Reds To Seek Impeachment Of Judges; Group Warns It Will Try To Block Their Salaries

[Skywalker69]

Monkeys in red.

[MaiChai]

There is alot of confusion here. The legislative branch are there create and amend laws. It's outside their remit to change the constitution. The constitution can only be changed via a referendum ; that is the majority of the people voting for a change.

[bigbamboo]

Reds showing their complete lack of understanding due process and law. The govt should invoke closure of this protest immediately. The Judges are the only protection left to Thailand to stop absolute dictatorship by the Shin clan as they continue to brainwash these people in their quest for greed and control.

Don't you just love it, the Democrats are after the speaker and the reds after judges and on it goes, children at play. Meanwhile the Chiang Mai Globetrotter is off again and today it's Brunei

No point in KY hanging around and getting involved in grubby political games. It's not as if she has any influence on events anyway.

Best stay well out of the way and let BB get on with it.

[MaxLee]

That's what all those Mega Projects and rice scams, first car scams, and etc-scams were all about, collecting money, hiding it under the table, behind closed doors, and use it to pay the Red short activist to take care of the dirty, violent business and protest campaigns.... these goons, the same ones who are getting ripped off by those policy SCAM schemes, are getting paid for such unethical protests like that, with no regard for Human life...

So how do you keep these goons by the carrot,.... by circulating their money, that has been ripped off by the Pheu Thai's ministry mafias, back to them, so they won't vote for anybody else, except Pheu Thai and Thaksin....

[Locationthailand]

""The Constitutional Court is the problem and is an obstacle that we must eradicate on our path to democracy."

The Deputy UDD leader Somwang Assarasi must have been listening to PHeu Thai party list MP and UDD leader Dr. weng who advocated to 'eradicate the Democrat party'. All democratically of course.

BTW when people say things like "court abused its power and meddled in the legislative branch's affairs" I always wonder if they know what they say and what it means.

It is normal communist talk. Democracy with were fascists are not allowed to get elected (and everyone who isn't communist is fascist) so all other parties will be banned in the name of democracy. It sounds strange, but that is exactly the mindset of the commies and most even believe that it is for the good of everyone.

The reds only link to communism is there colour scheme. They are fascists to the core, their thinking, their actions and complete intolerance of dissent are all remissisent of nazi Germany and fascist Italy.

I know many communist regimes had these same traits but in this case the actions and beliefs of the red shirts mirrors the mix of agrarian and disaffected working class support, rabid nationalism, populist and simplistic solutions to every problem, intolerance and readiness to use violence at every turn that nazis exploited in 1930s Germany.

And the Thai populace who gets to cast a vote can't see it because they are deliberately 'dumbed down' in matters of anything that happens outside the Kingdom and especially in a foreign language. If these same people saw the results of Nazism they may just be able to draw a parallel.

[Thai at Heart]

There is alot of confusion here. The legislative branch are there create and amend laws. It's outside their remit to change the constitution. The constitution can only be changed via a referendum ; that is the majority of the people voting for a change.

That is where it all goes wrong, because apparently, someone negelected to notice that a given part of the constitution can be changed by parliamentary majority at 51%. How dumb were these supposed constitutional experts? I prefer the word "naive" because of course, if the Democrats had actually come up with something that would win an election, there wouldn't be any objections.

But, then again, why would Abhisit dare to touch the constitution when the only way for them to get into power is on the back of military coersion?

Edited April 25, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[Baerboxer]

O yes we know this court is Abhisit and Democratic partys lifeline !!

Like it or not they are your life line to democracy in Thailand.

If they go you will see a dictatorship here in Thailand.

You are right Dolly. This little "people's protest" could be a side show. Undermining the financing of the legal system with budget cuts is another less public way of weakening those responsible for checks and balance.

PTP move towards dictatorship and classically convince the followers that this is "real democracy". The CC is the life line for the whole country. Without them it either the Army step in or dictatorship.

[Baerboxer]

There is alot of confusion here. The legislative branch are there create and amend laws. It's outside their remit to change the constitution. The constitution can only be changed via a referendum ; that is the majority of the people voting for a change.

