Supreme Court To Decide Whether To Nullify Election In Unprecedented Meeting

[LaoPo]

*******************************************************************************

"We have to find a way to solve the problem," King Bhumibol said in his televised speech.

"If you don't help to make democracy move forward, it will be the country's downfall," he told the judges, whom he had summoned to his seaside palace.

The king also criticised the 2 April poll, because so many ruling party candidates ran unopposed due to the opposition boycott.

"Having an election with only one candidate running is impossible. This is not a democracy," he said. "

*******************************************************************************

New elections....unavoidable.

LaoPo

[cclub75]

New elections....unavoidable.

We could have a surprise...

TRT seems to believe that the problem will be solved this saturday, with the by elections (third round) in the South.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/04/27...es_30002653.php

It looks like they managed to pay at least 1 small "party" to present one candidate in each of the 14 constituencies where TRT in second round received less than 20 % of the votes.

EC didn't talk about the official list of candidates.

Anyone has info about that ?

[lukamar]

It looks like they managed to pay at least 1 small "party" to present one candidate in each of the 14 constituencies where TRT in second round received less than 20 % of the votes.

They may not have had to pay anyone. If you had a small party that normally would get next to no one voting for you and you had just seen some other candidates that no one knew elected in an area that was not pro TRT, I think you might just run with it and field candidates, for free, hoping to win part of the election lottery.

[Jai Dee]

TRT Party acknowledges HM the King's Royal Words

The Thai Rak Thai Party has acknowledged His Majesty the King’s royal remark on the current national situation. His Majesty the King has advised all parties to work together in finding ways to end the national crisis.

The Deputy Leader of the Thai Rak Thai Party, Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan, called a meeting with the party’s core members yesterday, to acknowledge His Majesty the King’s royal comment related to the party. The deputy leader also considers that each party must perform its responsible duty, in order to allow Democracy to carry on normally. She said the Thai Rak Thai Party is trying to protect the framework of democracy by fielding its candidates to run in the election.

Khunying Sudarat also said it is up to the Supreme Court, the Administrative Court, and the Constitutional Court to consider whether the previous MP election is void.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 27 April 2006

[Jai Dee]

EC says no worries on courts' ruling and will hold 3rd round of MP election

The Election Commission (EC) has insisted that it will hold the 3rd round of MP election without worrying about the courts’ possible election annulment result.

Pol. Gen. Wassana Phermlarp, the EC President, said the commission will continue with the plan to hold the 3rd round of MP election on April 29th. He said the EC is not concerned with the three courts’ ruling because the commission has been working under all electoral laws. The EC will continue its duty until the time has run out regardless of the number of voters in each constituency.

Nevertheless, the EC will have a meeting about the certification of the party list MPs today.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 27 April 2006

[sriracha john]

Look forward to the new elections... "real" elections with candidates free to chose the party they represent... ample time for campaigning...

and with Thaksin no where in sight...

[h90]

It looks like they managed to pay at least 1 small "party" to present one candidate in each of the 14 constituencies where TRT in second round received less than 20 % of the votes.

They may not have had to pay anyone. If you had a small party that normally would get next to no one voting for you and you had just seen some other candidates that no one knew elected in an area that was not pro TRT, I think you might just run with it and field candidates, for free, hoping to win part of the election lottery.

have you ever been in the south??

you must get a lot money, because after helping TRT to cheat the constitution you can not live normal in the south again.....

How you pay your body-guards?

[Jai Dee]

Democrat files lawsuit with Administrative Court seeking to nullify election

The Democrat Party Thursday filed a lawsuit with Administrative Court seeking an order to nullify the royal decree which dissolved the House and set the election date.

The Democrat also alleged in the suit that the Election Commission unfairly organised the April 2 election and its way of arranging voting booths was illegal.

The suit also alleged that the EC had violated the laws by allowing new candidates to apply in constituencies where one-horse candidates failed to win up to 20 per cent of eligible votes to get elected.

Source: The Nation - 27 April 2006

[sriracha john]

IMHO, a big mistake :

Constitution Court president hints at ruling to endorse poll outcome

Phan Chantharaparn, acting president of the Constitution Court, Thursday hinted at a favrourble ruling for endorsement of the election outcome.

He said the current problem was not a crisis on constitutional technicality or a crisis related to administrative laws' technicalities.

