Pheu Thai And Red Shirts Split On Changes To The Charter

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

Pheu Thai and red shirts split on changes to the charter

Avudh Panananda

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The arguments on charter amendments are going round in circles, casting a murky future on the political system.

The uncertainty persists because the ruling Pheu Thai Party appears to lack a firm stand on who charter writers should be, what charter amendments should entail, and procedures related to a public hearing and a referendum vote.

Although the ruling party has set the charter change as a top priority, the country is no closer to activating a rewrite than six months previously, when Pheu Thai came to power.

Many Pheu Thai supporters are blaming the opposition for trying to block the change. But their rivals may not be the sole culprits. Judging by remarks by Pheu Thai MPs and red-shirt leaders, there are differing views within the alliance that may be posing a hindrance.

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung have made it clear the government will not spearhead changes to the charter at this juncture.

The two want to wait for an opportune moment in a bid to avoid a possible resumption of street protests by the yellow shirts. Chalerm has argued against a hasty push for charter change before ensuring that public sentiment is in the government's favour.

A large number of Pheu Thai MPs, the red shirts and proponents of charter amendments beg to differ. They view amending the charter as urgent and a way to maintain loyalty and popularity.

Yingluck, Chalerm and other Pheu Thai bigwigs do not object to a popular campaign to kick-start charter change. But coalition MPs and the red shirts subscribe to differing formulas, hence it appears their campaign has not got off the drawing board.

Charter amendments have dominated headlines for months. There is, however, no tangible progress to match the rhetoric.

As long as coalition lawmakers and the red shirts cannot reach a consensus on how to proceed, charter change may remain just big talk without corresponding action.

The coalition and the red shirts appear to support the formation of a Constitution Drafting Assembly to take charge of charter amendments. But the two sides omit to mention their differences over what the CDA should look like.

Certain cliques in Pheu Thai want Parliament to elect CDA members in order to exert the coalition's influence, while factions within the red-shirt movement have pushed for CDA seats to be allocated via a direct vote.

Pheu Thai wants to dominate the appointment of core charter writers, either as part of the drafting assembly or an independent panel, while the reds aspire to nominate charter writers from their ilk. They also have different goals. Pheu Thai is pushing for limited change, while the reds seek to overhaul the political system.

The ruling party and its red allies have contrasting ideas on detailed arrangements for public hearings and a referendum on the charter draft.

On Sunday, red-shirt leader Natthawut Saikua made his first public speech in the wake of his appointment as deputy agriculture minister.

Natthawut raised two interesting points. The first was that he saw no sign of reconciliation. The second was the root cause of the political struggle was about the powers-that-be refusing to allow the people to exercise their power.

In Natthawut's view, Thailand is still not a full-blown democracy because power does not belong to the people yet. But Pheu Thai is now in power. So was he making a veiled attack on Pheu Thai for not empowering the people?

This raises questions on what may happen if Pheu Thai decides to downplay the red shirts in the process to rewrite the charter -would that cause the alliance to sour?

-- The Nation 2012-01-31

[pimay11]

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive.

[Bakseedaa]

Reap what you Sow..... sleep with Dogs.... you get bitten....

[Moruya]

Sooner or later the PTP and red shirts will implode.

There are far too many agendas within both parties.

Remember all the "we don't want compensation - we want justice" from the Red Shirts?

Bear in mind the communist roots of the red shirts and section 112 that the PTP doesn't want to touch with a bargepole.

Bear in mind all the broken promises of the PTP election campaign

Bear in mind those that want to whitewash Thaksin's crimes against those who see him as irrelevant

Bear in mind this who want to rewrite the 2007 constitution, those who do not and the argument over CDA or legislation

[Reasonableman]

Does _anyone_ know what exactly should/would/could be amended? Seems to be lots of in-principle murmuring of "we should amend...", but no clear statement/proposition of "amend what?" and "why".

