Accused MPs Not Off The Hook Yet, High Court Declares

[punisher]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

That is in the bills as there were presented at that time.

What the final intent was, as stated by EVERY SINGLE MP

stating their written reasons for doing it is another matter.

Well if the final intent has been proved that there was no cumulative intent to overthrow the head of state etc. there was obviously no individual intent. It's not as if MP Somchai is going to state

"I Somchai do honestly declare that by voting for the change of Article 291 so that a CDA can be formed I was looking to overthrow the head of state etc."

Surely only members of the PAD, it's supporters and the 5 petitioners of Article 68 can be that stupid to believe that is the case?

However this is what happens when the CC has different interpretations of the law each time it looks at something.

Nothing about intent was proved.

Only that the documents as written didn't break the constitution.

Nothing more -nothing less.

Intent may be proved from the MP's statements,

especially if one or two (accidentally) actually tell the truth...

Well great constitution then, if a mp of government can't say what he think,or what he likes to say,reason enough to change the constitution,on top it's still not clear if the cc even had the right to rule about the amending,and even if they have the right,they rule for what?Iff ptp did not even say what they want to change,this shows clearly they scared to lose their jobs,also it's amazing that 2-3 guys from cc what drafted the army constitution[2007] now have the right to decide about a new constitution,i would say nit noi biased

[animatic]

quote name='whybother' timestamp='1342401945' post='5488493'

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

That is in the bills as there were presented at that time.

What the final intent was, as stated by EVERY SINGLE MP

stating their written reasons for doing it is another matter.

Well if the final intent has been proved that there was no cumulative intent to overthrow the head of state etc. there was obviously no individual intent. It's not as if MP Somchai is going to state

"I Somchai do honestly declare that by voting for the change of Article 291 so that a CDA can be formed I was looking to overthrow the head of state etc."

Surely only members of the PAD, it's supporters and the 5 petitioners of Article 68 can be that stupid to believe that is the case?

However this is what happens when the CC has different interpretations of the law each time it looks at something.

Nothing about intent was proved.

Only that the documents as written didn't break the constitution.

Nothing more -nothing less.

Intent may be proved from the MP's statements,

especially if one or two (accidentally) actually tell the truth...

Seeing as they were voting to amend Section 291 so as to form a constitution drafting assembly/agency, I can't see what more you are going to get from an MP's statement especially if they tell the truth.

Q. Do you wish to put your vote towards amending Section 291 so as to form a CDA.

A. Yes.

Why do you and others attribute some dark deeds to this I don't know. Well I do know, the truth is inconveniently banal and does not fit in with the image of the PTP smuggling thaksin back in with full pardon and money repayment having rewritten the constitution (incidentally coercing the entire CDA to do so) to make such a thing happen. Abhisit and his myth machine has a lot to answer for.

That is not the question the court asked them.

More distraction from the point.

[animatic]

quote name='animatic' timestamp='1342404680' post='5488625'

That is in the bills as there were presented at that time.

What the final intent was, as stated by EVERY SINGLE MP

stating their written reasons for doing it is another matter.

Well if the final intent has been proved that there was no cumulative intent to overthrow the head of state etc. there was obviously no individual intent. It's not as if MP Somchai is going to state

"I Somchai do honestly declare that by voting for the change of Article 291 so that a CDA can be formed I was looking to overthrow the head of state etc."

Surely only members of the PAD, it's supporters and the 5 petitioners of Article 68 can be that stupid to believe that is the case?

However this is what happens when the CC has different interpretations of the law each time it looks at something.

Nothing about intent was proved.

Only that the documents as written didn't break the constitution.

Nothing more -nothing less.

Intent may be proved from the MP's statements,

especially if one or two (accidentally) actually tell the truth...

Seeing as they were voting to amend Section 291 so as to form a constitution drafting assembly/agency, I can't see what more you are going to get from an MP's statement especially if they tell the truth.

