Bid To Oust Amendment Supporters

[Lite Beer]

Bid to oust amendment supporters

The Nation on Sunday

BANGKOK:-- Group says Article 291 abused; 'thank' pair who attacked Nitirat member

A group of charter-change opponents yesterday launched a campaign seeking the impeachment of parliamentarians who voted in support of recent legislation that would facilitate the amendment of the 2007 Constitution.

The Siam Samakkhi group organised a political discussion featuring Chirmsak Pinthong, Seri Wongmontha, Kaewsun Atibodhi and Banjerd Singkaneti at Lumpini Park.

The group accused the 399 MPs and senators who voted in support of amending the charter's Article 291 - thereby paving the way for the appointment of a Constitution Drafting Assembly - of violating the spirit and intention of the Constitution, saying the article was not intended for this purpose. The panel members started their talk by jokingly thanking the twins arrested on Thursday over Wednesday's assault on Worajet Pakeerat, a member of the Nitirat group, which has campaigned in support of changes to the lese majeste law. While they do not support violence, tolerance has its limits, the panel members said.

Questioning the motives of supporters of charter change, the group showed a video entitled "Eliminating the Post-Coup 2007 Constitution - Seizing Power for Thaksin", and distributed a book with the same title to members of the public attending the event.

Meanwhile, Chart Thai Pattana Party chief adviser Banharn Silapa-archa yesterday pushed for the amendment of Article 237 of the Constitution, which provides for the dissolution of political parties whose executives commit wrongdoing, saying he totally disagreed with the law.

Banharn said he did not believe the government would interfere in the charter-amendment process. He urged all parties to refrain from commenting on institutions that could be adversely affected by amendments to the charter, because the government had made it clear that it had no intention of supporting such changes.

Banharn denied that his calls for the removal of provisions to dissolve parties, with retroactive effect, were made to benefit himself. He said he did not mind waiting for another year before his own political ban ends. The political ban on 111 former executives of the disbanded Thai Rak Thai Party would be lifted in May, so it is not necessary for any change to have retroactive effect; Article 237 should be scrapped simply because it is not right, he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Yongyuth Wichaidit supported Banharn, saying the article was problematic and resulted in political "massacres" that affected innocent politicians.

Election Commissioner Sodsri Sattayathum suggested that Article 237 be amended so that party executives who commit wrongdoings face five-year political bans, but their political parties remain intact.

'Target execs not parties'

She said party executives should face bans only if they are proved to have committed electoral offences, conspired to commit them, or acknowledge that electoral offences were committed by party members.

Sodsri said dissolving parties is not a common practice internationally, because parties are generally given the status of a political institution. Some parties are long established and if they are easily dissolved, stability is affected. She said the provision was included in the 2007 Constitution because its drafters wanted a strong deterrent to electoral offences.

A Democrat Party MP for Trang, Sathit Wongnongtoey, suggested that to prevent political violence, those involved in charter amendment must be clear about what points they want to amend. He said the Pheu Thai Party and red-shirt leaders have been trying to interfere in the amendment process by seeking to dissolve independent agencies in revenge for perceived punishments meted out by the agencies in the past.

They also want to amend the lese-majeste law, even though the prime minister has said the government had no intention of doing so, he said. Time has proven that the premier does not have the ability to rein in the red shirts, Sathit said. "Ultimately, charter amendment is a time bomb that will lead to more divisions," he said.

-- The Nation 2012-03-04

[Ricardo]

The problem with punishing only those party-executives who are proven to attempt to cheat the voters, and rig elections on their party's behalf, instead of also the rest of the party-executive as well, is that it would remove any incentive to monitor or control those who had been tasked with carrying-out the actions.

Better to set a slightly-higher standard, by giving them cause to monitor, what their colleagues are up-to !

[Unkomoncents]

"...tolerance has its limits..." There we go Thailand (Land of Smiles hahahahaha); you're bearing your real gangster soul. This is what the tourism industry needs to see. "Happy, happy, smile, smile, you an-lee me. Me kiww you."