[hellodolly]

Does _anyone_ know what exactly should/would/could be amended? Seems to be lots of in-principle murmuring of "we should amend...", but no clear statement/proposition of "amend what?" and "why".

Good points what is it they want amended why do they want it amended and what do they propose to do.

So far it is shaping up as amend any thing to any thing as long as it will help them gain power.

[OzMick]

"In Natthawut's view, Thailand is still not a full-blown democracy because power does not belong to the people yet."

IMHO democracy will be fully blown when the likes of Nattawut are free to do whatever they wish. In democracy there are limits on the power of the legislature - what he seeks is called dictatorship.

[renaissanc]

Yingluck will soon have this sorted out.

Seriously though, Thaksin will probably be thinking that the only way to appease his Red Shirts is to get them lucrative positions where they can steal taxpayers' money.

[drdoom6996]

Step 2 for the favored few. Step one was to set up Red Shirt Communities. Now they have their base of people and they are separated from the government that they help get elected. I hope step 3 ain't more ROCKET LAUNCHERS. Lets just say their version of reconcilation is you do it the Red Shirt way or else.............................................

[Steely Dan]

First the PAD fall out with the democrats, now the redshirts fall out with Pheu Thai, why is it that these groups with 'Democracy' as part of their name have so much trouble with the results of the democratic process?

[kirk0233]

Does _anyone_ know what exactly should/would/could be amended? Seems to be lots of in-principle murmuring of "we should amend...", but no clear statement/proposition of "amend what?" and "why".

Good points what is it they want amended why do they want it amended and what do they propose to do.

So far it is shaping up as amend any thing to any thing as long as it will help them gain power.

From what I gather, they want to amend article 291 of the constitution, which deals with amendments.

CHAPTER XV

Amendment of the Constitution

Section 291. An amendment of the Constitution may be made only under the rules and procedure as follows:

(1) a motion for amendment must be proposed either by the Council of Ministers or members of the House of Representatives of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members of the House of Representatives or members of both Houses of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members thereof or persons having the right to votes of not less than fifty thousand in number under the law on the public submission of a bill;

A motion for amendment which has the effect of changing the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State or changing the form of State shall be prohibited;

(2) a motion for amendment must be proposed in the form of a draft Constitution Amendment and the National Assembly shall consider it in three readings;

(3) the voting in the first reading for acceptance in principle shall be by roll call and open voting, and the amendment must be approved by votes of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(4) in the consideration section by section in the second reading, consultation with the people who submit a draft Constitution Amendment shall be held;

The voting in the second reading for consideration section by section shall be decided by a simple majority of votes;

(5) at the conclusion of the second reading, there shall be an interval of fifteen days after which the National Assembly shall proceed with its third reading;

(6) the voting in the third and final reading shall be by roll call and open voting, and its promulgation as the Constitution must be approved by votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(7) after the resolution has been passed in accordance with the above rules and procedure, the draft Constitution Amendment shall be presented to the King, and the provisions of section 150 and section 151 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Why the desire to change the procedure for amendments to the constitution is unknown to me. They certainly do not want to change section 112 of the criminal code as a group of law professors from Thammasat University, the Nimirat (enlightened jurists), have called for to protect free speech. The PM, DPM, army and police have all said they will not support a change to 112.

[sparebox2]

in many countries (example China), RED mean communist.

Maybe not in Thailand. maybe.

[JohnAllan]

If they must proceed, an obvious prerequisite is to keep the red shirts out of it. Or bring the yellow shirts into it. Or act as an elected government should act, and make the decision; either through a referendum, or not.

[necronx99]

First the PAD fall out with the democrats, now the redshirts fall out with Pheu Thai, why is it that these groups with 'Democracy' as part of their name have so much trouble with the results of the democratic process?

Necrons' Theorem #2. Any group or country with the word "Democratic" in their name, by definition, isn't.

[whybother]

From what I gather, they want to amend article 291 of the constitution, which deals with amendments.

