Court Names 81 Red Shirts In Judges' Intimida

[Moruya]

Well in my country the UK we had mass protests against the gulf war and effigies were burnt of our politicians but noone was charged.

The fact is the court is seen by a significant portion of the electorate as biased, corrupt and now it seems to think it has powers to interfere in the democratic process by potentially allowing frivolous charges (as we have just seen) to be made against the ruling governement to be pursued whilst

disregarding Article 68 of the thai constitution in the process. In short making up the rules as suits them and attempting to set themselves up above the law.

Their latest attempt at perverting the course of justice is to claim that any changes, rewrite to the coup imposed constitution will require a reerendum first on the need for any changes.

Actually that's why we had an election in order to make these changes.

The "Coup for the rich" didn't work but the right people for these didn't get elected (well they never can be can they) so extra parliamentary methods have to be used.

But now they truly have a foe in the redshirts who see right through them.

We are discussing judges- not politicians.

We are discussing Thailand - not the UK.

We are discussing the burning of effigies and threats to the judges - not an interpretation of the law

[Moruya]

Well I think the CC are setting themselves up for another fall.

Do you think mass arrests are the way forward?

There should have been 2000 arrests in 2010.

There has been none so far related to this.

Edited July 31, 2012 by Moruya

[whybother]

They never did, the ICT blocked the videos as best they could (not very well), arrest warrants were issued, Pasit went walkabout to Hong Kong for a couple of months, the President of the CC resigned eventually, Pasit came back, was sued by the CC judges for libel and the case was extended until Jun 18th as Buchholz told us here <snipped>

The PTP did caught out the judges with the exams, but their intention to "show the Democrats conspiring with the judges" didn't get off the ground.

[tlansford]

These laws have been in place since 1956.

Perhaps if Parliament wasn't busy with reconciliation bills to exonerate the Dubai Dude, then they might have had time to set to work on revamping those laws they feel unjust.

As for censorship, the ever greater curtailment of the internet with Chalerm in charge is a fair indicator of how the current government views censorship. "it's ok as long as we're in charge of it"

.

The laws may well have been in existence since 1956. However the constitutional court has only been in existence since 1997, the adversarial non independant version of it since 2007. This is only the 2nd time I am aware of it being involved in "pressing charges" against ordinary citizens (the first being against Jatuporn) so it's a bit of a new situation for everybody.

Not sure this is what the writers of "The Peoples Charter" envisioned when they set up the first Constitutional Court to concentrate entirely on constitutional matters.....................

It is a new situation for Thailand... I suspect that as the courts become more political that there will be more anti-court demonstrations, and more retaliatory acts by the courts.

As for censorship, whether it is Thaksin's gov't, the military junta, Abhisit's gov't, the current gov't, or the CC, it's still people in power putting a muzzle on citizens.

[Nickymaster]

Amazing twister PPD is.

The only "despicable" acts I see here are the the giving out of judges addresses and inciting violence on those judges - if that is the case and when proven.

What is there to proof? We have all seen it with our own eyes.

As far as the rest goes, the reaction to the symbolic "burning of coffins" is emotional hyperbole by people who really think that they are not "ordinary" people. As such the reports are ideal partners for the faux emotionality displayed on these forums - did you ever write to forums back home gushing "Punish these guys for their despicable Acts", actually you probably did. Yes.

Where I come people get punished for despicable acts otherwise we would soon have a lawless state run by a few.

Get over it, some red shirts burnt some paper coffins over their understandable frustration with the Judiciary getting involved where they shouldn't.

I think they did more then burn paper coffins. UNDERSTANDABLE frustration!? You are amazing.

This court lacks credibility.

We saw in the videos uploaded on YouTube exposing their contempt for the pheu Thai opposition during abhisit's reign with their consorting with the dems and their open discussions of placing relatives in key jobs in the court after releasing text answers to admission exams for them.

The members of this court were installed by the junta after the coup precisely to prevent any reform to the coup enforced rewrite of the 1997 constitution.

Let's not forget also the unelected senators placed by the coup who resigned en masse days before their 1 term was due to expire and then en masse reapply and take up their jobs for a further term.

So now we have "contempt of court" charges from the constitutional court interfering into the democratic process.

An alignment of the pad, unelectable dems, unelected placed senators and unelected placed judges against an elected government.

