TRT Attempts To Convene Lower House By May 1

[Jai Dee]

TRT to seek House quorum ruling

Democrats say they have no right to do so

Newly-endorsed Thai Rak Thai MPs will on Monday ask caretaker Senate speaker Suchon Chaleekrua to seek a Constitution Court ruling on whether the Lower House, which still lacks a quorum, can convene its first session by May 1.

But the Democrat party was quick to oppose the plan, saying the Election Commission, cabinet and parliament are not eligible to seek a Constitution Court ruling in this case.

The Democrats, along with the other opposition parties, boycotted the election.

Last Wednesday, the EC endorsed the election results of 209 constituency candidates, almost all from Thai Rak Thai party, and announced that the party was qualified for the full quota of 100 party-list House seats.

On Monday, it was asked to approve the results of the April 2 snap election in 134 more constituencies. It decided to call by-elections tomorrow in 40 constituencies, 38 in the South, after lone candidates failed to win 20% of eligible votes.

Wichit Plangsrisakul of Thai Rak Thai's legal team said regardless of the results of the by-elections in the 40 constituencies, all newly-endorsed Thai Rak Thai MPs would, on the party's advice, submit a petition to the caretaker Senate speaker to find a way out of the quorum impasse.

The Lower House is still short of its full 500 seats as it is required to open its first meeting 30 days after the April 2 general elections.

The ruling party felt Mr Suchon, as caretaker parliament president, was the right person to approach the court.

His help is needed to quell fears the EC will not be able to complete the by-elections within the deadline to install all 500 MPs.

Mr Wichit believed the party's petition would carry enough weight to be admissible.

In the meantime, Sukhumpong Ngonkham, another Thai Rak Thai legal expert, predicted that the Lower House would lack a full quorum to open the first parliamentary meeting since the EC would be unable to endorse the by-election results and finish probes into alleged poll fraud by May 1.

But the parliament, the EC and cabinet, as affected parties, had the power to seek Constitution Court rulings on this duty-related problem. The ruling was expected in a couple of days if sought, he added.

Earlier, he had suggested the three entities resort to article 266 of the charter, which says that in the event of conflicts over the authority and duty of independent organisations set up under the constitution, the organisations or the president of parliament may recommend a solution to the Constitution Court.

However, Democrat party deputy leader Witthaya Kaewparadai insisted that asking the Constitution Court for a ruling was unlawful as the three entities are not in any position to submit such as request.

Mr Witthaya predicted chaos ahead as the EC and the government had no duty in seeking Constitution Court rulings while Mr Suchon was just the caretaker Senate speaker, not the caretaker parliament president, and was therefore not authorised to do the government a favour. He urged the government to resign to "activate" article 7 of the charter, which allows for a prime minister to be royally installed.

Source: Bangkok Post - 22 April 2006

[cclub75]

TRT to seek House quorum ruling

What a bunch of crooks !

Their "victory" at elections is a non victory. But mai pen rai, just ask the "Constitution court" (we know they are part from Thaksin's clique) and then seek a ruling to convene house, and hop, they can form the government.

It's exactly the same with the consituency with 1 only candidate : they just paid small parties to list some candidates (even the EC aknowledges it now).

The all process, general and senatorial elections, is a farce since the begining. And since april 2, we know that it leads to a dead-end.

There is only one solution : rally again.

[Jai Dee]

Election sham part of Thai Rak Thai's political scam

We have got a new batch of senators who are supposed to play the role of a check-and-balance institution, screen bills and ensure that the government does not engage in activities harmful to the public interest, among other things.

That's only in theory and in the world of optimists. In reality, the new senators do not inspire hope that the country is heading toward a stable future with proper democratic development.

Most of the new senators are factional and affiliated with political parties or related to politicians. In fact, the new Senate has already been dubbed the Upper House of Spouses or "Upper Household", which doesn't sound too much of an exaggeration.

The new line-up of senators bids fair to serve the political agenda and objectives of Thai Rak Thai Party very well. Many of them are in fact former party members with unflinching obedience to the currently inactive caretaker prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra.

What hope is left that the country can get back on the right track through promised constitutional amendments and political reforms, now that Thai Rak Thai has firm control over the House of Representatives and the Senate?

The Senate, with supporters of Thai Rak Thai forming a comfortable majority, will be another rubber-stamp institution, though there remain enough independent members with the public interest at heart to be a serious nuisance to the government.