"Sodsri said dissolving parties is not a common practice internationally, because parties are generally given the status of a political institutions" It's also because most governments are not chalk-full of corrupt, incompetent dingbats. I always love seeing exactly who Yingluck's international audiences are during her public appearances.

[whybother]

A group of charter-change opponents yesterday launched a campaign seeking the impeachment of parliamentarians who voted in support of recent legislation that would facilitate the amendment of the 2007 Constitution.

... of violating the spirit and intention of the Constitution

What? Idiots.

[scorecard]

"...tolerance has its limits..." There we go Thailand (Land of Smiles hahahahaha); you're bearing your real gangster soul. This is what the tourism industry needs to see. "Happy, happy, smile, smile, you an-lee me. Me kiww you."

"Sodsri said dissolving parties is not a common practice internationally, because parties are generally given the status of a political institutions" It's also because most governments are not chalk-full of corrupt, incompetent dingbats. I always love seeing exactly who Yingluck's international audiences are during her public appearances.

Some time back I had some respect for Ms Sodsri, but no more.

Just one reason - she was part of the electoral commission 'team' (something like 80% of all the commissions) who decided they needed en masse to go to Europe for 10 days or so, to inspect the preparations for voting in the last election. They returned to Thailand from their trip (the jolly they believe they are entitled to) just 2 or 3 days before the election date.

A total farce, totally unprofessional and unethical, and IMHO they should have all been severely punished (and their is precedent for electoral commission being punished, most the previous 'team' were found guilty of graft and sentenced to several years jail time).

There are obviously aspects of the 'set-up' of electoral laws in other countries which are worth following. But IMHO it's also true that Thailand right now needs electoral laws which have big teeth and make big inroads into quickly reducing political graft and corruption.

In fact I would suggest the punishments be strongly increased where there is proof of vote buying, collusion, etc:

- Executives of parties: Mandatory jail time, starting at 5 years, plus massive fines, starting at 50Million Baht, plus banned for life from any form whatever of political activity or back room involvement in any political party. Plus publicly shamed - large photo and details of their crime to appear in all newspapers for 7 days.

- Party members: Massive fines, starting at 10MillionBaht, plus 10 years ban and not allowed to take part in any form whatever of political activity or back room involvement, plus banned for life from holding executive positions in any political party. Plus publicly shamed - large photo and details of their crime to appear in all newspapers for 7 days.

Why so severe? Because there are many very very capable, sincere and honest Thais who could quickly take Thailand forward who, right now stay away from any form of political activity. Why:

• They don't want to be associated with the gangs of obvious 'get rich quick thieves' who currently make up Thai political parties.
  

• They fear if they did join the current parties and speak out they would quickly be punished, with violence a possibility.
  

IMHO, until we get the capable honest people involved, nothing will change, Thailand will not move forward.

[Crushdepth]

Electoral fraud should be subject to the most severe punishment a country has to offer. If the country falls into the hands of fraudsters, crooks and cheats, the lives of 60 million people are affected.

The prize is so great and the penalty so laughable that cheating is a no brainer. 5 years of harsh leisure and you are free to try again. Where is the incentive to stop?

[pisico]

Electoral fraud should be subject to the most severe punishment a country has to offer. If the country falls into the hands of fraudsters, crooks and cheats, the lives of 60 million people are affected.

The prize is so great and the penalty so laughable that cheating is a no brainer. 5 years of harsh leisure and you are free to try again. Where is the incentive to stop?

True! Those penalties should be paramount priority of any administration in power or aspiring to it. But, what party can it good conscience lob the first proverbial stone?

Years ago a friend, who has resided in Thailand for 20 years, said to me that vote buying and corruption in general, are industries that no one in the country wants to change or eliminate. As he put it: it's Thai way, paraphrasing a local expression.

What are the chances that telling all this to other Farangs will bring about a positive change? What are the chances that a Thai national in a position of power will read the post and will do something about it?

Whatever we think or say about Thailand's political, financial or traditional way of life (whether we love it or hate it) will end up only in some of TV's readers eyes.

Nothing we Farangs say will mean an iota to the reality we all enjoy-endure.

That is reality. All we can do is this: express and/or vent our opinions so that other Farangs will share or oppose them: IMHO not a productive exercise .

