Supreme Court To Decide Whether To Nullify Election In Unprecedented Meeting

[cclub75]

It's going to be funny to hear our dear Unemployed Great Leader when he'll return monday...

I suppose he will have many comments to do about "his" elections, and the "mess" he created...

Third round were canceled by Administrative Court. The whole farce is going to be canceled eventually.

What a blow, what a blow.

[ColPyat]

Third round were canceled by Administrative Court. The whole farce is going to be canceled eventually.

What a blow, what a blow.

Which would mean that TRT is ruling party with absolute majority, he is still PM, and new elections will have to be called in at a date...well, when?!

In a bit more than a month we have the 60 year celebrations in which Thailand will most definately be in the spotlight of the international media. I don't know, but i really don't understand your gloating. Thailand not having a functioning government will do the country incredible amount of damage.

But it seems that you don't really care much about this.

Well, everybody who brought this mess up - and that means TRT, the PAD, and the opposition parties will have a lot of explaining to do.

[jdinasia]

อุย

Let's see .....

what can come out of this mess.

Restored freedom of the Press .....

Political Reform

Constitutional reform ....

an end to non-sustaianable populist vote buying that further damages Thailand ....

But good on you Cappy for pointing out all those instances in the West where peaceful assemblies have been put down by violence!

[jezchesters]

ando, what exeactly have you got against the democratic right to peacefully protest? Are you saying that, although its OK to do it in Australia, Europe, the USA etc, its not OK to do it in Thailand? The right to protest is one of the prime requisits of any democratic society.

I think you already know that such a sustained level of protest which virtually amounted to a blockade of the nations democratically elected leader would never be tolerated in advanced democracies like USA, Briton, Australia or Europe. Just wouldn't be allowed to continue, so dont kid yourself there. A one day march maybe, but certainly not the same sort of thing that went on in Bangkok. I really think the PAD were hoping for a confrontation in order to gain international attention and sympathy for their cause. Thaksin didn't play their game and it all went down with only occasional, minor mentions in the international news.

Thailand is a third world country and is in a transitional stage between accepting established western practices of democracy and changes of government by mass protest and pseudo-popular uprisings. Thank goodness Thailand has progressed far enough down the the path of democracy now that civil unrest by a tiny minority can not change a democratically elected government. Both the military and the Monarchy have distanced themselves from interfence in the democratic process. That can only be a good thing for democracy. Sooner or later the democrats will realize that they have to go out there and win votes if they want to get into government and implement their "ideals". (Sorry, I almost said "policies", but I dont think they have any).

Unfortunately since Bangkok is 50 times larger than the next largest city in Thailand (Chang Mai), and is also the stronghold of old style thinking in line with democrat ideology, it is easy for the democrats to raise a very impressive show of support which doesn't necessarily reflect the wishes of the majority of Thai voters. The only protest that counts in a democracy is at the ballot box, and that has already shown overwhelming majority support for TRT. The PAD street protests may have been tolerated in Thailand due to their unique political position, but dont try to kid yourself that such things would have been tolerated for long in any mainstream western democracy.

That post is so full of holes I don't know where, or whether I should, begin...

In answer to your entire first paragaph, just type French Youth Labour Law into Google to save me having to tell you the story. Months of street protests (some violent, at that) before the government realised how unpopular the law was and repealed it...

'Thailand is a third world country'. Wrong on two counts, the first being that technically there are no third-world countries since the collapse of the second-world. The correct terminology is 'developing country' or 'less developed country'. The UN uses a system called the HDI (Human Development Index) to guage a country's development based on a myriad of factors. A rating of less than 0.500 denotes a 'less developed country. Thailand rates at 0.778, only 0.144 behind Germany and 21 places above Turkey: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_hum_dev_ind

Of course, you can always argue with those amatuers at the UN can't you?

Peaceful protest, no matter what your views are, does not constitute civil unrest...

As for the rest, I'm not going to repeat what many others have posted and what you already know but refuse to accept. You throw the term 'democrats' around like its some dirty word. As you know the PAD and the Democrat party are two entirely separate entities, so it is very difficult to understand who you are talking about in the rest of your thread. If you wish to involve yourself in debate, please make it clear exactly who you are talking about.

'The only protest that counts in a democracy is at the ballot box'. If you really believe that, and have the arrogance to ignore centuries of history and billions of humans alive today, there really is no point in continuing.

[ando]

'The only protest that counts in a democracy is at the ballot box'. If you really believe that, and have the arrogance to ignore centuries of history and billions of humans alive today, there really is no point in continuing.

Yep. I really do believe that in any true democracy the only protest that counts is at the ballot box.

Thats just the way it is in civilized societies. The Democrats will have to get off their arse and start coming up with policies to win some votes now that the option of a Royally appointed PM has gone out the window. While protests in western democracies may often change government policies, they dont ever change governments. That has to be done at the ballot box in a democracy.

Thailand has gone too far down the road to true democracy to let mob protests over rule the will of the majority. The old days of coups and counter coups are gone and the Democrats just have to get used to that and get out there and win some votes if they want to make any difference.