<snip>

But once they amend article 291 so that they can amend the constitution, what do they want to amend?

[kirk0233]

From what I gather, they want to amend article 291 of the constitution, which deals with amendments.

<snip>

But once they amend article 291 so that they can amend the constitution, what do they want to amend?

Article 291 allows them to amend the constitution. It seems they want to change the amendment procedure found in article 291. Perhaps they wish to change the percentages for an amendment or bypass others who are currently part of the process.

[Buchholz]

I see today that incarcerated Red Shirt Leader and Red Shirt magazine Voice of Thaksin Editor Somyot had his bail request denied again.

Red Shirt lawyer Karom Polthaklang had filed the request along with posting 1.7 million baht of land title deeds as a bond.

It might be another wedge being developed between PTP and the Red Shirts.

.

Edited January 31, 2012 by Buchholz

[Mosha]

Soon to turn into a 3 way fight when the banned have served their time. "It's better to be a dog in a peaceful time than be a man in a chaotic period"

[tlansford]

Amending the charter is a serious issue. Unfortunately in this editorial, it is treated in a most insincere fashion. The sole purpose of the editorial is to use the charter amendment issue as a tool to pretend there is a huge divide, even a rift, forming between the UDD and the PTP. That would be wishful thinking on the part of The Nation's handlers. In addition, it is one of the most poorly composed articles I've read here in a while - including some of the drivel TAN is able to string together.

IMO it is normal to have nearly as many opinions on the charter change as you have people in the room. At the most fundamental level it is an important issue. But I'm pretty sure that everyone here recognizes that there is also a lot of politics behind it. Even if everyone from all sides had only the best interest of Thailand at heart, which is obviously not the case, there would be questions about what is the right thing to do, what is possible to do, and where must compromises be made. Throw in a healthy dose of self-interest and this is going to be a cluster - ... big mess.

[animatic]

First the PAD fall out with the democrats, now the redshirts fall out with Pheu Thai, why is it that these groups with 'Democracy' as part of their name have so much trouble with the results of the democratic process?

Incompetence, and lack of understanding of what it means... in either order.

[waza]

Amending the charter is a serious issue. Unfortunately in this editorial, it is treated in a most insincere fashion. The sole purpose of the editorial is to use the charter amendment issue as a tool to pretend there is a huge divide, even a rift, forming between the UDD and the PTP. That would be wishful thinking on the part of The Nation's handlers. In addition, it is one of the most poorly composed articles I've read here in a while - including some of the drivel TAN is able to string together.

IMO it is normal to have nearly as many opinions on the charter change as you have people in the room. At the most fundamental level it is an important issue. But I'm pretty sure that everyone here recognizes that there is also a lot of politics behind it. Even if everyone from all sides had only the best interest of Thailand at heart, which is obviously not the case, there would be questions about what is the right thing to do, what is possible to do, and where must compromises be made. Throw in a healthy dose of self-interest and this is going to be a cluster - ... big mess.

Thanks for that, so nothing to see here, just move along.

Edited January 31, 2012 by waza

[Buchholz]

I see today that incarcerated Red Shirt Leader and Red Shirt magazine Voice of Thaksin Editor Somyos had his bail request denied again.

Red Shirt lawyer Karom Polthaklang had filed the request along with posting 1.7 million baht of land title deeds as a bond.

It might be another wedge being developed between PTP and the Red Shirts.

another setback for Red Shirt Leader Samyos today...

Constitution Court rules Article 112 not unconstitutional

The Constitution Court ruled Wednesday that Article 112 of the Criminal Code that defines penalties against those who commit lese majeste does not violate the charter.

Constitution Court judges voted unanimously to uphold the constitutionality of the article.

Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, a defender in a lese majeste case, sough the ruling, alleging that Article 112 violated Articles 3, 29 and 45 of the Constitution.

But the court ruled that the article is aimed at keeping law and order and does not contradict with any article of the charter.

