Verdicts Must Be Reasonable: Thai Judge

[webfact]

SPECIAL REPORT

Verdicts must be reasonable: Judge

By Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

Court verdicts must be "reasonable and explainable" in order to avoid dissatisfaction by the public, Administrative Court President Hasawut Vititviri-yakul has said.

Hasawut made the remark when welcoming members of the media who went to learn about the work of the Administrative Court, which is entering the second decade of its existence.

Over the past 10 years, a rising number of people have regarded the court as a beacon of judicial hope amid growing distrust of other courts, especially the Constitution Court, which fared poorly in a recent poll, when a third of respondents said they doubted its political impartiality.

Judge Saithip Sukatiphan, deputy spokesperson of the Administrative Court, said some members of the public may see the court as being liberal or more attuned to human rights due to the fact the court's underlying principle was "respect for rights and liberty of citizens".

Saithip said such a view only began taking root in Thailand over the past decade or two. This coincided with the foundation of the court in 1999.

A few examples of the court's rulings were given. One involved a man who in 2007 successfully filed a case against the Railway Authority of Thailand to remove advertising stickers covering Bangkok to Chiang Mai train windows that blocked passengers' view out. The court eventually ruled that such ads violated "passengers' dignity" and constituted an action which treated passengers as inanimate "objects", Judge Vajira Chobtaeng, another deputy spokesperson of the court, said.

Another example was how shop owners at Klong Thom in Bangkok lost a case after they tried to force the Bangkok Metropolitan Administra-tion to remove street-side vendors who collectively form the Klong Thom flea market, saying they were an inconvenience to their businesses. But judges in the case stated that the famous flea market was "a community way of life which had existed for decades" and should be allowed to continue, after weighing the damage incurred by shophouse owners and the benefit of the flea market to the public.

Saithip noted that at times the court deals with the tension between personal rights versus public rights.

The court recently set up a special chamber to deal with environmental cases, which indicates growing recognition of the importance of such matters, as well as impact assessments for state agencies and various projects.

Hasawut said this was due to recognition that impacts on the environment often went beyond the immediate vicinity or surrounding community near a plant or project site.

Some new judges with specialised knowledge have been recruited and others sent for training on environment-related subjects. The start of the new chamber will help speed up cases, especially as the court operates not on the traditional accusatorial system but on an interrogational basis.

Article 55 of laws relating to the Administrative Court states that it "may hear oral evidence, documentary evidence or experts or evidence other than the evidence adduced by the parties, as is appropriate".

Another chamber will also be launched soon to handle matters relating to human-resource management by state agencies. Bureaucrats or staff at state agencies who feel they have been unjustly demoted, transferred or mistreated will be able to have their cases heard in a specialist court.

Hasawut said delays in rulings could also be unjust, especially if the aggrieved party had to retire before the verdict was given.

More controversial exercises of state power do not come under the court's jurisdiction. Actions by security officers under an Emergency Decree are one example. And the court has not managed to figure out how to legally deal with military coups d'etat, which have plagued the Kingdom. A common reaction by judges or courts is that they have to accept coup-makers who usurp power and tear up the Constitution simply because generals "become the state and law" and usually grant themselves amnesty for unconstitutional actions.

-- The Nation 2011-08-26

[Thai at Heart]

The court eventually ruled that such ads violated "passengers' dignity" and constituted an action which treated passengers as inanimate "objects"

But judges in the case stated that the famous flea market was "a community way of life which had existed for decades" and should be allowed to continue, after weighing the damage incurred by shophouse owners and the benefit of the flea market to the public.

Good to see that their decisions are founded on strong firm, fair and unarbitrary laws. :blink:

[bkkjames]

I would suggest the verdict should be guilty or not-make the sentence reasonable if you want.

[Mario2008]

This is a story about the administrative court, dealing with conflicts between civilians and the government, not about the criminal court.

[Thai at Heart]

This is a story about the administrative court, dealing with conflicts between civilians and the government, not about the criminal court.

Indeed, but the logic of deeming things like street vendors ok in one part of town, versus not in another is fraught with arbitrary problems.

As for claiming that posters on windows renders humans as inanimate???? when you see the entire up country rolling stock of the SRT, I would suggest a lot of it isn't fit for human use anyway. Why doesn't this rule about stickers on the windows apply to the BTS? I think I shall get someone to complain.

[Latindancer]

The court eventually ruled that such ads violated "passengers' dignity" and constituted an action which treated passengers as inanimate "objects"

This raises an interesting issue. The video advertising on BTS trains is noisy and irritates myself and many other people because it cannot be escaped, except perhaps with earplugs.......and even then it can be heard.

Stickers and other visual advertising are not nearly so intrusive. Everyone has the option to look away.......though in the original case the stickers blocked passengers view.

In the case of the barrage of advertising noise on BTS and, even worse, Tescos, there is no option. People are FORCED to listen to it. If the court found that passengers dignity was violated by stickers, then how much more so is it violated by constant, unrelenting advertising noise ?

[phanangpete]

The court eventually ruled that such ads violated "passengers' dignity" and constituted an action which treated passengers as inanimate "objects"

But judges in the case stated that the famous flea market was "a community way of life which had existed for decades" and should be allowed to continue, after weighing the damage incurred by shophouse owners and the benefit of the flea market to the public.

Good to see that their decisions are founded on strong firm, fair and unarbitrary laws. :blink:

Also im sure the shophouse owners, who are no doubt registered to trade and pay taxes felt this was a just and right decision by the court, in favor of the flea market stall holders who have been there for decades. Thats all very well but are they registered and have any of them payed one baht in taxes, i doubt it it ! Any other country would have chased them.