Democrats Consider Seeking Pheu Thai Dissolution

[phiphidon]

.. cut some quotes, post got very long. Original still has all ..

Thats because the Junta introduced a new law and then applied it retrospectively!

Asia correspondent explains it so much better than I could in their "guide" "How to defeat the TRT"

Panikabutara Coorey, Pornsakol --- "The evolution of the rule of law in Thailand: The Thai constitutions" [2008] UNSWLRS 45

Last Updated: 12 December 2008

http://www.austlii.e...RS/2008/45.html

"

10. Arguable interpretation of the retrospective principle in the area of electoral law

When considering the doctrine in the context of criminal law, it cannot be denied that the formal legality of the rule of law which requires law to be prospective has theoretically and practically gained a strong momentum. The above examples clearly indicate that the Court is ready to strike out any unpredictable law. However, when the doctrine is applied in the context of electoral law, the interpretation of such doctrine may not render a clear result as it does in the criminal case. It is concerned that the formal legality on the prospective law may not be appropriately interpreted in the case where the Thai Rak Thai Party of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was ordered to be dissolved and the members were revoked the political rights by the Constitutional Tribunal.<a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLRS/2008/45.html#fn68" name="fnB68">[68]

The decision for the dissolution of the Party was relied on the Declaration of the Council for Democratic Reform (No.27) (“the Declaration”) which was the applicable law before the 2006 interim constitution was promulgated.[69] Harsh criticism of the decision is inevitable since the Tribunal based its decision on the Declaration which was approved by the coup. The primary concern of such criticism is whether the Declaration could render the retrospective effect on the corrupted political activities which had been committed before the military coup has taken control of the country.

According to section 3 of the Declaration, the executive member of the disbanded political party is prohibited from engaging in any electoral activity for 5 years.[70] By dissolving the Thai Rak Thai Party, the Tribunal therefore revoked the electoral rights of the Party’s executive members. The Party was banned on the ground that two senior members had hired small political parties to artificially run in the general election on 2 April 2006 in order for Thai Rak Thai Party to win the election.[71] However, the hiring was committed before the Declaration became effective and if the Declaration was applicable to the case, is this the example of the violation of the rule of law?

In answering “no” to the question, six out of nine judges of the Constitutional Tribunal agree that the revocation of the electoral rights is not a criminal penalty. It was only a legal measure derived from the effect of law which entitles the dissolution of a political party engaging in prohibited acts under the Organic Act on Political Parties (1998).[72] By deeming that such revocation is not a penalty, the retroactive effect can take place without interfering the rule of law. It is further affirmed by the majority of the judges that the rule of law as against the retroactive legislation could be tainted only when the retroactive legislation renders the criminal punishment to the respondent.

The opponent of the decision argue that even though the revocation of the electoral rights is a criminal penalty, the fact that such revocation renders a retroactive effect has proved that the law is not prospective.[73] Whether the decision is sensible in the eye of the rule of law scholars depends on how the principle of retroactive law can be interpreted. Even though the decision leaves some room for controversy especially for those who lost their political rights, it is admitted that the existence of the retrospective law principle in the Thai constitutions is secured at a satisfactory level. This is particularly true for those laws which contain the criminal penalty because the Court of Justice has never failed to overthrow such retroactive legislations.[74]

"

6 out of 9 Judges (reminds me of a dog food commercial for pedigree chum) agreed that it's ok to apply a law retroactively so that you lose your electoral rights as its not a criminal penalty just a legal one. Same end result for the Junta appointed Judges dedicated to hit back at Thaksin in whatever way they can.

"Leaves room for controversy", well yes it does. Might have to be dusted off for the PTP, I'm sure the democrats will worm their way back somehow, military coups being out of the window (hopefully) we'll just have to wait for another judicial one. Heaven forbid they try it through the ballot box.

[animatic]

If the reason for the coup was the electoral violations, power abuses by the executive, and rampant corruption at all levels of the political machine in charge at the time, unstoppable by constitutional means, plus extra-ordinarily damaging to the nation as a whole, and with reasonable expectations of those harms continuance, then what actions were taken after the coup to prevent these continued violations can not be ruled out as invalid. Retrospectively or not, they're being just a continuance of the reason for their being enacted.