[jdinasia]

Ando ... in a democracy ONE man doesn't hold enough power not to be impeached ... and when the courts fail to protect the people ... and when the institutions like the NCCC are no more ... and when the Free Press is no longer Free ... there exists only one recourse left to the people ... to gather in the streets and petition for redress ....

quit thinking that this is somewhere OTHER than Thailand .... but simply there are protests all over the world ... they fail to topple governments because they are often just wrong ... here it worked for exactly the opposite reason .. they were correct

[Khun Jean]

They are for sure taking their time.

Amazingly quiet all of a sudden.

With such strong words as encouragement i expected something quick and strong.

[sriracha john]

Lots of isssues being decided by the three, not just the Surpreme Court, courts involved. Looks like it will take a bit longer:

Courts seen as uniting on legitimacy question

The Constitution Court secretary-general, Paiboon Warahapaithoon, expects the ruling by the Administrative Court on the legitimacy of the April 2 general election, likely to be handed down by mid-May, to concur with that of his own court. Both the Administrative and Supreme courts have been swamped with legal complaints against the Election Commission (EC) which has come under heavy fire for its handling of the snap poll.

But the EC is trying to defend itself by asking for protection from the Constitution Court in a challenge to the Administrative Court's authority.

The Administrative Court stated yesterday that it planned to issue its ruling on the legitimacy of the April 2 election some time in the middle of this month once enough facts have been established.

The ruling is expected to be issued based on a petition by a group of 10 complainants who argued that the EC's order to re-position polling booths with their open ends facing officials on duty violated voters' right to secrecy. This was because others could see how voters marked their ballots.

Secretary-general Paiboon of the Constitution Court said yesterday the rulings of both the Administrative and the Constitution courts on the election legitimacy would be in accord.

''I don't believe the deliberations by the Constitution Court and the Administrative Court will contradict or be different from each other. But we must wait for the details of the cases. The Administrative Court will deliberate on cases within its legal prerogative and decisions by either court will not affect the other,'' he said.

The Supreme Administrative Court yesterday accepted a complaint against the EC accusing it of hastily scheduling the April 2 snap poll and of making the decision on holding the election without having a quorum. The five-member commission was missing two members _ one had passed away while another was abroad.

At the Criminal Court, senators-elect Nirun Pitakwatchara, Karoon Sai-gnarm and Somboon Thongburan, together with Somsak Kosaisuk, a core leader of the People's Alliance for Democracy, filed a complaint against the remaining four commissioners for malfeasance, demanding that they face jail and fines and lose their voting rights for 10 years.

The complainants alleged that the April 2 election was unfair because its schedule was rushed. They also accused the EC of re-positioning polling booths, changing the ballots and displaying candidates' numbers within polling venues within sight of voters in violation of its rules.

This, they said, gave undue advantage to a major political party, in apparent reference to Thai Rak Thai, which contested the election virtually unchallenged.

On its part, the EC has asked the Constitution Court to overrule the Administrative Court's interim order for it to cancel the second round of by-elections last Saturday and allow voters to mark ballots with pens or rubber stamps. The Constitution Court yesterday accepted both EC complaints for hearing.

Opposition to the April 2 general election, particularly over the re-positioning of polling booths, has encouraged losers in some tambon administration organisation (TAO) elections on July 31 last year to file complaints with the Administrative Court to demand the results be nullified.

Complaints were filed by losing candidates in tambon Tha Maka in Kanchanaburi, tambon Nong Sa Bua in Ayutthaya and tambon Hua Samrong in Lop Buri. More such cases are expected.

In another development, the cabinet decided yesterday to withdraw its earlier plan to propose a royal decree to convene the House of Representatives to the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary and to ask the Constitution Court to support the convening of the House despite the fact that it lacks full membership, Government spokesman Surapong Suebwonglee said yesterday.

The withdrawal was proposed by caretaker Deputy Prime Ministers Chidchai Wannasathit, Visanu Krue-ngarm and Suriya Jungrungreangkit, and Agriculture Minister Khunying Sudarat Keyuraphan and Prime Minister's Office secretary-general Prommin Lertsuridej.

- BP

Edited May 2, 2006 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

OR, perhaps even a bit longer .

The only quick deadline established was today being the final day left for the Election Commission to submit it's response to the Constitution Court :

Court will rule first on validity of poll

Faced with a flurry of complaints about the election, the Constitution Court said yesterday it would first rule on whether the election was valid and then on two matters regarding the Election Commis-sion's handling of the April 2 ballot.

The Central Administrative Court, meanwhile, is expected to hand down by the middle of this month its verdict on whether the EC erred in its configuration of voting booths in the general election.

In a bid to counter charges of impropriety lodged against it in the Administrative Court, the Election Commission has requested two separate reviews of constitutional provisions relating to its mandate to manage elections.

In the first case, the EC has asked the court to rule whether the Central Administrative Court was legally able to issue an injunction against the third round of balloting in the disputed election.

It also questioned whether the court had erred in intervening in the electoral process, which it said was not an administrative dispute. This puts it at odds with the court.