This government is bad because the right side didn't win and then of course there's always the bogeyman/scapegoat to remind the dumber loyalist members of Thai society what the purpose of all this is.

Democratic process = referendum

Democratic process doesn't mean I will use my majority to change the law to whitewash a few people.

The government is bad because it is bad. Simple as that. Only cares about populist policies to keep their voters happy and whitewashing their crimes. Soon Thailand will be a failed state where 90% of its people are not able to survive without hand-outs etc.

If I had to choose between who has more credibility the court or Thaksin, I would say the court. Any party let by a guy like Thaksin has no credibility.

Shame on you guys for supporting Thaksin and challenging every move the court makes. The UN called Thaksin a human rights abuser of its worst kind. You have to be proud to make that kind of guy your hero.

[tlansford]

- deleted for quote limits -

Don't you think that given the current political landscape here in Thailand, having groups of people, shown on TV, burning effigies of the judges as well as coffins was an incitement to violence?

Simply put, No. Did you see any violence happening as a result? If that was the intended result it seems to have been a resounding failure.

And you would feel the same if people started burning effigies of your family in such a way?

Well in my country the UK we had mass protests against the gulf war and effigies were burnt of our politicians but noone was charged.

The fact is the court is seen by a significant portion of the electorate as biased, corrupt and now it seems to think it has powers to interfere in the democratic process by potentially allowing frivolous charges (as we have just seen) to be made against the ruling governement to be pursued whilst

disregarding Article 68 of the thai constitution in the process. In short making up the rules as suits them and attempting to set themselves up above the law.

Their latest attempt at perverting the course of justice is to claim that any changes, rewrite to the coup imposed constitution will require a reerendum first on the need for any changes.

Actually that's why we had an election in order to make these changes.

The "Coup for the rich" didn't work but the right people for these didn't get elected (well they never can be can they) so extra parliamentary methods have to be used.

But now they truly have a foe in the redshirts who see right through them.

the courts are players in the game, not referees ...

[tlansford]

Amazing twister PPD is.

The only "despicable" acts I see here are the the giving out of judges addresses and inciting violence on those judges - if that is the case and when proven.

What is there to proof? We have all seen it with our own eyes.

As far as the rest goes, the reaction to the symbolic "burning of coffins" is emotional hyperbole by people who really think that they are not "ordinary" people. As such the reports are ideal partners for the faux emotionality displayed on these forums - did you ever write to forums back home gushing "Punish these guys for their despicable Acts", actually you probably did. Yes.

Where I come people get punished for despicable acts otherwise we would soon have a lawless state run by a few.

Get over it, some red shirts burnt some paper coffins over their understandable frustration with the Judiciary getting involved where they shouldn't.

I think they did more then burn paper coffins. UNDERSTANDABLE frustration!? You are amazing.

This court lacks credibility.

We saw in the videos uploaded on YouTube exposing their contempt for the pheu Thai opposition during abhisit's reign with their consorting with the dems and their open discussions of placing relatives in key jobs in the court after releasing text answers to admission exams for them.

The members of this court were installed by the junta after the coup precisely to prevent any reform to the coup enforced rewrite of the 1997 constitution.

Let's not forget also the unelected senators placed by the coup who resigned en masse days before their 1 term was due to expire and then en masse reapply and take up their jobs for a further term.

So now we have "contempt of court" charges from the constitutional court interfering into the democratic process.

An alignment of the pad, unelectable dems, unelected placed senators and unelected placed judges against an elected government.

This government is bad because the right side didn't win and then of course there's always the bogeyman/scapegoat to remind the dumber loyalist members of Thai society what the purpose of all this is.

Democratic process = referendum

Democratic process doesn't mean I will use my majority to change the law to whitewash a few people.

The government is bad because it is bad. Simple as that. Only cares about populist policies to keep their voters happy and whitewashing their crimes. Soon Thailand will be a failed state where 90% of its people are not able to survive without hand-outs etc.

If I had to choose between who has more credibility the court or Thaksin, I would say the court. Any party let by a guy like Thaksin has no credibility.

Shame on you guys for supporting Thaksin and challenging every move the court makes. The UN called Thaksin a human rights abuser of its worst kind. You have to be proud to make that kind of guy your hero.