That is where it all goes wrong, because apparently, someone negelected to notice that a given part of the constitution can be changed by parliamentary majority at 51%. How dumb were these supposed constitutional experts? I prefer the word "naive" because of course, if the Democrats had actually come up with something that would win an election, there wouldn't be any objections.

But, then again, why would Abhisit dare to touch the constitution when the only way for them to get into power is on the back of military coersion?

If that's the case, why don't PTP simply do this? Or are you saying that the parts they want to change are not included "in the given parts of the constitution" that can be changed.

If PTP were really a democratic party, they would of course organize a referendum. But, they might loose which isn't in their script. Again, we have a political party, that holds power without an actual majority of the people voting for them, trying to change the constitution to suit themselves. Lessons from history - usually ignored until too late.

It's amazing how many people take democracy for granted in their country, and don't realise how precious it is until its stolen. Just ask anyone from a former communist or facist regime.

[Thai at Heart]

There is alot of confusion here. The legislative branch are there create and amend laws. It's outside their remit to change the constitution. The constitution can only be changed via a referendum ; that is the majority of the people voting for a change.

That is where it all goes wrong, because apparently, someone negelected to notice that a given part of the constitution can be changed by parliamentary majority at 51%. How dumb were these supposed constitutional experts? I prefer the word "naive" because of course, if the Democrats had actually come up with something that would win an election, there wouldn't be any objections.

But, then again, why would Abhisit dare to touch the constitution when the only way for them to get into power is on the back of military coersion?

If that's the case, why don't PTP simply do this? Or are you saying that the parts they want to change are not included "in the given parts of the constitution" that can be changed.

If PTP were really a democratic party, they would of course organize a referendum. But, they might loose which isn't in their script. Again, we have a political party, that holds power without an actual majority of the people voting for them, trying to change the constitution to suit themselves. Lessons from history - usually ignored until too late.

It's amazing how many people take democracy for granted in their country, and don't realise how precious it is until its stolen. Just ask anyone from a former communist or facist regime.

That is the whole problem, someone asked the Constitutional Court, how to amend the constitution, and the read the small print and realised that a wholesale re-write required a referendum, but tweaking bits here and there could be done by parliament, on a simple majority basis.

Do you really believe that this loophole wasn't deliberately left there, should a favourable government want to politely amend a bit here and a bit there. The whole thing was written on the basis that TRT/PTP was dead in the water, the army were in control, and Abhisit and the Dems were going to be in power for the next ten years. They had a shoe-in by the army, and they still didn't win. Then the courts contorted this way that way, the army leant on a few people, and finally, the Dems got in, and then they finally lost again.

This is really a case of "the best laid plans of mice and men". Their sheer arrogance led them to write this system whereby supermajority is not required, because they always wanted to leave a loophole should an agreeable government want to change something at an acceptable time. Their fear of the parliament and their lack of understanding of how popular and determined PTP/Thaksin actually is, led them to this point.

[Thaddeus]

The real problem with ignorance, is ignorance.

[rubl]

Knowledge can be am unbearable burden which may lead to suicidal tendencies and sudden flare-ups of violent behaviour.

[Thaddeus]

No chance of Thaksin topping himself then.

[daboyz1]

"The red shirts yesterday briefly clashed with security officials manning the court when they tried to enter the compound."

That is what is worrying. The Reds are prepared to force their way in. The police should be stepping in on this now. But they are under Thaksins family control. The Army should be preparing with more precision and speed to take out those who wish to bring more mob rule and terror to Thailand. Thailand is going further down the toilet every day. Soon it will be controlled the same as its neighbours. And the Army is the problem? Thank God they are there as the final judicator for more years yet.