He added that the Election Commission had not overstepped its power in organising the April 2 election.

His statement was seen as strongly indicating that he did not want the Administrative Court to step in to make any ruling related to the April 2 election.

His Majesty the King had asked the Supreme, Administrative and Constitution courts to explore legal possibility to find solution to the political impasse.

The heads of the three courts are scheduled to have a meeting on Friday. But Phan said he would attend the meeting together with Constitution Court judge Noppadol Hengcharoen, who is seen as close to the government.

- TN

[LaoPo]

IMHO, a big mistake :

Constitution Court president hints at ruling to endorse poll outcome

Phan Chantharaparn, acting president of the Constitution Court, Thursday hinted at a favrourble ruling for endorsement of the election outcome.

He said the current problem was not a crisis on constitutional technicality or a crisis related to administrative laws' technicalities.

He added that the Election Commission had not overstepped its power in organising the April 2 election.

His statement was seen as strongly indicating that he did not want the Administrative Court to step in to make any ruling related to the April 2 election.

His Majesty the King had asked the Supreme, Administrative and Constitution courts to explore legal possibility to find solution to the political impasse.

The heads of the three courts are scheduled to have a meeting on Friday. But Phan said he would attend the meeting together with Constitution Court judge Noppadol Hengcharoen, who is seen as close to the government.

- TN

I agree SJ.

Not a crises ?

IMHO it's unavoidable for everybody, after HM's speech and meeting with the Judges, that Thailand has to face complete new elections....with all parties involved.

When?

Not before the festivities of HM The King in June, and also not during the Holiday-season July/August since millions of foreigners/tourist will be in Thailand.

Unrest and/or mass-demonstrations (again) is the last thing Thailand needs...

so:

IMHO: September earliest.

That means a cool-off period of some 3 to 4 months. And that would be a good thing to do.

Just my personal opinion though.

LaoPo

[Plus]

HM used the word "mua" in Thai to descrbie the current situation, and his words about CC were: "The Court said it's not their jurisdiction, they drafted the Constitution and said their job is finished after that". I don't know how CC president dares to say he's ready to endorse April 2 elections as if nothing happend.

There are direct quotes somewhere here, I'm tyoing from memory.

[cclub75]

I don't know how CC president dares to say he's ready to endorse April 2 elections as if nothing happend.

No shame.

CC is completly sold to Mister T's clique.

Don't forget their famous "ruling" in 2001 (Thaksin's assets) or recently about the non opening of an investigation after Shin sale.

[penzman]

True, same goes with the Election Commitee.

[sriracha john]

Well, today is D-Day (Decision Day)... Anxiously awaiting the Courts' decision.

In the meantime... more reports

Judges divided at 11th hour

Leaked reports suggest fears of a power vacuum; Constitution Court chief said to favour convening Parliament now

Judges from the Constitution, Supreme and Administrative courts appear split over how to rule on the April 2 election as they take note of His Majesty the King's advice and head into an unprecedented judicial summit today to defuse the political crisis.

Leaked reports suggest Phan Chantarapan, the acting Constitution Court president, is inclined to convene the new Parliament as the unfilled seats will not impair the legislative work. Phan has also apparently expressed concerns that a power vacuum might result if a new government is not formed within the 30-day deadline.

It has been predicted that today he will try to convince Chanchai Likhitjittha and Akaratorn Chularat, the presidents of the Supreme and Supreme Administrative courts, to rule in favour of opening the House.

The argument is that a new Parliament should be convened to defuse tension before starting to untangle the problems behind the crisis.

His Majesty the King on Tuesday told the judges to solve the crisis and said the April 2 election, marred by several legal and constitutional violations, would not produce a legitimate Parliament.

The King's speech led to expectations that the election results would be cancelled and a fresh election held to kick-start Thai political life.

Supreme Court judges are reported to want the election scrapped to wipe the slate clean and allow rival politicians to settle some of their differences.

Wirat Chinvinijkul, secretary-general of the Supreme Court, said judges would be reviewing two important questions.

First, were the poll and the subsequent by-elections held with honesty and justice in accordance with the law and the Constitution? Second, what is the legal scope of the judiciary in looking at the disputes emanating from the electoral process?

"We shall be consulting with the judges at the Constitution and Administrative courts. We'll work to resolve the crisis," Wirat added.