We have to respectfully witness it all without lecturing, ridiculing or try to impose our individual ways of life or culture values on Thais.

OK, I am ready to be flamed. To flame or not to flame: will that change anything?

Edited March 4, 2012 by pisico

[anterian]

If my father commits a crime and I know of it but keep quiet out of loyalty, should I be punished? Legally the answer is yes, morally I think it depends upon how serious the crime. In reality most people would say no.

[TAWP]

If my father commits a crime and I know of it but keep quiet out of loyalty, should I be punished? Legally the answer is yes, morally I think it depends upon how serious the crime. In reality most people would say no.

To continue the hypothetical scenario, if you either told your dad that the crime would be in the families best interest or the crime greatly helped you (eliminated an opponent in a land-bidding etc) then surely you are morally responsible too.

To let you then hold onto the price gained by the illegal actions would be wrong.

if that means doing an do-over of the action, than fine...

[JurgenG]

Group thanks pair who attacked Nitirat member

The panel members started their talk by jokingly thanking the twins arrested on Thursday over Wednesday's assault on Worajet Pakeerat, a member of the Nitirat group, which has campaigned in support of changes to the lese majeste law. While they do not support violence, tolerance has its limits, the panel members said.

Yes, tolerance has its limits.

I'm interested to know what the posters who support these people have to say.

[CalgaryII]

Bid to oust amendment supporters, #1^

"A group of charter-change opponents yesterday launched a campaign seeking the impeachment of parliamentarians who voted in support of recent legislation that would facilitate the amendment of the 2007 Constitution"

Impeaching Parliamentarians????? Try impeaching the voters who elected this Govt, fully in the knowledge that the Coup Constitution would be the first thing to be expunged when an elected Government returned to power....as has always been the case, everywhere.

What ever makes them think that Coupist excesses such as Constitution change, to justify themselves, will stand, after a Govt. elected by the people returns political life back to normal, from its' coup abnormality.

"The Siam Samakkhi group organised a political discussion"

What is that I have been saying about the Opposition laundering its' agenda through seemingly independent groups.

Here's another one. There is no end to them.

".......the group showed a video entitled "Eliminating the Post-Coup 2007 Constitution - Seizing Power for Thaksin",

Back to deceiving people about the Thaksin singularity constitution stuff, that which they started with their coup constitution changes.

The disrespectful theme coursing through this opposition, whereby they characterize their political opponents as having no political awareness outside the Thaksin association thing.

Only they have this political awareness.----------Arrogance or what.

"He said the Pheu Thai Party and red-shirt leaders have been trying to interfere in the amendment process by seeking to dissolve independent agencies in revenge for perceived punishments meted out by the agencies in the past"

Revenge or correcting imbalances?

Maligning the PTP and Red Shirt leaders is maligning the electorate that voted them into power.

"Ultimately, charter amendment is a time bomb that will lead to more divisions," he said."

Didn't bother the coupists any.

Had the coupists not messed with self serving constitional reform, this would not be an issue now.

They started it, this elected Government is correcting it.

Not complicated.

Edited March 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[CalgaryII]

pisico, #7^

"Whatever we think or say about Thailand's political, financial or traditional way of life (whether we love it or hate it) will end up only in some of TV's readers eyes.

Nothing we Farangs say will mean an iota to the reality we all enjoy-endure.

That is reality. All we can do is this: express and/or vent our opinions so that other Farangs will share or oppose them: IMHO not a productive exercise .

We have to respectfully witness it all without lecturing, ridiculing or try to impose our individual ways of life or culture values on Thais.

OK, I am ready to be flamed. To flame or not to flame: will that change anything?"

But that is what political junkies do pisico.

I don't apologise for spouting off, being fully aware that all of it is totally inconsequential.

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

[CalgaryII]

If my father commits a crime and I know of it but keep quiet out of loyalty, should I be punished? Legally the answer is yes, morally I think it depends upon how serious the crime. In reality most people would say no.

To continue the hypothetical scenario, if you either told your dad that the crime would be in the families best interest or the crime greatly helped you (eliminated an opponent in a land-bidding etc) then surely you are morally responsible too.

