"Can the country afford to let politicians who wield executive power dominate both the legislative and judicial branches?"

You mean like when the Democrats are the majority in parliament?

Abhisit modified the constitution prior to the last election to jiggle the size of the constituencies.

So, you see parliament can do this it would appear.

Changing the number of constituency and party-list MP's did nothing to alter the judicial system.

The Democrats did not "wield executive power dominate both the legislative and judicial branches".

Also, the constitutional article that was amended by the then coalition government did not begin with the same verbage of the the constitution article that PTP is trying to amend:

Article 68.

No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State

I know. So, if they can prove that doing so violates article 68, it's moot. Unfortunately, Thailand is incapable of having a reasoned debate on article 68.

Lese majeste law is open to abuse in my opinion and many think the same, so why can it not be changed if parliament decides? As for the bit about overthrowing the government, isn't that a bit of a silly discussion considering this is the hub of coups.

Article 68 has nothing to do with the lese majeste law.

The point yourauntbob was trying to make was that the Democrat administration attempted to "wield executive power dominate both the legislative and judicial branches."

They absolutely did not.

The ability to amend the constitution is in the constitution. That is not in dispute.

What is in dispute is whether amending the constitution.will result in "wield executive power dominate both the legislative and judicial branches" is acceptable or not.

Why do you think there was a coup? Someone was trying to control Everything with No check and balance.... His way or no way... The same thing is happening all over again and the same NUT is pulling the strings.....