-- The Nation 2012-10-10

[Buchholz]

I see today that incarcerated Red Shirt Leader and Red Shirt magazine Voice of Taksin Editor Somyos had his bail request denied again.

Red Shirt lawyer Karom Polthaklang had filed the request along with posting 1.7 million baht of land title deeds as a bond.

It might be another wedge being developed between PTP and the Red Shirts.

another setback for Red Shirt Leader Somyos today...

Constitution Court rules Article 112 not unconstitutional

The Constitution Court ruled Wednesday that Article 112 of the Criminal Code that defines penalties against those who commit lese majeste does not violate the charter.

Constitution Court judges voted unanimously to uphold the constitutionality of the article.

Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, a defender in a lese majeste case, sough the ruling, alleging that Article 112 violated Articles 3, 29 and 45 of the Constitution.

But the court ruled that the article is aimed at keeping law and order and does not contradict with any article of the charter.

The Nation 2012-10-10

Tomorrow, the Criminal Court of Bangkok is scheduled to render its verdict on the charges that Red Shirt Leader Somyos Prueksakasemsuk faces.

.

[yoshiwara]

Amending the charter is a serious issue. Unfortunately in this editorial, it is treated in a most insincere fashion. The sole purpose of the editorial is to use the charter amendment issue as a tool to pretend there is a huge divide, even a rift, forming between the UDD and the PTP. That would be wishful thinking on the part of The Nation's handlers. In addition, it is one of the most poorly composed articles I've read here in a while - including some of the drivel TAN is able to string together.

IMO it is normal to have nearly as many opinions on the charter change as you have people in the room. At the most fundamental level it is an important issue. But I'm pretty sure that everyone here recognizes that there is also a lot of politics behind it. Even if everyone from all sides had only the best interest of Thailand at heart, which is obviously not the case, there would be questions about what is the right thing to do, what is possible to do, and where must compromises be made. Throw in a healthy dose of self-interest and this is going to be a cluster - ... big mess.

Whitewash wish-wash.

Every single proposed change leads back to one singular issue namely the effort to get Thaksin back, return his monies and open up a pathway to the capture of state power. The internal argument is an argument about to what degree they need to disguise their ulterior motives.

[philw]

I see today that incarcerated Red Shirt Leader and Red Shirt magazine Voice of Taksin Editor Somyos had his bail request denied again.

Red Shirt lawyer Karom Polthaklang had filed the request along with posting 1.7 million baht of land title deeds as a bond.

It might be another wedge being developed between PTP and the Red Shirts.

another setback for Red Shirt Leader Somyos today...

Constitution Court rules Article 112 not unconstitutional

The Constitution Court ruled Wednesday that Article 112 of the Criminal Code that defines penalties against those who commit lese majeste does not violate the charter.

Constitution Court judges voted unanimously to uphold the constitutionality of the article.

Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, a defender in a lese majeste case, sough the ruling, alleging that Article 112 violated Articles 3, 29 and 45 of the Constitution.

But the court ruled that the article is aimed at keeping law and order and does not contradict with any article of the charter.

The Nation 2012-10-10

Tomorrow, the Criminal Court of Bangkok is scheduled to render its verdict on the charges that Red Shirt Leader Somyos Prueksakasemsuk faces.

http://www.thaivisa....2/#entry5946553

.

Thank you for quoting yourself and resurrecting a thread 3 months old.

Clearly no agenda here.

[Buchholz]

I see today that incarcerated Red Shirt Leader and Red Shirt magazine Voice of Taksin Editor Somyos had his bail request denied again.

Red Shirt lawyer Karom Polthaklang had filed the request along with posting 1.7 million baht of land title deeds as a bond.

It might be another wedge being developed between PTP and the Red Shirts.

another setback for Red Shirt Leader Somyos today...

Constitution Court rules Article 112 not unconstitutional

The Constitution Court ruled Wednesday that Article 112 of the Criminal Code that defines penalties against those who commit lese majeste does not violate the charter.

