All independence will be wiped out if charter amended

[webfact]

All independence will be wiped out if charter amended
Somroutai Sapsomboon

BANGKOK: -- IDEALLY, the Senate should be free of any political influence or interference. However, judging from the way things are at present, many senators appear to be closely connected to politicians, even though these connections are prohibited by the Constitution.

But this situation is likely to get worse if the proposed charter amendment related to senators goes through.

Government MPs have voted in support of amendment clauses that would lift the ban on parents, spouses and children of MPs or political office holders from becoming senators. They also back lifting a ban on ex-MPs, former political-party members and former political-office holders who have left their positions for no more than five years. These prohibitions were obviously aimed at preventing the Senate from being dominated by people with political connections.

But if these bans are lifted, people close to politicians and political parties will be able to contest for senatorial seats freely.

A close look at the Senate's duties and powers will show why people with political connections should not become senators.

The Senate has six key areas of duty: screening laws; scrutinising the government administration; studying and approving key matters such as the appointment of a regent or declaring war; removing political-office holders by an impeachment process; selecting, appointing or endorsing the appointment of members of scrutinising agencies; and others such as amending the Constitution and acknowledging annual reports by state agencies.

If senators do not have political independence, they might well end up putting people with political links in charge of independent agencies such as the Constitutional Court, the Election Commission, the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the Office of the Auditor-General.

Hence the move to change the law so the Senate is open to political intervention has led to suspicion that politicians in power want to control independent agencies. After all, these very agencies have served as obstacles to the government on many issues, such as the Bt2.5-trillion borrowing bill and the water-related mega-project worth Bt300 billion.

In 2000, when Thailand had its first wholly elected Senate, senators were clearly divided into two groups towards the latter half of their six-year term -those who favoured the then-ruling Thai Rak Thai party and those who sided with then-opposition Democrat Party. Many of these senators joined the party they were supporting after completing their term.

The ban on relatives of MPs and Cabinet members as well as those who have left their political positions for less than five years from becoming senators was added to the 2007 Constitution in a move to keep the Senate free from political intervention.

Yet despite this ban, the current upper house still includes senators with close political ties. So perhaps the best thing would be to try to limit the number of people with political connections in the Senate, because removing this rule completely would put the entire Parliament under the current government's control.


-- The Nation 2013-09-06

[whybother]

Senators should be voted for, but it shouldn't be a family affair.

[Robby nz]

In the mean time until we can control the independent agencies we will cut their budgets.

Paiboon said the panel had decided unilaterally to cut the proposed budget of courts and independent agencies. Originally, the 2014 budget allotted to the courts of justice was Bt18.7 billion, including Bt2.2 billion for the Administrative Court and Bt1.5 billion to the NACC.

The committee later altered the figures to Bt14.5 billion, Bt2 billion and Bt1.3 billion respectively.

[smutcakes]

I dont agree with lifting the ban on family members of MP's etc as I think this is a simple if not infallible basic protection.

I do wonder in Thailand how much difference this all makes though, whether they are elected or selected it would be nigh on impossible in Thailand to find a person from the type of people that senators are who is not in some way politically affiliated to a party in some respect. And even if they were not affiliated, I am sure they would be more than happy to be 'influenced'.

The very fact that both sides are fighting so hard on this point indicates that the senators are not completely impartial, or at least both parties feel it possible to get a more 'compliant' senator.

[TomTao]

Goodbye democracy, hello autocracy..........or worse.

[AyG]

Senators should be voted for, but it shouldn't be a family affair.

Given that votes are bought so easily here, and on such a wide scale, that would be a recipe for disaster. Unfortunately, Thailand isn't ready for democracy yet.

[ramrod711]

Thailand, hub of nepotism. Democracy is not the end goal says Thaksin, obviously a man of his word.

[geriatrickid]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

[muratremix]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

You are forgetting this is Thailand we speak. Hub of corruption!

[noitom]

Goodbye democracy, hello autocracy..........or worse.

Ineptocracy and/or Kleptocracy might be more fitting.

[NongKhaiKid]

How can independence be wiped out when it doesn't exist ? I can't think of anyone or anything in the way of official bodies, institutions and the like that are truly independent as everything here is a vested interest of one sort or another.

[peterpop]

Would this move if successful bring Thailand into line with other countries such as USA and UK?

[scorecard]

Goodbye democracy, hello autocracy..........or worse.

I'll be more direct, there's a player in this charade who claims to be the champion of democracy and equal justice for all, who shows their true colors again; not interested whatever in the idea of checks and balances, not interested whatever in what's best for Thailand long-term, not interested at all in the development of the pillars which build strong democracy / maintain strong democracy / the mechanisms that fight off any nasty challenges to strong democracy.

And not interested in listening to what the Thai people want through proper approaches to open debates or whatever whereby the people are encouraged to participate. And we still have the situation where vast numbers of 'voters' have no understanding of what they are involved in.

Manipulation, nasty manipulation and grossly immoral manipulation abounds.

[15Peter20]

How can independence be wiped out when it doesn't exist ? I can't think of anyone or anything in the way of official bodies, institutions and the like that are truly independent as everything here is a vested interest of one sort or another.

Exactly! Which is why this article is such a blatant attempt at smearing the proposed charter amendments without bringing anything new to the table at all.

Money for old rope, which is the best that Dem supporters like The Nation can hope for these days.

[SOTIRIOS]

The Senate has 6 key areas........vote as you are told to vote by those that got you your position.....that's what you are there for....

[Baerboxer]

Would this move if successful bring Thailand into line with other countries such as USA and UK?

No.

[Baerboxer]

Goodbye democracy, hello autocracy..........or worse.