The administrative order put a stop to any new rounds of voting until the court rules whether the EC has violated voters' privacy when it comes to the configuration of the ballot booths.

The court found cause to suspect foul play in the April 2 election, after the EC changed how the booths were laid out, allowing bystanders to see how people voted.

In the second case, the EC has appealed against the Administrative Court's ruling against the use of rubber stamps to mark ballots.

It said it was empowered by the Constitution and organic laws to rule on matters relating to the electoral process to use the stamps, which is outside the purview of the administrative court.

Constitution Court secretary-general Paiboon Warahapaitoon said his court would rule on the two cases after completing its inquiry into the validity of the April 2 election.

The court will today begin a continuous session until it can reach a decision on the election's outcome, Paiboon said.

On Monday it ruled it would launch a judicial review and also set a three-day deadline for the EC to submit factual evidence on its management of the polls. That deadline expires today.

Paiboon said he was optimistic the verdict would end the political crisis, but refused to predict how long a ruling would take.

Meanwhile, the Central Administrative Court is expected to hand down by the middle of this month its verdict on whether the EC erred in its configuration of voting booths in the general election. If the court rules that the EC acted improperly, it could lead to the invalidation of the April 2 election.

"The parties to the dispute have submitted factual evidence on which the court can base a verdict," presiding judge Somchai Watanakarun said yesterday.

The judicial review is based on two citizen's complaints filed by Photiphong Banluewong and Pramual Wirutamasen. The court has combined the two cases.

The complainants allege that the EC violated the privacy of voters because bystanders could observe the marking of ballots.

During the hearing to decide whether the case merited judicial review last week, the court found cause to suspect foul play in the April 2 election. It also issued an injunction against the repeat vote until it can rule on the matter.

Photiphong said he lodged a separate complaint last week asking the Supreme Administrative Court to cancel the April 2 election on grounds that the Royal Decree for the vote had been wrongfully enacted.

In another lawsuit, Sompong Sukpinij, a voter from Samut Sakhon, asked the court to order the EC to reimburse him the Bt50 he spent on travelling to the balloting station.

He also demanded Bt100 compensation for the EC's failure to protect his privacy while marking his ballot.

Representing Sompong, lawyer Sukrit Kittisriworaphan said the EC should pay compensation because it went ahead with the balloting even though the vote was not honest or fair.

- TN

[sriracha john]

The courts are completely clogged....

Complaints flood courts - 414 cases

The April 2 general election has led to an unprecedented number of legal complaints flooding the court system, with the Supreme Court alone receiving 414 cases _ the most in Thai political history . The high number of cases reached the courts despite the fact that the Thai Rak Thai party ran virtually unopposed.

In the Feb 6, 2005 general election, only 34 election-related complaints were lodged with the Supreme Court.

Somjit Thongsri, secretary to the Supreme Court's panel on election cases, said the court had received a total of 414 cases of alleged electoral violations in the April 2 poll. Of these, 275 cases were lodged by election candidates and the other 139 by the directors of election panels.

Most candidates petitioned the court to overrule an election panel's decision to reject their applications as candidates.

Mr Somjit said there were 37 complaints about the April 23 by-elections. The Administrative Court has accepted 12 cases for deliberation, as opposed to just one case in the previous general election.

All but one of the cases were filed against the Election Commission (EC).

The EC has been accused of issuing unlawful orders involving the allegedly hasty organisation of the election.

It has also faced criticism over the re-organisation of poll booths which allegedly deprived voters of the right to secrecy, the use of rubber stamps instead of pens to mark the ballots, its permission for candidates to re-run in different constituencies in by-elections, and its negligence to take action against caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra for electoral violations. Several complaints called on the EC to invalidate the April 2 election.

One case was filed against Mr Thaksin, accusing him of unlawfully issuing a royal decree to hold the election.

Meanwhile, the Constitution Court will start deliberating a case calling for the invalidation of the election.

The case was lodged by Thammasat University law lecturer Banjerd Singkhaneti and poll observer Gen Saiyud Kerdpol, who questioned the legitimacy of the poll.

The petition was based on complaints that the election was arranged too hastily and that the polling booths were arranged in a way which deprived voters of their right to secrecy.

The Constitution Court has accepted two more petitions for consideration. Both were lodged by the EC against the Administrative Court's rulings on two cases.

The EC disagreed with the Administrative Court's ruling ordering it to suspend the April 29 by-elections in 14 constituencies. The injunction came a day after the court accepted petitions by Potipong Bunleuwong and Pramual Wirutmasen.

Mr Potipong and Mr Pramual alleged that the April 2 election contravened the constitution's article 104, which requires voting to be confidential. They claimed the EC had the polling booths arranged in a way that compromised the integrity of the voting, and so asked the court to scrap the election results.

The EC argued that the court ruling to suspend the 3rd round of voting was unconstitutional. In another petition, the EC also sought the court's interpretation on the legality of using rubber stamps to mark ballots. The court issued its ruling in favour of Nimit Thiam-udom, by ordering the EC to launch a public relations campaign to inform voters of their right to use pens to mark their ballots.