The position of the Supreme Administrative Court over the election remains unclear but will take all the cases filed against the conduct of the polls into consideration when it arrives at a verdict.

The three top judges may not find a solution to end the political crisis in one sitting because they face many hurdles in finding an appropriate legal stance to get the country out of the political quagmire.

The judicial summit is likely to take more than a few sessions to sort out the political entanglement and the Supreme Court's Akaratorn is expected to be the swing vote.

Yesterday, each court held a press conference to outline its summit agendas.

Phan said he would discuss the Constitution Court's jurisdiction relating to the electoral process and the performance of the Election Commission (EC).

"I will propose the three top courts examine every aspect of the electoral process, including the status of the Royal Decree for the election," he said. He would not speculate on the summit outcome but argued that the EC did not exceed its mandate in managing the polls. After defending the EC's performance, he said only his court was empowered to rule whether the House could convene if some of the 500 seats remained vacant. Phan said the EC was fully empowered to manage the third round of balloting, scheduled for Saturday, in a bid to fill the remaining House seats.

He refused predict how his court would rule on whether the election outcome should be validated or the partially filled House be convened, saying he did not want to commit judicial prejudice.

"The judicial ruling will be based on the Constitution and the law and meet public expectations," he said, expressing confidence that the crisis would be amicably resolved.

Akaratorn said: "The judicial summit is not expected to issue one combined ruling of the three courts but exchange views from each court to be handled within their jurisdiction."

He said his court would rule quickly on each case relating to the electoral process but it was not obliged to do so before convening of the House. All 233 top judges of the justice courts nationwide convened a closed-door meeting yesterday.

At the summit, many senior judges will accompany the presidents of the top three courts.

Phan is to lead two judges, Ura Wang-omklang and Nopadol Hengcharoen, who are seen as close to the government and court secretary-general Paiboon Warahapaitoon.

Akaratorn will be accompanied by his top aide Sonthaya Pongsuriyawan.

The Supreme Court is in charge of organising the summit and nine senior judges will assist Chanchai, including Wirat, Jaran Pakdithanakul and Jiraniti Hawanont.

The Democrat Party yesterday petitioned the Central Administrative Court to abandon the election on the grounds that it was "unconstitutional".

In a separate case, three lawyers yesterday submitted a citizen's petition asking the Supreme Administrative Court to cancel the Royal Decree for the election.

The trio - Nitithorn Lumlua, Nakhon Chompoochat and Pairoj Pholphet - chose to litigate as individuals rather than involving their professional group, the Law Society of Thailand.

- TN

[sbk]

Did I read that quote from the CC President right? Convene the new Parliament as the unfilled seats won't impair the legislative work, is he serious? Parliament is supposed to represent the constituents and there will be quite a few districts unrepresented.

I guess, he means it won't impair their ability to push through whatever legislation they want.

[sriracha john]

Some more insider source views:

Judges feel poll not legitimate

The Supreme Court judges think the April 2 elections were not legitimate, but believe it is up to the Supreme Administrative Court to decide whether to nullify the results at a much-anticipated meeting today, a source said yesterday.

The findings, the result of yesterday's meeting of the 234 judges, will be put forth at today's meeting of top judges to end the political crisis, said the source.

The elections were deemed to lack legitimacy from the beginning with the House of Representatives being dissolved for political reasons, the source said. The polls were organised in haste and the electoral process was flawed with ballot booths rearranged in a way that cost the voters their privacy.

The judges agreed the election results should be voided and believed the Administrative Court should have the honour of making the ruling because it is stipulated in the act governing the court that disputes stemming from a royal decree should be settled by the Administrative Court.

''The Supreme Court can support the court. It will look into legal matters to help the Administrative Court make a correct ruling,'' said the source.

However, Supreme Court secretary Virat Chinvinitkul said the Supreme Court was ready to act to quickly end the impasse.

''The Supreme Court is ready to rule if the Constitution Court and the Administrative Court decide they have no authority to make decisions,'' he said.

Declining to discuss the matter in detail, he said the unprecedented meeting of the judges from the three courts was likely to provide answers to legal questions, including which agency was authorised to rule on the elections.

The majority of judges in the Constitution Court are, however, against invalidation of the April 2 general election, feeling it will only prolong the political uncertainty.