Interesting post. My wife's family come from Chantaburi. They take no part in politics; the area in which they live is not known as a PTP stronghold. What they do say is that they do not like or trust the police but they like and trust the army. My wife and I were taking some much needed supplies through to some displaced persons who live in a remore border area. The soldiers at a check point appreciated what we were doing and let us through - we came back with a gift for them but they absolutely refused it and then thanked us for helping others in need. (Would the police have refused?) My wife's family are poor farmers - they are good Buddhists in that they try and do the right thing according to their precepts. They are not involved or interested in politics. However they do feel threatened by the increasing power of the wealthy Shinawatra clan and firmly believe that this is bad for Thailand. When asked about the last coup, their opinion - and indeed the opinion of some of their neighbours with whom we discussed this issue - is that a coup is no bad thing if it keeps the "bad people" (quote) at bay. Given all the 'anti-coup' rhetoric on these forums, it is interesting to note that - contrary to western media opinion - coups which are there to support democracy and not to give power to some besotted general can work in favour of the nation as a whole.

That's a very good post. Alot of people automatically assume that a coup is bad in all cases. IMO, this is one case where a coup was warranted. Not only that, the people that staged the coup had an election a year or so later. So it wasn't some kind of permanent power grab by the military to run the country forever. In fact it was in response to caretaker PM that wanted to run the country forever.

[Noistar]

"BANGKOK Upset that the Constitutional Court judges have been ignoring demands for them to quit, the red shirts yesterday threatened to launch an impeachment campaign and have the Budget Bureau stop paying their salaries."

Or we will huff and puff and burn the city down............. again:giggle:

edit note, can not change the bold quote to no bold.

Do these people have a clue what the Constitution Court is/does? Perhaps more importantly, do they have a clue why they are there?

[hellodolly]

There is alot of confusion here. The legislative branch are there create and amend laws. It's outside their remit to change the constitution. The constitution can only be changed via a referendum ; that is the majority of the people voting for a change.

That is where it all goes wrong, because apparently, someone negelected to notice that a given part of the constitution can be changed by parliamentary majority at 51%. How dumb were these supposed constitutional experts? I prefer the word "naive" because of course, if the Democrats had actually come up with something that would win an election, there wouldn't be any objections.

But, then again, why would Abhisit dare to touch the constitution when the only way for them to get into power is on the back of military coersion?

I would suggest you direct your paranoia at the police.

There is nothing hypothetical about what they can do they are doing it on a daily base.

The last time I checked the PTP had control of them.

[longway]

There is alot of confusion here. The legislative branch are there create and amend laws. It's outside their remit to change the constitution. The constitution can only be changed via a referendum ; that is the majority of the people voting for a change.

That is where it all goes wrong, because apparently, someone negelected to notice that a given part of the constitution can be changed by parliamentary majority at 51%. How dumb were these supposed constitutional experts? I prefer the word "naive" because of course, if the Democrats had actually come up with something that would win an election, there wouldn't be any objections.

But, then again, why would Abhisit dare to touch the constitution when the only way for them to get into power is on the back of military coersion?

If that's the case, why don't PTP simply do this? Or are you saying that the parts they want to change are not included "in the given parts of the constitution" that can be changed.

If PTP were really a democratic party, they would of course organize a referendum. But, they might loose which isn't in their script. Again, we have a political party, that holds power without an actual majority of the people voting for them, trying to change the constitution to suit themselves. Lessons from history - usually ignored until too late.

It's amazing how many people take democracy for granted in their country, and don't realise how precious it is until its stolen. Just ask anyone from a former communist or facist regime.

That is the whole problem, someone asked the Constitutional Court, how to amend the constitution, and the read the small print and realised that a wholesale re-write required a referendum, but tweaking bits here and there could be done by parliament, on a simple majority basis.

Do you really believe that this loophole wasn't deliberately left there, should a favourable government want to politely amend a bit here and a bit there. The whole thing was written on the basis that TRT/PTP was dead in the water, the army were in control, and Abhisit and the Dems were going to be in power for the next ten years. They had a shoe-in by the army, and they still didn't win. Then the courts contorted this way that way, the army leant on a few people, and finally, the Dems got in, and then they finally lost again.

This is really a case of "the best laid plans of mice and men". Their sheer arrogance led them to write this system whereby supermajority is not required, because they always wanted to leave a loophole should an agreeable government want to change something at an acceptable time. Their fear of the parliament and their lack of understanding of how popular and determined PTP/Thaksin actually is, led them to this point.

