Jump to content

Abhisit Tells Sodsri Off For Explaining Her Vote


Recommended Posts

Posted

Abhisit tells Sodsri off for explaining her vote

The Nation

30184740-01_big.jpg?1340406984468

BANGKOK: -- Opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva yesterday criticised Election Commission member Sodsri Satayathum for the remarks she made about the decision to disqualify Pheu Thai MP Karun Hosakul.

Abhisit, who is also leader of the Democrat Party, said it was improper for Sodsri to defend her minority position on the matter, adding that some politicians could use her remarks to their political advantage.

"The EC as a whole should explain this matter, or there would be confusion among the public. The agency has already made its decision, but an EC member is trying to defend her minority stance while the majority members are not explaining their side," Abhisit said.

The election watchdog decided to disqualify Karun, who won in last year's election in Bangkok's Constituency 12, for slandering Democrat candidate Tankhun Jit-issara in his campaign speeches.

Sodsri said later that the EC had rejected all other complaints of slander filed against election winners, and that Karun was the first to be disqualified by the agency. She also said that as far as she could remember the Supreme Court's Division on Electoral Litigation had never tried a case in which the election winner was accused of slandering his competitor.

However, Abhisit disagreed, saying that Democrat MP Supachai Jaisamut had been "red-carded" - or disqualified - by the EC for slandering his election rival. The Democrat leader said the law was clear about punishing any election candidates found to have caused a misunderstanding leading to the competitor losing out in popularity stakes.

Meanwhile, Pheu Thai leader Yongyuth Wichaidit said yesterday that the ruling party had not decided on its candidate for the resulting by-election because the Supreme Court had yet to endorse the EC decision on Karun.

Yongyuth said Pheu Thai would wait for the court's decision on the case before picking the candidate. "We will have to act respectfully towards Karun. It is good etiquette for the wife and children not to discuss the inheritance while the ailing man is still alive," he said.

Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan, who was recently disqualified as Pheu Thai party-list MP for failing to vote in last year's general election, said yesterday that the EC had made the decision while one of its five members was absent. As for him becoming a Pheu Thai candidate in the by-election, Jatuporn said he wanted Karun to remain an MP, though if the Supreme Court does endorse his removal, he would be happy to contest for the post.

nationlogo.jpg

-- The Nation 2012-06-23

Posted

PTP reconciliation.

Stick as many Red Shirt leaders in the face of the Opposition as you can.

Jatuporn is a disgrace to mankind.

The Uncle Tom of the working clasd

  • Like 1
Posted

Aren't there rules on standing as an MP in a constituency? Like having to live there for a certain time period( Not sure where Pie Man lives), and the fact you have to have voted in the last election?

  • Like 2
Posted

Aren't there rules on standing as an MP in a constituency? Like having to live there for a certain time period( Not sure where Pie Man lives), and the fact you have to have voted in the last election?

Correct, on both.

Posted

Aren't there rules on standing as an MP in a constituency? Like having to live there for a certain time period( Not sure where Pie Man lives), and the fact you have to have voted in the last election?

Correct, on both.

Yes - but they have a "majority" so they can change the rules. A simple charter change.

Posted

DEM (Mark) always say, "Don't vote for the party that burn the nation and cities" Pow Ban Pow Mueang.

I wonder who they mean? TRT?

Posted

Libel laws here are pretty strict, but what there should be is 'demonstrable damages' i.e. evidence that many voters changed their opinion on Kaun's opponent on hearing (falsely) that he was gay or whatever else. It's difficult to say where you draw the line between criticising your opponents political credentials and slandering him personally.

Posted
Libel laws here are pretty strict, but what there should be is 'demonstrable damages' i.e. evidence that many voters changed their opinion on Kaun's opponent on hearing (falsely) that he was gay or whatever else. It's difficult to say where you draw the line between criticising your opponents political credentials and slandering him personally.

I think personal attacks of the sort Karin did are out of order. Simple as that.

Criticisms about his politics OK. But personal slander. No

Sent from my GT-P1010 using Thaivisa Connect App

Posted

Jatuporn said: " . . . that the EC had made the decision while one of its five members was absent."

20% of the EC's membership, and the decision would still have represented a majority. On the other hand, MPs, who are elected to represent the people, have a habit of being absent on numerous occasions when votes are being taken that will have a significant impact on their constituents.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...