TRT Attempts To Convene Lower House By May 1

[Jai Dee]

His Majesty rejects invoking Article Seven

In comments broadcast on national television last night, His Majesty the King dismissed the invocation of Article Seven as undemocratic.

His Majesty the King last night rejected the invocation of Article Seven of the Constitution as a way out of the country’s current political crisis, saying that suggestions for him to name a new prime minister were convoluted and unconstitutional.

“I’m deeply troubled that people keep talking about a royally appointed prime minister. A royally appointed prime minister does not represent a democratic form of governance – it is a convoluted kind of governance,” His Majesty stated on national television.

His Majesty added that frequent references to the invocation of Article Seven were based on the wrong premises. “Article Seven says that whatever is not written in the Constitution should follow traditional practice,” His Majesty said.

HM the King was addressing two groups of new judges from the Administrative Court and the Supreme Court. The tape of their audiences was televised on all television networks around 8pm last night.

His Majesty’s comments on Article Seven follow persistent appeals by the anti-Thaksin People’s Alliance for Democracy in the last few months. Similar calls for HM the King’s intervention to sack caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and appoint a new interim prime minister to undertake political reforms were subsequently adopted by the opposition alliance that boycotted the April 2 election.

His Majesty maintained that Article Seven does not give the King the power to do whatever he likes. “Take a look for yourself. The article doesn’t say that the King has powers to issue orders,” His Majesty told the new judges.

His Majesty maintained that he had never done anything on a whim. “There have been many constitutions and we have done it for several decades. I have never done anything on a whim because if I had done so, the country would have collapsed,” he said.

Referring to the royal appointment of Prof Sanya Dharmasakdi as prime minister in the immediate aftermath of the October 14, 1973 uprisings, His Majesty said the appointment was made in accordance with constitutional provisions and counter-signed by the deputy speaker of the National Legislative Assembly.

His Majesty also called on the Supreme Court and Administrative Court judges to put their heads together and find an appropriate solution to the political impasse arising from the inability of the electoral system to produce the full 500 MPs for the new Parliament.

Referring to the April 2 election, His Majesty said: “Was it correct that the election had to be held within 30 days of the parliamentary dissolution? If this was incorrect, then it has to be changed.” His Majesty dismissed as “undemocratic” the widely criticized repetitions of by-elections in the southern provinces where sole candidates from the ruling Thai Rak Thai party repeatedly ran in several constituencies. “This is impossible…it is not democracy,” he said.

His Majesty voiced concern over the confusion and said that, without a House of Representatives, there cannot be democratic rule. “The courts can help restore democratic rule to the country. Don’t wait for any royally appointed prime minister,” he said.

His Majesty urged the Supreme Court judges, in particular, to find a proper way to ensure a full Parliament that can function.

Stressing the importance of the country adhering to the rule of law, His Majesty said: “Without 500 MPs, Parliament cannot function. Then it becomes problematic. You all have to help find some solutions. Don’t just ask the King to intervene.” His Majesty also said that the people now trust the courts, especially the Supreme Court, and pin their hopes on the judicial system because they believe judges are honest.

Source: ThaiDay - 26 April 2006

[Plus]

That guy Premsak "resigned" to make TRT's list short of 100, and he stayed "resigned" until now, when we learn that he has been elected anyway.

Consider this, under normal cirumstances he would have been replaced by the next on the list and not called an MP.

If he techinically still is a candidate, EC would have mentioned it a million times already. Was he endorsed, btw? Was his name among 100 party list MPs that EC forwarded for Royal endorsement?

It doesn't matter at all in the big scheme of things, it's just another question about EC's work, and now Council of State's, too.

[Jai Dee]

TRT demands the former Opposition to field their members to run in the 3rd round of the by-election

Thai Rak Thai party has demanded the Democrat party to live up to its promise that they would field their members to run in the by-election.

Ekaporn Rakkhwamsuk (เอกพร รักความสุข), the spokesperson of the Thai Rak Thai Party's committee on election preparation, views that the third-round of the by-election is a good opportunity for the Democrat party including other party members of the former Opposition to field their members to run in the election.

He said that the participation in the election would show their sincerity in living up to its promises.

He also demanded the former Opposition to halt all activities that could spur chaos in the country.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 26 April 2006

[sriracha john]

TRT demands the former Opposition to field their members to run in the 3rd round of the by-election

Thai Rak Thai party has demanded the Democrat party to live up to its promise that they would field their members to run in the by-election.

Ekaporn Rakkhwamsuk (เอกพร รักความสุข), the spokesperson of the Thai Rak Thai Party's committee on election preparation, views that the third-round of the by-election is a good opportunity for the Democrat party including other party members of the former Opposition to field their members to run in the election.

He said that the participation in the election would show their sincerity in living up to its promises.

He also demanded the former Opposition to halt all activities that could spur chaos in the country.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 26 April 2006

"demanded"

hahahahahaha

[ColPyat]

Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul (สนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล), one of the PAD’s leading members, yesterday affirmed that he and his PAD members will hold a rally on May 2nd to show their standpoint in demanding for a royally-granted Prime Minister in accordance with the article 7 of the constitution.

Is Sondhi completely mad now?

I believe it could not have been made any more clear that the Royally appointed interim Prime Minister is not going to happen. If they hold a rally now with those demands they should be arrested, so that the courts can be given time to find a solution.

Enough long term damage has been done already to Thailand by the egocentric power games of both sides.

[Plus]

That's not how The Nation reported it:

PAD to continue with May 2 rally

The People's Alliance for Democracy said Wednesday that it would go ahead with its rally at Sanam Luang next Tuesday.

Somsak Kosaisuk, a decision maker of the PAD, said the PAD leaders had listened to message from His Majesty the King and decided to continue with the rally.

He said the rally was aimed to explain the situation and suggest direction of political reform as well as providing suggestion on how to end problems related to the election.

He said the rally would be a form of invoking of people's rights, not attempt to create disturbance.

http://nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/r...newsid=30002577

[ColPyat]

That's not how The Nation reported it:

PAD to continue with May 2 rally

The People's Alliance for Democracy said Wednesday that it would go ahead with its rally at Sanam Luang next Tuesday.

Somsak Kosaisuk, a decision maker of the PAD, said the PAD leaders had listened to message from His Majesty the King and decided to continue with the rally.

He said the rally was aimed to explain the situation and suggest direction of political reform as well as providing suggestion on how to end problems related to the election.

He said the rally would be a form of invoking of people's rights, not attempt to create disturbance.

http://nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/r...newsid=30002577

Oh, the Nation, Thailand's paragon of impartial reporting...

Anyhow, i am very interested how the PAD is going to explain on that rally that one of their two key demands - the Royally appointed interim Prime Minister has been clearly rejected. That is going to be rather interesting.

What do you make out of this? I am interested...

[jdinasia]

impartial?

Since the PAD doesn't have the clout of a political party ... and it's only power is percieved to be the population that supports it ... and since they have always been restricted to rallies since the airwaves for the most part have been closed to them ....

makes sense that they will gather ...

I am betting we will see reduced rhetoric ...calling on political reform and not calling on a royally apponted PM etc ... but that assumption is based upon what I THINK will happen tmw

Edited April 26, 2006 by jdinasia

[ColPyat]

That's not what i was asking.

But thanks for evading the issue.

[jdinasia]

baiting?

Very simply I assume they will cease calling for a royally appointed PM ... and work for political reform ... and of course keep the heat on Thaksin but with less rhetoric.

I am sure that SOMEONE around here could just call and ask them what they are thinking though

Edited April 26, 2006 by jdinasia

[h90]

Arrested why? for begging the King for help? It might be useless, boring or foolish but it is definitly not insulting.

So what law does he brake? Or arrest him anyway without braking any law?

By the way where did you read that a royally appointed interim Prime Minister is not going to happen???

Read here:

I affirm that Article 7 does not empower the King to make a unilateral decision. It talks about the constitutional monarchy but does not give the King power to do anything he wishes. If the King did so, he would overstep his duty. I have never overstepped this duty. Doing so would be undemocratic.

They refer to the government under Prime Minister Sanya Dharmasakti. Then, I did not overstep this duty. At that time, we had a parliament but the House Speaker was away. The Deputy House Speaker countersigned according to the Constitution. At that time, the prime minister was not Royally appointed. It was not against the Constitution.

Installing a Royally appointed prime minister means appointing a prime minister without any rules. At that time, Professor Sanya was appointed as prime minister, but a Deputy House Speaker legally countersigned for his appointment.

Go review the history. You are knowledgeable people. You know the guidelines and the principles.

At that time, other councils, even the Sapha Sanam Ma [the National Convention of 1973] that people laughed at, didn't breach the law because Mr Sanya was countersigned for. I was content because it was according to the Constitution's guidelines.

maybe Sondhi demands that TRT should ask for an interim Premier and countersign it.

Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul (สนธิ ลิ้มทองกุล), one of the PAD’s leading members, yesterday affirmed that he and his PAD members will hold a rally on May 2nd to show their standpoint in demanding for a royally-granted Prime Minister in accordance with the article 7 of the constitution.

Is Sondhi completely mad now?

I believe it could not have been made any more clear that the Royally appointed interim Prime Minister is not going to happen. If they hold a rally now with those demands they should be arrested, so that the courts can be given time to find a solution.

Enough long term damage has been done already to Thailand by the egocentric power games of both sides.

[lukamar]

By the way where did you read that a royally appointed interim Prime Minister is not going to happen???

This is what I think he was referring to

"Now I have suffered a great deal because whatever happened there will always be calls for a royally appointed prime minister. It is not democratic. Go back and read Article 7. This is a wrong citation of Article 7. The article only has two lines; that is, whatever not stated by the Constitution, then should follow the traditional practices. But asking for the royally appointed prime minister is undemocratic. It is irrational, it is a mess" Source: The Nation - 26 April 2006

[ColPyat]

Arrested why? for begging the King for help? It might be useless, boring or foolish but it is definitly not insulting.

So what law does he brake? Or arrest him anyway without braking any law?

By the way where did you read that a royally appointed interim Prime Minister is not going to happen???

I have read that on the unofficial translation posted here on this thread:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=67227

Do not wait for a Royally appointed prime minister because that would not be democracy.

or

I have suffered a lot. Whatever happens, people call for a Royally appointed prime minister, which would not be democracy. If you cite Article 7 of the Constitution, it is an incorrect citation. You cannot cite it. Article 7 has two lines: whatever is not stated by the Constitution should follow traditional practices. But asking for a Royally appointed prime minister is undemocratic. It is, pardon me, a mess. It is irrational.

or

Look at Article 7. The article does not say that a constitutional monarchy means the King has the authority to make an order. I insist that I have never issued any orders without basing them on directives of the articles of the Constitution, laws and Acts. I strictly and correctly have complied with the Constitution.

or

People have asked for a Royally appointed prime minister, but there is not a rule for this; a prime minister is correctly Royally endorsed every time. There may be people who say that King Rama IX likes to do what he wants, but I have never done that.

I believe that should be more than clear. Even to you.

Arresting Sondhi for disturbing the peace would be a good idea, by the way, if he keeps on demonstrating right now.

[ando]

Interesting how the original focus of the Democrats/PAD (which was to force the democratically elected PM out of politics altogether), has now been all but forgotten amidst the mess they have created which threatens to drive the country into anarchy and ruin.

I doubt the recent actions of PAD/Democrats will endear them to other than their own hard core supporters. The political crisis they created is potentially many, many more times damaging to the country than anything Thaksin might have done. Their single minded focus on achieving their political goals outside the democratic process, and their preparedness to drive the country into chaos in order to achieve those goals, is to be deplored and hopefully will never be repeated.

But history has a way of repeating itself. Maybe not this year or next year, but 5 10 or 20 years down the road unless the judges can put something in place to prevent this sort of thing reoccurring.

The debate over wheather Thaksin should resign from politics or not is now a side issue and is unlikely to carry the same depth of emotion in the next "real" election.

Sooner or later the Democrats will realize that in a democracy they can not bring about political reform through the back door by disrupting the process of democracy. A means to an ends is not justification for destroying what you seek to preserve. Sooner or later the Democrats will realize that the way to bring about political change in a democracy is to firstly get elected to govern. And sooner or later the Democrats will realize that to get elected they need to come up with policies that appeal to the majority of voters in the north. It is the voters in the north who are among the most underprivileged in Thailand, and it those voters who hold the balance of voting power.

[sriracha john]

Interesting how the original focus of the Democrats/PAD (which was to force the democratically elected PM out of politics altogether), has now been all but forgotten amidst the mess they have created which threatens to drive the country into anarchy and ruin.

I doubt the recent actions of PAD/Democrats will endear them to other than their own hard core supporters. The political crisis they created is potentially many, many more times damaging to the country than anything Thaksin might have done. Their single minded focus on achieving their political goals outside the democratic process, and their preparedness to drive the country into chaos in order to achieve those goals, is to be deplored and hopefully will never be repeated.

But history has a way of repeating itself. Maybe not this year or next year, but 5 10 or 20 years down the road unless the judges can put something in place to prevent this sort of thing reoccurring.

The debate over wheather Thaksin should resign from politics or not is now a side issue and is unlikely to carry the same depth of emotion in the next "real" election.

Sooner or later the Democrats will realize that in a democracy they can not bring about political reform through the back door by disrupting the process of democracy. A means to an ends is not justification for destroying what you seek to preserve. Sooner or later the Democrats will realize that the way to bring about political change in a democracy is to firstly get elected to govern. And sooner or later the Democrats will realize that to get elected they need to come up with policies that appeal to the majority of voters in the north. It is the voters in the north who are among the most underprivileged in Thailand, and it those voters who hold the balance of voting power.

I don't feel that the PAD central issue of Thaksin resigning is over just yet and that could easily become the crux of any future rallies.

As long as he continues to portray himself as leader with his world tour jaunts and remains head of the TRT Party and is a member of Parliament gives PAD something they can justifiably protest, certainly more so than asking for a Royally-appointed PM, for which I think they will now stop requesting.

I believe the Democrats and oppostion parties agreeing to abide by the decision of the Heads of the Courts will absolutely endear them to their supporters. They have requested only fairness from the beginning and after the Royal intervention that seems to be occuring. The judiciary will decide the best course of action. From my point of view, the best course is scrap all these previous

pseudo-elections and start afresh. Allow any candidate to run under any Party banner and allow ample time for campaigning... perhaps even, perish the thought, an actual real live debate.

I don't believe Thaksin leaving politics is a side issue at all. For the reasons stated above, a dark cloud of suspicion will be hanging over the political climate. If a PM of his chosing is selected... if he continues to sit in on House sessions... if apparent puppet-mastering is evident... not much has been achieved by his so-called resignation.

[ando]

Is there any news on wheather the Democrats are going to continue to boycott the last by-elections?

I know it wouldn't achieve much now even if they did run. Perhaps a show of good faith is all. I assume the by-elections will be held on Sunday the 30th and its possible the whole election will have been nullified by then anyway. The reason I ask is because if they did run and TRT was allowed to form an interim government until full re-elections take place at some time in the not too distant future, Thaksin could step aside from the PM role in the next government as promised only to re-emerge as PM after the following (real) election. Its still very much a game of strategy but now with the added factor of trying not to be disrespectful to the Kings wishes.

[tettyan]

Sooner or later the Democrats will realize that in a democracy they can not bring about political reform through the back door by disrupting the process of democracy. A means to an ends is not justification for destroying what you seek to preserve. Sooner or later the Democrats will realize that the way to bring about political change in a democracy is to firstly get elected to govern. And sooner or later the Democrats will realize that to get elected they need to come up with policies that appeal to the majority of voters in the north. It is the voters in the north who are among the most underprivileged in Thailand, and it those voters who hold the balance of voting power.

Now that we can agree on!

Elections in all parts of the world, including advanced industrialised countries, are won on bread-and-butter issues. When will the Democrats ever learn? I hope there's somebody from the party who checks on this board every once in a while...

[sriracha john]

The "No Vote Party" has done very well in the elections... even beating out the TRT Party in some districts, but sadly won't be represented by their elected representatives, as they somehow were beat out by the TRT Party, despite receiving fewer votes. The saving grace is those TRT Party MP's will be easily identified by the tin cans on their heads:

"A Ramkhamhaeng University student covers his head with a can to protest against Thai Rak Thai MPs who received fewer votes than the "no votes" cast in their constituencies. The student said the MPs-elect should be too ashamed to take seats in Parliament."

Edited April 27, 2006 by sriracha john

[Jai Dee]

Civil disobedience out to clog Thaksin regime's machine

Thanks to the omnipotence of the Thaksin regime, disobedience will become a way of life in Thai politics. Even with Thaksin Shinawatra's break, the pall cast by his long shadow has prompted the Thai people to vote "No" against the Establishment in overwhelming numbers for the first time ever.

And when a political science lecturer broke all the rules by publicly tearing up his ballot to protest the aberration of the April 2 snap election called by Thaksin, he was setting a political precedent.

More voters followed his lead during the April 23 election, committing the same act to join the country's undeclared civil disobedience movement.

The authorities - police and National Election Commission officials alike - were at first stunned, then confused and finally enlightened by such in-your-face acts of defiance.

They didn't know how to handle civil resistance. They knew the law had been broken but the lawbreakers weren't ignorant rural folk or weapon-wielding criminals.

Instead they were all soft-spoken, articulate, well-educated intellectuals who, after declaring their rights to resist what they considered wrongful acts by their rulers, surrendered themselves to investigations by the police without seeking special treatment. In other words, pioneers of the modern-day civil disobedience movement are challenging Thaksin and his legacy in the forum of a public trial.

The mushrooming of discontent against Thaksin's system is a new phenomenon indeed.

This isn't like the series of public rallies that have been agitated by the People's Alliance for Democracy, nor is it a noisy, go-for-broke march on the streets calling for an end to the Thaksin era.

This, interestingly enough, is more in line with famous American author Henry David Thoreau's 1849 essay entitled "Civil Disobedience", which underscores the belief that people should not allow their governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences.

The group of university lecturers who staged acts of defiance at the polling booths insist that responsible citizens, faced with autocratic rule such as this one, have a duty both to avoid doing injustice directly and to avoid allowing their acquiescence to enable the government to make them agents of injustice.

Thoreau's acts of civil disobedience 157 years ago (including not paying his taxes) were motivated in part by his disgust with slavery and the Mexican-American War.

Today Thai academics have been spurred to commit similar acts of peaceful rebellion because they have come to the conclusion that if they cast their ballots simply because Thaksin wanted them to make an impossible choice, they would be betraying their consciences.

Thai law specifies a jail term of up to one year and a fine of up to Bt20,000 as well as deprivation of electoral rights for five years for breaking the election law.