I don't think this is accurate interpretation. If they were thinking ahead in the way you suggest then they would have amended the way MP seats were allocated. Isaan had about 5% more MPs per head of population than other regions of Thailand and they would have neutralised this advantage if they had any foresight whatsoever. A massive tactical oversight on their part. It is mainly why Thaksin's party at the time got about 50% of the MP seats with only 35% of the vote. Of course by the time they changed that PT got close to 50% of the votes and it was too late.

Its not that Thaksin plays the game so well, its just that the other side sucks so bad!

[Publicus]

"The red shirts yesterday briefly clashed with security officials manning the court when they tried to enter the compound."

That is what is worrying. The Reds are prepared to force their way in. The police should be stepping in on this now. But they are under Thaksins family control. The Army should be preparing with more precision and speed to take out those who wish to bring more mob rule and terror to Thailand. Thailand is going further down the toilet every day. Soon it will be controlled the same as its neighbours. And the Army is the problem? Thank God they are there as the final judicator for more years yet.

Interesting post. My wife's family come from Chantaburi. They take no part in politics; the area in which they live is not known as a PTP stronghold. What they do say is that they do not like or trust the police but they like and trust the army. My wife and I were taking some much needed supplies through to some displaced persons who live in a remore border area. The soldiers at a check point appreciated what we were doing and let us through - we came back with a gift for them but they absolutely refused it and then thanked us for helping others in need. (Would the police have refused?) My wife's family are poor farmers - they are good Buddhists in that they try and do the right thing according to their precepts. They are not involved or interested in politics. However they do feel threatened by the increasing power of the wealthy Shinawatra clan and firmly believe that this is bad for Thailand. When asked about the last coup, their opinion - and indeed the opinion of some of their neighbours with whom we discussed this issue - is that a coup is no bad thing if it keeps the "bad people" (quote) at bay. Given all the 'anti-coup' rhetoric on these forums, it is interesting to note that - contrary to western media opinion - coups which are there to support democracy and not to give power to some besotted general can work in favour of the nation as a whole.

That's a very good post. Alot of people automatically assume that a coup is bad in all cases. IMO, this is one case where a coup was warranted. Not only that, the people that staged the coup had an election a year or so later. So it wasn't some kind of permanent power grab by the military to run the country forever. In fact it was in response to caretaker PM that wanted to run the country forever.

I agree that the post presents good insight and itself is presented well.

However, as long as Thais continue to believe in the army and coups, the country will never be stable politically or socio-economically. Additionally, I fear the next coup will not be a one year job as the last one was, in 2006-7. If the army takes charge again it will have to be indefinitely, ie., until Thaksin dies of old age. Even then, there's no stopping the red shirts because they have become determined to get a piece of the Thai pie, the pie that the longtime elites have hoarded for themselves only.

These courts are a joke besides. Samak gets kicked out because he got a few baht for doing a cooking show on Tv. Of course he had no business doing a cooking show on Tv, but TiT. In any democracy public opinion and media commentary/criticism would be enuff to cause such a PM to quit the silly show. But in Thailand the court removed the entire government, which is absurd. The courts bring disrespect and, yes, contempt, on themselves.

It looks like Thailand is heading into one kind of dictatorship or another, neither benevolent. The only question is whether both sides are the Nazis.

[whybother]

I agree that the post presents good insight and itself is presented well.

However, as long as Thais continue to believe in the army and coups, the country will never be stable politically or socio-economically. Additionally, I fear the next coup will not be a one year job as the last one was, in 2006-7. If the army takes charge again it will have to be indefinitely, ie., until Thaksin dies of old age. Even then, there's no stopping the red shirts because they have become determined to get a piece of the Thai pie, the pie that the longtime elites have hoarded for themselves only.

These courts are a joke besides. Samak gets kicked out because he got a few baht for doing a cooking show on Tv. Of course he had no business doing a cooking show on Tv, but TiT. In any democracy public opinion and media commentary/criticism would be enuff to cause such a PM to quit the silly show. But in Thailand the court removed the entire government, which is absurd. The courts bring disrespect and, yes, contempt, on themselves.

It looks like Thailand is heading into one kind of dictatorship or another, neither benevolent. The only question is whether both sides are the Nazis.

A couple of corrections.

The court removed Samak for being paid for a second job, and he could have been reelected PM the next day ( ). The government continued as before after electing Somchai PM.

Later, the courts disbanded PPP and banned the executives. Most of the remaining PPP MPs formed PTP and were still in government (ie the court didn't remove the government) ... but they needed to elect a PM. They could have called an election, but chose once again to go to parliament to elect a new PM.

Unfortunately for them, a large faction of the PPP didn't join PTP and formed their own party (BJT). This party, and some other smaller parties, backed the Democrats and elected Abhisit PM.

Most people complain about the Democrat coalition supposedly being formed in the military barracks. These are the same people who accept that the current coalition was formed in Dubai.

[Thai at Heart]

That is the whole problem, someone asked the Constitutional Court, how to amend the constitution, and the read the small print and realised that a wholesale re-write required a referendum, but tweaking bits here and there could be done by parliament, on a simple majority basis.

Do you really believe that this loophole wasn't deliberately left there, should a favourable government want to politely amend a bit here and a bit there. The whole thing was written on the basis that TRT/PTP was dead in the water, the army were in control, and Abhisit and the Dems were going to be in power for the next ten years. They had a shoe-in by the army, and they still didn't win. Then the courts contorted this way that way, the army leant on a few people, and finally, the Dems got in, and then they finally lost again.

This is really a case of "the best laid plans of mice and men". Their sheer arrogance led them to write this system whereby supermajority is not required, because they always wanted to leave a loophole should an agreeable government want to change something at an acceptable time. Their fear of the parliament and their lack of understanding of how popular and determined PTP/Thaksin actually is, led them to this point.

I don't think this is accurate interpretation. If they were thinking ahead in the way you suggest then they would have amended the way MP seats were allocated. Isaan had about 5% more MPs per head of population than other regions of Thailand and they would have neutralised this advantage if they had any foresight whatsoever. A massive tactical oversight on their part. It is mainly why Thaksin's party at the time got about 50% of the MP seats with only 35% of the vote. Of course by the time they changed that PT got close to 50% of the votes and it was too late.

Its not that Thaksin plays the game so well, its just that the other side sucks so bad!

I remembered reading something about this a while ago, and lo and behold, look what springs up......

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-08/abhisit-takes-aim-at-thaksin-s-turf-as-brutal-thai-vote-nears.html

Constitutional Changes

Abhisit’s government changed the constitution earlier this year to boost the number of party-list lawmakers to 125 and reduce the number of constituency MPs to 375. That includes the removal of 12 seats in northern provinces where the Democrats failed to win in 2007.

One of those is Lamphun, where the number of seats has been reduced from three to two. Khayan is facing fellow lawmaker Sa- nguan Pongmanee, Puea Thai’s candidate who has been elected four times.

So you see, it is possible for a sitting government with a majority to modify the Constitution, it just appears that only certain "sitting governments" are allowed to modify certain bits. As I have maintained all the time, this loophole has been left there intentionally, to enable an appropriate government to modify the appropriate bits when it is 'approved' of to maintain the status quo.

Edited April 26, 2013 by Thai at Heart

[hellodolly]

"BANGKOK Upset that the Constitutional Court judges have been ignoring demands for them to quit, the red shirts yesterday threatened to launch an impeachment campaign and have the Budget Bureau stop paying their salaries."

Or we will huff and puff and burn the city down............. again:giggle:

edit note, can not change the bold quote to no bold.

Do these people have a clue what the Constitution Court is/does? Perhaps more importantly, do they have a clue why they are there?

Every time I see this picture it reminds me of what my idea was of a sewing bee in the 1800s back in what was hillbilly country.

[Publicus]

I agree that the post presents good insight and itself is presented well.

However, as long as Thais continue to believe in the army and coups, the country will never be stable politically or socio-economically. Additionally, I fear the next coup will not be a one year job as the last one was, in 2006-7. If the army takes charge again it will have to be indefinitely, ie., until Thaksin dies of old age. Even then, there's no stopping the red shirts because they have become determined to get a piece of the Thai pie, the pie that the longtime elites have hoarded for themselves only.

These courts are a joke besides. Samak gets kicked out because he got a few baht for doing a cooking show on Tv. Of course he had no business doing a cooking show on Tv, but TiT. In any democracy public opinion and media commentary/criticism would be enuff to cause such a PM to quit the silly show. But in Thailand the court removed the entire government, which is absurd. The courts bring disrespect and, yes, contempt, on themselves.

It looks like Thailand is heading into one kind of dictatorship or another, neither benevolent. The only question is whether both sides are the Nazis.

A couple of corrections.

The court removed Samak for being paid for a second job, and he could have been reelected PM the next day ( ). The government continued as before after electing Somchai PM.

Later, the courts disbanded PPP and banned the executives. Most of the remaining PPP MPs formed PTP and were still in government (ie the court didn't remove the government) ... but they needed to elect a PM. They could have called an election, but chose once again to go to parliament to elect a new PM.

Unfortunately for them, a large faction of the PPP didn't join PTP and formed their own party (BJT). This party, and some other smaller parties, backed the Democrats and elected Abhisit PM.

Most people complain about the Democrat coalition supposedly being formed in the military barracks. These are the same people who accept that the current coalition was formed in Dubai.

The "most people" are right concerning each of the two coalitions you reference.

And yes, your narrative is essentially correct. I was out of the country during that time, although I was present during the coup. I do recall the Newin defection to the arm, er, to help Abhisit form a new government after Somchai got tossed. At the time Newin's defection to become leader of the new BJP made him a top dog for a while in the new government, but since last July's election of Yingluck, Newin's been in the doghouse, or another worse kind of house.

Samak stood down because he hadn't delivered the goods to the honcho in Dubai. Thaksin had decided to go to within the family with brother in law Somchai, but Somchai turned out to be a bust too. Thaksin subsequently went deeper into the family to advance Yingluck, who I'd have to admit isn't a big bust.

[Thai at Heart]

I agree that the post presents good insight and itself is presented well.

However, as long as Thais continue to believe in the army and coups, the country will never be stable politically or socio-economically. Additionally, I fear the next coup will not be a one year job as the last one was, in 2006-7. If the army takes charge again it will have to be indefinitely, ie., until Thaksin dies of old age. Even then, there's no stopping the red shirts because they have become determined to get a piece of the Thai pie, the pie that the longtime elites have hoarded for themselves only.

These courts are a joke besides. Samak gets kicked out because he got a few baht for doing a cooking show on Tv. Of course he had no business doing a cooking show on Tv, but TiT. In any democracy public opinion and media commentary/criticism would be enuff to cause such a PM to quit the silly show. But in Thailand the court removed the entire government, which is absurd. The courts bring disrespect and, yes, contempt, on themselves.

It looks like Thailand is heading into one kind of dictatorship or another, neither benevolent. The only question is whether both sides are the Nazis.

A couple of corrections.

The court removed Samak for being paid for a second job, and he could have been reelected PM the next day ( ). The government continued as before after electing Somchai PM.

Later, the courts disbanded PPP and banned the executives. Most of the remaining PPP MPs formed PTP and were still in government (ie the court didn't remove the government) ... but they needed to elect a PM. They could have called an election, but chose once again to go to parliament to elect a new PM.

Unfortunately for them, a large faction of the PPP didn't join PTP and formed their own party (BJT). This party, and some other smaller parties, backed the Democrats and elected Abhisit PM.

Most people complain about the Democrat coalition supposedly being formed in the military barracks. These are the same people who accept that the current coalition was formed in Dubai.

The "most people" are right concerning each of the two coalitions you reference.

And yes, your narrative is essentially correct. I was out of the country during that time, although I was present during the coup. I do recall the Newin defection to the arm, er, to help Abhisit form a new government after Somchai got tossed. At the time Newin's defection to become leader of the new BJP made him a top dog for a while in the new government, but since last July's election of Yingluck, Newin's been in the doghouse, or another worse kind of house.

