Chart Thai Pattana Opts Out Of Vote

[webfact]

Chart Thai Pattana opts out of vote

Piyanart Srivalo,

Kanittha Thepphajorn,

Atapoom Ongkulna

The Nation

Yingluck to wait for advice from the Council of State on govt options

BANGKOK: -- The Chart Thai Pattana Party will not vote in the third reading of the constitutional amendment bill, although it still supports the push to rewrite the charter, party chief adviser Banharn Silapa-archa said yesterday.

"The final passage of the bill should be put on hold until an amicable solution on how to proceed with charter change can be found," he said.

Banharn said his party welcomed the Constitution Court's decision not to disband parties involved in sponsoring the bill.

But at the same time, he disagreed with the idea of amending charter provisions individually in lieu of introducing a new charter. He said this would lead to confusion because the anti-amendment camp might still try to block charter change by initiating a new round of judicial review.

He said he wanted to study the full verdict before commenting on whether a referendum should be held to seek a public mandate to rewrite the entire charter.

He said he remained optimistic the government would be able to rectify flaws in the political system, such as Article 237 of the charter prescribing punishment by party dissolution, before it completes its four-year term.

Likewise, both Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Achaporn Charucinda, secretary-general of the Council of State, said yesterday they were waiting to study in detail rulings of the Constitution Court and the individual judges before deciding on how to proceed on charter amendment.

Yingluck said after the Cabinet meeting that ministers would wait for details of the court's ruling to be released, then the Council of State would interpret it and give findings to the Cabinet, as the council acts as its legal adviser.

She declined to discuss comments made by senior members of her party, saying that a vote on the third reading was up to Parliament, and beyond the Cabinet's power to decide.

In response to questions from reporters on how the government would prevent mistakes in the future, given that the court had said rewriting the whole charter was not allowed, Yingluck said that making amendments was not a mistake.

"Constitutional amendment is one of the government's policies, but someone asked the court to interpret it. It's been shown now that the charter amendment was not aimed at overthrowing the political system or rewriting a new charter. Therefore, we have to interpret the ruling, look at the guidelines on what to do and the choices before the Parliament," she said.

The PM said she was happy with the Constitution Court's ruling last week, as it not only proved that the charter amendment attempt was not an attempt to replace the current political system, but it also helped prevent a worsening of the political conflict.

Achaporn said the government would not decide on its next move towards charter change until a study of the verdict and the individual opinions of the eight judges had been completed.

"The push for charter change should be put on hold pending the study of the verdict," he said.

The council would outline recommendations for the government to respond to and comply with the judicial decision following the release of the verdict and individual opinions, Achaporn said.

The high court's verdict and the judges' individual opinions will be published in the Royal Gazette in two weeks.

In regard to the holding of a referendum to seek a mandate from the public before drafting charter amendments, Achaporn said that if the high court were to order that a referendum must be held, then the government and Parliament would be obliged to comply.

Should the verdict state that the referendum was a non-binding judicial opinion, then the decision on whether or not to carry out the vote would be a political one, he said.

"The key is to consider carefully what the court really meant. In principle, its suggestion would be non-binding, and the key is the court's ruling. Supporting reasons are another story, but we have to look at it [the ruling] as a whole and cannot separate each point," he said.

"What's unclear is that while the court said the bill in the Parliament was allowed because it simply establishes a Constitution Drafting Assembly, and the examining agencies have full power, ultimately the charter drafting by the CDA has no effect. There will be a referendum anyway," he said.

-- The Nation 2012-07-18

[jonclark]

Chart Thai Pattana opts out of vote -

Bunch of pussies

[nurofiend]

lol

[OzMick]

"Constitutional amendment is one of the government's policies, but someone asked the court to interpret it. It's been shown now that the charter amendment was not aimed at overthrowing the political system or rewriting a new charter. Therefore, we have to interpret the ruling, look at the guidelines on what to do and the choices before the Parliament," she said.

Would that be "said" or "read from a prepared statement"?

[FOODLOVER]

Nice pearls, i believe the golden pearl is quite rare.

[asiawatcher]

Next... Boring as all get out.

[Moruya]

Next... Boring as all get out.

I think that unless policies are declared in a manifesto, they should not be permitted in policy speeches.

Nobody voted on the charter amendment and Yingluck is propagating a big fat porky pie

[LuckyLew]

anyone else want to give her a pearl necklace?

[lannarebirth]

It's a good time to renegotiate his fee.

[nurofiend]

It's a good time to renegotiate his fee.

sounds awesome.

[lannarebirth]

It's a good time to renegotiate his fee.

sounds awesome.

[nurofiend]

you should have done that the first time.

[Pib]

Looks like folks are being to jump of this charter rewrite bandwagon driven by the PTP.

[nurofiend]

the kitchen is getting hotter and some can't stand the heat.

[Bagwan]

anyone else want to give her a pearl necklace?

Well she wouldn't enjoy receiving a Firestone necklace from Winnie Mandela.