But the lecturers and other defiant voters are intent upon letting the court decide whether the election law can supersede the spirit of freedom of peaceful protest, which is enshrined in Article 65 of the Constitution: "A citizen has the right to protest through peaceful means against any act to obtain the right to govern not in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution."

Thaksin, the self-styled CEO who tried to use money and a populist platform to turn the country into his own private firm, is now confronted with a movement that is using a non-violent form of non-cooperation as its main weapon.

The academics, by tearing up their ballots, were telling Thaksin in no uncertain terms that they were putting an end to any possibility that they would comply with his regime's political manipulation, which is enabled by obedience to unjust rules and regulations. In other words, they were saying that if they had cast their ballots in this snap election, they would simply have let themselves become unwitting tools of Thaksin's political machinations.

The die has been cast. Thai society will from now on see civil disobedience as a new-found tool in the broad democratic framework and conventional politicians of Thaksin's genre who consider ballot-casting to be the only important feature of democracy will find that a new challenge of unprecedented implications has arrived.

And together with Thaksinomics, the emergence of its most formidable antidote, the civil disobedience movement, will go down in as probably the most significant chapter in Thailand's unfolding political history.

Thaksin may be pulling strings from the background, but those fighting for his genuine ouster refuse to be lured into his game.

The civil disobedience activists have made it abundantly clear that they won't take part in his any of his games, because to use legal channels to fight unjust laws would be to participate in an evil machine and, what's worse, to disguise dissent as conformity with the system.

They not only don't want to have anything to do with the "evil machine"; the growing number of anti-Thaksin dissidents want, in Thoreau's terminology, to "clog the machine" as well. And they are even willing to go to jail to do that now.

Source: The Nation - Editorial Opinion - 27 April 2006

[ando]

Hardly a mass civil disobedience movement when a dozen or two people out of 40 million plus voters tear up their votes. Just a publicity stunt really. Maybe a few more will follow now that the Nation is trying to glamorize it as some act of self sacrifice to save the country from evil, but it could never have any significant effect on the democratic process. Just a handful of wasted votes.

If The Nation had the countries interest at heart rather than their own narrow political agenda they would be urging the Democrats to pursue policies in order to win elections rather than wasting votes. The Nations editor seems to have really lost the plot here. Wonder if he is going to tear up his own vote?

[Plus]

They've got lots of sympathisers, though. It's still a criminal offence and it doesn't influence the outcome so there were not many takers.

If The Nation had the countries interest at heart rather than their own narrow political agenda they would be urging the Democrats to pursue policies in order to win elections rather than wasting votes.

Democrats are boycotting these elections, haven't you heard? There's no point in urging them to campaign unless they end the boycott.

Could you elaborate on "The Nation's own narrow political agenda"?

[Heng]

If The Nation had the countries interest at heart rather than their own narrow political agenda they would be urging the Democrats to pursue policies in order to win elections rather than wasting votes. The Nations editor seems to have really lost the plot here. Wonder if he is going to tear up his own vote?

Suthichai Yoon just wants his tv channel (and soapbox) back. The same way Sondhi just wants his share of telecoms. There aren't too many true political agendas in a lot of "politics" anywhere IMO... just business agendas disguised as political agendas. For most regular folks though, if you can't prosper under one party, you likely won't prosper under any other party either.

[sriracha john]

Just as I mentioned earlier about "Thaksin's so-called resignation"... this.... it's enough to make one puke:

Thaksin could be back soon

Thai Rak Thai deputy spokesman Jatuporn Promphan said if the courts nullify the April 2 election and announce a fresh poll, Thaksin should quit his break from politics.

On April 4, Thaksin went on air to say he would decline another term as prime minister, but would stay on in name only until the House convenes and chooses his replacement. <deleted>??? A 24-day "resignation"???

Chaiyan Chaiyaporn, a political science lecturer at Chulalongkorn University, said the changing circumstances opened the way for Thaksin to throw his weight around again.

Prinya Thaewanarumitkul, a Thammasat University lecturer, said Thaksin should not try to take advantage of the current political situation.

Thaksin's arrival now on the political scene would throw the country into another crisis, but he might emerge again if politics has been reformed, he said.

A Thai Rak Thai source insisted Thaksin was needed back for because the party had to campaign with him as prime minister. "Only Thaksin can help Thai Rak Thai win the election," the source said.

Suriyasai Katasila, a spokesman for the People's Alliance for Democracy, said the conditions under which Thaksin had made his announcement had changed. The caretaker prime minister could come back.

However, it wouldn't be beautiful if he comes back before the completion of political reform, Suriyasai said. If he came back at this time, the PAD wouldn't be able to accept it and would demonstrate to get rid of him.

...and the chaos would start ALL over again...

- TN

Edited April 27, 2006 by sriracha john

[ando]

However, it wouldn't be beautiful if he comes back before the completion of political reform, Suriyasai said. If he came back at this time, the PAD wouldn't be able to accept it and would demonstrate to get rid of him.

...and the chaos would start ALL over again...

- TN

I doubt things would run the same course if the PAD try the same strategy all over again. And I doubt the same level of street demonstrations (which amounted to a virtual blockade) would be tolerated next time. And I doubt the protests would attract the same level of enthusiastic support anyway in view of where it took the country last time. The Kings speech would also have some bearing of support for such actions.

But they could always tear up their ballot papers in the up coming election and become marters as suggested by the editor of The Nation.

[sriracha john]

However, it wouldn't be beautiful if he comes back before the completion of political reform, Suriyasai said. If he came back at this time, the PAD wouldn't be able to accept it and would demonstrate to get rid of him.

...and the chaos would start ALL over again...

- TN

I doubt things would run the same course if the PAD try the same strategy all over again. And I doubt the same level of street demonstrations (which amounted to a virtual blockade) would be tolerated next time. And I doubt the protests would attract the same level of enthusiastic support anyway in view of where it took the country last time. The Kings speech would also have some bearing of support for such actions.

But they could always tear up their ballot papers in the up coming election and become marters as suggested by the editor of The Nation.

If Thaksin goes back into the foray after "resigning", I would imagine the resulting rallies and demonstrations would increase many, many fold.

No one could tolerate that level of lying... not even from a compulsive liar like Thaksin.

[ando]

The outcome which I think is most likely now is that the current election gets nullified and Thaksin and TRT stay on as government till fresh elections can be held. TRT need him at the helm in the lead up to fresh elections as he is the most popular political figure in Thailand and without him TRT would not have the same level of support. Assuming TRT win the next election my guess is that Thaksin will keep his word and not take up the PM job.

The Democrats/PAD will surely want Thaksin out of the picture altogether in the lead up to the next election because he alone is the biggest obstacle to them gaining a majority. Without Thaksin in the picture The Democrats might be in with a fighting chance. With him they have only a very slim chance.

The street demonstrations, although BIG in numbers, still only represented less than 0.25% of eligible voters. They were pinning their hopes on Royal intervention which we know is not going to happen now. Who would PAD now be hoping to put pressure on in order to force Thaksin out of politics? -- No one but the already converted. Further large and prolonged street protests would achieve nothing and would be seen by the government, and no doubt touted by the government, merely as an attempt to disrupt the democratic process in the lead up to elections.

I get the feeling that the military would be more than happy to assist in bringing order to the streets if requested.

[sriracha john]

The Democrats/PAD will surely want Thaksin out of the picture altogether in the lead up to the next election because he alone is the biggest obstacle to them gaining a majority. Without Thaksin in the picture The Democrats might be in with a fighting chance. With him they have only a very slim chance.

The street demonstrations, although BIG in numbers, still only represented less than 0.25% of eligible voters. They were pinning their hopes on Royal intervention which we know is not going to happen now. Who would PAD now be hoping to put pressure on in order to force Thaksin out of politics? -- No one but the already converted. Further large and prolonged street protests would achieve nothing and would be seen by the government, and no doubt touted by the government, merely as an attempt to disrupt the democratic process in the lead up to elections.