Samak stood down because he hadn't delivered the goods to the honcho in Dubai. Thaksin had decided to go to within the family with brother in law Somchai, but Somchai turned out to be a bust too. Thaksin subsequently went deeper into the family to advance Yingluck, who I'd have to admit isn't a big bust.

I think she has an ample bust.

[Publicus]

Suit yourself of course. I think she's holding up well as PM. Tough to pin down though. A lot of empty talk. Won't actually do much of anything except listen to her brother who I strongly suspect really hates me. Small fry brother but big problems. You know.

[Thai at Heart]

Suit yourself of course. I think she's holding up well as PM. Tough to pin down though. A lot of empty talk. Won't actually do much of anything except listen to her brother who I strongly suspect really hates me. Small fry brother but big problems. You know.

She's doing OK. Considering the muppets she has around her

[longway]

 

That is the whole problem, someone asked the Constitutional Court, how to amend the constitution, and the read the small print and realised that a wholesale re-write required a referendum, but tweaking bits here and there could be done by parliament, on a simple majority basis.

Do you really believe that this loophole wasn't deliberately left there, should a favourable government want to politely amend a bit here and a bit there. The whole thing was written on the basis that TRT/PTP was dead in the water, the army were in control, and Abhisit and the Dems were going to be in power for the next ten years. They had a shoe-in by the army, and they still didn't win. Then the courts contorted this way that way, the army leant on a few people, and finally, the Dems got in, and then they finally lost again.

This is really a case of "the best laid plans of mice and men". Their sheer arrogance led them to write this system whereby supermajority is not required, because they always wanted to leave a loophole should an agreeable government want to change something at an acceptable time. Their fear of the parliament and their lack of understanding of how popular and determined PTP/Thaksin actually is, led them to this point.

I don't think this is accurate interpretation. If they were thinking ahead in the way you suggest then they would have amended the way MP seats were allocated. Isaan had about 5% more MPs per head of population than other regions of Thailand and they would have neutralised this advantage if they had any foresight whatsoever. A massive tactical oversight on their part. It is mainly why Thaksin's party at the time got about 50% of the MP seats with only 35% of the vote. Of course by the time they changed that PT got close to 50% of the votes and it was too late.

Its not that Thaksin plays the game so well, its just that the other side sucks so bad!

I remembered reading something about this a while ago, and lo and behold, look what springs up......

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-08/abhisit-takes-aim-at-thaksin-s-turf-as-brutal-thai-vote-nears.html

Constitutional Changes

Abhisit’s government changed the constitution earlier this year to boost the number of party-list lawmakers to 125 and reduce the number of constituency MPs to 375. That includes the removal of 12 seats in northern provinces where the Democrats failed to win in 2007.

One of those is Lamphun, where the number of seats has been reduced from three to two. Khayan is facing fellow lawmaker Sa- nguan Pongmanee, Puea Thai’s candidate who has been elected four times.

So you see, it is possible for a sitting government with a majority to modify the Constitution, it just appears that only certain "sitting governments" are allowed to modify certain bits. As I have maintained all the time, this loophole has been left there intentionally, to enable an appropriate government to modify the appropriate bits when it is 'approved' of to maintain the status quo.

 

I wouldn't classify it as a loophole, its just there as I imagine its normal to allow some flexibility. If the army, democrats, bureaucracy were really as coordinated as you imply then this action to tweak boundaries and make changes to seat allocations would have been done before the 2007 election; not 4 years later. It was a massive blunder on the army's part. It just shows how hollow the claims are of a co-ordinated 'amart', its obviously a far more complex and fluid situation. When the democrats finally got around to making these changes then the damage had been done already. If the 'amart' had thought ahead then many of the situations that occurred post 2007 election could have been avoided as Thaksin's party would have seats commensurate with its proportion of the voter base and not its disproportionate share.

It will be interesting if PT reverse the changes of the democrats before the next election. The PT are trying to modify the constitution bit by bit. This 'loophole' is obviously not well thought out and if intentional as you imply is biting the originators on the ass to a certain extent.