Q. Do you wish to put your vote towards amending Section 291 so as to form a CDA.

A. Yes.

Why do you and others attribute some dark deeds to this I don't know. Well I do know, the truth is inconveniently banal and does not fit in with the image of the PTP smuggling thaksin back in with full pardon and money repayment having rewritten the constitution (incidentally coercing the entire CDA to do so) to make such a thing happen. Abhisit and his myth machine has a lot to answer for.

And now you know the mind of every PT member.

And surprise surprise they all think just like you do.

You truly are amazing.

What is / was in the mind of every PTP member,

who has his pre-signed resignation papers in the hands of Dear Leader Thaksin.

Of course it is a VERY valid question to ask them WHY they are choosing to re-write the constitution.

The truth will set you free, but send you back to the countryside

with no contacts and your company's contracts rescinded.

[OzMick]

CC : "Why did you vote for a complete re-write of the constitution?"

PTP MP : "Thaksin told me to do it."

Or he would publicly display my pre-signed resignation letter

that he is holding over my head like the sword of Damocles.

Unless you know different with an identified source ,that "pre-signed resignation letter" is just a myth promulgated by the english language newspapers.

I've often wondered about this as well as I can't see a pre signed resignation letter being of any use if it's not dated. Just doesn't add up to me.

Would you consider having pre-signed blank cheques in your wallet safe because they are undated?

[waza]

Thaksin cant afford a referendum to decide if the constitution needs amending at all. It may not be uncostitutional to amend the charter to give Thaksin retrospective amnesty and return the funds corrupted from the Thai treasury but it is immoral.

The present constitution is not stopping the government from managing Thailand for the benifit of all Thais but the persuit of the amendment at all costs is.

Edited July 16, 2012 by waza

[virtualtraveller]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

[Moruya]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

You'd have more chance trying to explain hexadecimal to the Red faction

[McMagus]

It intrigues me the way so many posters here get caught up in Thai politics. What irritates me most is the arrogant assumption that because Mr. Issan was paid to come to BKK to protest it is suddenly a red plot and he has no legitimate understanding of politics. Are they uneducated?... a lot are. Are they stupid?..... not any more so than any other person. When will the posters here realise that our view of what counts as democracy is not their same view. Here is a feudal society with a veneer of democracy. And before I get shouted down about how great it is in the west, we have had hundreds of years to get it right and we still stuff it up... case in point the election of G.W. Bush and the Florida fiasco. As for me, it's their country and it's up to them to fashion the style of government that suits them and fight for what they believe in. If it happens to transpire that what they settle for is not what we westerners would like to see... OK...it's their country and their pathway to tread.

[Moruya]

It intrigues me the way so many posters here get caught up in Thai politics. What irritates me most is the arrogant assumption that because Mr. Issan was paid to come to BKK to protest it is suddenly a red plot and he has no legitimate understanding of politics. Are they uneducated?... a lot are. Are they stupid?..... not any more so than any other person. When will the posters here realise that our view of what counts as democracy is not their same view. Here is a feudal society with a veneer of democracy. And before I get shouted down about how great it is in the west, we have had hundreds of years to get it right and we still stuff it up... case in point the election of G.W. Bush and the Florida fiasco. As for me, it's their country and it's up to them to fashion the style of government that suits them and fight for what they believe in. If it happens to transpire that what they settle for is not what we westerners would like to see... OK...it's their country and their pathway to tread.

Bagus, bagus, Mister McMagus!

You are right.

I'd love to see real policies being persued. Road safty, education, health, public transport, flooding etc. than watch the eternal soap-opera that id Thai Bolloticks.

[h90]

Please can someone tell me who is allowed to make these complaints which are going to be investigated? I am curious as to what position Chamlong is in to file this complaint, and who do the courts take complaints from? I am not sure whether Chamlong is part of an official political party, or anyone could file a complaint like this?

It seems a lot of work load etc for the courts if anyone in the country can file a complaint which will be investigated by the courts.