Just to be perfectly clear - considering and discussing the actions of the Thai courts in current events is not supporting Thaksin.

[ramrod711]

These laws have been in place since 1956.

Perhaps if Parliament wasn't busy with reconciliation bills to exonerate the Dubai Dude, then they might have had time to set to work on revamping those laws they feel unjust.

As for censorship, the ever greater curtailment of the internet with Chalerm in charge is a fair indicator of how the current government views censorship. "it's ok as long as we're in charge of it"

.

The Dubai Dude.....love it!

[animatic]

Red Shirt/Government Employee Jeng Dokjik is facing 8 years in prison,

Red Shirt/Government Employee Kokaew Pikulthong is facing 23 years in prison,

Red Shirt/Government Employee Prasit Chaisrisa is facing 8 years in prison,

Red Shirt Anurak Jentawanit is facing 8 years in prison,

26 Unnamed Red Shirts are facing 8 years in prison, and

Red Shirt Wuthipong Kotchathamkhun and 50 unnamed Red Shirts are facing 8 years in prison.

Congratulations to Korkaew for being the most offensive.

.

More than the usually false teeth in these penalties for these charges.

[animatic]

Well some feel that interpreting the constitution is a political act,

vs. the commonly held belief it is a judicial act,

that may or may not affect political realities.

Those that receive a negative affect to their aims often scream 'political judgment',

those that don't just say a 'judicial interpretation of un-clear statute has been handed down'.

Those that say the latter when it goes against them, are true democrats.

Those that says the former

typically wanted a political outcome, and when they don't get it their way,

they think a political outcome went against them, so it MUST be political.

Edited July 31, 2012 by animatic

[Nickymaster]

Amazing twister PPD is.

The only "despicable" acts I see here are the the giving out of judges addresses and inciting violence on those judges - if that is the case and when proven.

What is there to proof? We have all seen it with our own eyes.

As far as the rest goes, the reaction to the symbolic "burning of coffins" is emotional hyperbole by people who really think that they are not "ordinary" people. As such the reports are ideal partners for the faux emotionality displayed on these forums - did you ever write to forums back home gushing "Punish these guys for their despicable Acts", actually you probably did. Yes.

Where I come people get punished for despicable acts otherwise we would soon have a lawless state run by a few.

Get over it, some red shirts burnt some paper coffins over their understandable frustration with the Judiciary getting involved where they shouldn't.

I think they did more then burn paper coffins. UNDERSTANDABLE frustration!? You are amazing.

This court lacks credibility.

We saw in the videos uploaded on YouTube exposing their contempt for the pheu Thai opposition during abhisit's reign with their consorting with the dems and their open discussions of placing relatives in key jobs in the court after releasing text answers to admission exams for them.

The members of this court were installed by the junta after the coup precisely to prevent any reform to the coup enforced rewrite of the 1997 constitution.

Let's not forget also the unelected senators placed by the coup who resigned en masse days before their 1 term was due to expire and then en masse reapply and take up their jobs for a further term.

So now we have "contempt of court" charges from the constitutional court interfering into the democratic process.

An alignment of the pad, unelectable dems, unelected placed senators and unelected placed judges against an elected government.

This government is bad because the right side didn't win and then of course there's always the bogeyman/scapegoat to remind the dumber loyalist members of Thai society what the purpose of all this is.

Democratic process = referendum

Democratic process doesn't mean I will use my majority to change the law to whitewash a few people.

The government is bad because it is bad. Simple as that. Only cares about populist policies to keep their voters happy and whitewashing their crimes. Soon Thailand will be a failed state where 90% of its people are not able to survive without hand-outs etc.

If I had to choose between who has more credibility the court or Thaksin, I would say the court. Any party let by a guy like Thaksin has no credibility.

Shame on you guys for supporting Thaksin and challenging every move the court makes. The UN called Thaksin a human rights abuser of its worst kind. You have to be proud to make that kind of guy your hero.

Just to be perfectly clear - considering and discussing the actions of the Thai courts in current events is not supporting Thaksin.

O yeh that is right. I thought I was discussing credibilty and why (mainly) the Reds give the court no credit. I was assuming it had something to do with the way Thaksin had set up his propaganda machine..

[Nickymaster]

The only "despicable" acts I see here are the the giving out of judges addresses and inciting violence on those judges - if that is the case and when proven - I still believe in trials unlike some of the "voices of reason" on here .

As far as the rest goes, the reaction to the symbolic "burning of coffins" is emotional hyperbole by people who really think that they are not "ordinary" people. As such the reports are ideal partners for the faux emotionality displayed on these forums - did you ever write to forums back home gushing "Punish these guys for their despicable Acts", actually you probably did.

Get over it, some red shirts burnt some paper coffins over their understandable frustration with the Judiciary getting involved where they shouldn't.

Don't you think that given the current political landscape here in Thailand, having groups of people, shown on TV, burning effigies of the judges as well as coffins was an incitement to violence?

Simply put, No. Did you see any violence happening as a result? If that was the intended result it seems to have been a resounding failure.

yeah no violence just hatred but that is normal..I guess. And hatred never resorted into violence. Challenging the law never resorted into violence in Thailand. Simply put, they did nothing wrong those law-abiding, democracy loving peaceful reds.

Edited July 31, 2012 by Nickymaster

[tlansford]

Well some feel that interpreting the constitution is a political act,

vs. the commonly held belief it is a judicial act,

that may or may not affect political realities.

Those that receive a negative affect to their aims often scream 'political judgment',

those that don't just say a 'judicial interpretation of un-clear statute has been handed down'.

Those that say the latter when it goes against them, are true democrats.

Those that says the former

typically wanted a political outcome, and when they don't get it their way,

they think a political outcome went against them, so it MUST be political.

or maybe it is just political regardless of which side you come from...

[khunken]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

[tlansford]

- deleted -

Democratic process = referendum

Democratic process doesn't mean I will use my majority to change the law to whitewash a few people.

The government is bad because it is bad. Simple as that. Only cares about populist policies to keep their voters happy and whitewashing their crimes. Soon Thailand will be a failed state where 90% of its people are not able to survive without hand-outs etc.

If I had to choose between who has more credibility the court or Thaksin, I would say the court. Any party let by a guy like Thaksin has no credibility.

Shame on you guys for supporting Thaksin and challenging every move the court makes. The UN called Thaksin a human rights abuser of its worst kind. You have to be proud to make that kind of guy your hero.

Just to be perfectly clear - considering and discussing the actions of the Thai courts in current events is not supporting Thaksin.

O yeh that is right. I thought I was discussing credibilty and why (mainly) the Reds give the court no credit. I was assuming it had something to do with the way Thaksin had set up his propaganda machine..

I thought that it was obvious.

I was referring to this statement you made :

"Shame on you guys for supporting Thaksin and challenging every move the court makes. The UN called Thaksin a human rights abuser of its worst kind. You have to be proud to make that kind of guy your hero."

[Nickymaster]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

Bravo. But.... you are going to be challenged by people wearing red glasses who will claim that all despicable behavior by the Reds and Thaksin is justifiable because of the...uh... coup, and..uuuh oh yes, they won the election so they can do WHATEVER they want.

Be ready for some twisted info.

[tlansford]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

I would agree with you if it were a reaction only against the intimidation - eg: the charges related to threatening their safety.

But throwing in the other groups who demonstrated in front of the court, filed the charges, etc, that is IMO a real attempt at censorship.

As for your other characterizations of the government, that is just the standard dismissal technique used here to trivialize an elected mandate. Yes, any gov't with 300/500 seats has a mandate, and no, it is not true that the gov't can just do whatever it wants regardless of the laws.

And AFAIK, posters here do not generally defend the violence of the UDD, but they do generally defend the violence of the military... just that it is a different group of posters than you meant.

[SuneeTH]

Who do they think they are?

Why do they think they can do anything they like?

[Buchholz]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

Bravo. But.... you are going to be challenged by people wearing red glasses who will claim that all despicable behavior by the Reds and Thaksin is justifiable because of the...uh... coup, and..uuuh oh yes, they won the election so they can do WHATEVER they want.

Be ready for some twisted info.

and sure enough, he didn't have to wait too long for it

[khunken]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

I would agree with you if it were a reaction only against the intimidation - eg: the charges related to threatening their safety.

But throwing in the other groups who demonstrated in front of the court, filed the charges, etc, that is IMO a real attempt at censorship.

As for your other characterizations of the government, that is just the standard dismissal technique used here to trivialize an elected mandate. Yes, any gov't with 300/500 seats has a mandate, and no, it is not true that the gov't can just do whatever it wants regardless of the laws.

And AFAIK, posters here do not generally defend the violence of the UDD, but they do generally defend the violence of the military... just that it is a different group of posters than you meant.

Yes, it may be over the top to charge all of them. But those who gave out personal details & incited people to commit violence should be charged. However to claim it is censorship is equally over the top & doesn't help your argument.

You say the government can't do whatever it likes & I hope you're right, but PT & all it's predecessors have always tried to do whatever they want. The CC is doing what it should do - rein in the government when it oversteps its power.

I see you've pushed the 'but the military button' which is not the subject of this thread. I've not seen many supporters of the military crimes at Tak Bai or Krue Be (spelling?). There are those who defend the military for clearing out the take-over of Ratchaprasong. Someone had to do it & as the police, as usual, refused to do their job, the military had to do it.

[Nickymaster]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

I would agree with you if it were a reaction only against the intimidation - eg: the charges related to threatening their safety.

But throwing in the other groups who demonstrated in front of the court, filed the charges, etc, that is IMO a real attempt at censorship.

As for your other characterizations of the government, that is just the standard dismissal technique used here to trivialize an elected mandate. Yes, any gov't with 300/500 seats has a mandate, and no, it is not true that the gov't can just do whatever it wants regardless of the laws.

And AFAIK, posters here do not generally defend the violence of the UDD, but they do generally defend the violence of the military... just that it is a different group of posters than you meant.

Yes, it may be over the top to charge all of them. But those who gave out personal details & incited people to commit violence should be charged. However to claim it is censorship is equally over the top & doesn't help your argument.

You say the government can't do whatever it likes & I hope you're right, but PT & all it's predecessors have always tried to do whatever they want. The CC is doing what it should do - rein in the government when it oversteps its power.

I see you've pushed the 'but the military button' which is not the subject of this thread. I've not seen many supporters of the military crimes at Tak Bai or Krue Be (spelling?). There are those who defend the military for clearing out the take-over of Ratchaprasong. Someone had to do it & as the police, as usual, refused to do their job, the military had to do it.

There was no police when the Reds started occupying Ratchaprasong. It was all part of the game to get the military involved (and to blame the military for the loss of people); carefully orchestrated by Thaksin. I have witnessed it with my own eyes (living in the area). Reds came, police left. There were weeks I couldn't find any police, only Reds "managing" down-town Bangkok. And it worked I guess when reading how much hatred there is (by some) towards the military for cleaning up the mess the Police left behind.

Edited July 31, 2012 by Nickymaster

[lungmi]

These laws have been in place since 1956.

Perhaps if Parliament wasn't busy with reconciliation bills to exonerate the Dubai Dude, then they might have had time to set to work on revamping those laws they feel unjust.

As for censorship, the ever greater curtailment of the internet with Chalerm in charge is a fair indicator of how the current government views censorship. "it's ok as long as we're in charge of it"

.

The laws may well have been in existence since 1956. However the constitutional court has only been in existence since 1997, the adversarial non independant version of it since 2007. This is only the 2nd time I am aware of it being involved in "pressing charges" against ordinary citizens (the first being against Jatuporn) so it's a bit of a new situation for everybody.

Not sure this is what the writers of "The Peoples Charter" envisioned when they set up the first Constitutional Court to concentrate entirely on constitutional matters.....................

It is a new situation for Thailand... I suspect that as the courts become more political that there will be more anti-court demonstrations, and more retaliatory acts by the courts.

As for censorship, whether it is Thaksin's gov't, the military junta, Abhisit's gov't, the current gov't, or the CC, it's still people in power putting a muzzle on citizens.

The courts don't become more political, they want to survive as one of the three columns of democracy. The anti-court demonstrations - it's your hidden desire, I suppose, seeing the fact that you inverse cause and effect.

[Nickymaster]

These laws have been in place since 1956.

Perhaps if Parliament wasn't busy with reconciliation bills to exonerate the Dubai Dude, then they might have had time to set to work on revamping those laws they feel unjust.

As for censorship, the ever greater curtailment of the internet with Chalerm in charge is a fair indicator of how the current government views censorship. "it's ok as long as we're in charge of it"

.

The laws may well have been in existence since 1956. However the constitutional court has only been in existence since 1997, the adversarial non independant version of it since 2007. This is only the 2nd time I am aware of it being involved in "pressing charges" against ordinary citizens (the first being against Jatuporn) so it's a bit of a new situation for everybody.

Not sure this is what the writers of "The Peoples Charter" envisioned when they set up the first Constitutional Court to concentrate entirely on constitutional matters.....................

It is a new situation for Thailand... I suspect that as the courts become more political that there will be more anti-court demonstrations, and more retaliatory acts by the courts.

As for censorship, whether it is Thaksin's gov't, the military junta, Abhisit's gov't, the current gov't, or the CC, it's still people in power putting a muzzle on citizens.

The courts don't become more political, they want to survive as one of the three columns of democracy. The anti-court demonstrations - it's your hidden desire, I suppose, seeing the fact that you inverse cause and effect.

Inverting cause and effect. Spot on.

[Moruya]

Who do they think they are?

Why do they think they can do anything they like?

They are many things but predominantly anarchists.

The constitution court is there for the constitution. Unfortunately the anarchists want to cannibalise anything that gets in their way. Therefore the constitution court has to deal with some difficult sh1t. In fact so much of it that it may as well be renamed the constipation court.

Reconciliation? Utter gonads.

[tlansford]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

I would agree with you if it were a reaction only against the intimidation - eg: the charges related to threatening their safety.

But throwing in the other groups who demonstrated in front of the court, filed the charges, etc, that is IMO a real attempt at censorship.

As for your other characterizations of the government, that is just the standard dismissal technique used here to trivialize an elected mandate. Yes, any gov't with 300/500 seats has a mandate, and no, it is not true that the gov't can just do whatever it wants regardless of the laws.

And AFAIK, posters here do not generally defend the violence of the UDD, but they do generally defend the violence of the military... just that it is a different group of posters than you meant.

Yes, it may be over the top to charge all of them. But those who gave out personal details & incited people to commit violence should be charged. However to claim it is censorship is equally over the top & doesn't help your argument.

You say the government can't do whatever it likes & I hope you're right, but PT & all it's predecessors have always tried to do whatever they want. The CC is doing what it should do - rein in the government when it oversteps its power.

I see you've pushed the 'but the military button' which is not the subject of this thread. I've not seen many supporters of the military crimes at Tak Bai or Krue Be (spelling?). There are those who defend the military for clearing out the take-over of Ratchaprasong. Someone had to do it & as the police, as usual, refused to do their job, the military had to do it.

I never claimed that pursuing charges against people passing out the justices details to incite violence is censorship. But IMO many of the charges ) eg against people protesting in front of the court - amount to censorship.

As for the court reining in the gov't - we have different views. I don't view it as the courts' position to halt debates in parliament.

I didn't push the "but military" button. You simply talk about defending violence, and I do not defend violence, regardless of which corner it comes from. As you mention, there are posters who support and justify the military violence under the last government. That is the only violence I have ever seen defended on this forum.

[Moruya]

the courts are players in the game, not referees ...

How many goals have they scored?

If this were a game of football, the red side would have murdered half the opposition, the referee and linesmen would have mysteriously disappeared, they would be holding FIFA to ransom as they try to rewrite the rule book and the crowd would be rioting and burning the stadium.

[lungmi]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

I would agree with you if it were a reaction only against the intimidation - eg: the charges related to threatening their safety.

But throwing in the other groups who demonstrated in front of the court, filed the charges, etc, that is IMO a real attempt at censorship.

As for your other characterizations of the government, that is just the standard dismissal technique used here to trivialize an elected mandate. Yes, any gov't with 300/500 seats has a mandate, and no, it is not true that the gov't can just do whatever it wants regardless of the laws.

And AFAIK, posters here do not generally defend the violence of the UDD, but they do generally defend the violence of the military... just that it is a different group of posters than you meant.

Yes, it may be over the top to charge all of them. But those who gave out personal details & incited people to commit violence should be charged. However to claim it is censorship is equally over the top & doesn't help your argument.

You say the government can't do whatever it likes & I hope you're right, but PT & all it's predecessors have always tried to do whatever they want. The CC is doing what it should do - rein in the government when it oversteps its power.

I see you've pushed the 'but the military button' which is not the subject of this thread. I've not seen many supporters of the military crimes at Tak Bai or Krue Be (spelling?). There are those who defend the military for clearing out the take-over of Ratchaprasong. Someone had to do it & as the police, as usual, refused to do their job, the military had to do it.

I never claimed that pursuing charges against people passing out the justices details to incite violence is censorship. But IMO many of the charges ) eg against people protesting in front of the court - amount to censorship.

As for the court reining in the gov't - we have different views. I don't view it as the courts' position to halt debates in parliament.

I didn't push the "but military" button. You simply talk about defending violence, and I do not defend violence, regardless of which corner it comes from. As you mention, there are posters who support and justify the military violence under the last government. That is the only violence I have ever seen defended on this forum.

In Germany (and the Thai constitution is 'modeled' a little bit in this way) the CC halts recently debates in parliament to wait it's final decision.

[Moruya]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

There is a law in Thailand against criticising judges and verdicts.

[khunken]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

I would agree with you if it were a reaction only against the intimidation - eg: the charges related to threatening their safety.

But throwing in the other groups who demonstrated in front of the court, filed the charges, etc, that is IMO a real attempt at censorship.

As for your other characterizations of the government, that is just the standard dismissal technique used here to trivialize an elected mandate. Yes, any gov't with 300/500 seats has a mandate, and no, it is not true that the gov't can just do whatever it wants regardless of the laws.

And AFAIK, posters here do not generally defend the violence of the UDD, but they do generally defend the violence of the military... just that it is a different group of posters than you meant.

Yes, it may be over the top to charge all of them. But those who gave out personal details & incited people to commit violence should be charged. However to claim it is censorship is equally over the top & doesn't help your argument.

You say the government can't do whatever it likes & I hope you're right, but PT & all it's predecessors have always tried to do whatever they want. The CC is doing what it should do - rein in the government when it oversteps its power.

I see you've pushed the 'but the military button' which is not the subject of this thread. I've not seen many supporters of the military crimes at Tak Bai or Krue Be (spelling?). There are those who defend the military for clearing out the take-over of Ratchaprasong. Someone had to do it & as the police, as usual, refused to do their job, the military had to do it.

I never claimed that pursuing charges against people passing out the justices details to incite violence is censorship. But IMO many of the charges ) eg against people protesting in front of the court - amount to censorship.

As for the court reining in the gov't - we have different views. I don't view it as the courts' position to halt debates in parliament.

I didn't push the "but military" button. You simply talk about defending violence, and I do not defend violence, regardless of which corner it comes from. As you mention, there are posters who support and justify the military violence under the last government. That is the only violence I have ever seen defended on this forum.

As I've said, charging 'Uncle Tom Cobly & all' is over the top but I do think it's understandable as the CC judges had become so fearful of the red shirts, that some wanted to withdraw from the recent case. Just charging someone is not censorship as they will have their day in court - as long as they don't run away.

Well, if you didn't 'push the military button', who did? I certainly didn't.

You say you don't condemn violence. You do seem to ignore it when the 'military violence' was in response to red/black shirt violence. How the government of the day was supposed to remove the occupants of Ratchaprasong - some of whom were armed - without some sort of violent response is beyond me. The occupants were given every opportunity to disperse freely. They, or more correctly, the leaders, just wanted a confrontation (on instructions from the paymaster) and, got what they wanted with sacrificial lambs thrown in. All of this in response to the paymaster losing some of his ill-gotten gains.

Finally when it is pointed out that Thaksin was responsible for far more violence & death, all you & your friends do is push the 'but Abhisit' button. It's a cop-out.

[phiphidon]

I don't think the judges of any court should be treated differently to the general populace. However, they should not be subject to intimidation and to argue that their reaction to intimidation is censorship is a totally false claim.

The real problem is that PT &, in particular, the red shirt leaders think that once they get into power they have a mandate to do what they like. It was exactly the same when Thaksin was PM & almost succeded in subverting all of the checks & balances that are a part of a democracy.

It is surprising that a group of posters on this thread (& many other threads) go out of their way to defend the red shirt leaders who have instigated far too much violence on behalf of their paymaster. The latter, incidently, has made Kork-screw into a millionaire who is following his leader in having asset declaration problems.

There is a law in Thailand against criticising judges and verdicts.

Precisely.