A source in the court said most judges at yesterday's meeting thought revocation presented no solution to the political stalemate. Dwelling on the past by claiming the royal decrees governing the House dissolution and the April 2 general election were problematic would only add to the confusion. The judges also thought MPs-elect would probably object to the polls being cancelled.

A court injunction alone would not break the deadlock because the problem was too complex to be tackled purely on the basis of law, the judges said.

A long-term solution rested with meaningful political reform via constitutional amendments, they said.

The judges recommended the Constitution, Supreme and Administrative courts form a panel to iron out reform issues to pave the way for a new general election in six months.

The new poll would still be supervised by the Election Commission although an election court should be created to balance the commission's power in adjudicating poll disputes.

The special court would help recover the loss of public trust in the EC's handling of polls.

The judges added that while the charter was being rewritten, the opposition and the government must sign a joint declaration agreeing to the post-reform election rules.

They must also allow the present batch of MPs to do their work for six months.

A Constitution Court judge, who declined to be named, said the suggestion should satisfy all parties.

The court panel should present a better alternative than the reform proposal floated by the Thai Rak Thai party which would take longer to materialise.

Constitution Court judge Pan Chantarapan, who chaired yesterday's meeting, said the judges looked at the options available for easing the effects of the election fall-out, election flaws and the EC's authority.

The judges' proposals would be put forward at a joint of meeting of the presidents of the Administrative Court and the Supreme Court.

Mr Pan said that no complaints had been lodged with the Constitution Court seeking to revoke the April 2 polls. His court's recommendations to ease the crisis were non-confrontational and would hopefully comply with people's wishes, he added.

Akarathon Chularat, president of the Supreme Administrative Court, said today's meeting would discuss each court's scope of power and responsibility. ''It doesn't mean that we will issue a resolution forcing people to comply. The bottom line is each court must do its job.''

Mr Akarathon said the court is authorised to consider the cases that are under its responsibility.

At today's meeting will be 12 Supreme Court judges, two Administrative Court judges and four Constitution Court judges.

- BP

[Jai Dee]

Constitutional Court hints it can nullify April election

A top Constitutional Court judge opened the door yesterday for the courts to nullify the boycotted April 2 election ahead of a much-anticipated meeting today between the country’s top legal minds.

Asked yesterday whether the courts had the authority to order the election invalid, acting Constitutional Court President Phan Jantrapan said: “I cannot talk about the authority of other courts, but for the Constitutional Court there is a way. But I cannot say what it is now.”

Judges from the Constitutional Court, the Administrative Court and the Supreme Court met separately yesterday to prepare for today’s unprecedented brainstorming session. The meeting was called after His Majesty the King instructed the country’s top judges earlier this week to look into ways of solving the impending legal “mess.”

Judge Wirat Chinwinigkul, secretary-general of the Supreme Court, told reporters that today’s meeting would seek to determine whether the controversial Lower House election followed all the rules, and to define which court has what jurisdiction to make the final call on various legal and Constitutional issues that have arisen from the snap poll.

“The courts will discuss the consequences if [the April 2 election and subsequent by-elections] are nullified,” Wirat said. “Also, we will seek a measure on how the next election must proceed, which court is able to make an absolute decision and whether Parliament can convene with fewer than 500 members.”

A host of lawyers and politicians filed lawsuits yesterday in connection with the election. Several cases concerned the Election Commission, while others asked the Supreme Administrative Court to cancel the Royal Decree that dissolved the House, claiming it was unconstitutional.

One petition, filed by three lawyers from the Law Society of Thailand, claimed the government did not consult the entire Election Commission about the election date. Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra claimed the Privy Council also endorsed the date of the election – a mere 37 days after the premier dissolved the House – so that a functioning Parliament could be in place for the 60th anniversary of His Majesty the King’s coronation on June 9.

The Constitution’s Article 116 says: “The King has the prerogative to dissolve the House of Representatives for a new election of members of the House. The dissolution of the House of Representatives shall be made in the form of a Royal Decree in which the day for a new general election must be fixed within sixty days and [the] election day must be the same throughout the Kingdom. The dissolution of the House of Representatives may be made only once under the same circumstance.”

Although it is unclear if the courts can make any decisions concerning the cases filed yesterday, the Administrative Court has been reluctant to overturn decisions made by the Election Commission. A 2003 ruling by the Constitutional Court declared that all Election Commission decisions concerning the specifics of elections were “conclusive.”

The Central Administrative Court has upheld that precedent in previous cases dealing with the April 2 poll. The court rejected an appeal filed earlier this month against the Election Commission that accused the independent body of violating the Constitution by the way ballot boxes were placed on April 2.

“The authority of the Election Commission to announce a by-election and investigate the facts is the authority given [to it] under the Constitution, and is not an administrative authority,” the judges wrote in dismissing the case, according to court documents dated April 21.

The deference to the Election Commission’s sovereignty makes it difficult for the courts to rule against decisions made by the independent body. Thus, any rulings concerning the April 2 poll are more likely to focus on the caretaker government.

“It’s difficult to see what the courts will decide on because these are more political issues than legal issues,” said Vorajet Phakheerat, a law lecturer at Thammasat University. “The Election Commission can nullify the election, but it must give a reason to do so. That will be difficult because 28 million people have gone to the polls and submitted a ballot. If the election is not nullified, then Parliament can convene and the new prime minister should dissolve the House immediately after the first session.”

Source: ThaiDay - 27 April 2006 22:25

[sriracha john]

The meeting has begun:

Judges consider whether to annul election

(dpa) - Judges from Thailand's top courts met Friday in an unprecedented judicial effort to solve the country's political crisis.

Senior judges from the Supreme Court, Supreme Administrative Court and Constitutional Court entered Bangkok's Criminal Court Friday morning to debate and decide the legality of Thailand's April 2 snap election.

"We've set no timeframe for today's discussions," said Charnchai Likitjittha, President of the Supreme Court, before entering the Criminal Court.

The unprecedented gathering of the country's top courts to tackle a political, rather than criminal case, follows Tuesday's unusually blunt advice to the judiciary given by Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej.

In an audience with newly appointed judges to the Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court, King Bhumibol said it was the duty of the judiciary to find a way out of Thailand's looming constitutional crisis, caused by a highly peculiar snap election held April 2.

The king expressed misgivings about the legitimacy of the April 2 general election.

"Should the election be nullified? You have the right to say what's appropriate or not," he told new members of the Supreme Administration court. "When an election is undemocratic, you should look carefully into the administrative issues."

The April 2 election was boycotted by Thailand's three main opposition parties to protest the alleged parliamentary dictatorship wielded by populist Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra over the past five years.

The boycott resulted in a one-horse race for Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai Party. Although the TRT was unopposed in almost half of the constituencies, the ruling party has failed to fill all 500 seats in the lower house of parliament.

The constitution stipulates that a single candidate must win more than 20 per cent of the votes in an uncontested constituency, which the TRT has failed to do in 13 constituencies despite a by-election held on April 23.

Another by-election is scheduled for Saturday, but given the strong opposition to Thaksin in the remaining constituencies it is deemed unlikely that the TRT will win.

Under the constitution, a new parliament must be set up 30 days after a general election, but it seems impossible that this will happen, leading to a constitutional crisis. Without a new parliament a new government cannot be named.

"As far as I am concerned, a one-party election is not normal. The one candidate situation is undemocratic," King Bhumibol opined in his speech on Tuesday.

Given the much revered king's advice, political watchers have speculated that the top courts will nullify the April 2 polls at their meeting on Friday.

- BP

[tettyan]

I still think the best solution is for the opposition and TRT to reach a gentleman`s agreement where TRT constituency MPs who won fewer votes than the NO votes and spoiled ballots combined agreed not to take their seats, triggering by-elections which the opposition would then contest. As for the party-list seats, too bad - this parliament is only supposed to be temporary anyway. And I believe the grand-coalition government proposal is still on the table.

Of course, you might say I`m dreaming. Even if this proposal were handed to the opposition on a silver platter, I really wonder if they would have the maturity to put their egos aside and accept it. But things won`t get any better for them. For the country`s sake, better a brokered deal between the affected parties than a solution imposed from above.

[ColPyat]

For the country`s sake, better a brokered deal between the affected parties than a solution imposed from above.

You are right.

But you are dreaming.

[Plus]

There's no solution from above, unless you mean the courts. It's entirely in their jurisdiction to rule on the elections when petitioned to do so. They, of course, have been kicked into action by HM request to take charge.