- BP

[LaoPo]

The courts are completely clogged....

Complaints flood courts - 414 cases

The April 2 general election has led to an unprecedented number of legal complaints flooding the court system, with the Supreme Court alone receiving 414 cases _ the most in Thai political history . The high number of cases reached the courts despite the fact that the Thai Rak Thai party ran virtually unopposed.

- BP

Sad...very sad indeed.

Thai sueing Thai and the end is not in sight.

Thailand is rolling further down the hill and it seems that even the 'Thai-Intelligent-Top-People' didn't listen very good to HM the King:........Go and solve the problems.

Instead of talking to each other they're sueing each other.

Supreme Court: 414 cases: a disaster for Thailand.

And all this a few weeks before the celebrations for HM the King...

LaoPo

[stumonster]

The five-member commission was missing two members _ one had passed away while another was abroad.

enought time to oversee election preparations , but not enough time to elect a new member or reschedule holidays ? ? ?

its permission for candidates to re-run in different constituencies in by- elections

is there a lack of commitment here ?

not is not really a farce.

Edited May 3, 2006 by stumonster

[Plus]

I really do believe that in any true democracy the only protest that counts is at the ballot box.

Have you heard of a concept of "law"? Breaking laws is not a matter of ballot boxes but judiciary. Accused do not defend themselves at ballot boxes but in courts.

Back to Thailand, courts refused to deal with citizens petitions regarding Thaksin. They didn't care about citizen's petitions regarding elections either, not until HM directly told them to get involved and clear the mess.

Should they got involved in Thaksin's case back in February, there wouldn't be elections at all.

Now, for empeenth time, please tell us what's the connection between Thaksin's corruption charges and Democrat's policies? And how chosing your local politician on election day answers the question "Did Thaksin keep Shin shares in BVI through nominees?"

[sriracha john]

Cracks in the new airport runways...

Cracks in the new airport terminal flooring...

Cracks in TRT Party's unity?:

After the threats of the newly elected TRT Party MP's to denounce any undesireable Court ruling,

comes this:

Interior Minister Korngsak warns new MPs against violating court power

Caretaker Interior Minister Kongsak Wantana Wednesday warned the newly-elected 485 MPs against violating the power of the Administrative Court when they hold a meeting on Thursday.

The MPs plan a meeting on Thursday as proposed by Thai Rak Thai MP Sophon Phetsawang on Tuesday questioned the power of the Administrative Court to try the case against the legality of the April 2 election. He called the meeting of the new MPs to discuss the court's power.

Kongsak said the MPs could hold a meeting but they would have to be careful not make any contempt of court.

Supreme Administrative Court President Akkarathorn Chularat said Wednesday that the court had the power to try the case.

- TN

[sriracha john]

Is TRT floundering about without Takky's steady guidance?

Where is he? Why is he being so quiet now?

Anyway... in the meantime, more TRT disunity:

Thai Rak Thai MPs disagree with TRT MP Sophon's move against Administrative Court

A Thai Rak Thai Party MP said Wednesday at least 20 Thai Rak Thai MPs disagreed with a plan by Buri Ram MP Sophon Phetsawang to hold a meeting of 485 new MPs to move against the Administrative Court.

Sophon, a member of Wang Nam Yom faction, invited all 485 MPs to attend a meeting on Thursday to express their stand against the Administrative Court's judicial review of the legality of the April 2 election.

Sophon has said the court has no power to try the case.

But Prasert Boonruang, another member of the Wang Nam Yom faction, said some 20 Thai Rak Thai MPs, including himself, disagreed with Sophon's move so they would not attend the meeting.

Prasert said Sophon should heed the message of His Majesty the King who assigned the courts to work out the solution for the national crisis.

Prasert said Sophon had caused a lot of damages to the image of the party so he should stop making any move in the name of the party or he and his group would come out to counter Sophon.

- TN

Edited May 3, 2006 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

Meanwhile, back at the busy Courthouse:

EC chairman will testify in person

Wasana Permlarp, chairman of Election Commission, will testify to the Constitution Court this afternoon in two separate trials in relation to a demand from civic groups seeking nullification of the April 2 election.

Paiboon Warahapaiboon, secretary general of the Constitution Court, said that the court was informed that Wasana will testify in person.

The Court on Wednesday also deliberated separate trials filed by Gen Saiyud Kerdpon, chairman of an election watchdog, and Banjerd Singkaneti, a Thammasat lecturer, against EC, alleging that the April 2 poll was unconstitutional.

Paiboon said the judges discussed general information of the trial during the morning session and will continue the deliberation through out the day.

He said he could not say whether the deliberation will be compleated by today.

- TN

[sriracha john]

POLITICAL CRISIS

TRT in retreat as judges hit back

Leaders claim no plan for Thaksin to return, as court moves to sue Buri Ram MP for threat

Thai Rak Thai yesterday retreated from its stance backing the return of caretaker Premier Thaksin Shinawatra from "a political break" if a new election is held.

In contrast to strong support for Thaksin by party MPs in recent days, party leaders claimed they had not discussed the issue.

