PM Yingluck Abroad On Decision Day: Charter Amendment Verdict

[bigbamboo]

FM Surapong shows Clinton's invitation for PM Yingluck to join the Siem Reap's US-Asean Busienss Forum http://bit.ly/Mex3r7 / via @veen_NT

Why showing this? Was there any doubt that she has been invited? Or is it to brag a bit in front of the adoring populace?

That's just embarrassing.

I thought only White House interns stooped so low for a Clinton.

Edited July 10, 2012 by bigbamboo

[Buchholz]

FM Surapong shows Clinton's invitation for PM Yingluck to join the Siem Reap's US-Asean Busienss Forum http://bit.ly/Mex3r7 / via @veen_NT

Why showing this? Was there any doubt that she has been invited? Or is it to brag a bit in front of the adoring populace?

That's just embarrassing.

I thought only White House interns stooped so low.

You have to remember that this is the same cousin that acted as a DHL delivery boy by hand carrying his relative's new passport to him in Dubai.

Door-to-door customer service from his Foreign Minister Office.

.

Edited July 10, 2012 by Buchholz

[ratcatcher]

FM Surapong shows Clinton's invitation for PM Yingluck to join the Siem Reap's US-Asean Busienss Forum http://bit.ly/Mex3r7 / via @veen_NT

Why showing this? Was there any doubt that she has been invited? Or is it to brag a bit in front of the adoring populace?

That's just embarrassing.

I thought only White House interns stooped so low.

You have to remember that this is the same cousin that acted as a DHL delivery boy by hand carrying his relative's new passport to him in Dubai.

Door-to-door customer service from his Foreign Minister Office.

.

Buchholz, you have to admit he is, to some at least, cute & cuddly.

Perhaps that's one o0f the few tablets so far delivered from China?

[Moruya]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

[ogb]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

Real courts won't base verdicts on assumptions or suspicions - they require evidence/proof, but then again, in Thailand........

[Moruya]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

Real courts won't base verdicts on assumptions or suspicions - they require evidence/proof, but then again, in Thailand........

So the outcome may be that the CC will need to approve a TOR for the CDA B4 KO

[SuneeTH]

Better sell your stock, Thai Baht, etc.

Even PM run away that day, quite sure coup is coming.

[SOTIRIOS]

...nauseating.....

[h90]

Better sell your stock, Thai Baht, etc.

Even PM run away that day, quite sure coup is coming.

Last coup: No problem for the THB.

And if you sell it, where to do you go? Euro? USD? Gold?

[JAG]

Abroad?

Remember Thaksin last went abroad? he never returns.

I smell another coup. The 2012 good coup.

You can't beat a good coup. Parties on the street, flowers for the soldiers, photo oportunities on the tanks for the girls and Thaksin gibbering away on Al Jazeera

Followed by a Junta appointed government blundering around for a year or so, a massive hike in the defence budget, a rejig of the constitution to ensure the coup stagers can never be held to account, followed by an election which Thaksins party wins, despite massive pressure by the Army to try and ensure that the Democrats win.

[ThaiOats]

Just a reminder about the border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand. See that yellow island that the white line runs through? That yellow island is Thailand's so it doesn't make sense that Cambodia would draw their line out like that. If you were to draw a line at the bottom right corner of the red line all the way to the bottom towards Malaysia, the connection would make sense wouldn't it? So again, why is Yingluck going to Cambodia at the invitation of Hillary and Chevron being present?

Edited July 10, 2012 by ThaiOats

[ThaiOats]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

Real courts won't base verdicts on assumptions or suspicions - they require evidence/proof, but then again, in Thailand........

Well they asked Somsak a question in regards to the power bestowed onto the Monarchy in the constitution. If the CDA were to change or remove those articles where the Monarch had power ie: The power for the Monarch to appoint judges or give amnesty, wouldn't it tantamount to usurping the power? Somsak your Pheu Thai, unbiased House Speaker replied "yes, it would". Like I said, not many of us are lawyers and paying attention to detail goes a long way in the court room.

[Buchholz]

Just a reminder about the border dispute between Cambodia and Thailand. See that yellow island that the white line runs through? That yellow island is Thailand's so it doesn't make sense that Cambodia would draw their line out like that. If you were to draw a line at the bottom right corner of the red line all the way to the bottom towards Malaysia, the connection would make sense wouldn't it? So again, why is Yingluck going to Cambodia at the invitation of Hillary and Chevron being present?