If there is any sign of hope left, it is the probable inability of Thai Rak Thai to have a full House of 500 members, even with the election re-runs in southern provinces today. The voters there are expected to say "No" again to Thai Rak Thai candidates, and that includes possibly tearing up ballots as a gesture of protest.

If Thai Rak Thai candidates again fail to muster 20 per cent of the total ballots today, there will be more rounds of voting together the exploration of shady ways to somehow force open the House whether or not it has the quorum of 500 members required by the Constitution.

Thai Rak Thai legal luminaries are working overtime to do just this before May 2, the deadline set for the House to convene and elect a new prime minister. Thaksin is particularly anxious because failure to achieve this could spell trouble for his political future.

With more rounds of voting expected after today, the entire process is looking more and more like a sham for Thai Rak Thai to prolong its hold on power. Thaksin and his cronies don't seem to care about public opinion and criticism. They even thank their lucky stars for having the Election Commission and the Constitutional Court on their side.

The most interesting aspect of the whole sham is how Thaksin can get the House functioning. It is already a sure bet that the party can have only 99 party-list members in place. Without shameless means and wily legal interpretation, none of Thaksin's hopes will materialise.

With this shortcoming, it is highly unlikely that Thai Rak Thai will seek the blessings of the country's highest institution for the House opening, as is traditional.

Come May 2, the pro-democracy alliance is expected to organise another massive rally and street demonstration to tell Thaksin and his cronies again that they no longer have the legitimacy to hang around without full membership of the House. That will be a crucial point of confrontation between Thaksin and the uprising against his leadership.

The actions and decisions of the Election Commission are other things that could lead to widespread public anger. If it decides to invalidate some senators for Bangkok for their participation in the rallies against Thaksin, there is likely to be uproar over extreme prejudice in performing its duty.

Selective police action against leaders of the anti-Thaksin alliance could further inflame public anger at the government. With the caretaker Cabinet performing no better than a lame duck with little or no credibility, the prevailing crisis will get worse whatever the outcome of the election.

The Election Commission has long been a target of public criticism and strong displeasure for its role in assisting politicians in power. It has been quick to certify the elections of House members without bothering to investigate whether there was any wrongdoing such as vote-buying or other shady practices.

What's more, it has been slow to determine whether Thaksin violated electoral law on a number of occasions, always coming up with pretexts such as insufficient evidence and at times whitewashing his actions, including dubious campaign promises.

Whether any person or party can break the current political impasse remains uncertain. With Thaksin acting as the puppet master of the entire Cabinet, there is no hope of a stable political future.

This is a political scam of a sort we have never experienced. It will drag on for a while, as long as Thai Rak Thai is unable to present an acceptable choice as an interim prime minister to oversee reforms and changes.

Oh yes, there is one other possible flashpoint: if the police arrest the alliance leaders before they give themselves up, that could lead to unforeseen consequences. Or could they in fact be foreseen after all, to lead to a state of emergency and a widespread crackdown on dissenters?

Source: The Nation - Editorial Opinion - Sun, April 23, 2006

[Jai Dee]

MP-elect Manote Senachu from Nakhon Si Thammarat, who won the April 2 election with less than 4,000 votes, reports to the House of Representatives yesterday. He will be the only opposition MP in a House dominated by the Thai Rak Thai Party.

Source: The Nation

[hammered]

At this point it seems that there are no effective checks and balances left on the incoming TRT government. They can pretty much do as they want if all goes to their plan. The opposition will only have the option of street protests. Weirdly enough this scenario of a completely unfettered government doing whatever it wants but facing high profile on going street demonstrations in the capital may just shock one of the courts into doing something to prevent this outcome.

[ando]

In a nut shell, the Democrats who have refused to participate in the democratic process, are seeking anarchy in preference to democracy. While their underlying agenda of reducing official corruption is supported in principle by the vast majority of Thai voters, their means of achieving their goals through anarchy is certainly not.

The Democrats refuse to go to the polls and adhere to the process of democracy simply because they know they dont have the support of enough voters to go anywhere near gaining government.

The Democrats only strategy now is to obstruct the normal process of government and drive the economy down in hope of some external force ousting the elected government and installing them as the countries new government.

All this occurring at a time when the elected government (and the military) are bound to avoid confrontation out of respect for the upcoming celebrations for the king. The Democrats have chosen their timing well. However there is a limit as to how long any democratically elected government will tolerate a minority of anarchists disrupting the proper governance of a country.

