Pheu Thai M Ps To Seek Impeachment Of Constitution Court Judges

[rubl]

I'm confused trying to combine 'checks and balances' with a one-way system. I thought the current remotely controlled government was trying it's best (as forced by the skyper) to diminish and if possible get rid of the 'checks and balances' to be able to go to the 'one way system'.

[mancub]

Thai politics ...with the best intentions ,I never get past the 3rd paragraph in OP's like this one.

I understand why the simplicity of an appalling CH3 soap opera is more worthy of their attentive efforts for the majority of the electorate in this country..

[473geo]

I'm confused trying to combine 'checks and balances' with a one-way system. I thought the current remotely controlled government was trying it's best (as forced by the skyper) to diminish and if possible get rid of the 'checks and balances' to be able to go to the 'one way system'.

Under the the almost impossible burden of threat of dissoution be it contrived or genuine, the system is flawed, it favours and supports those that implemented and control it. But then that was the aim, was it not. Given the current system where any parliamentary decision can be overturned, a party be dissolved, on a whim by the judiciary if they choose to class it as in their remit!! It would appear the face of a parlimentary democracy in Thailand is a virtual image.

Edited April 20, 2013 by 473geo

[Baerboxer]

So, a duly elected government, with a parliamentary majority seeks to reorganise some part of an inept and badly designed judicial system.

Where is the problem ??

Constitutions are in place to protect the people from "duly elected governments' that would like to change things to make sure that they are never unelected.

Democracy relies are having an independent judiciary not one dictated to by one political party that have managed to get themselves in power.

Who says the Constitutional Court is inept or badly designed? Apart from PTP and it's Master that is?

[Baerboxer]

I'm confused trying to combine 'checks and balances' with a one-way system. I thought the current remotely controlled government was trying it's best (as forced by the skyper) to diminish and if possible get rid of the 'checks and balances' to be able to go to the 'one way system'.

Under the the almost impossible burden of threat of dissoution be it contrived or genuine, the system is flawed, it favours and supports those that implemented and control it. But then that was the aim, was it not. Given the current system where any parliamentary decision can be overturned, a party be dissolved, on a whim by the judiciary if they choose to class it as in their remit!! It would appear the face of a parlimentary democracy in Thailand is a virtual image.

I agree - a democracy would not tolerate a government whose senior ministers openly break the law, refuse to answer questions, and threaten and intimidate the judiciary when they dare to oppose them.

[473geo]

I'm confused trying to combine 'checks and balances' with a one-way system. I thought the current remotely controlled government was trying it's best (as forced by the skyper) to diminish and if possible get rid of the 'checks and balances' to be able to go to the 'one way system'.

Under the the almost impossible burden of threat of dissoution be it contrived or genuine, the system is flawed, it favours and supports those that implemented and control it. But then that was the aim, was it not. Given the current system where any parliamentary decision can be overturned, a party be dissolved, on a whim by the judiciary if they choose to class it as in their remit!! It would appear the face of a parlimentary democracy in Thailand is a virtual image.

I agree - a democracy would not tolerate a government whose senior ministers openly break the law, refuse to answer questions, and threaten and intimidate the judiciary when they dare to oppose them.

It would appear the charge is "abuse of authority".........I seem to recall this is a very serious allegation.....and swift incisive action against those responsible for such an act is widely supported on Tvisa......so let the courts get on with it post haste.....

[rubl]

The "almost impossible burden of threat of dissoution be it contrived or genuine" has been in the Thai constitution since at least 1997.

A Pheu Thai MP has gone on record to say his party only wants to bring Const2007/art68 back in line with Const1997/art63. That suggests 'only' the added paragraph on five year ban of politicians and other fools might be removed.

Anyway, Pheu Thai MPs to seek Impeachment of Constitutional Court because that court is deemed to abuse it's authority by agreeing to review charter-change bill. The 'constitutional' court allegedly abuses it's authority by agreeing to review 'constitution' changes proposed in an amendment bill. What's next?

[Tatsujin]

Are PTP actually doing anything besides fighting the legal system and borrowing money?

Sorry, I think you mis-typed, it should be:

Are PTP actually doing anything besides fighting the legal system and borrowing stealing money?

[rubl]

Unlike some here seem to think, there is no charge. There is just a "Pheu Thai MPs yesterday threatened to file criminal charges". So, with a political party or some of it's MPs 'threatening' to charge there might not be that much substance in the 'alleged' abuse or maybe the MPs don't think it's that urgent as parliament is in recess anyway and they've got more important things to do

[khunken]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

[473geo]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

So who carries the final say so in the current structure Ken, who holds the "power" to control change?

[Thai at Heart]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

So who carries the final say so in the current structure Ken, who holds the "power" to control change?

Why ask such difficult questions?

The people directly? No.

The parliament ? No apparently.

I go with plodprasob.

He can change gravity.

[khunken]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

So who carries the final say so in the current structure Ken, who holds the "power" to control change?

No one - yet - has absolute power. The problem is that PTP want it for one person.

[473geo]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

So who carries the final say so in the current structure Ken, who holds the "power" to control change?

No one - yet - has absolute power. The problem is that PTP want it for one person.

I would say when the military stage a coup......that is about as absolute in the power stakes as you can get...wouldn't you Ken?

[rubl]

Trying to move away from the 'red roses' coup in September 2006 even thought the leader is an MP of a party which is part of the Pheu Thai-led government. Some Pheu Thai MPs have threatened to charge a court they don't like. The court of which members of the public have addresses, telephone numbers, etc. thanks to some Pheu Thai party list MPs who just happen to be UDD leader as well. Well, that charge will get a decision on bail next week, but that's another topic.

[khunken]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

So who carries the final say so in the current structure Ken, who holds the "power" to control change?

No one - yet - has absolute power. The problem is that PTP want it for one person.

I would say when the military stage a coup......that is about as absolute in the power stakes as you can get...wouldn't you Ken?

When the going gets tough the 'tough' go off topic.

Since the abolition of absolute rule by the monarchy the closest we've come to dictatorship was 2001-6. One man dictatorship which the likes of the CC is protecting the country from.

[khunken]

I'm afraid that the usual suspects are just blindly supporting their PTP heros yet again. The system is 'not balanced' meaning that the ruling party under the master's instructions can't do what they like.

The CC is standing in the party's way so it must be impeached/abolished/made toothless. It is one of a few institutions standing between a semblance of democracy and one party (man) rule.

That PTP want more (total?) power is not surprising. What is surprising is that seemingly educated Farangs support it.

So who carries the final say so in the current structure Ken, who holds the "power" to control change?

No one - yet - has absolute power. The problem is that PTP want it for one person.

I would say when the military stage a coup......that is about as absolute in the power stakes as you can get...wouldn't you Ken?

When the going gets tough the 'tough' go off topic.

Since the abolition of absolute rule by the monarchy the closest we've come to dictatorship was 2001-6. One man dictatorship which the likes of the CC is protecting the country from.

Actually the question wasn't absolute power, just power.

Seems it rests with courts to me. The parliament are the people's representatives, but it appears they can't change it, even if it complies with the prescribed necessity for voting in parliament.

Well I have to disagree with you. No court has stopped PTP from carrying out constitutional amendments - all they've done so far is set out some rules as guidance. The problem is that PTP (Thaksin in reality) don't like the rules. As the current constitution was accepted by the Thai people, those people must be allowed to decide on amendments & even whether any amendment is necessary.

PTP want total freedom to do as they please - that's an abuse of power.

[rubl]

If a complete rewrite needs first a referendum on the need for a rewrite followed by a referendum on the rewrite itself, a more 'subtle' approach of amending selected articles in a step-by-step approach which may led to the same result, it would be foolish of the Constitutional Court to accept that. Especially because the reasoning for article amendment has been very limited to '2007 no good, 1997 good', 'Thaksin ordered so', 'junta 2007 charter', etc., etc.

Now if only someone could describe the new text of the articles as proposed and sound reasoning for the changes related to the 2007 charter (and even how that relates to the 1997 charter if it does).

Mind you, the topic is about a threat, the threat by Pheu Thai MPs, the threat to the Constitutional Court, the threat to charge them for alleged abuse of power. Nothing happened today, but maybe they wait till Monday? That would be perfect timing for a threat to the Constitutional Court. End of November the Criminal Court revoked Korkaew's bail on grounds that he acted and spoke out in a way considered intimidating to the Constitutional Court judges, but he used his parliamentary immunity to get bailed again. With parliament in recess that's to be decided on again Monday.

[Publicus]

Either there is judicial review in Thailand or there isn't.

Judicial review is the practice in Thailand. Where in the constitution does it state the parliament can challenge an order of a court? The parliament is presently in contempt of court just for talking about impeaching the judges it doesn't like.

Disobeying a court order creates a constitutional crisis. A constitutional crisis in Thailand invites the army to take action.

Thais forever keep shooting themselves in the head. However Thais are so thick skulled the bullets keep bouncing off. So the madness is endless.

[Thai at Heart]

Ken, that's true and as yet they haven't even tabled the proposals 100%.

It isn't that ptp wants absolute power, the discussion is should parliament be able to do this. It cuts any which way depending on who is in power.

I don't see how parliament changes the law it can be reasonable for a court to block it. In fact, I would see that virtually as damaging as the courts having taken an expedient decision over thaksins assets all those years ago.

More fool the writers who didn't put on a super majority clause those years ago.

[virtualtraveller]

A show down is looming between Peua Thai parliament and the CC, the courts have actually been fairly quiet in tolerating this farce of a govt. Me thinks sooner or later they are going to rule on something significant to take Thaksin down a few measures. Threatening courts is totally out of order, he did a measure of this in 2001 ahead of his assets case that eventually did the trick for him, but they won't let it happen this time. Trouble is, what exactly can Thaksin do, call his reds on to the streets to protest, but his lot are in govt. So then what? I'm guessing they are going to let the amnesty get passed then accept a petition on the 15 law and take it down on a technicality. Waste time and annoy Thaksin, force him to do something outrageous. If you're going to legislate the CC into irrelevance by controlling the gate keeper of course the CC are going to rule it invalid one way or another. Thaksin is a really tricky number, read his biography, as far as he is concerned a judiciary that isn't voted (indirectly) by the people is invalid and that is nonsense!

[AleG]

Either there is judicial review in Thailand or there isn't.

Judicial review is the practice in Thailand. Where in the constitution does it state the parliament can challenge an order of a court? The parliament is presently in contempt of court just for talking about impeaching the judges it doesn't like.

Disobeying a court order creates a constitutional crisis. A constitutional crisis in Thailand invites the army to take action.

Thais forever keep shooting themselves in the head. However Thais are so thick skulled the bullets keep bouncing off. So the madness is endless.

I have the suspicion it's not accidental how PTP locks horns with the Constitutional Court, with that I mean, I suspect they purposely confront the court so as to more deeply drive a wedge in society for their own benefit. "Come, come! see the injustice inherent to the system", paraphrasing Monty Python.

What better to rally the faithful than to create an enemy via calculated provocations?

They want to create the perception of a justice system opposed to them not because of what they do, but because of who they are, you know, the little people Thaksin and his party care so very much about and represent their best interests. So for example TRT being disbanded had nothing to do with the party having been found to had committed electoral fraud, a fact that seems to fly right over the heads of Thaksin''s We Love Democracy club, no, it was the elites siccing the courts to steal DemocracyTM out of the people's hands.

[khunken]

Ken, that's true and as yet they haven't even tabled the proposals 100%.

It isn't that ptp wants absolute power, the discussion is should parliament be able to do this. It cuts any which way depending on who is in power.

I don't see how parliament changes the law it can be reasonable for a court to block it. In fact, I would see that virtually as damaging as the courts having taken an expedient decision over thaksins assets all those years ago.

More fool the writers who didn't put on a super majority clause those years ago.

Maybe PTP doesn't want absolute power but Thaksin does & always has. I don't subscribe to the PTP supporters view that everything the court does is to target Thaksin.

As I said the court hasn't blocked anything. As Rubl says (above) we still don't know what actual changes that PTP are proposing. If one of them targets the CC, it's hardly surprising that the CC are going to shoot that down if they can.

I agree with you about the super majority.

[OzMick]

There is a balance required in the Thai system, a situation whereby an independant body can make judgements to protect its ability to continue to do so is not an ideal situation

That is a rather confused/confusing statement. Do you believe the system should NOT allow independent bodies to defend themselves from attack? Should they be vulnerable to a malignant assault from a body subject to constant change to the political whim of the day, and which would then destroy their independence?

No wonder you are confused Mick, what you fail to acknowledge is the one way system in operation....

I see many more problems with the Thai parliamentary system than with the constitution and the CC which interprets and enforces it. IMHO opinion the constitution should be difficult to change and require a super-majority referendum, to protect the nation from poor electoral decisions. I see no reason why a political party that wins an election should be able to change the constitution to remove the threat of prosecution for its illegal actions and to ensure its own future electoral success.

[Noistar]

Are PTP actually doing anything besides fighting the legal system and borrowing money?

Sorry, I think you mis-typed, it should be:

Are PTP actually doing anything besides fighting the legal system and borrowing stealing money?

I stand corrected!

[rametindallas]

Dr. Thaksin, in his zeal to become the equivalent of Hun Sen i.e. undisputable power, doesn't even retain a façade of democratic methods. 'By hook or by crook' he WILL be President-for-Life even if it kills Thailand as we know it.

[maidu]

So, a duly elected government, with a parliamentary majority seeks to reorganise some part of an inept and badly designed judicial system.

Where is the problem ??

Are you joking?

Actually, much of the Thai populace has to take at least some blame for the ugly political mess Thailand is stuck in. And if you think they've figured out what a problem they've enabled - a majority of voters in Chiang Mai appear to be set to exacerbate Thailand's problems. It looks as though they'll vote in another Shinawatre there soon. You know the expression, "You've made your bed, now you've got to sleep in it." How long will it take until they realize their folly? I don't know, but in the meantime, they deserve all the grunge that comes down the pipes.

[473geo]

So, a duly elected government, with a parliamentary majority seeks to reorganise some part of an inept and badly designed judicial system.

Where is the problem ??

Are you joking?

Actually, much of the Thai populace has to take at least some blame for the ugly political mess Thailand is stuck in. And if you think they've figured out what a problem they've enabled - a majority of voters in Chiang Mai appear to be set to exacerbate Thailand's problems. It looks as though they'll vote in another Shinawatre there soon. You know the expression, "You've made your bed, now you've got to sleep in it." How long will it take until they realize their folly? I don't know, but in the meantime, they deserve all the grunge that comes down the pipes.

How can the Thai people continue to get it so wrong for so many years? indeed many foreigners who have chosen to leave their own fantastic countries to reside in Thailand just cannot understand why Thailand isn't more like 'home'

Edited April 20, 2013 by 473geo

[Thai at Heart]

So, a duly elected government, with a parliamentary majority seeks to reorganise some part of an inept and badly designed judicial system.

Where is the problem ??

Are you joking?

Actually, much of the Thai populace has to take at least some blame for the ugly political mess Thailand is stuck in. And if you think they've figured out what a problem they've enabled - a majority of voters in Chiang Mai appear to be set to exacerbate Thailand's problems. It looks as though they'll vote in another Shinawatre there soon. You know the expression, "You've made your bed, now you've got to sleep in it." How long will it take until they realize their folly? I don't know, but in the meantime, they deserve all the grunge that comes down the pipes.

The solution is not to overthrow the right of the parliament, it is for another political party to get its ducks in a row and challenge ptp.

Using courts to neuter parliamentary rights will eventually bite Thailand on the ass, just like thaksins asset judgement and the coup.

Can't someone just get a bum copy of another monarchial democracy and translate it word for word?

Edited April 20, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[waza]

"Judges abused authority by agreeing to review charter-change bill, they say"

My goodness they are right, how dare these judges do their appionted jobs..