"It is not the right time to talk about the future," TRT secretary-general Suriya Jungrungreangkit said. He was replying to speculation Thaksin could stand as the party's number one party-list candidate in a new poll if the Constitution, Administrative or Supreme courts nullify the April 2 election.

Thai Rak Thai leaders attempted to present a softer, more accepting face yesterday in the wake of another controversy. One said that threats by MPs-elect to impeach judges - if they nullify the April 2 poll - were damaging and must be stopped.

The Administrative Court reportedly plans to sue Buri Ram MP Sophon Phetsawang, a Thai Rak Thai MP-elect who claimed they had no right to nullify the April 2 poll. Judges are said to be collecting evidence for a defamation suit - mostly Sophon's interviews with the media.

Akaratorn Chularat, president of the Administrative Court, yesterday countered Sophon's claim that the court had no authority to invalidate the election because it could only rule on cases of conflict among government agencies or conflicts between government and private agencies.

"The courts know if they have authority to rule on the case," he said. "Nobody needs to tell us."

In recent days, a group of TRT MPs expressed support for Thaksin to return after the three top courts indicated they may rule that the April 2 poll was illegal, which would pave the way for a new election. They claimed that if the poll was nullified it would be legitimate for Thaksin to stand as a candidate for prime minister again.

Thaksin announced on April 5 that he would not assume the prime ministership, despite Thai Rak Thai getting at least 15 million votes when 29 million people went to the polls last month.

But Deputy TRT leader Somsak Thepsuthin said yesterday he had yet to talk to Thaksin about the possibility of his return.

And Sudarat Keyuraphan, another TRT deputy, also claimed she had not talked with the caretaker PM about the issue. She believed Thaksin was waiting until the courts rule on whether the April 2 poll was legal.

Sudarat, who heads the party's Bangkok faction, also asked Thai Rak Thai's newly-elected MPs to drop their challenge to impeach the Administrative Court if it nullifies the April 2 election.

"The move is not only irrelevant to the party's goal, but damaging our image," Sudarat said in response to a move against the court on Tuesday by MPs in TRT's Wang Nam Yom faction. They included Buri Ram MP Sophon Phetsawang, Nakhon Phanom MP Phaichit Sriworakhan and Chiang Rai MP Buasorn Prachamon.

Sudarat said she would tell Somsak, a Wang Nam Yom leader, to stop Sophon from making any more such moves. This included Sophon's call for the 485 endorsed MPs to convene today [May 4] to discuss solutions to the political crisis.

"We, the Thai Rak Thai Party, will accept and follow the court's ruling, although it could rule in favour of a new election," she said.

Sudarat would consult TRT executives about getting all party MPs together for a meeting, she said. "They need to stop before things get worse," she commented.

Sudarat and Somsak are known rivals who have struggled for power in the party.

MPs-elect from the Wang Nam Yom faction called on Tuesday for the House to be opened despite the possibility of the April 2 election being invalidated by the Administrative Court. They said they were endorsed as MPs and the court had no right to nullify the election.

Somsak ruled out speculation he backed Sophon's move to challenge the Administrative Court. "They [his faction MPs] acted on their own," he said.

Wang Nam Yom MP Prasert Boonreung also called on Sophon not to make any further moves. All sides should respond positively to His Majesty the King's plea for national reconciliation, he said.

Suriya, who heads Wang Nam Yen, said senior party members had agreed to follow the court's ruling. But they had not discussed Sophon's move, he said.

- TN

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

We won't be rushed: Constitution judges

Constitution Court acting president Phan Chantarapan yesterday reiterated the court was open-minded about whether the April 2 election should be invalidated.

"Judges will review every aspect of the electoral process with no fixed deadline to come to a decision and without worrying about outside pressure," he said.

The 14 presiding judges began their first day of deliberation on the petition submitted by Thammasat University law lecturers questioning the election outcome.

Four legal issues were raised by the petition: the legality of the Royal Decree calling for the polls; voter privacy while marking the ballots; the funding of small parties; and the endorsement of voting results without a formal review.

The judges will sit until they reach a verdict and yesterday morning they outlined the pertinent legal issues for the judicial review.

In the afternoon they heard testimony from Election Commission (EC) chairman Vasana Puemlarp.

Vasana, accompanied by colleague Prinya Nakchudtree, submitted evidence on the management of the electoral process.

The EC chief refused to talk to reporters before entering the court, which is closed to the public.

The pair presented some 90 pages of documents and answered questions from Constitution Court judges, said the court's secretary-general Paiboon Warahapaitoon.

The meeting lasted almost two hours.

A source from the court said yesterday it was likely the judges would decide on the case early next week.

In a related development, students from Ramkhamhaeng University demanded the EC's resignation on grounds they mismanaged the polls.

"The four EC members should resign because they failed to ensure honest and fair balloting," said student representative Uthai Yodmanee, adding that the students expected a response by Wednesday.

He claimed the EC organised the April 2 election in an unfair fashion and caused a rift in society.

Meanwhile, activist Taikorn Pholsuwan called on the EC to unmask the masterminds who hired minor parties to run against Thai Rak Thai candidates.