To let you then hold onto the price gained by the illegal actions would be wrong.

if that means doing an do-over of the action, than fine...

Also, if you were remiss in informing your Dad that winning elections is a no-no, so he keeps winning them, and is criminalized in the process, does that criminalize you too.

dam_n, this is complicated.

[TAWP]

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

By posting false information, such as 500,000 of people attending the free Red Shirt concert/protest instead of 30-50k, you will not convince many that your posts contains the path to enlightenment.

[CalgaryII]

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

By posting false information, such as 500,000 of people attending the free Red Shirt concert/protest instead of 30-50k, you will not convince many that your posts contains the path to enlightenment.

And others trying to characterize a political event as a concert, because their contemptuousness cannot conceive of these mainstream Thai people having political awareness and events, and suggesting 300,000 participants is "over 50,000".

Misleading information by people who were nowhere near the event, or involved in its' planning, are seen as simply advancing Oppositional agenda's............. Agenda-speak in other words.

I was there and privy to its planning, you were not.

Let credibility be self-evident.

Edited March 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[CalgaryII]

Speaking of numbers, I am surprised apologists for this anti-constitution change group haven't been holding forth about the number of people attending this Lumpini Park event.

Given the paltry numbers of these Oppositional groups of late, the attendance at Lumpini Park wasn't too bad.

Not the 300,000 people such as at Bonanza, but for them, pretty good.

I saw images of the event, and noted that many people were trucked up from the south.

Basically the Democrat Party electoral minority constituants.

Edited March 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[TAWP]

Since the only source of 500,00 is you, not even VoiceTV etc, then the credibility is indeed self-evident.

I wasn't there, I ask for numbers and perhaps proof. You refuse to post the latter.

[scorecard]

pisico, #7^

"Whatever we think or say about Thailand's political, financial or traditional way of life (whether we love it or hate it) will end up only in some of TV's readers eyes.

Nothing we Farangs say will mean an iota to the reality we all enjoy-endure.

That is reality. All we can do is this: express and/or vent our opinions so that other Farangs will share or oppose them: IMHO not a productive exercise .

We have to respectfully witness it all without lecturing, ridiculing or try to impose our individual ways of life or culture values on Thais.

OK, I am ready to be flamed. To flame or not to flame: will that change anything?"

But that is what political junkies do pisico.

I don't apologise for spouting off, being fully aware that all of it is totally inconsequential.

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

Errant. How dare you. I have a right to an opinion, whether I am a farang or whatever and you have no right to say I or my opinion are errant.

Or perhaps you support trampling on freedom of expression.

The bottom line, IMHO you are a troll trying to coerce people by using spin, nothing more.

[anterian]

If my father commits a crime and I know of it but keep quiet out of loyalty, should I be punished? Legally the answer is yes, morally I think it depends upon how serious the crime. In reality most people would say no.

To continue the hypothetical scenario, if you either told your dad that the crime would be in the families best interest or the crime greatly helped you (eliminated an opponent in a land-bidding etc) then surely you are morally responsible too.

To let you then hold onto the price gained by the illegal actions would be wrong.

if that means doing an do-over of the action, than fine...

Also, if you were remiss in informing your Dad that winning elections is a no-no, so he keeps winning them, and is criminalized in the process, does that criminalize you too.

dam_n, this is complicated.

TAWP, takes my example too far, I did not say the son profited from his father's crime, equally I did not make it clear that the son found out after the event.

What I am trying to illustrate is that it is complicated, complicated by a concept called loyalty. Many of Hitler's followers were loyal and unaware of the atrocities that other followers committed.

Most people have a breaking point in their loyalty, I might tolerate my father seducing other men's wives, but would draw the line at him seducing their underage daughters. The same must apply to political parties, particularly within the Thai cultural system of patronage. At what point does a politician decide that his executive leaders have gone too far.

We admire loyalty, yet punish those who are loyal to our enemies.

[scorecard]

Speaking of numbers, I am surprised apologists for this anti-constitution change group haven't been holding forth about the number of people attending this Lumpini Park event.