If the political and constitutional mechanisms were not functioning as intended, what is the course to take?Certainly those causing the problems while in control are going to do nothing to stop their crimes since they saw nothing to strong enough to impede their avariciousness. Apparently a belief in their 'right by power', to do as they choose, to whomever they choose.

We know what the situation was, and we know the actions taken, and we know those who were removed from power seek yet again to entrench their power and gain a measure of revenge on those who stopped them before. Using legal argument, street intimidation of opposition and media outlets, coopting intellectuals, and raw political power plays using money and favors and intimidations as tools.

The question is, what will be done when the situation surpasses what caused the the coup before?

Will it be allowed to reach it's logical conclusion, no matter who burns in it's pyre,

or will some modulating force reappear to damp it down.

Ignoring the possiblity of 'random chance' causing a snuffing of the existing situation.

One thing is clear, success at a crooked ballot box is not the gift of carte blanche to ANY winning group to do just as they please and ignore the betterment of the populace for their own gains. Once they do that rapaciously, then they cross the rubicon and civil war can't be ruled out.

Edited March 17, 2012 by animatic

[rubl]

.. cut some quotes, post got very long. Original still has all ..

Thats because the Junta introduced a new law and then applied it retrospectively!

Asia correspondent explains it so much better than I could in their "guide" "How to defeat the TRT"

Panikabutara Coorey, Pornsakol --- "The evolution of the rule of law in Thailand: The Thai constitutions" [2008] UNSWLRS 45

Last Updated: 12 December 2008

http://www.austlii.e...RS/2008/45.html

"

10. Arguable interpretation of the retrospective principle in the area of electoral law

When considering the doctrine in the context of criminal law, it cannot be denied that the formal legality of the rule of law which requires law to be prospective has theoretically and practically gained a strong momentum. The above examples clearly indicate that the Court is ready to strike out any unpredictable law. However, when the doctrine is applied in the context of electoral law, the interpretation of such doctrine may not render a clear result as it does in the criminal case. It is concerned that the formal legality on the prospective law may not be appropriately interpreted in the case where the Thai Rak Thai Party of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was ordered to be dissolved and the members were revoked the political rights by the Constitutional Tribunal.<a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UNSWLRS/2008/45.html#fn68" name="fnB68">[68]

The decision for the dissolution of the Party was relied on the Declaration of the Council for Democratic Reform (No.27) (“the Declaration”) which was the applicable law before the 2006 interim constitution was promulgated.[69] Harsh criticism of the decision is inevitable since the Tribunal based its decision on the Declaration which was approved by the coup. The primary concern of such criticism is whether the Declaration could render the retrospective effect on the corrupted political activities which had been committed before the military coup has taken control of the country.

According to section 3 of the Declaration, the executive member of the disbanded political party is prohibited from engaging in any electoral activity for 5 years.[70] By dissolving the Thai Rak Thai Party, the Tribunal therefore revoked the electoral rights of the Party’s executive members. The Party was banned on the ground that two senior members had hired small political parties to artificially run in the general election on 2 April 2006 in order for Thai Rak Thai Party to win the election.[71] However, the hiring was committed before the Declaration became effective and if the Declaration was applicable to the case, is this the example of the violation of the rule of law?

In answering “no” to the question, six out of nine judges of the Constitutional Tribunal agree that the revocation of the electoral rights is not a criminal penalty. It was only a legal measure derived from the effect of law which entitles the dissolution of a political party engaging in prohibited acts under the Organic Act on Political Parties (1998).[72] By deeming that such revocation is not a penalty, the retroactive effect can take place without interfering the rule of law. It is further affirmed by the majority of the judges that the rule of law as against the retroactive legislation could be tainted only when the retroactive legislation renders the criminal punishment to the respondent.

The opponent of the decision argue that even though the revocation of the electoral rights is a criminal penalty, the fact that such revocation renders a retroactive effect has proved that the law is not prospective.[73] Whether the decision is sensible in the eye of the rule of law scholars depends on how the principle of retroactive law can be interpreted. Even though the decision leaves some room for controversy especially for those who lost their political rights, it is admitted that the existence of the retrospective law principle in the Thai constitutions is secured at a satisfactory level. This is particularly true for those laws which contain the criminal penalty because the Court of Justice has never failed to overthrow such retroactive legislations.[74]

"

6 out of 9 Judges (reminds me of a dog food commercial for pedigree chum) agreed that it's ok to apply a law retroactively so that you lose your electoral rights as its not a criminal penalty just a legal one. Same end result for the Junta appointed Judges dedicated to hit back at Thaksin in whatever way they can.