Constitution Court judges voted unanimously to uphold the constitutionality of the article.

Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, a defender in a lese majeste case, sough the ruling, alleging that Article 112 violated Articles 3, 29 and 45 of the Constitution.

But the court ruled that the article is aimed at keeping law and order and does not contradict with any article of the charter.

The Nation 2012-10-10

Tomorrow, the Criminal Court of Bangkok is scheduled to render its verdict on the charges that Red Shirt Leader Somyos Prueksakasemsuk faces.

http://www.thaivisa....2/#entry5946553

.

Thank you for quoting yourself and resurrecting a thread 3 months old.

Clearly no agenda here.

I see you're still struggling to comprehend the difference between quoting news articles and quoting one's own personal comments.

Given that, it's not too surprising that you also struggle to comprehend that updated news is placed in the thread that it corresponds to.

Do you have any comments that actually involve the topic and not posters?

Besides purposefully stalking, what's your agenda?

.

Edited January 22, 2013 by Buchholz

[OzMick]

Thank you for quoting yourself and resurrecting a thread 3 months old.

Clearly no agenda here.

Let me guess at yours - suppression of news you don't like?

[Buchholz]

Ahead of today's Criminal Court ruling on his case, Red Shirt Leader Somyos submitted an 18 page closing statement.

In it, he details how he should not be held responsible for the two articles that appeared in his Voice of Taksin magazine for which he is facing charges. He argued that it is the writer of the articles that should be held accountable, not himself as editor.

Last week his supporters submitted a letter to Prime Minister Yingluck and the Justice Minister demanding that he be released from custody.

.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Buchholz

[philw]

Ahead of today's Criminal Court ruling on his case, Red Shirt Leader Somyos submitted an 18 page closing statement.

In it, he details how he should not be held responsible for the two articles that appeared in his Voice of Taksin magazine for which he is facing charges. He argued that it is the writer of the articles that should be held accountable, not himself as editor.

Last week his supporters submitted a letter to Prime Minister Yingluck and the Justice Minister demanding that he be released from custody.

.

The heading of the thread is

"Pheu Thai And Red Shirts Split On Changes To The Charter", you have 4 posts referring to a LM case.

You must be thin skinned if you think questioning is "stalking" and I shall ignore your veiled and juvenile insult in post 26.

Apologies for the mixed fonts.

[otherstuff1957]

I see today that incarcerated Red Shirt Leader and Red Shirt magazine Voice of Taksin Editor Somyos had his bail request denied again.

Red Shirt lawyer Karom Polthaklang had filed the request along with posting 1.7 million baht of land title deeds as a bond.

It might be another wedge being developed between PTP and the Red Shirts.

another setback for Red Shirt Leader Somyos today...

Constitution Court rules Article 112 not unconstitutional

The Constitution Court ruled Wednesday that Article 112 of the Criminal Code that defines penalties against those who commit lese majeste does not violate the charter.

Constitution Court judges voted unanimously to uphold the constitutionality of the article.

Somyos Prueksakasemsuk, a defender in a lese majeste case, sough the ruling, alleging that Article 112 violated Articles 3, 29 and 45 of the Constitution.

But the court ruled that the article is aimed at keeping law and order and does not contradict with any article of the charter.

The Nation 2012-10-10

Tomorrow, the Criminal Court of Bangkok is scheduled to render its verdict on the charges that Red Shirt Leader Somyos Prueksakasemsuk faces.

http://www.thaivisa....2/#entry5946553

.

In Thaksin's view, idealists like Somyos have served their purpose and are no longer useful. In fact, they are now a potential danger as they could turn on him if they actually open their eyes and saw what his goals are. I predict that Somyos, Da Torpedo and others of their ilk will stay safely out of sight in jail, where they can serve as martyred figures, rather than being released on bail or freed where they might start asking embarrassing questions.