Given the paltry numbers of these Oppositional groups of late, the attendance at Lumpini Park wasn't too bad.

Not the 300,000 people such as at Bonanza, but for them, pretty good.

I saw images of the event, and noted that many people were trucked up from the south.

Basically the Democrat Party electoral minority constituants.

First, I cancel the 'I like this'. My error.

Second you continue to say 300,000, others have indicated 30,000.

[CalgaryII]

Since the only source of 500,00 is you, not even VoiceTV etc, then the credibility is indeed self-evident.

I wasn't there, I ask for numbers and perhaps proof. You refuse to post the latter.

Did that at length.....lazy to do it again.

300,000 at Bonanza, enough to send a clear message to coupists!

[CalgaryII]

pisico, #7^

"Whatever we think or say about Thailand's political, financial or traditional way of life (whether we love it or hate it) will end up only in some of TV's readers eyes.

Nothing we Farangs say will mean an iota to the reality we all enjoy-endure.

That is reality. All we can do is this: express and/or vent our opinions so that other Farangs will share or oppose them: IMHO not a productive exercise .

We have to respectfully witness it all without lecturing, ridiculing or try to impose our individual ways of life or culture values on Thais.

OK, I am ready to be flamed. To flame or not to flame: will that change anything?"

But that is what political junkies do pisico.

I don't apologise for spouting off, being fully aware that all of it is totally inconsequential.

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

Errant. How dare you. I have a right to an opinion, whether I am a farang or whatever and you have no right to say I or my opinion are errant.

Or perhaps you support trampling on freedom of expression.

The bottom line, IMHO you are a troll trying to coerce people by using spin, nothing more.

Hey, joke.

I meant errant in matters sexual

But to be perfectly serious, difference of opinion does not equate to trolling.

You have an absolute right to an opinion, as do I....so lets get it on and express freely!

Edited March 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[scorecard]

If my father commits a crime and I know of it but keep quiet out of loyalty, should I be punished? Legally the answer is yes, morally I think it depends upon how serious the crime. In reality most people would say no.

To continue the hypothetical scenario, if you either told your dad that the crime would be in the families best interest or the crime greatly helped you (eliminated an opponent in a land-bidding etc) then surely you are morally responsible too.

To let you then hold onto the price gained by the illegal actions would be wrong.

if that means doing an do-over of the action, than fine...

Also, if you were remiss in informing your Dad that winning elections is a no-no, so he keeps winning them, and is criminalized in the process, does that criminalize you too.

dam_n, this is complicated.

TAWP, takes my example too far, I did not say the son profited from his father's crime, equally I did not make it clear that the son found out after the event.

What I am trying to illustrate is that it is complicated, complicated by a concept called loyalty. Many of Hitler's followers were loyal and unaware of the atrocities that other followers committed.

Most people have a breaking point in their loyalty, I might tolerate my father seducing other men's wives, but would draw the line at him seducing their underage daughters. The same must apply to political parties, particularly within the Thai cultural system of patronage. At what point does a politician decide that his executive leaders have gone too far.

We admire loyalty, yet punish those who are loyal to our enemies.

And at what point do we stop saying it's all OK because it's the 'Thai cultural system'.

In fact, from what I read one of the red / udd demands is in essence that democracy = equal voice, equal right to be heard, etc., should be the 'system'.

So which is it?

[scorecard]

pisico, #7^

"Whatever we think or say about Thailand's political, financial or traditional way of life (whether we love it or hate it) will end up only in some of TV's readers eyes.

Nothing we Farangs say will mean an iota to the reality we all enjoy-endure.

That is reality. All we can do is this: express and/or vent our opinions so that other Farangs will share or oppose them: IMHO not a productive exercise .

We have to respectfully witness it all without lecturing, ridiculing or try to impose our individual ways of life or culture values on Thais.

OK, I am ready to be flamed. To flame or not to flame: will that change anything?"

But that is what political junkies do pisico.

I don't apologise for spouting off, being fully aware that all of it is totally inconsequential.

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

Errant. How dare you. I have a right to an opinion, whether I am a farang or whatever and you have no right to say I or my opinion are errant.

Or perhaps you support trampling on freedom of expression.