I'll be more direct, there's a player in this charade who claims to be the champion of democracy and equal justice for all, who shows their true colors again; not interested whatever in the idea of checks and balances, not interested whatever in what's best for Thailand long-term, not interested at all in the development of the pillars which build strong democracy / maintain strong democracy / the mechanisms that fight off any nasty challenges to strong democracy.

And not interested in listening to what the Thai people want through proper approaches to open debates or whatever whereby the people are encouraged to participate. And we still have the situation where vast numbers of 'voters' have no understanding of what they are involved in.

Manipulation, nasty manipulation and grossly immoral manipulation abounds.

Don't forget the 108 forums now

[bigbamboo]

How much more 'connected' can you get than having a senator who is married to a MP?

Unless it's their mia noi...!

Might be worth introducing a one MP or senator per family rule here. Can't do any harm that's for sure.

[gemini81]

The worst part is the people in general here are getting shafted right before their eyes and they don't know or can't see it-or don't care as they can't see the longer term results.

If you wanna be a dictator or start a family dynasty on the back of the public, couldn't pick a better place than here.

[Thait Spot]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

Yingluck is there because she is Thaksin's sister - for no other reason.

Somchai was there because he is Thaksin's brother in law.

That is NOT democracy - it's ab abuse of the system.

It is also denying the rights of others to be elected.

[Nickymaster]

A good article on wiping out opposition to Thaksin's political machine.

Indeed, Thaksin Shinwatra's populist gimmicks for quick support at the polls will cost Thailand for many years to come, especially the very people they allegedly were designed to help - the rural poor. And his government is just getting started. The hole they plan to dig for Thailand is for all intents and purposes bottomless. As long as they can keep their support base in the dark regarding economics and the long-term damage they are doing to Thailand, they can maintain, even expand their political foothold.

Thaksin and his Wall Street-backers hope by the time Peua Thai's supporters realize what has happened it will be too late. They hope, and are actively attempting to sweep away any form of coherent opposition to their political machine, much as has been done in neighboring Cambodia. This will leave Thais at the mercy of a Hun Sen-style dictatorship no matter how woefully corrupt, incompetent, or brutally autocratic it may be, and Thailand, like Cambodia is now, a backwards, foreign-owned and pillaged fiefdom.

http://altthainews.blogspot.com/2013/03/thailands-thaksinomics-populism-failing.html

[dunque]

Would this move if successful bring Thailand into line with other countries such as USA and UK?

No.

arguably it would make it more democratic than the UK

[billd766]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

How many hundreds and thousands of other people are denied their basic electoral rights BECAUSE they are NOT connected to a family?

The law should be changed to ensure that ALL MPs and Senators are only allowed 2 terms in office and NO party list MPs at all.

If you want to be an MP you must be a constituency MP ONLY.

[scorecard]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

How many hundreds and thousands of other people are denied their basic electoral rights BECAUSE they are NOT connected to a family?

The law should be changed to ensure that ALL MPs and Senators are only allowed 2 terms in office and NO party list MPs at all.

If you want to be an MP you must be a constituency MP ONLY.

Wait for it, g'kid will be back soon to claim that limiting to 2 terms is a denial of human rights and unjust.

[bigbamboo]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

Ordinarily I would agree but the law is needed because Thailand IS flawed and unjust.

[scorecard]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

Yingluck is there because she is Thaksin's sister - for no other reason.

Somchai was there because he is Thaksin's brother in law.

That is NOT democracy - it's ab abuse of the system.

It is also denying the rights of others to be elected.

Adding weight to the abuse comment, neither one of the relatives had / has any ability to do the job.

That is except for gaining frequent flyer points.

[billd766]

The ban on relatives holding a senate seat has always been questioned as a denial of basic electoral rights.

Is it right to say to someone, sorry you cannot run for Senate because your brother is an MP?

Really? One person is denied his/her right to participate. That in itself is a denial of basic rights.

It is a flawed law and fundamentally uinjust.

How many hundreds and thousands of other people are denied their basic electoral rights BECAUSE they are NOT connected to a family?

The law should be changed to ensure that ALL MPs and Senators are only allowed 2 terms in office and NO party list MPs at all.

If you want to be an MP you must be a constituency MP ONLY.

Wait for it, g'kid will be back soon to claim that limiting to 2 terms is a denial of human rights and unjust.

My way MORE people can get a share.

There should also be an upper age limit of say 65 years old at the END of your second term and NOT at the start of your first term.

That would get rid of all the geriactric dinosaurs that hang around parliament.

[Misterwhisper]

This country is slowly but steadily turning into a fascist state. Even the ruling party's name is a mis-nomer: "Pheua Thai" (For Thai) should be renamed into "Pheua Shinawatra", because that's what it's all about.

[khunken]

The current make-up of the senate is half elected & half appointed. IMO there is nothing wrong with this and is the best of a bad lot of arguments about having a fully elected senate.

The 1997 constitution led to an elected senate & what a disaster that was. It became just another arm of Thaksins regime and was hell bent on reducing or totally destroying the make-up of some of the most important checks & balances institutions in the country.

Look at what happened over the Auditor General. She was appointed by the senate before the elected body took over and tried through devious means to have her replaced by a Thaksin yes-man. This was only thwarted by the Privy Council refusing to endorse the replacement. A very strong red flag against having a fully elected senate here.

None of the PTP's proposed constitutional amendments are designed to enhance democracy. Quite the opposite - they are designed to enhance their leader's future way to a dictatorial role when they have finished giving him an amnesty.

[geriatrickid]

How much more 'connected' can you get than having a senator who is married to a MP?

Unless it's their mia noi...!

Might be worth introducing a one MP or senator per family rule here. Can't do any harm that's for sure.

Think about it.

If you are independent from your brother and he was an MP, this means that you would be denied your personal right to be a senator.

This is wrong.