For the moment, this is the personal opinion of Wasan Soipisuth and not a ruling of the Constitution Court. The rulings of the Constitution Court are final and cannot be revised, not even by a single (and new) judge of this court.

I don't know the background of Wasan Soipisuth, but considering that for us "normals" criticizing the verdict of a court may be considered as contempt of court and punished, he must feel pretty sure to offer his "dissenting" opinion. Who backed him?

Sep 12, 2006 – Unsuccessful Election commission nominee Wasan Soipisut yesterday defended himself against criticism he dishonoured the senate by refusing to declare his assets.

Wasan, head of the Supreme Court Labour Division dismissed the criticism as groundless. Wasan did not declare his assets to the special committee screening the 10 nominees for the five commissioners' seats. www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/.../politics_30013394.php - Thailand

Nine chief judges appointed to try Thaksin, wife

The nine judges are

- Somsak Netmai, chief judge for commercial and economic litigation;

- Suwat Wanthanahathai, chief judge for intellectual property and international trade litigation;

- Surachart Boonsiriphan, chief judge for environmental litigation;

- Wasan Soipisut, chief judge for juvenile and family litigation; http://www.thailandqa.com/forum/showthread.php?14673-Nine-chief-judges-appointed-to-try-Thaksin-wife

The constitutional court isnt just one judge, I wonder what the other judges have to say on the matter.

For the moment, this is the personal opinion of Wasan Soipisuth and not a ruling of the Constitution Court. The rulings of the Constitution Court are final and cannot be revised, not even by a single (and new) judge of this court.

I don't know the background of Wasan Soipisuth, but considering that for us "normals" criticizing the verdict of a court may be considered as contempt of court and punished, he must feel pretty sure to offer his "dissenting" opinion. Who backed him?

Welcome to interpretation of Thai legal judgements where some are more equal than others

Me thinks the judiciary of Thailand is no higher than the government or it's departments , ankle high.

Nostrils high in many cases, with little doubt.

Since reconsidering your decisions/verdicts is akin to losing face, for admitting being wrong,

It is a rather rare thing, regardless of ageing nurses opinions on the subject,

and typically happens only in cases of severe influence by someone above them being imposed,

or large piles of cash and favors being applied or both. Otherwise it is virtually unkown.

Hmm, so what role do the Appeal Courts and the Dika have in respect to civil and criminal law? If reconsidering decisions is akin to losing face, there must be a great many lawyers and judges looking for the faces that they lost.

Thailands' Appeals Court and Dika, have a long history of allowing appeals and ruling on the misinterpretation of the law. Your argument means that they are a mirage and do not reconsider judgements. Appreciably, the Constitutional Court is not subject to appeal by another court, however the constitutional court is subject to the decisions of the legislature. It is the legislature that can draft and/or amend the constitution. The constitution sets out the law upon which the Constitution Court will adjudicate. In case you forget, the new Constitution of 2007 did precisely that.

Are you now claiming that the Military/Democrat backed Constitution which changed the basis of the Constitutional Court and the Constitution itself was a case of severe influence by someone above them being imposed, or large piles of cash and favors being applied or both?

Wow. I'm shocked that you would say that against the folks that changed the Constitution. .

Perhaps we can find an "aging nurse" to help you regain your composure? I'd offer assistance, but I'm not a nurse.

Me thinks the judiciary of Thailand is no higher than the government or it's departments , ankle high.

Nostrils high in many cases, with little doubt.

Since reconsidering your decisions/verdicts is akin to losing face, for admitting being wrong,

It is a rather rare thing, regardless of ageing nurses opinions on the subject,

and typically happens only in cases of severe influence by someone above them being imposed,

or large piles of cash and favors being applied or both. Otherwise it is virtually unkown.

Hmm, so what role do the Appeal Courts and the Dika have in respect to civil and criminal law? If reconsidering decisions is akin to losing face, there must be a great many lawyers and judges looking for the faces that they lost.

Thailands' Appeals Court and Dika, have a long history of allowing appeals and ruling on the misinterpretation of the law. Your argument means that they are a mirage and do not reconsider judgements. Appreciably, the Constitutional Court is not subject to appeal by another court, however the constitutional court is subject to the decisions of the legislature. It is the legislature that can draft and/or amend the constitution. The constitution sets out the law upon which the Constitution Court will adjudicate. In case you forget, the new Constitution of 2007 did precisely that.

Are you now claiming that the Military/Democrat backed Constitution which changed the basis of the Constitutional Court and the Constitution itself was a case of severe influence by someone above them being imposed, or large piles of cash and favors being applied or both?

Wow. I'm shocked that you would say that against the folks that changed the Constitution. .

Perhaps we can find an "aging nurse" to help you regain your composure? I'd offer assistance, but I'm not a nurse.

Any judge who knows the law could not help but find Mr T guilty as charged. He broke the law and he knew it and that's why he fled the scene.

Me thinks the judiciary of Thailand is no higher than the government or it's departments , ankle high.

Nostrils high in many cases, with little doubt.

Since reconsidering your decisions/verdicts is akin to losing face, for admitting being wrong,

It is a rather rare thing, regardless of ageing nurses opinions on the subject,

and typically happens only in cases of severe influence by someone above them being imposed,

or large piles of cash and favors being applied or both. Otherwise it is virtually unkown.

Hmm, so what role do the Appeal Courts and the Dika have in respect to civil and criminal law? If reconsidering decisions is akin to losing face, there must be a great many lawyers and judges looking for the faces that they lost.

Thailands' Appeals Court and Dika, have a long history of allowing appeals and ruling on the misinterpretation of the law. Your argument means that they are a mirage and do not reconsider judgements. Appreciably, the Constitutional Court is not subject to appeal by another court, however the constitutional court is subject to the decisions of the legislature. It is the legislature that can draft and/or amend the constitution. The constitution sets out the law upon which the Constitution Court will adjudicate. In case you forget, the new Constitution of 2007 did precisely that.

Are you now claiming that the Military/Democrat backed Constitution which changed the basis of the Constitutional Court and the Constitution itself was a case of severe influence by someone above them being imposed, or large piles of cash and favors being applied or both?

Wow. I'm shocked that you would say that against the folks that changed the Constitution. .

Perhaps we can find an "aging nurse" to help you regain your composure? I'd offer assistance, but I'm not a nurse.

Any judge who knows the law could not help but find Mr T guilty as charged. He broke the law and he knew it and that's why he fled the scene.

I believe that you have the wrong case.