The bottom line, IMHO you are a troll trying to coerce people by using spin, nothing more.

Hey, joke.

I meant errant in matters sexual

But to be perfectly serious, difference of opinion does not equate to trolling.

You have an absolute right to an opinion, as do I....so lets get it on and express freely!

My point is simple - I believe (my opinion) that you are nothing more than a dedicated spin artist, trying to convince others to believe a specific and determined line, you deliberately twist and deliberately avoid / ignore many salient points which strongly question / erode your spin items.

[scorecard]

pisico, #7^

"Whatever we think or say about Thailand's political, financial or traditional way of life (whether we love it or hate it) will end up only in some of TV's readers eyes.

Nothing we Farangs say will mean an iota to the reality we all enjoy-endure.

That is reality. All we can do is this: express and/or vent our opinions so that other Farangs will share or oppose them: IMHO not a productive exercise .

We have to respectfully witness it all without lecturing, ridiculing or try to impose our individual ways of life or culture values on Thais.

OK, I am ready to be flamed. To flame or not to flame: will that change anything?"

But that is what political junkies do pisico.

I don't apologise for spouting off, being fully aware that all of it is totally inconsequential.

I just hope to straighten out some errant Farang opinions....a truly heavy burden.

Just more smartass / insulting comment.

Edited March 4, 2012 by scorecard

[CalgaryII]

Scorecard, #24

"My point is simple - I believe (my opinion) that you are nothing more than a dedicated spin artist, trying to convince others to believe a specific and determined line, you deliberately twist and deliberately avoid / ignore many salient points which strongly question / erode your spin items".

Is disagreement all of that?

Then let it be described as such from all sides of the debate!

Not particularly complimentary to all of us posting here.

Edited March 4, 2012 by CalgaryII

[Unkomoncents]

Spin artist or no spin artist, this is crap politics from a country that doesn't, on a fundamental level, understand the concept of honesty leading to trust. Just watch the soap opera serials that are so popular here. They are a great window into the soul of Thais in the same way that any Will Smith movie surmises the issues with Americans....

Edited March 4, 2012 by Unkomoncents

[anterian]

To continue the hypothetical scenario, if you either told your dad that the crime would be in the families best interest or the crime greatly helped you (eliminated an opponent in a land-bidding etc) then surely you are morally responsible too.

To let you then hold onto the price gained by the illegal actions would be wrong.

if that means doing an do-over of the action, than fine...

Also, if you were remiss in informing your Dad that winning elections is a no-no, so he keeps winning them, and is criminalized in the process, does that criminalize you too.

dam_n, this is complicated.

TAWP, takes my example too far, I did not say the son profited from his father's crime, equally I did not make it clear that the son found out after the event.

What I am trying to illustrate is that it is complicated, complicated by a concept called loyalty. Many of Hitler's followers were loyal and unaware of the atrocities that other followers committed.

Most people have a breaking point in their loyalty, I might tolerate my father seducing other men's wives, but would draw the line at him seducing their underage daughters. The same must apply to political parties, particularly within the Thai cultural system of patronage. At what point does a politician decide that his executive leaders have gone too far.

We admire loyalty, yet punish those who are loyal to our enemies.

And at what point do we stop saying it's all OK because it's the 'Thai cultural system'.

In fact, from what I read one of the red / udd demands is in essence that democracy = equal voice, equal right to be heard, etc., should be the 'system'.

So which is it?

You seem to be under the impression that the Reds want democracy western style. In fact it is clear that neither the Reds or the Dems want such a dangerous form of democracy. Rather they both want partisan democracy, unequal rights for their opponents. Each when in power tries to weaken and exterminate the other. Of course if you are one of those who think the Dems are as pure as driven snow and filled with altruism then you will deny this and mistakenly call me a Red supporter. In fact I am simply a realist, sympathetic to some of the Red ideas but opposed to others. However in Thai politics they prefer to follow the American concept, "you are either with us or against us". A singularly unintelligent attitude.

[tlansford]

While they do not support violence, tolerance has its limits, the panel members said.

In other words, "ignore the first half of my sentence, we really do support violence".

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed.