Thai court dismisses complaint against ruling party

by Thanaporn Promyamyai

BANGKOK, July 13, 2012 (AFP) - Thailand's ruling party escaped the threat of dissolution on Friday after the Constitutional Court dismissed an opposition complaint that had raised fears of reigniting the kingdom's bitter splits.

"The Court dismiss all the petitions," said Nurak Marpraneet, one of eight judges at the Bangkok court, which had been flanked by security forces in anticipation of the ruling.

The court found complaints against plans by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's party to amend the constitution -- drawn up under the military junta that deposed her divisive brother Thaksin -- were unfounded.

Opposition Democrats, which were swept out of power in a landslide election win for Yingluck last year, alleged the efforts to amend the constitution signalled a threat to the deeply-revered monarchy.

"There are not sufficient facts to convince the Court that the defendants are trying to overthrow the constitutional monarchy," said Nurak, adding a drafting assembly had yet to be elected.

Hundreds of police officers surrounded the court building in the hours leading up to the decision as the country braced for a possible violent reaction to the verdict.

Yingluck's party vowed to go ahead with the amendment.

"Puea Thai will call meeting next week to map out our next move, but we are adamant that we will have to amend the constitution because it is a social contract with our supporters, who voted for us in the hope they would get a new charter," party spokesman Pormpong Nopparit told AFP.

Political tensions in Thailand have spiralled since huge anti-Thaksin rallies helped topple the tycoon, who draws support from rural and working class "Red Shirts" but is reviled by the Bangkok-based elite and military.

Judicial rulings have played a key part in Thailand's volatile recent past, with two pro-Thaksin premiers forced from office in 2008 by the courts.

Their departure made way for the Democrats, who are backed by the military and Bangkok elite, to take power in a parliamentary vote.

Puea Thai swept to power last year on a wave of Thaksin support following deadly 2010 Red Shirts street protests.

But the Democrats, who also fear the move could be used to open the way for Thaksin's return, alleged the underlying motivation threatens Thailand's system of constitutional monarchy.

The complaint was based on the "overconcern of the petitioner for the monarchy", Nurak said.

The Democrats said they accepted the ruling on Friday. "We are not going to create any conflicts or agitate anything," said party spokesman Chavanond Intarakomalyasut.

-- (c) Copyright AFP 2012-07-13

So, can they continue with the CDA, or do they need a referendum for that?

Sent from my shoe phone

OK, now the question: Will the ruling party or opposition party file the next set of complaints (whines) with the courts? To be fair, it is the ruling party's turn.

People will now say the decision is because of the threats, or maybe candy boxes from overseas, or whatever. I think it is the right decision. I am not crazy about the idea of handing PT a blank check (or cheque as some of you prefer) but until there is actually a draft written and it is clear what they want to change then there is no real basis for stopping the process. Later, if they propose wiping out the checks and balances or changes laws which directly benefit Thaksin, the formal complaints, based on actual proposed wording, can be raised.

Edited July 13, 201213 yr by Joeb

So it seems. Guess Thaksin, Yingluck, PTP knew the outcome.

Common sense prevailed.

_

Back to square one for the time being.

so, to be clear, is that a win win situation?

Common sense prevailed.

_

_

Thai court seems like American Supreme Court

Get ready for the Dems to throw their collective rattles out of the pram. Hahaha!

Well there goes the war.

But rest assured the red shirts will not be letting there guns get dirty.

They know only threats and violence. It is unfortunate that they have a ego maniac boss with lots of money.

"The court found that complaints against plans by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's party to amend the constitution -- drawn up under the military junta that deposed her divisive brother Thaksin -- were unfounded."

Strange choice of words from the judges, would expect them to at least try to appear neutral... or is that simply the media bias creeping in... I would have thought "drawn up under the divisive military junta", would have been more accurate, as it was them deposing Thaksin that struck the most divisive blow to Thailand, surely?

so, to be clear, is that a win win situation?

Thaksin's organised-crime syndicate wins , everyone else loses.

Edited July 13, 201213 yr by Yunla

I think the alleged rumors that Thaksin has everyone (including judges) in his pay-roll is not true.

"The court found that complaints against plans by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's party to amend the constitution -- drawn up under the military junta that deposed her divisive brother Thaksin -- were unfounded."