"Leaves room for controversy", well yes it does. Might have to be dusted off for the PTP, I'm sure the democrats will worm their way back somehow, military coups being out of the window (hopefully) we'll just have to wait for another judicial one. Heaven forbid they try it through the ballot box.

Full sentence was "Even though the decision leaves some room for controversy especially for those who lost their political rights, it is admitted that the existence of the retrospective law principle in the Thai constitutions is secured at a satisfactory level."

Of course the fellow wrote in the research series of the Australian University of NSW, Faculty of Law. Maybe there's a relation with the Australian National University which hosts the NewMandela site

Edited March 17, 2012 by rubl

[gemini81]

Why move to dissolve PTP on such paltry grounds, which will only cause more claims of judicial activism. Surely the involvement of Thaksin would be stronger cause and more easily provable.

Looks like the bros might be facing facing fraud charges (conspiracy to defraud?)

Why not try and win an expletive deleted election - might be a better way.

Not buying votes and exploiting the uneducated for support would be another.

Edited March 17, 2012 by gemini81

[Buchholz]

Deja vu on this banning a party discussion.

The very valid reasons for it...

2010 discussion

"There are very good reasons why political parties should be banned, that's why the provisions for banning were beefed up in the 2007 constitution."

Disagree. Why not target the guilty individuals rather than the whole party?

It falls along the lines of the effective Rico Act in the US.

The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO Act or RICO) is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. http://en.wikipedia....ganizations_Act

As the executives in these gangs know what's up with inner workings of the gang. It's best to toss out the whole gang and bar the leaders from politics.

There's no baby in this throwing out of the bath water.

2011 discussion

Did you miss the day-long reading by the judges in the cases when they handed down their verdicts explicitly detailing the wrong doings and the evidence presented?

If they are on the Executive Board, they are guilty of the duplicity of the illegal acts as they are presumed to have had knowledge of the conspiracy.

It's a good constitutional rule that works well with, for example, Mafia family convictions in other countries.

In the USA, RICO Statutes work very similarly to curtail the activities of those involved in ongoing conspiracy and rackateering activities. Thailand would benefit from such a group of laws, assuming they can find an honest judge someplace to apply the law. Similarly |Under Color Of Authority" laws might begin to make a dent in that who;;y corrupt body known as the Royal Thai Police.

http://www.wisegeek....ico-statute.htm

http://familyrightsa...olor_of_law.htm

[473geo]

I guess a bit of Deja vu regarding the coup too..........

The massive hike in the military budget following the coup was of course an unforseen side effect.......

Edited March 17, 2012 by 473geo

[473geo]

Why move to dissolve PTP on such paltry grounds, which will only cause more claims of judicial activism. Surely the involvement of Thaksin would be stronger cause and more easily provable.

Looks like the bros might be facing facing fraud charges (conspiracy to defraud?)

Why not try and win an expletive deleted election - might be a better way.

Not buying votes and exploiting the uneducated for support would be another.

Perhaps the democrats should try increasing the education budget when they are next elevated into office

Edited March 17, 2012 by 473geo

[rubl]

I guess a bit of Deja vu regarding the coup too..........

The massive hike in the military budget following the coup was of course an unforseen side effect.......

Nice suggestion. Prove both that the hike in the budget for the MoD was 'massive' AND that it wasn't in line or being brought in line with budgets of MoD's in the region.

[473geo]

I guess a bit of Deja vu regarding the coup too..........

The massive hike in the military budget following the coup was of course an unforseen side effect.......

Nice suggestion. Prove both that the hike in the budget for the MoD was 'massive' AND that it wasn't in line or being brought in line with budgets of MoD's in the region.

If memory serves me correctly between 17 and 24%.....go look it up.....

[rubl]

Why move to dissolve PTP on such paltry grounds, which will only cause more claims of judicial activism. Surely the involvement of Thaksin would be stronger cause and more easily provable.

Looks like the bros might be facing facing fraud charges (conspiracy to defraud?)

Why not try and win an expletive deleted election - might be a better way.

Not buying votes and exploiting the uneducated for support would be another.