The Democrats have been allowed to have their peacefull street protests, they have been tolerated and allowed to have their say. The Thai government and the military have been VERY tolerant of the PAD street protests (which incidentally only turned out less than a quarter of one percent of the Thai voting public). That level of tolerance may not continue after the Royal celebrations in June if the Democrats continue to obstruct the business of the country by the democratically elected government.

This stand off will have to be resolved one way or another in due course. Its unlikely there will be any physical confrontation before June out of respect for the King. And the Democrats are milking this opportunity to the max. It will be resolved for the good of Thailand after June I am sure.

Established western democracies would not be so tolerant of such political and economic instability. Some peaceful protests would be tolerated for sure. But not a month long sit in. But of course Thailand is unique in a lot of ways, and especially in the way the people respect the King.

This political deadlock will certainly become a precedent that will be anticipated in future Thai constitutional law. A democratic government can not function if all that is required to bring about anarchy is for the opposition to boycott elections every time they cant get their own way and cant raise enough votes to get elected to govern. Imagine if the Democrats somehow came into political power. All the TRT would have to do is boycott elections in order to make the country ungovernable.

The Democrats seem prepared to bring Thailand to its knees and harm the interests of all Thais in order to get into power through the back door and circumvent the democratic process. It only stands to reason that the powers to be in Thailand can not and will not let that happen for the good of the Thai people and democracy in that country.

[cclub75]

Your analysis is wrong because you seem to forget what and who created all this mess.

Who have dissolved the House ? Thaksin, just one year after a "landslide victory" during the 2005 elections.

Why ? To make diversion regarding the Shin scandal and to play a "poker game", a referendum on his person.

He played, but he lost because opposition decided to boycott this farce.

Thailand has a rule, its constitution. TRT is so impopular in the south (why ? because ferocious repression) that its candidates can't even receive 20 % of the votes when they compete alone in many constituencies.

However TRT paid some small and fictionous parties to present candidates, in order to avoid this constitutional rule.

That's a fact. The Electoral Commission has dissolved this week 2 small parties for that matter.

Remember that the EC is totally infeoded to TRT.

They did 50 % of the work : they didn't investigate WHO paid the small parties... TRT of course.

So how can you dare using word like "democracy" ? Who is cheating with the rules ?

Opposition is not seeking "anarchy". Just the only pragmatic solution : a governement appointed by the King, and then new general elections in a few months.

That's the only way to defuse the situation.

TRT is going to seek this week a ruling from the CC, in order to by pass the rule of quorum.

Well, there is word to designate this behaviour : a "constitutionnal coup d'etat".

In a nut shell, the Democrats who have refused to participate in the democratic process, are seeking anarchy in preference to democracy. While their underlying agenda of reducing official corruption is supported in principle by the vast majority of Thai voters, their means of achieving their goals through anarchy is certainly not.

The Democrats refuse to go to the polls and adhere to the process of democracy simply because they know they dont have the support of enough voters to go anywhere near gaining government.

The Democrats only strategy now is to obstruct the normal process of government and drive the economy down in hope of some external force ousting the elected government and installing them as the countries new government.

All this occurring at a time when the elected government (and the military) are bound to avoid confrontation out of respect for the upcoming celebrations for the king. The Democrats have chosen their timing well. However there is a limit as to how long any democratically elected government will tolerate a minority of anarchists disrupting the proper governance of a country.

The Democrats have been allowed to have their peacefull street protests, they have been tolerated and allowed to have their say. The Thai government and the military have been VERY tolerant of the PAD street protests (which incidentally only turned out less than a quarter of one percent of the Thai voting public). That level of tolerance may not continue after the Royal celebrations in June if the Democrats continue to obstruct the business of the country by the democratically elected government.

This stand off will have to be resolved one way or another in due course. Its unlikely there will be any physical confrontation before June out of respect for the King. And the Democrats are milking this opportunity to the max. It will be resolved for the good of Thailand after June I am sure.

Established western democracies would not be so tolerant of such political and economic instability. Some peaceful protests would be tolerated for sure. But not a month long sit in. But of course Thailand is unique in a lot of ways, and especially in the way the people respect the King.

This political deadlock will certainly become a precedent that will be anticipated in future Thai constitutional law. A democratic government can not function if all that is required to bring about anarchy is for the opposition to boycott elections every time they cant get their own way and cant raise enough votes to get elected to govern. Imagine if the Democrats somehow came into political power. All the TRT would have to do is boycott elections in order to make the country ungovernable.