That is a problem.....In Austria the same is happening with people complaining at court that some politicians are Nazis or discredit religion.

A torrent of law suits and at the end nothing (beside the waste of tax payers money).

There are always freaks that complain about something. On the other hand if you don't allow it, than it is dictatorship.

[h90]

It intrigues me the way so many posters here get caught up in Thai politics. What irritates me most is the arrogant assumption that because Mr. Issan was paid to come to BKK to protest it is suddenly a red plot and he has no legitimate understanding of politics. Are they uneducated?... a lot are. Are they stupid?..... not any more so than any other person. When will the posters here realise that our view of what counts as democracy is not their same view. Here is a feudal society with a veneer of democracy. And before I get shouted down about how great it is in the west, we have had hundreds of years to get it right and we still stuff it up... case in point the election of G.W. Bush and the Florida fiasco. As for me, it's their country and it's up to them to fashion the style of government that suits them and fight for what they believe in. If it happens to transpire that what they settle for is not what we westerners would like to see... OK...it's their country and their pathway to tread.

Well have a critic eye on what is happening in the west and you'll find that there are a lot problems that are similar to Thailand.

USA: A two party system without real choice

France: A strange system that blocks smaller parties. With a nice share of voters you don't have anyone in Parliament.

Greek: the strongest party just get 50 MPs as gift.

Austria: The parties in power uses huge amounts for promotions in all media+they direct finance media and if they would tell good things about the opposition they would cut of this money.

Everywhere is little bit Thailand.....

[phiphidon]

And now you know the mind of every PT member.

And surprise surprise they all think just like you do.

You truly are amazing.

For once , just spend some time slowly reading what I've written and it will become clear that it is not possible to amend section 291 of the constitution in such a way that the head of state is overthrown. Better still read the section yourself and learn about the constitution and how it can be altered and how it can't instead of believing all the hype about what the bill was about.

[nurofiend]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

[Thaddeus]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

Was it?..... here are their pre-election promises.

• national minimum daily wage of Bt300 ($10) nationally
  
• Universal medical care with patients making a co-payment of Bt30 ($1) per consultation
  
• Credit cards for farmers and a guaranteed price of Bt15,000 – Bt20,000 ($488 – $651) per ton for unmilled rice
  
• A moratorium for household debt up to Bt500,000 ($16,285) per household, with emphasis on debt reduction for teachers, farmers and civil servants
  
• A minimum monthly salary of Bt15,000 ($500) for university graduates and a “One Tablet-PC per Child” project for school children
  
• A 23.3 per cent reduction in corporate tax rates in the first year (from 30 to 20 percent) with a further 13 percent reduction in its second year to a flat 20 percent.
  
• Reduced taxes for first home and first car buyers
  
• A standard Bt20 (65 cent) fare for all Bangkok’s mass transit rail lines (MRT)
  
• High-speed rail lines linking major provincial cities in the north, northeast, east and upper south regions
  
• Rural village development funds of between Bt300,000 and Bt1 million ($9,770 – $32,573) per year
  
• A welfare allowance of Bt600 ($19.55) per month for citizens over 60, increasing by Bt100 ($3.20) at 70, and 80, and rising by a further Bt200 ($6.40) at 90.
  
• Free Wi-Fi and Internet access in public places
  
• 30km (18.8 mile) of levees to protect Bangkok and satellite towns from Gulf of Thailand tidal surges.
  
• Special administrative status for Muslim provinces in the violence-plagued southern provinces
  
• A war on drugs
  
• Amnesty for political offenses committed since 2006
  

Pretty low on the list, last on the list in fact, and doesn't contain the words charter or constitution, and do you seriously believe that the voting public saw that one and thought "that's where my vote is going" or was if more likely they saw the first three or four items and voted accordingly. Promises they are still waiting to receive.

The Thai people have every right to be angry, some are just being pointed at the wrong target.