Perhaps the democrats should try increasing the education budget when they are next elevated into office

The previous posts deal with elections and fraud, your's with activities AFTER an election. Just an observation, no reproach

[rubl]

I guess a bit of Deja vu regarding the coup too..........

The massive hike in the military budget following the coup was of course an unforseen side effect.......

Nice suggestion. Prove both that the hike in the budget for the MoD was 'massive' AND that it wasn't in line or being brought in line with budgets of MoD's in the region.

If memory serves me correctly between 17 and 24%.....go look it up.....

You 'obviously' didn't see or didn't want to see the AND in my post. You state, you prove. Your posting history suggest I will probably not get a meaningful answer. Never mind, up-to-you, have fun

[473geo]

I guess a bit of Deja vu regarding the coup too..........

The massive hike in the military budget following the coup was of course an unforseen side effect.......

Nice suggestion. Prove both that the hike in the budget for the MoD was 'massive' AND that it wasn't in line or being brought in line with budgets of MoD's in the region.

If memory serves me correctly between 17 and 24%.....go look it up.....

You 'obviously' didn't see or didn't want to see the AND in my post. You state, you prove. Your posting history suggest I will probably not get a meaningful answer. Never mind, up-to-you, have fun

Rubl a 17% + hike is massive to me, you want to try and make it look, 'in line' or lessen the impact go do it!!!!

[FangFerang]

This is pointless drivel. The sad truth is that most Thais don't care, and I don't either. Rules? Neither side follows them. Propriety? Neither side can claim it. Dissolving a party for one man's actions is like tossing out the baby with the bathwater.

Wake up,people. We're only talking to ourselves. Go back to whinging about taxes.

[Buchholz]

I guess a bit of Deja vu regarding the coup too..........

The massive hike in the military budget following the coup was of course an unforseen side effect.......

not sure what that has to do with the post above yours.

Anyway, not really any sense of deja vu for another coup coming. As said, I do get a definite deja vu with discussing party dissolution as cited above.

Every country's military budgets go up and down over time. Periods of underfunding are followed by periods of time when it goes up.

.

Edited March 17, 2012 by Buchholz

[rubl]

Nice suggestion. Prove both that the hike in the budget for the MoD was 'massive' AND that it wasn't in line or being brought in line with budgets of MoD's in the region.

If memory serves me correctly between 17 and 24%.....go look it up.....

You 'obviously' didn't see or didn't want to see the AND in my post. You state, you prove. Your posting history suggest I will probably not get a meaningful answer. Never mind, up-to-you, have fun

Rubl a 17% + hike is massive to me, you want to try and make it look, 'in line' or lessen the impact go do it!!!!

What I was asking was a proof that the hike in MoD budget was extraordinary taking into account the level over the previous years and the level of budget of MoD in surrounding countries.

As usual, this discussion is also a rehash of similar discussions some find necessary to have here every month or so.

[FangFerang]

Worse, Interpol refused to do a manhunt for Thaksin, and they are usually level-headed about apprehending criminals. They reviewed the charges, the documents, and the evidence and decided it was a political issue...not a criminal one.

That speaks volumes. Forever.

I don't like the guy or hate the guy. Especially here, he's just a guy, not especially different than the rest of the guys. Let the football match continue after the red card was given. There are other games in the series....

[Buchholz]

Military spending...

2010 ASEAN countries military expenditure as a percent of GDP

?.? (unreported) Myanmar

4.1 Singapore

3.9 Brunei

2.4 Vietnam

2.0 Malaysia

1.5 Thailand

1.1 Cambodia

1.0 Indonesia

0.8 Philippines

0.4 Laos

ASEAN average (not counting unreported Myanmar) = 1.9

On a world scale of military expenditure as a percent of GDP, Thailand ranks # 89.

Actually when putting in the updated figures for 2011, Thailand has dropped several places in comparison to their neighbors and is now even further below the average expenditures than they were before:

2011 ASEAN countries military expenditure as a percent of GDP

4.9 Singapore

4.5 Brunei

3.0 Cambodia

3.0 Indonesia

2.5 Vietnam

2.1 Burma

2.0 Malaysia

1.8 Thailand

0.9 Philippines

0.5 Laos

ASEAN average = 2.5

On a world scale of military expenditure as a percent of GDP, Thailand ranks # 85.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Edited March 17, 2012 by Buchholz

[rubl]

The Thai MoD budget in THB, constant 2009 US$ and % of GDP.

Goto http://milexdata.sipri.org/ , select Thailand and <submit>.

Look at the data and try to interpret. Better still return to the OP of "Dem's consider seeking Pheu Thai dissolution"

Edited March 17, 2012 by rubl

[473geo]

The Thai MoD budget in THB, constant 2009 US$ and % of GDP.

Goto http://milexdata.sipri.org/ , select Thailand and <submit>.

Look at the data and try to interpret. Better still return to the OP of "Dem's consider seeking Pheu Thai dissolution"

2004

1.1

2005

1.1

2006

1.1

2007

1.3

2008

1.6

2009

1.9

Interesting as the GDP increased 2007 so did the percentage, making up for lost time vehicle repairs I heard

But anyway as you say back to the OP

[rubl]

The Thai MoD budget in THB, constant 2009 US$ and % of GDP.

Goto http://milexdata.sipri.org/ , select Thailand and <submit>.

Look at the data and try to interpret. Better still return to the OP of "Dem's consider seeking Pheu Thai dissolution"

2004 1.1

20051.1

2006 1.1

2007 1.3

2008 1.6

2009 1.9

Interesting as the GDP increased 2007 so did the percentage, making up for lost time vehicle repairs I heard

But anyway as you say back to the OP

Manipulation, how to suggest, ignoring related data, stressing that when the sun shines it may be hot.

year THB US$ %GDP

2004 74.1 2,528 1.1

2005 78.1 2,547 1.1

2006 85.1 2,654 1.1

2007 115 3,498 1.3

2008 142 4,115 1.6

2009 168 4,907 1.9

2010 154 4,336 ?

2011 170 - 1.4-1.5

NOTE: THB and US$ in billions, US$ adjusted to 2009 level

Edited March 17, 2012 by rubl

[yellow1red1]

dissolve all political parties. They are not a small reason that democracy isn't working, will never work. What has it done for the World? 55555

[yoshiwara]

If the reason for the coup was the electoral violations, power abuses by the executive, and rampant corruption at all levels of the political machine in charge at the time, unstoppable by constitutional means, plus extra-ordinarily damaging to the nation as a whole, and with reasonable expectations of those harms continuance, then what actions were taken after the coup to prevent these continued violations can not be ruled out as invalid. Retrospectively or not, they're being just a continuance of the reason for their being enacted.

If the political and constitutional mechanisms were not functioning as intended, what is the course to take?Certainly those causing the problems while in control are going to do nothing to stop their crimes since they saw nothing to strong enough to impede their avariciousness. Apparently a belief in their 'right by power', to do as they choose, to whomever they choose.

We know what the situation was, and we know the actions taken, and we know those who were removed from power seek yet again to entrench their power and gain a measure of revenge on those who stopped them before. Using legal argument, street intimidation of opposition and media outlets, coopting intellectuals, and raw political power plays using money and favors and intimidations as tools.

The question is, what will be done when the situation surpasses what caused the the coup before?

Will it be allowed to reach it's logical conclusion, no matter who burns in it's pyre,

or will some modulating force reappear to damp it down.

Ignoring the possiblity of 'random chance' causing a snuffing of the existing situation.

One thing is clear, success at a crooked ballot box is not the gift of carte blanche to ANY winning group to do just as they please and ignore the betterment of the populace for their own gains. Once they do that rapaciously, then they cross the rubicon and civil war can't be ruled out.

One of the interesting questions is why when the coup took place there wasn't an elected government in place. Thaksin was in power as a caretaker PM (the government's term of office had expired) and why the coup took place at that moment in time.

[TAWP]

I don't think the democrats should seek dissolution of PTP. Since it will not have any real long-term effects for making the system cleaner. The crooks that want to game the system still can, even if they have to use their kids or gardeners to get there.

What the democrats instead should do is hunt down every case of fraud, get them investigated and guilty MPs banned and in time for next election hammer that PTP has no respect for peoples votes and cheats in elections and in rule.

[Buchholz]

Yes, it is so underhandedly to want the election process to be free of obvious frauds.

Well lets have the party declared illegal......then the riots can start.....then you can all sit around and wonder how to pin it all on Thaksin

One person committing fraud should never be a reason to dissolve a party, and people think this kind of political legal entitlement should continue with no change to the ridiculous mechanism.........no leave everything as it is.......chaotic claim and counter claim.....no time to fix the country

And if members of PTP executive are proven to be party to the fraud, what should be done; jail them? Of course you can't if they happen to be MPs. I wonder how many MPs in one party have to be deferring prosecution by their elected status before they become unworthy to retain office. Every day PTP looks more like a criminal conspiracy.

