So, does this mean that I can get a refund for the two traffic tickets I have been given since the coup? After all, they were 'judicial decisions'... or would have been if I hadn't slipped the cops a 100 baht instead of going to court each time.

So, does this mean that I can get a refund for the two traffic tickets I have been given since the coup? After all, they were 'judicial decisions'... or would have been if I hadn't slipped the cops a 100 baht instead of going to court each time.

Now this is, of course, a ridiculous example, but, I you follow the intent of these scholars, this would be the end result.

A more realistic call would be to amend the constitution to be fairer and more democratic.

But General Sonthi, the leader of the coup is now retired, actually an MP now.General Prayut maybe interested in your theory, but how can invalidate Thaksin's conviction?

Thaksin's trying every way to overturn his conviction, the 2.5 million people petition,( the personal appeal), possibly sumitting his name in a mass pardon on the King's birthday, citing his age-over 60 as a reason, and this group of 7 Thammasart lawyers, Nitirat, is another channel.

I'm not disputing your thesis although it's debatable of course.

I am however disputing your suggestion that Nitirat is an agency for promoting Thaksin's interests.It isn't and your suggestion is just plain wrong.You could argue that these Thammasat lawyers are naive or playing into Thaksin's hands, but that's not the same thing at all.

It is amazing that anyone or any group who holds an anti-coup view or a pro-democracy attitude is accused of aiding Thaksin. So to be anti-Thaksin you must support coups uncritically and want to see democracy stamped out.

The suggestions by Nittirat will benefit Thaksin 100%. They need to look at what caused the coup, how had the situation come to that. There hadn't been a coup for 15 years and if Thaksin hadn't abused the system so much there wouldn't have been one in 2006.

As I said yesterday many who supported the coup in 2006 were the same people who opposed General Sujunda in 1992 and indeed back in 1976 against the 3 tyrants. And this was becauuse they couldn't stand the authoritarian nature of the Thaksin regime.

But General Sonthi, the leader of the coup is now retired, actually an MP now.General Prayut maybe interested in your theory, but how can invalidate Thaksin's conviction?

Thaksin's trying every way to overturn his conviction, the 2.5 million people petition,( the personal appeal), possibly sumitting his name in a mass pardon on the King's birthday, citing his age-over 60 as a reason, and this group of 7 Thammasart lawyers, Nitirat, is another channel.

I'm not disputing your thesis although it's debatable of course.

I am however disputing your suggestion that Nitirat is an agency for promoting Thaksin's interests.It isn't and your suggestion is just plain wrong.You could argue that these Thammasat lawyers are naive or playing into Thaksin's hands, but that's not the same thing at all.

It is amazing that anyone or any group who holds an anti-coup view or a pro-democracy attitude is accused of aiding Thaksin. So to be anti-Thaksin you must support coups uncritically and want to see democracy stamped out.

The suggestions by Nittirat will benefit Thaksin 100%. They need to look at what caused the coup, how had the situation come to that. There hadn't been a coup for 15 years and if Thaksin hadn't abused the system so much there wouldn't have been one in 2006.

As I said yesterday many who supported the coup in 2006 were the same people who opposed General Sujunda in 1992 and indeed back in 1976 against the 3 tyrants. And this was becauuse they couldn't stand the authoritarian nature of the Thaksin regime.

But could they stand the authoritarian nature of the body they unleashed? That is indeed a question that some of them seem to be asking themselves right now. I doubt anyone is going to question the authoritarian nature of Thaksin but look at the non-democratic mechanisms of control and security inserted by the authoritarians who came after him and many of those have been removed form any check or balance or any need to answer to the government. I doubt any liberal minded person who stood against Thaksin also supports these things.

It is possible to look at a group of seven individuals who have made a call for something and see their motivation as idealistic whoever it ends up benefitting, and yes I know there are every powerful people in Thailand who would do anything they could to prevent Thaksin returning. However, I am amazed at the reaction against what are just 7 academics with no real power to do or achieve anything. Yet they get lambasted and now a coup is mentioned. Why would anyone who stood against Thaksin excesses also support that kind of action/language?

But General Sonthi, the leader of the coup is now retired, actually an MP now.General Prayut maybe interested in your theory, but how can invalidate Thaksin's conviction?

Thaksin's trying every way to overturn his conviction, the 2.5 million people petition,( the personal appeal), possibly sumitting his name in a mass pardon on the King's birthday, citing his age-over 60 as a reason, and this group of 7 Thammasart lawyers, Nitirat, is another channel.

I'm not disputing your thesis although it's debatable of course.

