Pheu Thai Statement To Target Court

[Lite Beer]

Pheu Thai statement to target court
Prapan Jindalert-udomdee
The Nation on Sunday

Pheu Thai MP Pichit Chuenban

BANGKOK: -- The Pheu Thai Party will this week officially submit a statement rejecting the Constitutional Court's authority to consider Senator Somchai Sawaengkarn's petition on whether the proposed amendment to Article 68 of the Constitution is unconstitutional.

Pheu Thai MP Pichit Chuenban, a legal expert for the party, said the statement - issued on behalf of some 300 Pheu Thai MPs and senators - would express the legislative branch's disagreement with the court's decision to review the charter-amendment bill. He said the party saw it as the court intervening in the affairs of the legislative branch, which had the freedom and authority to amend the charter. He said some MPs would also submit written explanations to the court about its decision.

As for the plan to seek impeachment of Constitutional Court judges, the party would discuss the issue first, because the idea had come from only a few politicians and had not yet been adopted as a resolution by the party, Pichit said.

Pichit said he thought legal action wasn't yet at a dead end as the committees assigned to amend the charter were still working on it. All parties should be careful not to cause friction, he said, and should avoid conflicts that could lead to weaknesses in the three branches of power: the legislative, administrative and judicial branches.

Pheu Thai Chiang Rai MP Samart Kaewmeechai, said the party's legal team would meet tomorrow to discuss the next move.

-- The Nation 2013-04-21

[NongKhaiKid]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

[reiltin]

if it's constitutional why fear scrutiny?

Most constitutions require a super majority in parliament followed by a public referendum(a route Pheu Thai don't wish to take) entrenched clauses within restrict certain amendments that may damage the spirit of the constitution eg democratic form of government and the protection of human rights.It could be argued that PT by trying to deny a citizens right to directly petition the court but instead go trough the AGs office(a branch of the legislature)runs counter to that spirit,given the strength of feeling that exists and the near certainty of civil unrest why would the PT wish to create further damage to an already divided society...do the people matter,or just one person.

[Roadman]

Are they already back peddling a bit? The party will now discuss impeachment. The Constitution Court, The Dems, The Army, and caring thai people should hold this Shinawatra pond scum to account to go to the people with a referendum to be passed as most other democracies do with a 2/3rds or there about yaying in factor of the proposed listed changes they wish to make. If Thaksin's crap is not rained in politically soon then it is going to require hardship and blood again at a later date.

[Ricardo]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

[Thai at Heart]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

Because the cc is literally a law unto itself?

[Robby nz]

So he is saying that the Constitutional Court's has no authority to consider what's Constitutional, right?

[ZhouZhou]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

[waza]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

Because the cc is literally a law unto itself?

The constitution is a law unto itself, the constitutional court is an independent arbitrator who determine if a new law. legislation and amnesty bills are in accord with the constitution, in other words legal. I can understand how a follower of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice would have little regard for legalities but the rule of law is the background of democracy that protects the rest of Thai society from criminal dictators like Thaksin.

[Thai at Heart]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

Because the cc is literally a law unto itself?

The constitution is a law unto itself, the constitutional court is an independent arbitrator who determine if a new law. legislation and amnesty bills are in accord with the constitution, in other words legal. I can understand how a follower of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice would have little regard for legalities but the rule of law is the background of democracy that protects the rest of Thai society from criminal dictators like Thaksin.

But that is the ultimate issue particularly surrounding less majeste complaints for example. Merely proposing to change it is deemed unconstitutional so it never can be changed.

The ultimate legal chicken and egg.

They have already stated that parliament can change it article by article, now that is being challenged.

The system is all over the place. As for being independent, it's appointed so be it. I like the idea of fixed terms for courts like this of say 10 years with the government of the day appointing say one new judge every 10 years or so.

Edited April 21, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[rubl]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

300 MPs and Senators who are paid-for by the general public and as member of Pheu Thai party by their paymaster in Dubai who orders them what to do. That's dictatorial and not democratic.

BTW it would seem that the few Pheu Thai MPs who 'threatened' to charge the Constitutional Court were a bit hasty after all. Implications still to be worked out. Maybe someone mentioned to them the Criminal Court verdict expected tomorrow, the one on extending bail for another Pheu Thai party list MP and UDD leader who threatened a court.

Edited April 21, 2013 by rubl

[Thai at Heart]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

300 MPs and Senators who are paid-for by the general public and as member of Pheu Thai party by their paymaster in Dubai who orders them what to do. That's dictatorial and not democratic.