The Democrats seem prepared to bring Thailand to its knees and harm the interests of all Thais in order to get into power through the back door and circumvent the democratic process. It only stands to reason that the powers to be in Thailand can not and will not let that happen for the good of the Thai people and democracy in that country.

[jdinasia]

I quit with Ando's responses ... they were done when the house dissolved .....

what the Democrats did was constitutional .... what the PAD did was true Democracy ...

Conveneing parlaiment without all constituencies being represented is truly undemocratic ... pretty simple really

[lukamar]

Opposition is not seeking "anarchy". Just the only pragmatic solution : a governement appointed by the King, and then new general elections in a few months. That's the only way to defuse the situation.

The problem with your thinking is that it will set a strong precedent. Every time a political party, no matter who they are, feels they will not win a majority they can boycott the election and seek to have the elected government deposed by the monarchy. It may be a good way to defuse the situation now but may not be in 5, 10 or 20 years.

TRT is going to seek this week a ruling from the CC, in order to by pass the rule of quorum.

[

TRT is going to seek an order from the CC re:- Section 98 & ??? (I don't remember the other section) of the constitution, this has nothing to do with a quorum. A quorum of the house is stipulated in Section 155 At a sitting of the House of Representatives or the Senate, the presence of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of each House is required to constitute a quorum. The house has to sit prior and has enough members to form a quorum.

[h90]

here it is not "a political party" here it is "all other political parties"

The problem with your thinking is that it will set a strong precedent. Every time a political party, no matter who they are, feels they will not win a majority they can boycott the election and seek to have the elected government deposed by the monarchy. It may be a good way to defuse the situation now but may not be in 5, 10 or 20 years.

[jdinasia]

Opposition is not seeking "anarchy". Just the only pragmatic solution : a governement appointed by the King, and then new general elections in a few months. That's the only way to defuse the situation.

The problem with your thinking is that it will set a strong precedent. Every time a political party, no matter who they are, feels they will not win a majority they can boycott the election and seek to have the elected government deposed by the monarchy. It may be a good way to defuse the situation now but may not be in 5, 10 or 20 years.

TRT is going to seek this week a ruling from the CC, in order to by pass the rule of quorum.

[

c'mon luk ... you understand what he means ... the same wording is used in the newspapers as well .... not a quorum to pass legislation etc ... but to convene the house ... simple ...

pedantry at its worst

TRT is going to seek an order from the CC re:- Section 98 & ??? (I don't remember the other section) of the constitution, this has nothing to do with a quorum. A quorum of the house is stipulated in Section 155 At a sitting of the House of Representatives or the Senate, the presence of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of each House is required to constitute a quorum. The house has to sit prior and has enough members to form a quorum.

[Plus]

Who come our news posters missed this?

Mob attacks PAD leaders

A pro-government mob, in the name of an organisation called the "Patriotic Udon Group", lays siege to the auditorium at Udon Thani Rajabhat University, the venue of an anti-Thaksin forum organised by PAD's Udon Thani branch yesterday. —YUTTHAPONG KUMNODNAE

YUTTHAPONG KUMNODNAE

Udon Thani _ Two leading members of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) were attacked yesterday by an angry mob they said was stirred up by Thai Rak Thai MPs.

Suriyasai Katasila, the PAD coordinator, and Chaiwat Sinsuwong were addressing an anti-Thaksin forum organised by the alliance's Udon Thani branch when about 200 people stormed the venue, forcing the meeting to end prematurely.

Mr Suriyasai said a band of noisy pickets blocked all doors leading to the forum titled "Thaksin Crisis from Political Hiatus" at the Udon Thani Rajabhat University. Police advised him and Mr Chaiwat to leave the conference room at once to pacify the angry crowd.

The mob threw shoes, water bottles and rocks at the PAD leaders and the 300 or so forum participants. Mr Suriyasai said a rock hit him on the chest and several injured people were taken to hospital.

Police escorted a number of participants out of the room but they were still kicked and punched as they squeezed their way through the angry crowd.

The protesters continued to block the venue until late in the evening.

Mr Suriyasai said before the villagers descended on the morning forum they had attended a gathering where two Thai Rak Thai MPs for Udon Thani, Vichai Chaijitvanichkul and Theerachai Sankaew, had agitated them into disrupting the PAD forum. He also claimed that a local radio host, Kwanchai Paipana, helped fan the anti-PAD sentiment.

Mr Suriyasai insisted he would not leave the conference room unless the pro-Thai Rak Thai mob dispersed first.

About 400 policemen and border patrol soldiers were called in to provide security at the forum, which was in the middle of brainstorming strategies to expand the PAD's provincial network when the mob forced its abrupt cancellation.

Mr Suriyasai described the situation as tense. The provincial governor and the chief of Udon Thani police tried in vain to talk the crowd into breaking up.

He said the mob was the result of manipulation by Thai Rak Thai political canvassers.

The mob leaders constantly provoked the villagers, some visibly drunk, into breaking into the conference room and assaulting the PAD members inside.

He said members of the crowd committed criminal acts, but he believed the majority of Udon Thani residents did not share their anti-PAD stance.

Mr Vichai denied pulling the strings. He went to meet Mr Suriyasai and offered to lead him out of the room, assuring his safety. Mr Suriyasai refused to leave. Mr Vichai said the PAD coordinator was trying to play a game.

Udon Thani Governor Charuek Parinyapol said the mob agreed to make way but Mr Suriyasai would not budge.

The crowd eventually thinned and Mr Suriyasai and Mr Chaiwat left the room about 6pm, amid boos and jeers from the few remaining protesters.

They missed their plane back to Bangkok and travelled by car instead.

The PAD was undeterred by the resistance and vowed to continue similar forums in major cities. PAD leader Pibhop Dhongchai condemned the "Patriotic Udon" protesters who staged the unruly protest, saying the assault and forceful detention were criminal acts, and demanded the government take full responsibility.

Suriyan Thongnoo-iad, adviser to the PAD's northern federation, said Thai Rak Thai had gone too far. The Udon Thani incident was clear proof of the ruling party's disservice to free speech.

The forum was educating the people about the "dark side" of Thaksinocracy. If the villagers had been aware of it, they would have ditched the government.

The PAD will organise similar forums in Chiang Mai, he said. They will take the form of seminars behind closed doors for safety reasons.

Charan Ditha-apichai, of the National Human Rights Commission, said the incident was deplorable. It set a bad example and will likely spark protests and counter-protests, widening social divisions.

from Bangkok Post

[Ricardo]

It's scary, that TRT feels so insecure, that they feel they have to resort to intimidation & violence in this way. Not a good thing for Thailand or democracy.

[lukamar]

c'mon luk ... you understand what he means ... the same wording is used in the newspapers as well .... not a quorum to pass legislation etc ... but to convene the house ... simple ...

I posted the information because it will help you and others understanding what is going to happen in the near future in the courts. There is no mention of a quorum in Section 98 only the numbers that make up the house. Section 155 refers to the quorum numbers and has no reference to convening the house in that section. Don't believe everything you read in the newspaper, they are sometimes wrong. The question is not if I knew the intent, the information was incorrect.

[lukamar]

Missed this also...

=============

ACM Kongsak : Mob in Udon Thani is considered normal under democratic framework

Interior Minister Air Chief Marshal Kongsak Wantana (คงศักดิ์ วันทนา) said that yesterday's mob in Udon Thani (อุดรธานี) was considered normal and under the democratic framework.

Yesterday, Suriyasai Katasila (สุริยะใส กตะศิลา ) , the PAD coordinator, and Chaiwat Sinsuwong (ไชยวัฒน์ สินสุวงศ์) were addressing an anti-Thaksin forum when about 200 people stormed into the venue, forcing the meeting to end early. Core PAD leaders claimed that the mob was stirred up by Thai Rak Thai MPs. ACM Kongsak said however, that the mob came from a group with differing ideas in political matters and would like to express their dissatisfaction; therefore yesterday's mob was considered a normal act under the framework of democracy.

In addition, ACM Kongsak declined to comment on whether or not the people who created the mob were from TRT sources. He said he is not able to verify who the mobsters were as authorities are currently investigating the issue. He said that every unit has rights to exercise its freedom of expression but they should be under the framework of the law.

National News Bureau Public Relations Department

[Plus]

"The mob threw shoes, water bottles and rocks at the PAD leaders and the 300 or so forum participants. Mr Suriyasai said a rock hit him on the chest and several injured people were taken to hospital."

ACM Kongsak : Mob in Udon Thani is considered normal under democratic framework

>>>>>>>>>>>>>...

I knew he was a raving idiot, but this beats all.

[lukamar]

"The mob threw shoes, water bottles and rocks at the PAD leaders and the 300 or so forum participants. Mr Suriyasai said a rock hit him on the chest and several injured people were taken to hospital."

ACM Kongsak : Mob in Udon Thani is considered normal under democratic framework

>>>>>>>>>>>>>...

I knew he was a raving idiot, but this beats all.

I can't condone that type of action by any group. I can also see why it happened but that's no excuse. There is going to be more of this and probably with even more dire results as all this drags on.

[ando]

One way or another this impasse will be resolved in the not too distant future I am sure.

The only reasonable solution is for government to be formed, the electoral laws that have allowed this mess to occur will be rewritten and fresh elections held within a short time.

Even if Thaksin resigned from politics and left the country the current electoral laws would still remain unworkable in the future if a party with more than 80% support in some electorates were to boycott the elections in just those seats. It could lead to a situation of abuse where a party holds off in a couple of key electorates to wait and see what the overall election outcomes are. If they lose the overall vote then they simply dont stand candidate in the by-elections. Thereby depriving their opposition of the right to govern as the majority of voters have determined they should. Such a situation would be very harmfull to the country as a whole.

[h90]

One way or another this impasse will be resolved in the not too distant future I am sure.

The only reasonable solution is for government to be formed, the electoral laws that have allowed this mess to occur will be rewritten and fresh elections held within a short time.

Even if Thaksin resigned from politics and left the country the current electoral laws would still remain unworkable in the future if a party with more than 80% support in some electorates were to boycott the elections in just those seats. It could lead to a situation of abuse where a party holds off in a couple of key electorates to wait and see what the overall election outcomes are. If they lose the overall vote then they simply dont stand candidate in the by-elections. Thereby depriving their opposition of the right to govern as the majority of voters have determined they should. Such a situation would be very harmfull to the country as a whole.

it is anyway not healthy if there are hugh areas in which the rulling party is facing hate by more than 80 % of the people. Under normal conditions the democrates would not have 80 % blind support in the south. It is the hate against TRT. If you make laws that they are still able to form a gouverment you don't fix the real problem.

[lukamar]

One way or another this impasse will be resolved in the not too distant future I am sure.

The only reasonable solution is for government to be formed, the electoral laws that have allowed this mess to occur will be rewritten and fresh elections held within a short time.

Even if Thaksin resigned from politics and left the country the current electoral laws would still remain unworkable in the future if a party with more than 80% support in some electorates were to boycott the elections in just those seats. It could lead to a situation of abuse where a party holds off in a couple of key electorates to wait and see what the overall election outcomes are. If they lose the overall vote then they simply dont stand candidate in the by-elections. Thereby depriving their opposition of the right to govern as the majority of voters have determined they should. Such a situation would be very harmfull to the country as a whole.

it is anyway not healthy if there are hugh areas in which the rulling party is facing hate by more than 80 % of the people. Under normal conditions the democrates would not have 80 % blind support in the south. It is the hate against TRT. If you make laws that they are still able to form a gouverment you don't fix the real problem.

I'm sure that the election law will be rewritten to correct the problems that have occurred in this election before the next one. That's not necessarily good as the TRT will be rewriting them but it is necessary so that this situation will not happen again. You probably will see the scrubbing of the 20% rule to where an unopposed candidate will just win by acclimation.

As I have said before the TRT will sink a lot of government effort, resources and money into the southern areas that they have MPs in and will use that as a flag to the other constituencies that it may be in their best interest to vote TRT next time so they can also get some government perks or they can vote another way and continue to receive nothing. Yes it's vote buying, in a round about way, but it is used by every government on earth.

[h90]

One way or another this impasse will be resolved in the not too distant future I am sure.

The only reasonable solution is for government to be formed, the electoral laws that have allowed this mess to occur will be rewritten and fresh elections held within a short time.

Even if Thaksin resigned from politics and left the country the current electoral laws would still remain unworkable in the future if a party with more than 80% support in some electorates were to boycott the elections in just those seats. It could lead to a situation of abuse where a party holds off in a couple of key electorates to wait and see what the overall election outcomes are. If they lose the overall vote then they simply dont stand candidate in the by-elections. Thereby depriving their opposition of the right to govern as the majority of voters have determined they should. Such a situation would be very harmfull to the country as a whole.

it is anyway not healthy if there are hugh areas in which the rulling party is facing hate by more than 80 % of the people. Under normal conditions the democrates would not have 80 % blind support in the south. It is the hate against TRT. If you make laws that they are still able to form a gouverment you don't fix the real problem.

I'm sure that the election law will be rewritten to correct the problems that have occurred in this election before the next one. That's not necessarily good as the TRT will be rewriting them but it is necessary so that this situation will not happen again. You probably will see the scrubbing of the 20% rule to where an unopposed candidate will just win by acclimation.

As I have said before the TRT will sink a lot of government effort, resources and money into the southern areas that they have MPs in and will use that as a flag to the other constituencies that it may be in their best interest to vote TRT next time so they can also get some government perks or they can vote another way and continue to receive nothing. Yes it's vote buying, in a round about way, but it is used by every government on earth.

when they continue gouverment and delete the 20 % rule than we have pure dictatorship here.....

getting the way of good old DDR gouverment....

if you give "single horse" candidates automatic the vote, why make an election. he get it automatic and it saves money.

[ColPyat]

when they continue gouverment and delete the 20 % rule than we have pure dictatorship here.....

getting the way of good old DDR gouverment....

if you give "single horse" candidates automatic the vote, why make an election. he get it automatic and it saves money.

There is a tiny difference - in former East Germany there was no opposition to the SED allowed, and that included the East German versions of the other political parties , while in Thailand the opposition decided by themselves to boycott the election, is though free to stand for election whenever they choose to.

[h90]

when they continue gouverment and delete the 20 % rule than we have pure dictatorship here.....

getting the way of good old DDR gouverment....

if you give "single horse" candidates automatic the vote, why make an election. he get it automatic and it saves money.

There is a tiny difference - in former East Germany there was no opposition to the SED allowed, and that included the East German versions of the other political parties , while in Thailand the opposition decided by themselves to boycott the election, is though free to stand for election whenever they choose to.

I meant that we are going the way to get a system like DDR. As with this election it was very clear that fair elections are not possible. The other parties have the choice to stand for election in which they have no chances, because the elections are far away from beeing fair or the boycott it, than the laws will be bend till we have a 1 party parliament with people inside which are not elected (having a new TRT financed party and TRT in an area and more than 80 % no-vote can not be considered as elected)

[lukamar]

because the elections are far away from beeing fair or the boycott it, than the laws will be bend till we have a 1 party parliament with people inside which are not elected (having a new TRT financed party and TRT in an area and more than 80 % no-vote can not be considered as elected)

If the CC lets parliament convene, a one party system is what Thailand would have. You have to ask yourself what is worse, a one party system or a minority group disrupting the electoral process through a loophole in the election law.

It's quite funny that the Democrats feel it's fine to disrupt the country by using a loophole in the law and at the same time scream bloody murder about the PM using a tax loophole to not pay taxes.

In a week we will all know what the CC thinks about the situation.

[Heng]

In a nut shell, the Democrats who have refused to participate in the democratic process, are seeking anarchy in preference to democracy. While their underlying agenda of reducing official corruption is supported in principle by the vast majority of Thai voters, their means of achieving their goals through anarchy is certainly not.

The Democrats refuse to go to the polls and adhere to the process of democracy simply because they know they dont have the support of enough voters to go anywhere near gaining government.

The Democrats only strategy now is to obstruct the normal process of government and drive the economy down in hope of some external force ousting the elected government and installing them as the countries new government.

All this occurring at a time when the elected government (and the military) are bound to avoid confrontation out of respect for the upcoming celebrations for the king. The Democrats have chosen their timing well. However there is a limit as to how long any democratically elected government will tolerate a minority of anarchists disrupting the proper governance of a country.

The Democrats have been allowed to have their peacefull street protests, they have been tolerated and allowed to have their say. The Thai government and the military have been VERY tolerant of the PAD street protests (which incidentally only turned out less than a quarter of one percent of the Thai voting public). That level of tolerance may not continue after the Royal celebrations in June if the Democrats continue to obstruct the business of the country by the democratically elected government.

This stand off will have to be resolved one way or another in due course. Its unlikely there will be any physical confrontation before June out of respect for the King. And the Democrats are milking this opportunity to the max. It will be resolved for the good of Thailand after June I am sure.

Established western democracies would not be so tolerant of such political and economic instability. Some peaceful protests would be tolerated for sure. But not a month long sit in. But of course Thailand is unique in a lot of ways, and especially in the way the people respect the King.

This political deadlock will certainly become a precedent that will be anticipated in future Thai constitutional law. A democratic government can not function if all that is required to bring about anarchy is for the opposition to boycott elections every time they cant get their own way and cant raise enough votes to get elected to govern. Imagine if the Democrats somehow came into political power. All the TRT would have to do is boycott elections in order to make the country ungovernable.

The Democrats seem prepared to bring Thailand to its knees and harm the interests of all Thais in order to get into power through the back door and circumvent the democratic process. It only stands to reason that the powers to be in Thailand can not and will not let that happen for the good of the Thai people and democracy in that country.

Excellent post.

[Plus]

I doubt 20% rule will be scrapped, though minimum voter turnout as an alternative idea is more reasonable, in my view. At the moment we have TRT candidates with 5% of votes getting elected. It's ridiculous.

What need to be addressed is possible future poll boycotts. Current situation shows that without at least SOME teamwork, no party can rule by itself.

Is it good? To a degree it is, becuase it calls for "unity" before claiming any "normalcy".

Thaksin made a mistake and left us with this mess, next time the PM should consult the House before dissolving it.

[h90]

because the elections are far away from beeing fair or the boycott it, than the laws will be bend till we have a 1 party parliament with people inside which are not elected (having a new TRT financed party and TRT in an area and more than 80 % no-vote can not be considered as elected)

If the CC lets parliament convene, a one party system is what Thailand would have. You have to ask yourself what is worse, a one party system or a minority group disrupting the electoral process through a loophole in the election law.

It's quite funny that the Democrats feel it's fine to disrupt the country by using a loophole in the law and at the same time scream bloody murder about the PM using a tax loophole to not pay taxes.

In a week we will all know what the CC thinks about the situation.

"a minority group" so the complete opposition (not only the democrates) and the complete south of Thailand is for you just an unimportant minority?

They are not disrupting an electoral process, they tried to disrupting a fraudulent electoral process, thats something different.

the PM is a bloody murder, but not for the tax thing, read some facts of the past (war against drugs, muslim minorities........)

[Plus]

The Democrats only strategy now is to obstruct the normal process of government and drive the economy down in hope of some external force ousting the elected government and installing them as the countries new government.

Dissolving a perfectly working House consisting of 500 people to solve PM personal credibility problems is anything but normal, so the response was also unusual. There's no evidence that Demos are driving the economy down either, or that they want to be appointed rather than elected.

The Democrats have been allowed to have their peacefull street protests...

When will people finally learn that PAD - People Alliance for Democracy, and Democrat Party are two totally different entities?

Ando, if you haven't noticed that it was PAD who had street protests, not Democrats, you should go and read the news for at least past two months. You post is so ridden with errors it's beyond repair. You are entitled to personal views, not to spreading misinformation.

[ando]

The current 20% law has been shown to be unworkable by the actions of the opposition. No party in power would want to have the threat of electoral blackmail through a boycott hanging over their head. The law will certainly be changed. Maybe it will only be removed for by-elections, I dont know. I am sure the Democrats will protest and cry foul when it is changed. At the moment it is a law that is open to abuse by opposition parties who are unable to gain government by legitimate means. If the Democrats were in power they would be the first to want this loophole closed, -- for moral reasons and the good of the country of course.

In the meantime the country cant go on indefinitely without a proper government. A way will have to be found around this unworkable law for the good of the country. A one party Parliament is not a good thing for anyone either.

[h90]

The current 20% law has been shown to be unworkable by the actions of the opposition. No party in power would want to have the threat of electoral blackmail through a boycott hanging over their head. The law will certainly be changed. Maybe it will only be removed for by-elections, I dont know. I am sure the Democrats will protest and cry foul when it is changed. At the moment it is a law that is open to abuse by opposition parties who are unable to gain government by legitimate means. If the Democrats were in power they would be the first to want this loophole closed, -- for moral reasons and the good of the country of course.

In the meantime the country cant go on indefinitely without a proper government. A way will have to be found around this unworkable law for the good of the country. A one party Parliament is not a good thing for anyone either.

If the democrated would have boycotted the election the 20 % law would not be any problem. But ALL other parties have it boycotted for a good reason.

As well it was not time for election. I don't think the other parties would have boycott the next regular elections.

And in Thailand there is an easy proper way out of that: If the parties can not make a gouverment, the King is appointing one. This gouverment prepares fair elections and everyone will join it.