[JurgenG]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

[whybother]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

The constitution court hasn't done anything to stop the government from functioning properly. That has been the government's own doing.

All the court has done is stop the government from making a wholesale change to the constitution. Which is the correct course of action, IMO. The government should concentrate on fixing the articles that need fixing. The whole constitution doesn't need rewriting.

[Siripon]

CC : "Why did you vote for a complete re-write of the constitution?"

PTP MP : "Thaksin told me to do it."

Or he would publicly display my pre-signed resignation letter

that he is holding over my head like the sword of Damocles.

Unless you know different with an identified source ,that "pre-signed resignation letter" is just a myth promulgated by the english language newspapers.

I've often wondered about this as well as I can't see a pre signed resignation letter being of any use if it's not dated. Just doesn't add up to me.

The undated letter issue predates the last election and was reported in several Thai newspapers.

Thaksin wanted every Pheua Thai candidate to sign the letter and give it to him to prevent any defections, as with Nevin etc.

It's signed but undated so Thaksin can fill it in when he feels it's necessary.

[OzMick]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

"But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country." (sic)Unless that body is named Thaksin?

[Moruya]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

"But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country." (sic)Unless that body is named Thaksin?

Or indeed a whole unelected group of people such as the red shirts

[Noistar]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

No dis-respect to my (Thai) wife, but she hasn't a clue why she voted, the significance of it and whether the Government is delivering on its election promises. She is an educated, self-employed person in Chiang Mai. If people like her don't know what it's all about it's more than likely there are significantly more in the same boat.

The manipulators can point to their mandate, but with justification?

A question:

If the 'reconciliation' Bill wasn't the current obsession, would the opposition and Government be roughly on the same hymn sheet re making Thailand better. At the moment I'm confused and TV posters joining the obsession re mandates (on presumably only one part of their manifesto) isn't helping my understanding.

[JurgenG]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

The constitution court hasn't done anything to stop the government from functioning properly. That has been the government's own doing.

All the court has done is stop the government from making a wholesale change to the constitution. Which is the correct course of action, IMO. The government should concentrate on fixing the articles that need fixing. The whole constitution doesn't need rewriting.

We can agree on that. I said a revision not a total rewrite.

One think people from both side should consider is the constitutional court may preserve the interests of a certain elite for the time being but the judges are elected for a period of 9 years only. It's like when the 111 from TRT were banned from politic for 5 years. That seems like a long period of time at the time, long enough to get rid of the Thaksin problem for ever. Right ...

Now let think what will happen if Thaksin can control the election of the next judges from the constitutional court. You will have Thaksin in control of a non elected body that can control the action of the government. Is that a risk that his opponents are ready to take ?

Democracy has built-in check and balance. Even a very popular government, if it goes too far, will be voted out office in the next election. If you mess with democracy, like in 2006, you open a Pandora box and things can get quickly totally out of control as the events for the past 6 years have shown.

Edited July 17, 2012 by JurgenG

[OzMick]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

The constitution court hasn't done anything to stop the government from functioning properly. That has been the government's own doing.

All the court has done is stop the government from making a wholesale change to the constitution. Which is the correct course of action, IMO. The government should concentrate on fixing the articles that need fixing. The whole constitution doesn't need rewriting.

We can agree on that. I said a revision not a total rewrite.

One think people from both side should consider is the constitutional court may preserve the interests of a certain elite for the time being but the judges are elected for a period of 9 years only. It's like when the 111 from TRT were banned from politic for 5 years. That seems like a long period of time at the time, long enough to get rid of the Thaksin problem for ever. Right ...

Now let think what will happen if Thaksin can control the election of the next judges from the constitutional court. You will have Thaksin in control of a non elected body that can control the action of the government. Is that a risk that his opponents are ready to take ?

Democracy has built-in check and balance. Even a very popular government, if it goes too far, will be voted out office in the next election. If you mess with democracy, like in 2006, you open a Pandora box and things can get quickly totally out of control as the events for the past 6 years have shown.