BTW it would seem that the few Pheu Thai MPs who 'threatened' to charge the Constitutional Court were a bit hasty after all. Implications still to be worked out. Maybe someone mentioned to them the Criminal Court verdict expected tomorrow, the one on extending bail for another Pheu Thai party list MP and UDD leader who threatened a court.

Hey politicians everywhere are paid to represent special interests. Just look at gun control voting and donations last week.

I am not saying this forgives thaksin, but that this issue is hardly exclusive to Thailand.

[rubl]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

300 MPs and Senators who are paid-for by the general public and as member of Pheu Thai party by their paymaster in Dubai who orders them what to do. That's dictatorial and not democratic.

BTW it would seem that the few Pheu Thai MPs who 'threatened' to charge the Constitutional Court were a bit hasty after all. Implications still to be worked out. Maybe someone mentioned to them the Criminal Court verdict expected tomorrow, the one on extending bail for another Pheu Thai party list MP and UDD leader who threatened a court.

Hey politicians everywhere are paid to represent special interests. Just look at gun control voting and donations last week.

I am not saying this forgives thaksin, but that this issue is hardly exclusive to Thailand.

Maybe so, but then I'm only referring to Thailand as this is 'Thai Visa', not 'USA Visa'

[waza]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

Because the cc is literally a law unto itself?

The constitution is a law unto itself, the constitutional court is an independent arbitrator who determine if a new law. legislation and amnesty bills are in accord with the constitution, in other words legal. I can understand how a follower of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice would have little regard for legalities but the rule of law is the background of democracy that protects the rest of Thai society from criminal dictators like Thaksin.

But that is the ultimate issue particularly surrounding less majeste complaints for example. Merely proposing to change it is deemed unconstitutional so it never can be changed.

The ultimate legal chicken and egg.

They have already stated that parliament can change it article by article, now that is being challenged.

The system is all over the place. As for being independent, it's appointed so be it. I like the idea of fixed terms for courts like this of say 10 years with the government of the day appointing say one new judge every 10 years or so.

It seems to me that a the constitution is the foundation of all legislature and judicial law and as such is the basis of all legal protection for all Thais. The fact that the present constitution was approved by the majority of Thais gives cause for any amendments to be likewise amended rather than on the dictates and under the threats of a convicted criminal and his henchmen. Constitutional changes should be constitutional, after all any amendments that takes power from the people to make the machinations of that criminal less transparent and less accountable shouldn't be considered democratic let alone constitutional even by you.

I believe the judges should be decided by career path in public service, that is as they continue to practice they should be appointed more senior positions in recognition of their experience and work ethics rather than jobs for the boys political appointments.

Les Majesty is a completely different matter and as such bears no comparison.

Edited April 21, 2013 by waza

[waza]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

Because the cc is literally a law unto itself?

The constitution is a law unto itself, the constitutional court is an independent arbitrator who determine if a new law. legislation and amnesty bills are in accord with the constitution, in other words legal. I can understand how a follower of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice would have little regard for legalities but the rule of law is the background of democracy that protects the rest of Thai society from criminal dictators like Thaksin.

But that is the ultimate issue particularly surrounding less majeste complaints for example. Merely proposing to change it is deemed unconstitutional so it never can be changed.

The ultimate legal chicken and egg.

They have already stated that parliament can change it article by article, now that is being challenged.

The system is all over the place. As for being independent, it's appointed so be it. I like the idea of fixed terms for courts like this of say 10 years with the government of the day appointing say one new judge every 10 years or so.

It seems to me that a the constitution is the foundation of all legislature and judicial law and as such is the basis of all legal protection for all Thais. The fact that the present constitution was approved by the majority of Thais give cause for any amendments to be likewise amended rather than on the dictates of a convicted criminal. Constitutional changes should be constitutional, after all any amendments that takes power from the people to make the machinations of that criminal less transparent and less accountable shouldn't be considered democratic let alone constitutional even by you. I believe the judges should be decided by career path in public service, that is as they continue to practice they should be appointed more senior positions in recognition of their experience and work ethics rather than jobs for the boys political appointments.

Les Majesty is a completely different matter and as such bears no comparison.

Didn't the cc just say it was constitutional to amend the constitution article by article?

For us to sit here and debate that it is being amended to suit a criminal is no more legally relevant than saying the last one was put up to absolve the coup makers.

Both committed crimes.

Read the OP that's not the topic. But, yes they did, but that doesn't remove the rights of individual to seek a ruling from them. Well not until this amendment is approved and that right is taken away. Please consider that this right was inherent in the 1997 constitution so its not a coupist change.

PS: two wrongs don't make a right.

Edited April 21, 2013 by waza

[thhMan]

I think the world just needs more love.... Too much hate!

[tomross46]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

So if you use the same logic Adolf Hitler and Mussolini were not dictators. Therefor Zimbabwe is not run by a dictator.

[waza]

I think the world just needs more love.... Too much hate!

If everyone abided by the same laws and were punished to the same extent,(rule of law) and had the same rights and responsibilities (democracy) then there would be no need for division of society and a whole lot more love.

[Bellweather]

Seems to me the PTP idea of judicial independence are those judges who find in their favour otherwise it's judicial activism and cannot be tolerated

[waza]

PTP are of course free to petition the CC, just as the senator is free to lodge a complaint, but why are they so very afraid of what the CC might rule, when there is still every chance that the complaint will be rejected ?

They seem very eager to deny other peoples' democratic and legal rights, for a party which claims to fight for justice & freedom, now they're in-power !

Not that they're displaying Double-Standards, of course !

Because the cc is literally a law unto itself?

The constitution is a law unto itself, the constitutional court is an independent arbitrator who determine if a new law. legislation and amnesty bills are in accord with the constitution, in other words legal. I can understand how a follower of a convicted criminal and fugitive from justice would have little regard for legalities but the rule of law is the background of democracy that protects the rest of Thai society from criminal dictators like Thaksin.

But that is the ultimate issue particularly surrounding less majeste complaints for example. Merely proposing to change it is deemed unconstitutional so it never can be changed.

The ultimate legal chicken and egg.

They have already stated that parliament can change it article by article, now that is being challenged.

The system is all over the place. As for being independent, it's appointed so be it. I like the idea of fixed terms for courts like this of say 10 years with the government of the day appointing say one new judge every 10 years or so.

It seems to me that a the constitution is the foundation of all legislature and judicial law and as such is the basis of all legal protection for all Thais. The fact that the present constitution was approved by the majority of Thais give cause for any amendments to be likewise amended rather than on the dictates of a convicted criminal. Constitutional changes should be constitutional, after all any amendments that takes power from the people to make the machinations of that criminal less transparent and less accountable shouldn't be considered democratic let alone constitutional even by you. I believe the judges should be decided by career path in public service, that is as they continue to practice they should be appointed more senior positions in recognition of their experience and work ethics rather than jobs for the boys political appointments.

Les Majesty is a completely different matter and as such bears no comparison.

Didn't the cc just say it was constitutional to amend the constitution article by article?

For us to sit here and debate that it is being amended to suit a criminal is no more legally relevant than saying the last one was put up to absolve the coup makers.

Both committed crimes.

Read the OP that's not the topic. But, yes they did, but that doesn't remove the rights of individual to seek a ruling from them. Well not until this amendment is approved and that right is taken away. Please consider that this right was inherent in the 1997 constitution so its not a coupist change.

PS: two wrongs don't make a right.

No you are right 2 wrongs don't make a right, but taking the moral high ground on politics is pointless.

I think they should find away to vet requests to the cc first. Maybe the complaints should go to a local prosecutor first and then be forwarded.

It is the case that the cc can be abused with frivolous requests. It shouldn't be vetted by the attorney general though, that is political.

The CC is vetting the request, to force requesters to go through a government appointed gate keeper is political interference in the constitutional process and predisposes the AG to make decisions overriding the CC.

Edited April 21, 2013 by waza

[rubl]

Just to be sure, the Constitutional Court has been asked to look at the proposed amendment of a few articles in the Constitution. So far so good. Anything else here is speculation, just a wind up in case the CC gives an answer not liked by some.

[Thai at Heart]

To waza:

As i said, it shouldn't be vetted by the attorney general, but I don't see an issue with it being vetted somewhere to stop spurious requests that are just used to tie the system up in knots. Just look at the request that was made before that there was some threat to the monarchy or such. After a point, they said, there is no threat to the monarchy and that they couldn't just guess that there was one.

It is the case that the cc can be abused with frivolous requests. It shouldn't be vetted by the attorney general though, that is political.

That was a fair decision, but it tied the whole system in a knot for quite a while.

[waza]

To waza:

As i said, it shouldn't be vetted by the attorney general, but I don't see an issue with it being vetted somewhere to stop spurious requests that are just used to tie the system up in knots. Just look at the request that was made before that there was some threat to the monarchy or such. After a point, they said, there is no threat to the monarchy and that they couldn't just guess that there was one.

It is the case that the cc can be abused with frivolous requests. It shouldn't be vetted by the attorney general though, that is political.

That was a fair decision, but it tied the whole system in a knot for quite a while.

"It is the case that the cc can be abused with frivolous requests" I agree if there is political interference this will occur, just look at the DSI. Since the DSI was taken over by the political appointee Tarit they have only investigated Thaksin's politically initiated frivolous request and ignore major issues like Thaksin's involvement in the red riots ect. I think the CC is quite capable of making constitutionally correct decision on any case including the frivolous ones.

[metisdead]

Posts with messed up quote headers have been removed, it's a bit difficult to determine who said what.

[rubl]

Pheu Thai to target court. In a democratic fashion. Judiciary too strong. Thaksin's party upset, Thaksin impatient. All in the name of Democracy.

If only all could see that our beloved criminal fugitive only wants what (he thinks) is rightfully his.

[NongKhaiKid]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

300 voices saying what they are told to, doing what they are told to and voting as they are told to. Peoples Power by one man

[waza]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

300 MPs and Senators who are paid-for by the general public and as member of Pheu Thai party by their paymaster in Dubai who orders them what to do. That's dictatorial and not democratic.

BTW it would seem that the few Pheu Thai MPs who 'threatened' to charge the Constitutional Court were a bit hasty after all. Implications still to be worked out. Maybe someone mentioned to them the Criminal Court verdict expected tomorrow, the one on extending bail for another Pheu Thai party list MP and UDD leader who threatened a court.

They were elected by the people. parliamentarian democracy is hardly a dictatorship.

didn't you read the paper you linked to few days ago? about who the junta was gerrymandering in the hope to give the Democrats a few more votes.

the article was also a good description about the unbalance between the elected parliament and the judiciary in Thailand.

go back and read it, then you might be understand little bit better what is going on here. the judiciary is to strong so there is an undemocratic unbalance.

The stronger the better, the judiciary is bounded by the law and thereby should be impartial and fair. Its only follows the legislatures mandates as set in law and should be the strongest institution in an effective democracy. Where as the parliament is a concoction of elected and appointed members with differing agendas and varied shareholders, it could hardly be described as impartial.

[dominique355]

In a true democracy, there are three powers: legislative, executive and judiciary. A proper constitution sets up these powers, how they are "manned" and ensures a clear separation of power. These are the main ingredients for a democracy run by the rule of law.

What we see here is that the legislative and executive are no more separated but form one big mash of Pheu Thai MPs and ministers, who have the majority in the legislative, have effectively established a dictatorship of the majority and the minority is practically powerless. Compromises doe not exist.

To strengthen their power, Pheu Thai has not set eye on the judiciary, which is still not under its control. Which is why the Constitutional Court will be cut back and can then only be accessed through the (Pheu Thai controlled) Attorney General.

And in the same time, the Pheu Thai conglomerate has already started to also control the Bank of Thailand in its independence.

It's Taksin's quest for absolute power, all over again.

[khunken]

There is no evidence that Thailand's weak democracy is skewed towards the courts.

All that has happened is (1) guidelines issued by the court about how to proceed with constitution amendment - disliked by PTP because it involves a referendum (or two); and (2) the court has accepted for consideration a petition (or two) about specific changes proposed by PTP.

No refusal, no dictatorial pronouncements, only opinions related to the constitution which happens to be their mandated job.

We have already seen how the red shirts view the CC - intimidation being the case. How long before the big boss releases the dog pack again to give the CC its 'opinion'? Not long by the way things are going.

[chainarong]

More and more a dictatorship. If judges don't do what we want they and their court are out, arsonists get cabinet posts and the DSI " investigates, sort of, then finds " as directed. The amnesty bill is now the only thing that matters as it benefits one person and it's orchestrated from overseas by that very person

300 elected members of the parliament, 300 elected lawmakers, make a statement. that sounds like peoples power to me and not like dictatorship.

In a Democracy The people have a referendum vote, they decide whether the constitution will be altered, not a load of self serving politicians .Zhou Zhou , you need to do a course in political science at a UNI in HK or Singapore, you need to understand there is no such thing as democracy in Thailand