- TN

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

Complaint to EC: Thai Rak Thai move to dissolve Democrats groundless, party says

The Democrat Party yesterday dismissed as groundless a complaint filed by the Thai Rak Thai Party with the Election Commission demanding the Democrats be dissolved.

Thai Rak Thai accused the Democrats of misleading court judges by seeking cancellation of the April 2 election.

Democrat spokesman Ongart Klampaiboon said his party members had only exercised their right as voters who believed the election had been organised illegitimately. They had no intention of misleading any court. He said that without complaints the courts could not function or solve the country's political crisis.

He dismissed claims that his party knew in advance the court would decide to annul the election, saying that every party - not just the Democrats - was prepared to go to the polls in case the court cancelled the election.

He urged Thai Rak Thai to accept the results of recent surveys that showed the majority of the public did not want to see Thaksin Shinawatra return as the next prime minister.

- TN

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

TRT man faces contempt charge

A former deputy House speaker and senior Thai Rak Thai party member could be charged with contempt of court after making comments deemed to question the Administrative Court's impartiality.

The Office of the Administrative Court is compiling evidence about comments by Sophon Phetsawang. They will be submitted to the court in three days.

Mr Sophon and TRT colleagues Paichit Sriworakhan and Buasorn Prachamon recently publicly questioned the court's independence and power to rule on the legality of the April 2 snap election.

Mr Sophon said he heard some Administrative Court judges had close ties with the Democrats and that could influence the judiciary's review of the polls.

Mr Buasorn said impeachment of the judges was also being considered.

The group invited other Thai Rak Thai MPs-elect to attend a meeting today to express their stand against the Administrative Court's review of the elections.

In its order yesterday to court officials, telling them to compile evidence, the Administrative Court said the comments made by Mr Sophon and his associates on May 1-3 might be "incorrect and deemed in contempt of court" and "appeared not to be criticism made in good faith".

The court will examine the evidence before deciding whether to summon Mr Sophon and his group.

A source close to the court said officials are making inquiries of media outlets which aired or published the comments.

Ackratorn Chularat, president of the Supreme Administrative Court, declined to comment on the case, saying it was still being considered. Every court, except the Constitution Court, could bring contempt charges, he said.

Some members of the public called the Administrative Court to lend moral support to the judges and staff in the wake of the comments by Mr Sophon and his group, which they believed were intimidatory.

Mr Sophon, who appeared isolated by his party yesterday, said the comments were just an expression of curiosity and not intended to undermine the court's authority.

"As a long-time politician and a graduate of the King Prajadhipok Institute, I understood the Election Commission had the sole authority relating to the elections.

"I did not mean for my comments to offend the court," he said.

Mr Sophon said deputy party leader Sudarat Keyuraphan confronted him yesterday and told him what he said was his own personal opinion.

"I nodded and told her it was my own view and had nothing to do with Thai Rak Thai," he said.

Mr Sophon admitted that many Thai Rak Thai MPs had declined to attend today's meeting, but he said it would go ahead as planned.

Former senator Sak Korsaengruang said Mr Sophon and his associates had crossed the line. "Their action was inappropriate. While the party leader pleads for the courts to do their job, party members come out and pressure the court themselves," he said.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Administrative Court yesterday upheld a ruling cancelling a regulation on the qualifications of provincial election committee members.

The regulation, issued by the Election Commission, required a candidate for the provincial committee to sever ties with political parties for at least five years.

The court said the EC's regulation violated a candidate's rights and was beyond the scope of power specified by the Election Commission Act.

The EC's use of its administrative powers was subject to the court's review.

"Even though the EC is set up under the constitution, it is not exempt from judicial examination.

"Its use of administrative powers including the legality of regulations it issues, can be reviewed by the court," the court said.

A group of political activists calling themselves the Constitution Protection Group yesterday lodged a petition with the Administrative Court asking for clarification of its powers.

Group leader Chucheep Cheewasuth said he believed the court had no power to annul the royal decree calling the April 2 general election.

The group also submitted a petition to the Supreme Court president and the Constitution Court president.

- BP

[ando]

It must be like Christmas for the lawyers in Thailand at the moment with thousands of politically motivated law suits flying around from all sides. Even the judges are getting in on the act now threatening their own law suits. Kind of takes the spotlight off the job of getting the country back on the rails again.

[sriracha john]

Poll booths 'the decider'

Court anxious to avoid Jaruvan-like deadlock

The much-criticised re-arrangement of polling booths is likely to provide grounds for the Constitution Court to rule the April 2 snap election unconstitutional, according to a source close to the issue.

The re-positioning of the booths by the Election Commission (EC), which allowed poll officials and onlookers to see how voters marked their ballot papers, is deemed a violation of the voter's right to secrecy under Article 104 of the constitution.

Paiboon Warahapaithoon, secretary-general to the Constitution Court, said yesterday the judges have completed their deliberations and will vote on Monday.

The court bench has 14 judges. A replacement for Kamol Thongthammachart, who retired, has still not been approved by the Senate.