" You will have Thaksin in control of a non elected body that can control the action of the government." 55555Thaksin controls the government. His desire is to remove the democratic checks and balances restricting his actions via that government.

[Moruya]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

it was not.

Suckered by red propaganda once more

[phiphidon]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

it was not.

Suckered by red propaganda once more

"Suckered by red propaganda once more" - apparently he's not the only one................

At the beginning of 2012 the Puea Thai-led government began fulfilling one of its main election promises, the pursuit of constitutional reform, which could lead to the nation's 19th Constitution since 1932

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/countrytemplate_th.html

[Noistar]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

Perhaps an unambiguous definition of Thai democracy is needed to support TV posters' arguments. Bearing in mind the potential ramifications, are there any takers?

[nurofiend]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

it was not.

Suckered by red propaganda once more

how do you know 'it was not'?

the only people saying it wasn't, seem to be yellowheads on this forum, the nation doesn't seem to be taking an issue with those who say it was promised.

i can't find one article specifically saying it wasn't mentioned over their campaign, however i can find many that say it was, including the 'cia' page that ppd so kindly posted.

so maybe you have been suckered by message board propaganda once again...

[Thai at Heart]

If the Constitution court has ruled that there was no intent to overthrow the "system", why is this still an issue?

They are just doing their job. The court was created with the single purpose to prevent any government that is not the right one to function properly. That was the idea behind the 2007 charter revision and why the junta made clear no "yes" vote, no election.

They knew that Abhisit wasn't the sharpest pencil in the box and despite all their efforts he may lose the next democratic election. So the constitution court was their poison pill for any future "non friendly" government.

But for the sake of democracy, you can't let a non elected body undirectly rule the country. That's why a revision of the present constitution is needed.

The constitution court hasn't done anything to stop the government from functioning properly. That has been the government's own doing.

All the court has done is stop the government from making a wholesale change to the constitution. Which is the correct course of action, IMO. The government should concentrate on fixing the articles that need fixing. The whole constitution doesn't need rewriting.

Actually its the fault of the complainants claiming that this was going to overthrow the monarchy.

Any court in the country has intervene for this subject. I look forward to the reds having endless fun with this sending in requests like people send in mama packs to win a gold chain.

Edited July 17, 2012 by Thai at Heart

[Reasonableman]

I'm so sick of this fuzzy math that states 15 million voted for Puea Thai therefore 15 million, and indeed the majority also support a Charter re-write.

i think it must be because it was a campaign promise to those who voted for them.

it was not.

Suckered by red propaganda once more

how do you know 'it was not'?

the only people saying it wasn't, seem to be yellowheads on this forum, the nation doesn't seem to be taking an issue with those who say it was promised.

i can't find one article specifically saying it wasn't mentioned over their campaign, however i can find many that say it was, including the 'cia' page that ppd so kindly posted.

so maybe you have been suckered by message board propaganda once again...

Citing ppd as an objective and reliable source is most reassuring. Thank you.

[Moruya]

At the beginning of 2012 the Puea Thai-led government began fulfilling one of its main election promises, the pursuit of constitutional reform, which could lead to the nation's 19th Constitution since 1932

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/countrytemplate_th.html

Find me something from election speeches and I'll accept I'm wrong.

And so we're on the same page, campaigning for "amnesty" or "reconciliation" are not the same.

[waza]

In May 2011, the Pheu Thai Party, which maintains close ties to Thaksin, nominated Yingluck as their candidate for Prime Minister in the 2011 general election.^[5][6] She campaigned on a platform of national reconciliation, poverty eradication, and corporate income tax reduction, but the ruling Democrat Party claimed that she would act in the interests of her exiled brother.....................