The Cambodians didn't draw the absurd line, the French did.

The same as they did at Preah temple, they came up with some ridiculous borderlines, but this maritime border takes the cake for its cock-eyed rendition of a border that juts out as a right angle.

It's not called the Gulf of Cambodia.

.

[ogb]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

Real courts won't base verdicts on assumptions or suspicions - they require evidence/proof, but then again, in Thailand........

Well they asked Somsak a question in regards to the power bestowed onto the Monarchy in the constitution. If the CDA were to change or remove those articles where the Monarch had power ie: The power for the Monarch to appoint judges or give amnesty, wouldn't it tantamount to usurping the power? Somsak your Pheu Thai, unbiased House Speaker replied "yes, it would". Like I said, not many of us are lawyers and paying attention to detail goes a long way in the court room.

A lawyer should know that hypotheticals are not facts, proof or evidence, (and if he didn't, a proper judge would).

[h90]

Abroad?

Remember Thaksin last went abroad? he never returns.

I smell another coup. The 2012 good coup.

You can't beat a good coup. Parties on the street, flowers for the soldiers, photo oportunities on the tanks for the girls and Thaksin gibbering away on Al Jazeera

Followed by a Junta appointed government blundering around for a year or so, a massive hike in the defence budget, a rejig of the constitution to ensure the coup stagers can never be held to account, followed by an election which Thaksins party wins, despite massive pressure by the Army to try and ensure that the Democrats win.

they didn't hike the defense budget, they just reversed the previous cut of it. The military appointed government was the only one I saw in Thailand that wasn't corrupt. So blundering doesn't fit.

And at the election there wasn't any pressure. Massive vote buying by Thaksin as always.....

[ThaiOats]

Well they asked Somsak a question in regards to the power bestowed onto the Monarchy in the constitution. If the CDA were to change or remove those articles where the Monarch had power ie: The power for the Monarch to appoint judges or give amnesty, wouldn't it tantamount to usurping the power? Somsak your Pheu Thai, unbiased House Speaker replied "yes, it would". Like I said, not many of us are lawyers and paying attention to detail goes a long way in the court room.

A lawyer should know that hypotheticals are not facts, proof or evidence, (and if he didn't, a proper judge would).

I never said it was a fact or evidence did I? The point was that there are many ways in which power from the Monarch can be usurped and not through Article 2 only. As for evidence, there were several evidence or video clips from the Red-Shirt rallies that points to a motive of why Article 68 might be violated and honestly those people cheering on the Red-Leaders need to.... ahh nevermind.

[TomTao]

I find it amazing that the PM is always absent whenever an important event happens, i.e passing bills designed to exhonorate big brother or the passing of a constitutional court ruling that could see the governnent disbanded.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Thaivisa Connect App

[waza]

Well they asked Somsak a question in regards to the power bestowed onto the Monarchy in the constitution. If the CDA were to change or remove those articles where the Monarch had power ie: The power for the Monarch to appoint judges or give amnesty, wouldn't it tantamount to usurping the power? Somsak your Pheu Thai, unbiased House Speaker replied "yes, it would". Like I said, not many of us are lawyers and paying attention to detail goes a long way in the court room.

A lawyer should know that hypotheticals are not facts, proof or evidence, (and if he didn't, a proper judge would).

I never said it was a fact or evidence did I? The point was that there are many ways in which power from the Monarch can be usurped and not through Article 2 only. As for evidence, there were several evidence or video clips from the Red-Shirt rallies that points to a motive of why Article 68 might be violated and honestly those people cheering on the Red-Leaders need to.... ahh nevermind.

I dont think its an accident.............

[Keesters]

Is that her official position?

No it's her mission position

[tlansford]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

therefore one understands that changing the country from a constitutional monarchy is illegal and of course a legal amendment process is not permitted to do something illegal, therefore the everyone should chill out and recognize that this is just the opposition throwing a wrench into the amendment process rather than the opposition participating in a meaningful way.

[khaowong1]

Perhaps....... in the vain of reconciliation, the spirit of working together and finally taking overall consideration of others into play, the esteemed court, could be so kind as to inquire as to when her importantness will be available and back in Thailand as to be able to be in attendance , and then the court would make the announcement at this much more convenient time.

After all we all know how much she would want to be in attendance.

I think just a nice re conciliatory type of gesture on the part of the court.

Maybe she could send flowers as a token of solidarity..

