First reading null and void: MP
The Nation



Democrats seek to impeach speaker; Nikom's claims unjustified

BANGKOK: -- Democrat MP Ong-art Klampaiboon insisted yesterday that the legislative vote on charter change might be null and void because of a technicality, as the first reading of the bill took place despite a lack of quorum.

Furthermore, he said, House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont had neglected to address a motion in which the Democrats demanded a 60-day deadline to vet the draft provisions, and instead he set the deadline at 15 days.

In light of Somsak's alleged lapse of performance, the Democrats will file a motion to have him impeached after the Songkran holidays, Ong-art said.

He also stated that Senate Speaker Nikom Wairatpanij was not justified in blaming the Democrats for stalling charter change.

Democrat MP Warong Dechgitvigrom said Pheu Thai spokesman Promphong Nopparit had tried but failed to blame him for the botched vote on amending the Constitution. Promphong wrongly tried to pass the blame on to the Democrat MP, but could not continue because of the lack of a quorum.

Pheu Thai deputy spokesman Anusorn Eiamsa-ard said the Democrats were doing everything in their power to block the efforts to amend the Constitution, adding that the process was valid as it followed the legislative process.

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality, adding that the Democrats were playing a game as their moves to block the charter rewrite were not justified.

Separately, the group of 40 senators who have drawn up a petition against the government's Bt2-trillion infrastructure and high-speed-rail project will take it to the Ombudsman instead of the Constitutional Court, mainly because the act on private-sector investments in state projects has already been published in the Royal Gazette.

Group leader Senator Paiboon Nititawan questioned whether the Royal Gazette was being used by the government to support its planned mega-projects, and will call on the Ombudsman to decide whether these projects should be transparent. Under Article 245 (1) of the charter, the State Ombudsman has the power to refer cases for the Constitutional Court.

Meanwhile, government Deputy Spokeswoman Sunisa Lertpakawat reacted against the Democrat Party's attack on the proposed high-speed-rail project, saying it had been clarified that the Northeast route would run to Nong Khai province, not just to Nakhon Ratchasima to link up with China as alleged.

She accused the Democrats of deliberately failing to get the message across despite repeated clarifications.

Noppadol Pattama, legal adviser of fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, posted a message on his Facebook page saying Vietnam was planning to buy bullet trains from Japan to develop its own high-speed-rail network even though Thailand was more suited to become a regional hub.

Thaksin also posted a message on his Facebook page saying the Bt2-trillion loan would not burden the economy because Thailand would grow in tandem as a result of rising incomes, better opportunities and reduced transport costs.

He said the level of public debt at no more than 60 per cent of gross domestic product was still considered good and it might not take 50 years to repay the loan.

Meanwhile, Ong-art said the Democrat Party was not against building a better infrastructure, but was concerned that if the loan and projects are badly managed, they will become a burden on the public.


-- The Nation 2013-04-09

Thaksin also posted a message on his Facebook page saying the Bt2-trillion loan would not burden the economy because Thailand would grow in tandem as a result of rising incomes, better opportunities and reduced transport costs.

This from the same man who said his Rice Scheme would triple the investment, that didn't work out so well, did it?

Yet again we see the interference and the manipulation of this current maladministration by the convicted bail jumping felon Thaksin.

The reported fact that Vietnam is considering buying bullet trains from Japan is indeed a fine example of a xenophobic drum beat from Thaksin via his mouthpiece Noppadol Pattama, who insists that of course Thailand is a better hub than Vietnam for the high speed rail network.

Worried about the ''commission'' that may well be lost on a deal if it's made in Vietnam are we Noppadol and Thaksin and of course their brown nosing crones too ?

Interesting to see that there is a two pronged assault on this scheme, seems as if a number of politicians are not so blind or as deaf as Thaksin, his family and their brown nosing acolytes would like them to be,

If it is proven that this first reading and the legislative vote of the charter amendment bill was conducted without a quorum being present it yet again highlights the fact that this current ,maladministration are no more than Thaksins hired assassins whose victim is the murder of democracy and the installation of a despotic ruling dynasty

Not enough MPs for a quorum? Thaksin will be docking his PTP employees again.

Interesting days indeed, having meetings and voting without the required number of persons and Mr Thaksin posting on Facebook the Thai economy will grow in tandem, how can a person predict fifty years into the future , scale modeling will give a better view, that western nations use,that view would not be welcome here, the only thing one can predict, Thailand in Fifty years time will have a robust sex industry and tandem bike hire will be popular in Phuket

When these guy's gonna take on the real issue,.........and block Skype

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality,

So is that a threat then?

PT policy on anyone who disagrees with them is always the same violence and/or intimidation. Do as we say or we call out the storm troopers.

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality,

So is that a threat then?

PT policy on anyone who disagrees with them is always the same violence and/or intimidation. Do as we say or we call out the storm troopers.

Better to call in the public who voted you in than the army to get rid of the people's choice I would say

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality,

So is that a threat then?

PT policy on anyone who disagrees with them is always the same violence and/or intimidation. Do as we say or we call out the storm troopers.

Better to call in the public who voted you in than the army to get rid of the people's choice I would say

Better still to accept you are not always right. That sometimes the courts rule against you and when they do you take it. Bully boy tactics and threats are wrong.

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality,

So is that a threat then?

PT policy on anyone who disagrees with them is always the same violence and/or intimidation. Do as we say or we call out the storm troopers.

Not only a threat, but a sinister one. He's telling the high court that they must only rule in favour of the PTP - or else. Nothing to do with the laws of the land. They are the elected government and laws only apply to the minions and political oponents,

Stalin, Hitler, Mao etc all took control of the courts in their dictatorial rise; and all used some form of storm troopers to dish out punishment to anyone who dared disagree. How long before the good old DSI can arrange some show trials and bring those who dare challenge this truly democratic and benovelent government of the people to book?

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality,

Wonder is the court rules in favor of PT could the public also question the judiciary's neutrality?

As for judicial intervention, he said that if the high court ruled in favour of the Democrats, then the public could question the judiciary's neutrality,

Wonder is the court rules in favor of PT could the public also question the judiciary's neutrality?

When Thaksin became PM he removed a few judges and replaced them with 'blood relatives'. How many of those are still in there I have no idea. As to neutrality at least one of them had the balls to convict him. Let's hope the 'law' itself will prevail. And of course when the bail jumping ex returned she was not even arrested. She was simply given immunity and impunity of the charges. One of the greatest problems here is the police who do not uphold the law. The law can adjudicate but the officers of law do not comply. Just look at the farce on Red Bull's brat. For this continued crap about changing the constitution, adjudication not in favour of PTP will simply be ignored.

Damn, doesn't any body show up to work.. the house is empty..