There's no time for by-elections in those constituencies where TRT lost to "no vote", it would have been interesting to consider it right after the polls. It would also go against all election rules, IMO.

Edited April 28, 2006 by Plus

[Jai Dee]

Courts - no conclusion on legitimacy of April 2 poll

The Supreme, Administrative and Constitutional Courts chiefs did not reach a conclusion on the legitimacy of April 2 election this Friday morning.

However, they all agreed that each respective court should operate in an independent, timely and consistent manner in reaching their verdicts with the benefit of the country in mind, Jaran Pakdithanakul, secretary of the Supreme Court President said.

The judges of the top three judicial bodies - the Supreme, Constitutional and Supreme Administrative courts - met Friday in response to remarks by H.M. King Bhumibol Adulyade on a rare televised appearance Tuesday. The King called the current Thai political situation a mess and urged the courts to find a solution.

Source: The Nation - Breaking News - 28 April 2006

[ando]

If they do, as expected, nullify the recent elections I wouldn't expect it to simply go back to "a point in time" with TRT back in government and Thaksin as PM. There is bound to be some compromise expected from the waring parties.

Now that the King has spoken, I think the courts will try to solve this mess by bringing the parties together and getting certain undertakings from them in order to ensure a peaceful and democratic lead up to the next election without civil unrest (including street protests). I think the peace will be brokered as much by negotiation as by proclamation. The options, I imagine would include an undertaking by Thaksin to honor his promise not to accept the PM position in any new government, and an undertaking from PAD/Democrat leaders not to conduct further street protests in the interim.

But the courts would need to have a big stick to wave if the parties choose to dishonor such agreement. If Thaskin chose to go back on his agreement after the election (assuming TRT wins),he would be very easy to deal with. He could be simply removed by the courts. However if the mobs take to the streets again, it would be a lot harder to deal with. Simply locking up the leaders wouldn't necessarily stop mass protests. Rather, it would probably enrage them more. Without established leaders, more radical leaders could gain power and cause the mob to move from peaceful protest to violent protest. This situation would not be allowed to happen and I am sure the threat of martial law endorsed in advance by the courts would avert such occurrence.

The PAD/Democrat protesters are not the down trodden poor who have nothing to loose. They are mainly middle class Thais who seized on a political opportunity at the time. Only a bare handful would dare to defy the law when the going gets really tough. They would be easily disbursed by a show of force if that became necessary.

I am only guessing how it might go. But I seriously doubt it will go much differently.

Edited April 28, 2006 by ando

[Jai Dee]

Just before we get any more comments re HM's speech, a reminder from our Forum Rules:

Discussion of topics concerning the King or other current or deceased members of the Thai Royal Family is forbidden.

Read it again please.

Thanks for your understanding.

[sriracha john]

or...

conversely...

they DO decide to simply rule the election null, call for new elections in 99 (to be auspicious) days, and continue the current "caretaker" status of the entire government until then.

I doubt PAD will go back on it's word to abide by the Court's decision, which would end rallies... as for Thaksin to go back on his word, I'm not as doubtful that he might not somehow attempt to worm out of his word, but I think/hope he won't.

Edited April 28, 2006 by sriracha john

[Plus]

Ando, your predictions go against all evidence and logic. It has been nearly a month since Thaksin resigned and PAD kept a low profile since.

Their goal was achieved, even if not to total satisfaction. I don't see on what gorunds they can mobilise the same, or even bigger crowds, if not for Thaksin return despite his promises.

The PAD/Democrat protesters are not the down trodden poor who have nothing to loose. They are mainly middle class Thais who seized on a political opportunity at the time. Only a bare handful would dare to defy the law when the going gets really tough. They would be easily disbursed by a show of force if that became necessary.

Again, events of 1973, 1976, and 1992 show that Bangkokians CAN and WILL stand up for what is right. It's the "poor who have nothing to lose" are usually easily bullied by the government. It's a philosphical question, maybe they are afraid to lose what little they have, whereas Bangkokians think that they can get back on their feet no matter what.

[sriracha john]

BREAKING NEWS

Police detain Sondhi

Police have arrested Manager newspaper publisher Sondhi Limthongkul, the leader of anti-Thaksin protests, and detained him at headquarters.

