingluck Shinawatra -- Thaksin's youngest sister -- accusing her of giving away free noodles during campaigning in an attempt to buy votes.

Google EC complaint Yingluck noodles. The first hit is from the other newspaper. The state it was simply a Nakhon Sawan resident, not a democatic party member.

However, back on topic, any noodle-giving-away pales in comparison to the banned fugitive from Montenegro who has been running the PTP campaign.

Edited July 9, 2011 by noahvail

[lungmi]

It's Thailand and they have their laws, but I find it difficult to understand how Farang can call themselves democratic and support such actions.

How Farang can support actions that could result in Civil war, I am gob-smacked

Do you really want to see blood on the streets, be honest do you?.

For sure it would not happen in England, if you voted for a loony who called himself loony, if he got the votes, then that is that, he is in, no one can say but he is a loony he should be disqualified.

Anyone who should be disqualified should be so Before the voting not after so not to waste the Electra's vote

Blood on the streets?

The honest posters in this forum knowing the facts, loving Thailand, staying in Thailand , some are Buddhists, working for the benefit of Thai comrades?

Who gives you the right to say we want the blood on the streets?

One of the Basic Teachings of the Buddha is "Investigate 'what is what'". Try, after you can ask Ganesha.

[rubl]

The quote on 'democratic member' is from the OP here, the other newspaper gives many more details including 'Nakhon Sawan person filed complaint after seeing the picture in the newspaper said PT spokeperson Prompong'.

Storm in a bowl of noodles. The EC is obliged by the Election Law to look into it and report. As if they have nothing else to do.

Edited July 9, 2011 by rubl

[citizen33]

...This study concerned two basic philosophic models of the criminal justice process (crime control vs. due process) pointed out by Packer (1968). The Crime Control Model is based on the proposition that the repression of criminal conduct is by far the most important function to be performed by the criminal process. The failure of law enforcement to bring criminal conduct under tight control is viewed as leading to the breakdown of public order and thence to the disappearance of an important condition of human freedom.The Due Process Model is based on the doctrine of legal guilt, i.e., a person is not to be held guilty of crime merely on a showing that in all probability, based upon reliable evidence, he did factually what he is said to have done. These two models comprise a continuum, with the models at the poles...

....Thus, the concept of rule of law is a broad generic one. It can be stated in many terms, but one's acceptance of a set definition will depend upon his own personal biases and prejudices. Ultimately, then, it may be better to let rule of law itself be operative rather than leave its interpretation to each separate practitioner....

...This judge and jury role assumption’on their part was far above their right “to do so. The violation of the rule of law is paramount when it reaches this proportion. Skolnick (1975) concludes that the “standards for applying the rule of law’ are developed by the courts in the setting of specific practices” [p". 17]. Neverthe-less, he also realistically concludes that “… appli-cations of the rule of law as well as conceptions of order will vary” ...

Thaksin Shinawatra.

http://asiancorrespo...ns-ph-d-thesis/ AKA Bangkok Pundit

Interesting juxtaposition of his situational ethics and true ethics.

It explains a lot. If he even wrote this himself.

Skolnick - gosh that takes me back! Law is not the same as ethics. Even if the point about 'situational ethics' versus absolute ethical standards might have some relevance at the margins, this isn't the main issue in Skolnick's quotation. This intersects with a debate in legal theory about the inherent ambiguity vs completeness of rules and the place of discretion in applying them. If you are interested, read K.C. Davis (1971) Discretionary Justice, and Rob Baldwin and Keith Hawkins, 'Discretionary Justice: Davis Reconsidered' (1984) Public Law 570. The argument is not about what ought to be, but rather how far in practice actors agree about the meaning of a rule in the myriad situations to which it may be applied. I shudder to think what would have happened to Khun Thaksin's doctoral thesis if he had started blethering on about 'true ethics'.