The court will also decide if the April 2 polls can be annulled and if the court has the power to do so. This is to avoid a fresh stand-off similar to one involving Auditor-General Jaruvan Maintaka, according to the source.

The Constitution Court ruled in July 2004 that the selection process that led to the appointment of Khunying Jaruvan as auditor-general lacked legitimacy. However, the court stopped short of saying if she had to leave the post.

Despite her refusal to resign without a royal command, a fresh selection round was called and Visut Montriwat nominated as her replacement. His nomination was never royally endorsed.

The stand-off ended when His Majesty the King's Principal Private Secretary asked that the issue be resolved. Khunying Jaruvan was reinstated in January after two years as Mr Visut backed down.

''The court verdict must not lead to further deadlocks. When elections are found to lack legitimacy what has to be considered next is whether they can be invalidated. The petition seeks invalidation of the polls,'' said the source.

A judge who spoke on condition of anonymity said there was no apparent need to consider other issues if the court finds the arrangement of polling booths unconstitutional.

''If we rule it [the arrangement of polling booths] unconstitutional, we don't have to consider in detail the other three issues in the petition before us,'' said the judge.

In a petition seeking the court's ruling, complainants raise four contentious points _ re-positioning of the polling booths, a rushed election date, small parties being hired to field candidates in certain constituencies, and some EC resolutions being reached at meetings lacking a quorum.

The three other areas also appeared inconclusive, the source said.

The court was unlikely to decide if the election date was set in favour of a political party. The EC had already said the date was actually set by the government.

The EC members insisted that most resolutions were made in the presence of all members. The few exceptions were not unprecedented.

As the Constitution Court is set to vote, the Administrative Court is hearing petitions on the polling booths. A verdict is expected in the middle of this month.

EC chairman Wassana Permlarp yesterday defended the commission's decision to rearrange the polling booths, saying it was for the voters' convenience.

''There are over 80,000 polling booths across the country. Aging voters forget the number of the candidates when they turn away from the candidate introduction boards to vote.''

...of all the completely stupid, hair-brained, stupid-a$$, lame, bullsh1t explanations I've heard, this takes the cake...

However, after criticism by the National Human Rights Commission and the People's Network for Elections, the commission decided to change back to the old arrangement for the by-elections on April 23 and Senate polls on April 19.

Pol Gen Wassana said the EC did not compromise voter secrecy, but media coverage may have done so.

''It's such a silly thing for news crews [who took pictures of people voting] to do. They compromised voter confidentiality by zooming in on voters as they were marking their ballots.

more unadultered crap from his mouth... if the media can see the voting taking place, so can any Somchai standing nearby. The right to privacy in marking one's ballot is specifically in the constitution... get rid of this <deleted>' clown.

''And they accused me of organising the voting in a way that deprived people of the right to vote in secret,'' he said.

That's because you WERE. The media was only revealing what YOUR fcukin' policies did, Mr. Police General Bu11shit Extraordinaire Wassana. Don't EVEN attempt to turn it around (no pun on your voting booths) and blame the media.

[penzman]

Another incompetent circus clown.

[marquess]

Another incompetent circus clown.

Is there such a thing as a competent circus clown? Anyway I have just seen an interview on CNN with Sondhi, who seems to feel that the 2nd April elections should not be annuled, as we will be back to square one. Anyone else see it and what did they think?

[ando]

Everyone knows the first step in cleaning up this mess has got to be nullifying the April 2 election.

Finding an air tight way to do that is the only problem facing the courts at the moment.

PAD, TRT and the Democrats are simply flexing their muscles trying to gain some points in the interim.

As I see it, the really interesting part will be to see how they are going to manage things AFTER the election is nullified. Will the status quo simply be reimposed as it was before? Do the courts have the authority to dissolve Parliament and call another early election? Certainly the most sensible way to resolve the issue would be to bring all parties together and gain a beneficial outcome for the country through negotiation. But right at the moment that seems impossible with them all trying to wreck the healing process through law suits, counter suits and threats.

Ironically if the mess was to continue indefinitely in legal gridlock, the only force capable of sorting things out would be the military. Imagine that? A military coup in order to restore democracy. Certainly a long shot probability at the moment but not entirely out of the question in a place like Thailand if the courts cant put things right.

Thaksins silence should not be taken as a show of disinterest. The man is stupid like a fox.

[jdinasia]

is Ando swinging off the "I love Thaksin" side here? Good for you man!

[sriracha john]

A Supreme Court judge drowned himself in an apprent suicide bid

A judge who suffered from chronic depression apparently drowned himself yesterday after leaving a suicide note to his wife and family.

The body of 58yearold Komwut Burithanawat, a Supreme Court judge, was found trapped in a fishing net in a 300 by 500 metres pond in Bangkok yesterday morning. Police suspects that victim have died more than seven hours before the body was found.

Komwit's wife found a handwritten farewell note from her husband and report the incident to the police on Friday night but failed not locate her husband in time. The judge was suffering from chronic depression and has been going in and out of hospital frequently for a long time.