It's not just any "one person", it needs to be a member of the party's executive board involved in the fraud in order for party dissolution to occur.

The dissolution occurs on the basis of presumed collusion, similar to the RICO Act, in that decisions of the executive board, just like organized crime figures of the RICO, are not made in a vacuum.

The executives are aware of any electoral fraud being conducted by the party.

They are punished collectively as a result of the conspiratorial nature of decisions to commit electoral fraud with a dissolution.

.

[animatic]

If the reason for the coup was the electoral violations, power abuses by the executive, and rampant corruption at all levels of the political machine in charge at the time, unstoppable by constitutional means, plus extra-ordinarily damaging to the nation as a whole, and with reasonable expectations of those harms continuance, then what actions were taken after the coup to prevent these continued violations can not be ruled out as invalid. Retrospectively or not, they're being just a continuance of the reason for their being enacted.

If the political and constitutional mechanisms were not functioning as intended, what is the course to take?Certainly those causing the problems while in control are going to do nothing to stop their crimes since they saw nothing to strong enough to impede their avariciousness. Apparently a belief in their 'right by power', to do as they choose, to whomever they choose.

We know what the situation was, and we know the actions taken, and we know those who were removed from power seek yet again to entrench their power and gain a measure of revenge on those who stopped them before. Using legal argument, street intimidation of opposition and media outlets, coopting intellectuals, and raw political power plays using money and favors and intimidations as tools.

The question is, what will be done when the situation surpasses what caused the the coup before?

Will it be allowed to reach it's logical conclusion, no matter who burns in it's pyre,

or will some modulating force reappear to damp it down.

Ignoring the possiblity of 'random chance' causing a snuffing of the existing situation.

One thing is clear, success at a crooked ballot box is not the gift of carte blanche to ANY winning group to do just as they please and ignore the betterment of the populace for their own gains. Once they do that rapaciously, then they cross the rubicon and civil war can't be ruled out.

One of the interesting questions is why when the coup took place there wasn't an elected government in place. Thaksin was in power as a caretaker PM (the government's term of office had expired) and why the coup took place at that moment in time.

• Thaksin had disolved the parliament on his own.

• He had failed to run a legitimate election in the required time.

• The election commissioners were going to jail after having been fired.

• Thaksin's legitimate term as Caretaker had expired, as noted be all.

• He had gone to the palace for discussions, and then publicly resigned from office the next day.

• His acting Deputy PM became the caretaker PM.

• A week later Thaksin just announced to the world he was PM again. <<<

• He was told this wasn't possibly legitimate until at least confirmed by HRM.

• He never returned to the palace for confirmation or publishment in the Royal Gazette.

Maybe realizing he would not be reconfirmed, maybe just from arrogance.

• He DID go to The UN in NYC to speak as if he was the Prime Minister Of Thailand,

and not the lapsed and self restored caretaker he was in reality. It was said many times that, he did not have the constitutional authority to do so, he ignored the legal advice.

• There was no government AT ALL except for Thaksins saying he was the PM, and deposing the acting Caretaker PM his former Deputy. And that DPM and most of the cabinet also having resigned their caretaker jobs when their terms expired. And the Judiciary which hadn't been assigned to figure out the constitutional; crisis at hand. Basically a giant loophole in the '97 constitution, that no one imagined this scenario.There was no Parliament and no functional government cabinet and PM. Only the ministries functioning in a holding pattern.

No doubt Thaksin's ignoring existing and still valid constitutional protocol, and 'going to the UN as PM' instigated the coup. Though his arrogance towards all others, including the highest chair's constitutional duties, and suborning of the checks and balances had well set the stage for it.

Edited March 18, 2012 by animatic

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post of a possibly defammatory nature has been removed.

[volk666]

Small correction to Animatic's post above - back in 2006 Thaksin disappeared for six weeks, not just one week, after the failed April elections and televised address to the nation.

He marked his unexpected return by gathering all the top bureaucrats and declaring war on "invisible hands" and demanding bureaucrats to take sides. Prem replied with his "government is just a jokey, not the owner" speech that has become a darling of all anti-coup crusaders who usually suffer the selective amnesia regarding that May and June and Thaksin speech that sent chills down lots of spines.

[tlansford]

I don't think the democrats should seek dissolution of PTP. Since it will not have any real long-term effects for making the system cleaner. The crooks that want to game the system still can, even if they have to use their kids or gardeners to get there.

What the democrats instead should do is hunt down every case of fraud, get them investigated and guilty MPs banned and in time for next election hammer that PTP has no respect for peoples votes and cheats in elections and in rule.

That is a good point. I agree about the dissolution - from both sides, too.

The Dems have lost to the TRT, PPP, PTP at the polls. The dems are not stupid people, so it should occur to them that a winning strategy might look like something "new".

I'm not sure they'll think of it, though.

[tlansford]

If the reason for the coup was the electoral violations, power abuses by the executive, and rampant corruption at all levels of the political machine in charge at the time, unstoppable by constitutional means, plus extra-ordinarily damaging to the nation as a whole, and with reasonable expectations of those harms continuance, then what actions were taken after the coup to prevent these continued violations can not be ruled out as invalid. Retrospectively or not, they're being just a continuance of the reason for their being enacted.

If the political and constitutional mechanisms were not functioning as intended, what is the course to take?Certainly those causing the problems while in control are going to do nothing to stop their crimes since they saw nothing to strong enough to impede their avariciousness. Apparently a belief in their 'right by power', to do as they choose, to whomever they choose.

We know what the situation was, and we know the actions taken, and we know those who were removed from power seek yet again to entrench their power and gain a measure of revenge on those who stopped them before. Using legal argument, street intimidation of opposition and media outlets, coopting intellectuals, and raw political power plays using money and favors and intimidations as tools.

The question is, what will be done when the situation surpasses what caused the the coup before?

Will it be allowed to reach it's logical conclusion, no matter who burns in it's pyre,

or will some modulating force reappear to damp it down.

Ignoring the possiblity of 'random chance' causing a snuffing of the existing situation.

One thing is clear, success at a crooked ballot box is not the gift of carte blanche to ANY winning group to do just as they please and ignore the betterment of the populace for their own gains. Once they do that rapaciously, then they cross the rubicon and civil war can't be ruled out.

One of the interesting questions is why when the coup took place there wasn't an elected government in place. Thaksin was in power as a caretaker PM (the government's term of office had expired) and why the coup took place at that moment in time.

• Thaksin had disolved the parliament on his own.

• He had failed to run a legitimate election in the required time.

• The election commissioners were going to jail after having been fired.

• Thaksin's legitimate term as Caretaker had expired, as noted be all.

• He had gone to the palace for discussions, and then publicly resigned from office the next day.

• His acting Deputy PM became the caretaker PM.

• A week later Thaksin just announced to the world he was PM again. <<<

• He was told this wasn't possibly legitimate until at least confirmed by HRM.

• He never returned to the palace for confirmation or publishment in the Royal Gazette.

Maybe realizing he would not be reconfirmed, maybe just from arrogance.

• He DID go to The UN in NYC to speak as if he was the Prime Minister Of Thailand,

and not the lapsed and self restored caretaker he was in reality. It was said many times that, he did not have the constitutional authority to do so, he ignored the legal advice.

• There was no government AT ALL except for Thaksins saying he was the PM, and deposing the acting Caretaker PM his former Deputy. And that DPM and most of the cabinet also having resigned their caretaker jobs when their terms expired. And the Judiciary which hadn't been assigned to figure out the constitutional; crisis at hand. Basically a giant loophole in the '97 constitution, that no one imagined this scenario.There was no Parliament and no functional government cabinet and PM. Only the ministries functioning in a holding pattern.

No doubt Thaksin's ignoring existing and still valid constitutional protocol, and 'going to the UN as PM' instigated the coup. Though his arrogance towards all others, including the highest chair's constitutional duties, and suborning of the checks and balances had well set the stage for it.

a whole lot in your post, but could you clarify that second point about an election, please?

I understand that the previous election results had been annulled by the EC causing a constitutional crisis, but I don't see that an election had not been called, much less in the proper time. The election was officially scheduled at the time of the coup.

[volk666]

There was no scheduled elections at the time of the coup, the EC had just been appointed a couple of days earlier and they hadn't started working yet.