I get the feeling that the military would be more than happy to assist in bringing order to the streets if requested.

If the elections are considered null and void, I don't believe anyone will be expecting Thaksin to leave the post of PM unmanned until the new elections have been finished.

For those reasons, I don't believe PAD will pressuring anyone for him to leave in the interim. They aren't now, so no reason to expect they would following the court's decision if they decide to call for new elections.

btw, just to reiterate once again about the protestors and their numbers :

Protestors of any cause in any country at any time in history are "representative" of unknown numbers of others who share the same view but are not in attendance. To simply state that the numbers of attendees represent less than 1% of the population fails to grasp this most basic of concepts regarding protesting. By that logic, it would require 33 million Thais protesting in one location at one time to constitute a "crisis" for the majority of Thais.

[Plus]

Suthichai Yoon just wants his tv channel (and soapbox) back. The same way Sondhi just wants his share of telecoms. There aren't too many true political agendas in a lot of "politics" anywhere IMO..

Nation lost their share in ITV before Thaksin came to power, and they are unlikely to get it back in any case. Their own channel is alive and kicking, it's just no one is watching it cos you need a special antenna.

They might hope that they can sell their content to nationwide channels after Thaksin is gone but it's not only Yoons who'd want to get back on air after media is freed from political interference, it's people's basic right, after all.

For Yoons it will be spoils of the war, not the goal, as you imply. If they were only after money they would run enterntainment channel, not news. News don't sell.

The street demonstrations, although BIG in numbers, still only represented less than 0.25% of eligible voters.

Or 13 million people who ticked "No vote". It was "No" to Thaksin, there's no other way to look at it.

They were pinning their hopes on Royal intervention which we know is not going to happen now.

They got what they wanted - Thaksin resigned, Royal intervention or not. PAD's goal is/was to get rid of Thaksin, they got it. If Thaksin comes back on his promise not to take PMship, PAD will be back in numbers even larger than before.

Who would PAD now be hoping to put pressure on in order to force Thaksin out of politics?

On Thaksin himself. Why?

-- No one but the already converted.

There will be quite a few new converts if Thaksin reneges on his pledge, people will definetely see it as stirring up trouble and so going against HM wishes.

Further large and prolonged street protests would achieve nothing and would be seen by the government, and no doubt touted by the government, merely as an attempt to disrupt the democratic process in the lead up to elections.

They have always been seen as such by the government, nothing new here, protests achieved their goal and the government lost when Thaksin reisgned, and it will lose again if it tries the same tricks.

I really doubt that there are any idiots in TRT who'd just rewind the clock back to April 2, put Thaksin in PM's seat again, and tell Democrats they can't boycott elections anymore. Being TRT, they've got plenty of idiots, though, like that spokesman above.

Perhaps he meant Thaksin can return to politics and run as an MP, but not take premier's post, as Thaksin promised himself. Surely PAD will not like it, but that's the deal they've got when Thaksin resigned and it appears to have Royal blessing.

Edited April 28, 2006 by Plus

[lukamar]

If Thaksin goes back into the foray after "resigning", I would imagine the resulting rallies and demonstrations would increase many, many fold.

TS and the government would not be nearly as accommodating to those rallies and demonstrations as in the past. TS and the government used everything in their power not to have any confrontation during the last election while being pressured by the PAD and others to have a confrontation. If he is back in as PM due to some kind of legal decree or even a change of heart, bet on his willingness to drop the hammer, hard and fast. He'll sign the martial law decree and send in the army.

[Plus]

He'll lose all support he ever had if he goes back on his promise, let alone decides to use force against demonstrators.

He resigned, after meeting with HM, btw, in order to prevent any further confrontation.