[ThaiOats]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

therefore one understands that changing the country from a constitutional monarchy is illegal and of course a legal amendment process is not permitted to do something illegal, therefore the everyone should chill out and recognize that this is just the opposition throwing a wrench into the amendment process rather than the opposition participating in a meaningful way.

Again Section 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution. For example: What if they amended or take this out:

Section 171. The King appoints the Prime Minister and not more than thirty-five other Ministers to constitute the Council of Ministers having the duty to carry out the administration of State affairs with collective accountability.

Wouldn't that conflict with the latter half of Article 68 and fall into the last part of the complainant's points? As for the second part, it's written that the amending process can only be done by Parliament not by a CDA. What the government CAN do, is to propose amendments to the charter but why don't they? Instead, they want to amend 291 to form a CDA and rewrite the whole charter because once it's in the hands of the CDA, it by-passes everything the current constitution has which means, they can indeed get away with turning it into another form of government.

Edited July 12, 2012 by ThaiOats

[CWMcMurray]

Bit wouldn't this mean that the case is premature?

Shouldn't the case come "if" they try to change in a way that is prohibited ?

Similarly.. You do not automatically get a speeding ticket if you drive a Porsche because the car is cable of reaching high speeds.., you still have to actually break the law first

[waza]

Bit wouldn't this mean that the case is premature?

Shouldn't the case come "if" they try to change in a way that is prohibited ?

Similarly.. You do not automatically get a speeding ticket if you drive a Porsche because the car is cable of reaching high speeds.., you still have to actually break the law first

Using the same analogy shouldnt that Porsche be determined to be registered and road worthy before its driven?

[tlansford]

Quite amusing, your use of the term 'unelected'

You may recall the PT election platform included constitutional amendments, and the electorate didn't seem to mind, did it?.

(they even had an election slogan: 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts'

You might like to read Sec 68 of the constitution, and even if you can see how the court decided to accept the petitions without the Attorney General's recommendation, I'd really like to see how the proposed amendments can be said to in any way : overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution ?

(Of course, I ask that question on the assumption we are not talking about a kangaroo court)

The problem is that there is no list of proposed amendments. Therefore one assumes that the whole shooting match is up for sale. Therefore......

therefore one understands that changing the country from a constitutional monarchy is illegal and of course a legal amendment process is not permitted to do something illegal, therefore the everyone should chill out and recognize that this is just the opposition throwing a wrench into the amendment process rather than the opposition participating in a meaningful way.

Again Section 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution. For example: What if they amended or take this out:

Section 171. The King appoints the Prime Minister and not more than thirty-five other Ministers to constitute the Council of Ministers having the duty to carry out the administration of State affairs with collective accountability.

Wouldn't that conflict with the latter half of Article 68 and fall into the last part of the complainant's points? As for the second part, it's written that the amending process can only be done by Parliament not by a CDA. What the government CAN do, is to propose amendments to the charter but why don't they? Instead, they want to amend 291 to form a CDA and rewrite the whole charter because once it's in the hands of the CDA, it by-passes everything the current constitution has which means, they can indeed get away with turning it into another form of government.

"because once it's in the hands of the CDA, it by-passes everything the current constitution has which means, they can indeed get away with turning it into another form of government."

It is unbelievable that people keep stating this kind of information. I'll let phiphidon's recent post address this issue again.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/568019-charter-change-brings-up-serious-legal-dilemma-thai-editorial/page__view__findpost__p__5464622

[soundman]

The connection of many posts in this topic to the OP, are tenuous at best.

Please try to veer the discussion back to "Yingluck's Absense on DD".

Thank-you for your co-operation.

[SuneeTH]

Better stock up and fill up.

PM and MP are leaving the country.

Coup quite possible.

[SuneeTH]

Bit wouldn't this mean that the case is premature?

Shouldn't the case come "if" they try to change in a way that is prohibited ?

Similarly.. You do not automatically get a speeding ticket if you drive a Porsche because the car is cable of reaching high speeds.., you still have to actually break the law first

So if you come premature, than no charge?

I think the service is already provided, and you have to pay regardless.

[saltandpepper]

Better stock up and fill up.

PM and MP are leaving the country.

Coup quite possible.

no kidding?

[philw]

I find it amazing that the PM is always absent whenever an important event happens, i.e passing bills designed to exhonorate big brother or the passing of a constitutional court ruling that could see the governnent disbanded.

Sent from my GT-I9003 using Thaivisa Connect App

If you think more deeply about it, you will find there is a reason.

There is also a reason why she did not vote on the contentious bills.