Pheu Thai Confident Of Victory In Amendment Ruling; Second Petition Filed

[webfact]

Pheu Thai confident of victory in amendment ruling; second petition filed
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Pheu Thai Party's legal team Friday appeared confident that it could defend a charter-amendment bill, despite the Constitutional Court accepting another petition against the planned amendment to Article 68.

Yasothon MP Piraphan Palusuk, a member of the Pheu Thai legal team, said he was not worried by the court's decision to accept a petition filed by Boworn Yasinthorn and his group against the bill seeking to amend Article 68.

Earlier, the Constitutional Court agreed to conduct a judicial review of a petition against the article filed by Senator Somchai Sawaengkarn.

A group of 312 MPs and senators have proposed an amendment to Article 68 that would require members of the public to petition the Constitutional Court via the Office of the Attorney-General when seeking a ruling on whether a party is attempting to overthrow the constitutional monarchy system of government.


-- The Nation 2013-04-12

[rubl]

A week or so ago a Pheu Thai MP said the change to article 68 was to bring it in line with article 63 of the 1997 constitution. The only difference between the two in this article is the addition of 'five year ban'. Obviously to all the removal of that added paragraph would greatly benefit the Thai population.

[tomross46]

The court must do as big brother has said, else the Red Dogs of war will attack.

[annabel]

The court must do as big brother has said, else the Red Dogs of war will attack.

And I am sure it will happen if it doesn't go HIS way ///

May have to up the Anti to 600 or 700 Baht but it will go ... Songkran almost over so will be May / June ... ?? TAT won't be too upset as then it is Low season

[NeverSure]

For a mere 100,000 baht, I won't object.

[webfact]

UPDATE
Pheu Thai certain of victory in court verdict on amendment bill
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Pheu Thai Party's legal team yesterday appeared confident that it could defend a charter-amendment bill, despite the Constitutional Court accepting another petition against the planned amendment to Article 68.

Yasothon MP Piraphan Palusuk, a member of the Pheu Thai legal team, said he was not worried by the court's decision to accept a petition filed by Boworn Yasinthorn and his group against the bill seeking to amend Article 68.

Earlier, the court agreed to conduct a judicial review of a petition against the article filed by Senator Somchai Sawaengkarn.

A group of 312 MPs and senators have proposed an amendment to Article 68 that would require the public to petition the Constitutional Court via the Office of the Attorney-General when seeking a ruling on whether a party is attempting to overthrow the constitutional-monarchy system of government.

Piraphan said the Pheu Thai MPs who sponsored the bill had assigned the legal team to defend the amendment on their behalf.

The team plans to defend the amendment on two grounds. First, it will put to the court that it cannot interfere in parliamentary affairs relating to legal amendments. Second, it will make the case that public's right to invoke Article 68 will not be restricted - rather, the amendment would make the article clearer.

Meanwhile, chief coalition whip Amnuay Klungpha insisted that Parliament President Somsak Kiartsuranont had not erred in his earlier decision to have three ad hoc panels vet the three amendment bills in 15 days.

He said Somsak made the decision based on parliamentary meeting regulations.

However, Somsak wants the opposition to cooperate on vetting the bill, so he ordered another joint meeting of MPs and senators to be held on April 18 to vote on whether the vetting time should be extended to 60 days as called for by the opposition, Amnuay said.


-- The Nation 2013-04-13

[reiltin]

When the people are turbulent, when passions are excited as has been the case for the last number of years a constitution is supposed to protect society(sometimes from itself)Pheu Thai seems to lack confidence in itself, considering itself weak unable to avoid corruption, bribery or just plain ignobility-much as the criminal only fears the law he intends to break.While governments are temporary-constitutions should never be.

[Locationthailand]

The request for amendment would be an injustice to the rest of Thailand protecting the criminals who wish to change it to suit their own needs. Thai's simply don't understand the concept of government "by the people for the people". They throw the word of 'democracy' around and have not got a clue of its true meaning. As with every proposed change to the law and constitution by this reckless mob in power, it is only about the wishes of one man and his narcissistic ego stroking attached to his criminal mind. This cannot ever benefit Thailand or its people.

[Thai at Heart]

The request for amendment would be an injustice to the rest of Thailand protecting the criminals who wish to change it to suit their own needs. Thai's simply don't understand the concept of government "by the people for the people". They throw the word of 'democracy' around and have not got a clue of its true meaning. As with every proposed change to the law and constitution by this reckless mob in power, it is only about the wishes of one man and his narcissistic ego stroking attached to his criminal mind. This cannot ever benefit Thailand or its people.

All sides are guilty. Dozens of coups, army based politicians, local overlords, massive corruption.

It's definitely a unique form of democracy, if one can even really call it that.

[Dap]

When the people are turbulent, when passions are excited as has been the case for the last number of years a constitution is supposed to protect society(sometimes from itself)Pheu Thai seems to lack confidence in itself, considering itself weak unable to avoid corruption, bribery or just plain ignobility-much as the criminal only fears the law he intends to break.While governments are temporary-constitutions should never be.

Unfortunately, with very few exceptions here, constitutions are merely the wil o' the wisp of each presiding government, allowing for more control over their opposition and less obstruction to their corruption. Rarely providing protection for the public rather, protecting the money making operations necessary to make politics profitable for the politicians. The rate of 30% & + corruption is simply untenable and will eventually be the downfall of this unceasing greed. The losers will always be the public. Unfortunately.