I am however disputing your suggestion that Nitirat is an agency for promoting Thaksin's interests.It isn't and your suggestion is just plain wrong.You could argue that these Thammasat lawyers are naive or playing into Thaksin's hands, but that's not the same thing at all.

These are legal scholars are they not? With respect to the current difficulties in Thailand, why wouldn't their natural start point for expunging illegal claims be the 2001 Assets Examination case rather than the 2006 coup? I mean that one is pretty open and shut. The judges admitted to flouting the law in favor of poular interests and it is the source of every strife, including the coup, Thailand has faced since..

But General Sonthi, the leader of the coup is now retired, actually an MP now.General Prayut maybe interested in your theory, but how can invalidate Thaksin's conviction?

Thaksin's trying every way to overturn his conviction, the 2.5 million people petition,( the personal appeal), possibly sumitting his name in a mass pardon on the King's birthday, citing his age-over 60 as a reason, and this group of 7 Thammasart lawyers, Nitirat, is another channel.

I'm not disputing your thesis although it's debatable of course.

I am however disputing your suggestion that Nitirat is an agency for promoting Thaksin's interests.It isn't and your suggestion is just plain wrong.You could argue that these Thammasat lawyers are naive or playing into Thaksin's hands, but that's not the same thing at all.

It is amazing that anyone or any group who holds an anti-coup view or a pro-democracy attitude is accused of aiding Thaksin. So to be anti-Thaksin you must support coups uncritically and want to see democracy stamped out.

Basic English:

The words: Thaksin and Democracy,should never be used in the same sentence!

It is possible to be anti-coup and not a Thaksinista albeit not in the eyes of the anti-Thaksinista thought police. In fact to be anti-coup and not a Thaksinista is a pretty principled place to be imho

Its usually a fake.

But General Sonthi, the leader of the coup is now retired, actually an MP now.General Prayut maybe interested in your theory, but how can invalidate Thaksin's conviction?

Thaksin's trying every way to overturn his conviction, the 2.5 million people petition,( the personal appeal), possibly sumitting his name in a mass pardon on the King's birthday, citing his age-over 60 as a reason, and this group of 7 Thammasart lawyers, Nitirat, is another channel.

I'm not disputing your thesis although it's debatable of course.

I am however disputing your suggestion that Nitirat is an agency for promoting Thaksin's interests.It isn't and your suggestion is just plain wrong.You could argue that these Thammasat lawyers are naive or playing into Thaksin's hands, but that's not the same thing at all.

It is amazing that anyone or any group who holds an anti-coup view or a pro-democracy attitude is accused of aiding Thaksin. So to be anti-Thaksin you must support coups uncritically and want to see democracy stamped out.

Basic English:

The words: Thaksin and Democracy,should never be used in the same sentence!

Somehow this sounds like the never ending assumption that if your not red then you are therefore yellow. Black and white with no shades of gray allowed.

But General Sonthi, the leader of the coup is now retired, actually an MP now.General Prayut maybe interested in your theory, but how can invalidate Thaksin's conviction?

Thaksin's trying every way to overturn his conviction, the 2.5 million people petition,( the personal appeal), possibly sumitting his name in a mass pardon on the King's birthday, citing his age-over 60 as a reason, and this group of 7 Thammasart lawyers, Nitirat, is another channel.

I'm not disputing your thesis although it's debatable of course.

I am however disputing your suggestion that Nitirat is an agency for promoting Thaksin's interests.It isn't and your suggestion is just plain wrong.You could argue that these Thammasat lawyers are naive or playing into Thaksin's hands, but that's not the same thing at all.

It is amazing that anyone or any group who holds an anti-coup view or a pro-democracy attitude is accused of aiding Thaksin. So to be anti-Thaksin you must support coups uncritically and want to see democracy stamped out.

The suggestions by Nittirat will benefit Thaksin 100%. They need to look at what caused the coup, how had the situation come to that. There hadn't been a coup for 15 years and if Thaksin hadn't abused the system so much there wouldn't have been one in 2006.

As I said yesterday many who supported the coup in 2006 were the same people who opposed General Sujunda in 1992 and indeed back in 1976 against the 3 tyrants. And this was becauuse they couldn't stand the authoritarian nature of the Thaksin regime.

Another point: The nitirat gang have given no reasoning why they have selected the day before the 2006 coup as the date 'to revert to'.

Or to put it another way, if they think statutes, laws, regulations which has come as a result of a coup should be cancelled then why have they not selected the day before the first coup as the date to go back to, in other words remove all laws, regulations etc., which have been enacted back to just after 1932?