Strange choice of words from the judges, would expect them to at least try to appear neutral... or is that simply the media bias creeping in... I would have thought "drawn up under the divisive military junta", would have been more accurate, as it was them deposing Thaksin that struck the most divisive blow to Thailand, surely?

Surely not. Thaksin was dividing the profits first.

sent from my Wellcom A90+

so, to be clear, is that a win win situation?

Thaksin's organised-crime syndicate wins , everyone else loses.

Time for another coup?

Like the NY taxi, you can't find a yellow when you need them.

so, to be clear, is that a win win situation?

Thaksin's organised-crime syndicate wins , everyone else loses.

Time for another coup?

Like the NY taxi, you can't find a yellow when you need them.

Man,you've got an addiction to "coup".

Seek assistance!

"The court found that complaints against plans by Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's party to amend the constitution -- drawn up under the military junta that deposed her divisive brother Thaksin -- were unfounded."

Strange choice of words from the judges, would expect them to at least try to appear neutral... or is that simply the media bias creeping in... I would have thought "drawn up under the divisive military junta", would have been more accurate, as it was them deposing Thaksin that struck the most divisive blow to Thailand, surely?

Surely not. Thaksin was dividing the profits first.

sent from my Wellcom A90+

Surely that's just normal, everyday Thai business practice... deposing him was the most divisive act as far as the impact on the Thai population...

So how fast can the PTP get a referendum together, to put to the people?

Get ready for the Dems to throw their collective rattles out of the pram. Hahaha!

Just as well the vote went in PTP's favour. God knows what the redshirts would be throwing if the verdict had gone against them.

I see this as a fair outcome.

The Government got told they cannot rewrite the entire charter and can only amend it (through public referendum)

The Government got warned that the court still has the power to block any amendment they feel is against the political structure (i read that as basically a slap on the wrists for the government)

but, the court decided that the government hadn't violated the rules enough to be disbanded.

So yeah, i see this as a win-win situation, they can amend the constitution within the framework of the law.

I think most of the reasonable minded folk here will agree thats a fair outcome.

Time for another coup?

Like the NY taxi, you can't find a yellow when you need them.

Hope you're still laughing after Thaksin is declared Chairman, and all non-Party websites are blocked.

Yes, they ruled this complaint was unfounded.

But did they rule on the validity of modifying the constitution without the necessity of a referrendum to make that modification?

That would seem to be the next step in the process.

Personally I don't care either way...in my opinion it's simply a matter of two groups fiighting over the spoils....no reall possibilty of the common Thai people having their opinion heard anyhow.

The opinion of the average Thai worker is of no importance anyhow.

Just two groups of monied elites wanting to get control of the whole money pie for themselves.

It's all a meaningless farce anyhow.

Edited July 13, 201213 yr by IMA_FARANG

I don't think that the PTP won anything here other than not being disbanded. To rewrite the constitution section by section will take forever and apparently the first thing that they will have to do is rewrite to allow for a referendum. The current constitution does not allow for this according to reports.

I see this as a fair outcome.

The Government got told they cannot rewrite the entire charter and can only amend it (through public referendum)

The Government got warned that the court still has the power to block any amendment they feel is against the political structure (i read that as basically a slap on the wrists for the government)

but, the court decided that the government hadn't violated the rules enough to be disbanded.

So yeah, i see this as a win-win situation, they can amend the constitution within the framework of the law.

I think most of the reasonable minded folk here will agree thats a fair outcome.

No, this is not fair. Thaksin still walks free in London (today).

No, this is not fair. Thaksin still walks free in London (today).

As much as i agree with you on the Thaksin front, that wasn't within the remit of the courts ruling today.

My question is if they wish to amend the constitution, why are they seeking to write a new one ? Why not simply address the areas of the current charter they have a problem with.

In a democracy, elections matter. They confer upon the victor the right to govern. You may like the result, you may not. But the process must be more respected than the outcome. Good decision.

Voranai Vanijaka @voranai

• 
  

Red lady "they are not afraid of pheu thai. They are afraid of us, the red shirts"

Sounds about right. democracy in it's truest form.

My question is if they wish to amend the constitution, why are they seeking to write a new one ? Why not simply address the areas of the current charter they have a problem with.

I think that's been the argument of a lot of people (read: government opposition) - don't rewrite it all, just amend the bits you feel you wanna amend, oh and let us know what you wanna amend!