Mr Sondhi had previously refused to report to police for interrogation on possible charges of lese majeste in a speech he made to an anti-Thaksin rally last month.

- BP

[sriracha john]

Update: Judges fail to reach election decision

Thailand’s top judges on Friday could not reach a conclusion on whether the inconclusive April 2 general election should be nullified.

The judges held an unprecedented judicial summit in the wake of His Majesty the King's instruction on April 25 to find solutions to the current political stalemate.

Speaking to a media conference after a two-hour meeting behind closed door, Supreme Court secretary-general Jaran Pakdithanakul said the chief judges of the three main courts—the Constitutional, Supreme and Supreme Admnistrative--would speed up their deliberations on pending cases under each court’s jurisdiction within the legal timeframe and in accordance with the Constitution law.

Among dozen cases contesting the legitimacy of the disputed general election filed before the three courts, the Democrat Party petitioned the Administrative Court to nullify the April 2 general election and to take legal action against caretaker prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra following his allegedly unconstitutional dissolution of the House of Representatives.

The top judges had been widely expected to annul the inconclusive April 2 general election.

The ruling Thai Rak Thai party under caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin won 56 percent of the vote in the snap elections.

But the opposition boycotted the polls leaving 40 of parliament's 500 seats empty, and the second round of voting last weekend failed to fill them.

A third round is scheduled for tomorrow in several southern provinces.

The law states that Parliament must meet within 30 days of a general election - i.e. May 1 - but also states that all 500 elected MPs must attend.

One of those stipulations will likely be impossible on Monday.

- BP

[sriracha john]

Constitution Court to consider cases related to EC on Monday

Acting Constitution Court President Phan Chantharaparn said Friday that the court would start considering two cases related to the Election Commission's power on Monday.

One of the case was the EC's request for the court to consider whether the EC had power to order the use of rubber stamp in voting or not, Phan said.

In another case, Phan said, a Thammasat University lecturer asked the court to consider whether the EC had breached the Constititution by setting the election date less than 45 days after the House dissolution and by setting voting booth which provided no privacy to voters.

Phan said the Office of Parliament Ombudsmen sent the complaint of the lecturer to the court Friday morning.

He said the court could start considering the cases on Monday.

- TN

[sriracha john]

Top Courts agree to speedily consider election cases

The top judges of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Administrative Court and the Constitution Court have agreed to work within their own jurisdiction to deliberate the cases involving the April 2 snap election in a speedy fashion to resolve the political crisis.

Jaran Phakdithanakul, secretary-general of the Supreme Court, said the judicial summit has agreed that the three Courts will work independently within their jurisdiction to deliberate the cases in a speedy fashion that meets the expectations of the Thai public.

Jaran said their deliberation in individual case will be on the similar directions to avoid the public's confusion.

The three top courts will meet again soon to compare notes, Jaran said, but declined to say when.

He was speaking after a meeting of top judges of the Administrative, Supreme and Constitution Courts to decide whether to nullify controversial April 2 election as they attempted to avert a political deadlock.

The meeting that started at 10am at Criminal Court on Rachadapisek Road was organised after HM the King assigned the courts to end months of political turmoil that saw anti-Thaksin protesters taking on the streets, and opposition parties boycotting the election.

"Today's resolution will be by consensus and will be made in accordance with the King's advice," Supreme Court spokesman Virat Chinvinijkul told local radio before the courts' meeting.

The judges were expected to slice through the political confusion, either by invalidating the election or by clearing the legal hurdles blocking parliament from opening.

Virat said the judges would decide on the "fairness and completeness" of the elections and a decision could come as early as 1pm.

Earlier reports said that judges from the Constitution, Supreme and Administrative courts appear split over how to rule on the April 2 election as they take note of HM's advice and head into an unprecedented judicial summit today to defuse the political crisis.

Leaked reports suggest Phan Chantarapan, the acting Constitution Court president, is inclined to convene the new Parliament as the unfilled seats will not impair the legislative work.

Phan has also apparently expressed concerns that a power vacuum might result if a new government is not formed within the 30-day deadline.

Supreme Court judges are reported to want the election scrapped to wipe the slate clean and allow rival politicians to settle some of their differences.

The three top judges may not find a solution to end the political crisis in one sitting because they face many hurdles in finding an appropriate legal stance to get the country out of the political quagmire.

- TN