Yingluck's main campaign theme was reconciliation following the extended political crisis from 2008 to 2010, culminating in the military crackdown on protesters which left nearly a hundred protesters dead and thousands injured. She promised to empower the Independent Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (ITRC), the panel that the Democrat Party-led government had set up to investigate the killings.^[23] The ITRC had complained that its work was hampered by the military and the government.^[24]

Yingluck also proposed a general amnesty for all major politically motivated incidents that had taken place since the 2006 coup, which could include the coup itself, court rulings banning Thai Rak Thai and People's Power Party leaders from seeking office, the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) seizures of Government House and Don Muang and Suvarnabhumi Airports, the military crackdowns of 2009 and 2010, and the conviction of Thaksin Shinawatra for abuse of power.^[25] The proposal was fiercely attacked by the government, who claimed that it would specifically give amnesty to Thaksin, and also result in the return to him of the 46 billion baht of his wealth that that the government had seized as a penalty. However, Yingluck denied that the return of seized assets was a priority for the Pheu Thai party, and repeated that she had no intention of giving amnesty to any one person. Abhisit claimed outright that Yingluck was lying and that amnesty to Thaksin actually was the Pheu Thai party's policy.^[26] The government blamed Pheu Thai for the bloodshed during the military crackdown.^[27]

Yingluck described a 2020 vision for the elimination of poverty.^[28] She promised to reduce the corporate income tax from 30% to 23% and then 20% by 2013 and to raise the minimum wage to 300 baht per day and the minimum wage for university graduates to 15,000 baht per month. Her agricultural policies included improving operating cashflow to farmers and providing loans of up to 70% of expected income, based on a guaranteed rice price of 15,000 baht per ton.^[29] She also planned to provide free public Wi-Fi and a tablet PC to every schoolchild (a Thai Rak Thai Party plan to provide one laptop per child was cancelled after the 2006 military coup).^{[30]http://en.wikipedia....luck_Shinawatra}

^{Nope cant see constitutional amendments reforms or charter change there.}

^{In comparison, the opposition Pheu Thai Party (PPP), who is fielding Yingluck Shinawatra, the youngest sister of deposed prime minister Thaksin, have opened their gift bag for the 2011 Thailand general election with offering such as:}

^{A national minimum daily wage of Bt300 ($10) nationally}

^{Universal medical care with patients making a co-payment of Bt30 ($1) per consultation}

^{Credit cards for farmers and a guaranteed price of Bt15,000 – Bt20,000 ($488 – $651) per ton for unmilled rice}

^{A moratorium for household debt up to Bt500,000 ($16,285) per household, with emphasis on debt reduction for teachers, farmers and civil servants}

^{A minimum monthly salary of Bt15,000 ($500) for university graduates and a “One Tablet-PC per Child” project for school children}

^{A 23.3 per cent reduction in corporate tax rates in the first year (from 30 to 20 percent) with a further 13 percent reduction in its second year to a flat 20 percent.}

^{Reduced taxes for first home and first car buyers}

^{A standard Bt20 (65 cent) fare for all Bangkok’s mass transit rail lines (MRT)}

^{High-speed rail lines linking major provincial cities in the north, northeast, east and upper south regions}

^{Rural village development funds of between Bt300,000 and Bt1 million ($9,770 – $32,573) per year}

^{A welfare allowance of Bt600 ($19.55) per month for citizens over 60, increasing by Bt100 ($3.20) at 70, and 80, and rising by a further Bt200 ($6.40) at 90.}

^{Free Wi-Fi and Internet access in public places}

^{30km (18.8 mile) of levees to protect Bangkok and satellite towns from Gulf of Thailand tidal surges.}

^{Special administrative status for Muslim provinces in the violence-plagued southern provinces}

^{A war on drugs}

^{Amnesty for political offenses committed since 2006}

^{Read more: Thailand economy ignored in the 2011 Thailand general election - Thainesshttp://photo-journ.c...n/#ixzz20vJvblF}

Nor here

Edited July 17, 2012 by metisdead
: Large fonts (shouting) removed.