Thai security agencies want Security Act pre-approved ahead of protests

[webfact]

Security agencies want Security Act pre-approved ahead of protests
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Security agencies will ask the Cabinet to consider approving ahead of time the use of the Internal Security Act so that it could be enforced should extra measures become necessary to handle expected protests against the amnesty bill late this week, National Security Council secretary-general Paradorn Pattanathabutr said yesterday.

A meeting of senior officials presided over by Deputy Prime Minister Pracha Promnog reviewed the situation ahead of the convening of a new session of Parliament tomorrow. The bill itself is due to be deliberated by the Lower House on August 7.

Participants in the meeting anticipated there would be many groups bringing large numbers of protesters to the capital to demonstrate against the bill, Paradorn said. The protests could last for at least a week starting tomorrow, he said.

The NSC would submit an assessment of the situation made by security agencies at yesterday's meeting for the Cabinet's consideration at a special session today, he said.

"If it becomes necessary, we would enforce the security act only in specific locations and for short periods," he said.

The coalition parties have decided against altering any content of an amnesty bill proposed by Pheu Thai MP Worachai Hema so that the bill can be passed quickly, Chat Thai Pattana Party chief adviser Banharn Silpa-archa said yesterday.

He said coalition party leaders agreed the bill would not be passed in three readings in a single sitting when Parliament deliberates the bill on August 7.

Anti-government groups have threatened to move against the drive to bring about a speedy passage of the bill, by not allowing all concerned parties to discuss the amnesty law.

Banharn said that after the House accepts the bill in principle, a committee would be appointed to vet it within seven days. The coalition party leaders also decided that not one line of the bill should be changed. He personally believed the bill would be beneficial to all parties and political colours.

Commerce Minister Niwatthumrong Boonsongpaisan said a meeting of coalition party leaders did not discuss the possibility of imposing the security law in light of anti-government protests against the amnesty bill.

Meanwhile, opposition chief whip Jurin Laksanawisit said the opposition had resolved not to accept Worachai's amnesty bill in principle on grounds that it discriminates against certain people, thereby violating of Article 30 of the Constitution. This runs counter to the rule of the law and would not help to bring about national reconciliation as claimed, Jurin said.


-- The Nation 2013-07-31

[cloudhopper]

None of this bodes well for the country IMO.

[CrisRMenumate]

So on the one hand, a group can come into the city, un-challenged, with thousands of tires and bamboo sticks and create a blockade of the entire city center for over 2 months..causing death and destruction... well that's ok... but if others wish to use their constitutional right to expression opinion about a controversial bill that is being pushed through without proper review in the community, then that needs to be put down with an iron fist... hmmm who is looking for reconciliation and who is looking to just create a country that only they can benefit from? Just wondering?

[tomross46]

So on the one hand, a group can come into the city, un-challenged, with thousands of tires and bamboo sticks and create a blockade of the entire city center for over 2 months..causing death and destruction... well that's ok... but if others wish to use their constitutional right to expression opinion about a controversial bill that is being pushed through without proper review in the community, then that needs to be put down with an iron fist... hmmm who is looking for reconciliation and who is looking to just create a country that only they can benefit from? Just wondering?

This sounds like history repeating itself. The Nazi beliefs are still alive and well. If you demonstrate against us, we have a place for you. How many bodies ate buried in Kanchanabuti, but PM Samak said no one died during the demonstrations, by the students at Thamasat University.

[CrisRMenumate]

"Four Legs good, Two Legs Better" Napoleon.. George ORwell.

[Emptyset]

So on the one hand, a group can come into the city, un-challenged, with thousands of tires and bamboo sticks and create a blockade of the entire city center for over 2 months..causing death and destruction... well that's ok... but if others wish to use their constitutional right to expression opinion about a controversial bill that is being pushed through without proper review in the community, then that needs to be put down with an iron fist... hmmm who is looking for reconciliation and who is looking to just create a country that only they can benefit from? Just wondering?

Abhisit enforced the ISA before the red shirts arrived in Bangkok. In this case, Paradorn wants the cabinet to approve its use so it can be enforced if things get out of hand. Seems pretty sensible. A bit of hyperbole to equate approving the potential use of the ISA with 'crushing with an iron fist'. Is there a government in the world that doesn't push certain things through without 'proper review in the community' (whatever that means)? Sometimes this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but either way, we don't live in the sort of democracies where people are consulted over every decision. I don't understand why this particular bill is causing such controversy. As far as I can work out, it benefits - at most - a few hundred people, none of whom are protest leaders or politicians. If it involved bringing Thaksin back, or pardoning the protest leaders, then I could see the reason for 'yellow' rage. But it doesn't. In fact I'd be more angry about it if I were a red shirt since it seems to benefit the military more than it does them imo. Anyway, I really don't see it making a blind bit of difference w/r/t the l/t political outlook.

[tingtongteesood]

It irks me greatly how they keep going on and on about riots before it's even happened, it's like they are trying to psychologically brainwash people through the media...But then I expect nothing less from this bunch of idiots...

[rubl]

Clearly all Thai are overwhelmingly behind a whitewash Amnesty to make the National Security Agencies asking for a pre-approved Security Act. If all those in favour show up with flowers our PM Yingluck might suffer from hayfeever or somesuch.

[OzMick]

So on the one hand, a group can come into the city, un-challenged, with thousands of tires and bamboo sticks and create a blockade of the entire city center for over 2 months..causing death and destruction... well that's ok... but if others wish to use their constitutional right to expression opinion about a controversial bill that is being pushed through without proper review in the community, then that needs to be put down with an iron fist... hmmm who is looking for reconciliation and who is looking to just create a country that only they can benefit from? Just wondering?

Abhisit enforced the ISA before the red shirts arrived in Bangkok. In this case, Paradorn wants the cabinet to approve its use so it can be enforced if things get out of hand. Seems pretty sensible. A bit of hyperbole to equate approving the potential use of the ISA with 'crushing with an iron fist'. Is there a government in the world that doesn't push certain things through without 'proper review in the community' (whatever that means)? Sometimes this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but either way, we don't live in the sort of democracies where people are consulted over every decision. I don't understand why this particular bill is causing such controversy. As far as I can work out, it benefits - at most - a few hundred people, none of whom are protest leaders or politicians. If it involved bringing Thaksin back, or pardoning the protest leaders, then I could see the reason for 'yellow' rage. But it doesn't. In fact I'd be more angry about it if I were a red shirt since it seems to benefit the military more than it does them imo. Anyway, I really don't see it making a blind bit of difference w/r/t the l/t political outlook.

Has anybody from the current group of protesters suggested bringing bottles (petrol will be provided) and burning the city to the ground if their goals are not achieved? When someone does that, would it not be prudent to invoke emergency rules?

Until then, why do government and security leaders expect unwarranted violence over what was, until recently, proclaimed to be a Reconciliation Act?

[jbrain]

Clearly all Thai are overwhelmingly behind a whitewash Amnesty to make the National Security Agencies asking for a pre-approved Security Act. If all those in favour show up with flowers our PM Yingluck might suffer from hayfeever or somesuch.

So true, if the majority of the Thai people is behind PTP and supports the amnesty bill,as they try to make people believe, then what they to fear from that small minority that actually has a clue of what is really happening.

[hellodolly]

In a Nation divided over political events as much as Thailand is what kind of a low life government would purposefully push a bill to make it worse.

They were given a perfectly decent bill by the relatives of some of the slain which would go far towards reconciliation.

But that is not important to these low life PTP red shirts. The only thing they care about is bringing the master corruptionest back to Thailand where he can act quicker and gain more cash.

In a way I think it might work out for the best I am sure there is a bullet with his name on it just waiting for him.

[impulse]

Being fat, dumb and oblivious myself, can anyone pinpoint specific areas of Bangkok that will be best avoided during these activities?

And if things do get out of hand, what's the best automobile (or other) route out of the city? And, more importantly, routes to avoid?

Edited July 31, 2013 by impulse