The Nation

[sriracha john]

Court urged to look at all points

Petition drafter wants all four arguments seeking annulment of poll result considered

By Supawadee Susanpoolthong

The Constitution Court should consider all the four contentious points on the legitimacy of April 2 snap elections, said a key drafter of a petition seeking annulment of the results. Bancherd Singkhaneti, of Thammasat University's law faculty, said the judges should hear all the legal points rather than concentrating on just the re-arrangement of the polling booths.

''The four issues interrelate and reflect the illegitimacy and unconstitutionality of the elections,'' he said.

In the petition submitted to the court via the Office of the Ombudsman, the complainants ask the court to consider four legal issues _ a rushed election date, re-positioning of the polling booths, alleged bankrolling of small parties by a major party to field candidates in certain constituencies, and lack of formal reviews of the Election Commission resolutions.

The re-arrangement of the polling booths is deemed to be against Section 104 of the charter that demands ballot confidentiality.

The rushed date is allegedly in violation of Section 136 and 144 which call for fair and clean elections. The fact that the elections were organised less than 45 days after the House dissolution left other parties at a disadvantage.

The alleged bankrolling is a breach of Section 108 which bars parties from fielding two candidates in a constituency. The claimed lack of formal reviews by commissioners is against Section 136.

Mr Bancherd's call follows an early report that the court is likely to consider re-arrangement of polling booths first.

If that is deemed a breach of the charter, there would be no need to consider the other issues.

The re-positioning of the booths triggered complaints that prompted the EC to switch back to the old arrangement in subsequent polls.

''If they [judges] consider these four points altogether, they'll realise the gravity of the situation which will add weight to the call for nullification of the polls,'' said Mr Bancherd.

The fact that the court accepted the petition for consideration showed the legal issues were within its jurisdiction.

He also said if the judges rule the polls are against the charter, they can describe in detail how they constitute a breach of the law and why the result should be overturned.

He said the court has full authority to annul the April 2 snap election.

''When I drafted the petition and lodged it with the Constitution Court, I knew it was within the court's jurisdiction to annul the April 2 vote,'' he said.

If polls are found unconstitutional, the EC's endorsements of the elections are also rendered void.

Despite the court's agreement to hear the petition, the EC still endorsed 99 Thai Rak Thai party-list MPs and was criticised for complicating the issue.

The poll agency also sent the list of 485 MPs to the Secretariat of the House of Representatives and announced the election was complete.

Mr Bancherd said the court ruling will be binding on the poll agency which is formed under the charter.

Meanwhile, caretaker Senate Speaker Suchon Chaleekhrua has called a meeting of legal advisers tomorrow to discuss the court ruling and the implications of any annulment.

The Constitution Court judges will issue their ruling and give their judicial view tomorrow morning.

A source said the advisory team will consider asking the Constitution Court to select a court president so the Senate can forward the appointment and the nomination of Udomsak Nitimontri as a new Constitution Court judge for royal endorsement.

Also on the agenda is the formation of a committee to examine the background and qualification of candidates vying for seats on the National Counter Corruption Commission.

The selection committee will meet tomorrow to shortlist 14 candidates and submit the nominations to the Senate.

- BP

[LaoPo]

A Supreme Court judge drowned himself in an apprent suicide bid

A judge who suffered from chronic depression apparently drowned himself yesterday after leaving a suicide note to his wife and family.

The body of 58yearold Komwut Burithanawat, a Supreme Court judge, was found trapped in a fishing net in a 300 by 500 metres pond in Bangkok yesterday morning. Police suspects that victim have died more than seven hours before the body was found.

Komwit's wife found a handwritten farewell note from her husband and report the incident to the police on Friday night but failed not locate her husband in time. The judge was suffering from chronic depression and has been going in and out of hospital frequently for a long time.

The Nation

Sad but strange story.

1. How can anybody who is seriously sick (Chronic depression = a serious sickness) be a member of the Supreme Court?

2. Is it correct that the Supreme Court had 5 members and of which 1 died earlier already? So that there are just 3 members now?

3. Strange way to commit suicide...

LaoPo

[lukamar]

3. Strange way to commit suicide...

[/color]

Very strange. More common is the high dive or the single shot to the back of the head.

[sriracha john]

Will May 8th, 2006 (2549) go down in Thai history as a turning point to improved democracy? The potential is there. We await the decision.... today is the rest of time for Thailand:

Court to rule on polls today

Major parties, PAD gear for new elections

The Constitution Court will hand down its much-anticipated verdict on the April 2 snap polls today, with preparations already afoot in some quarters for a new general election. The Thai Rak Thai party is making preparations to hit the campaign trail once again, and the People's Alliance for Democracy is mounting pressure to keep caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra from going back on his word not to lead the next government.

The verdict on whether to annul the April 2 general election will be decided by all 14 sitting judges of the court.

Constitution Court judge Pan Chantharapan said the verdict will only take a short time to reach.

All 14 judges will meet and each will read out a written statement. After that, they will vote, with the court verdict decided by a majority.

The verdict will then be announced to the public, before the judges proceed to draft details of the verdict to be distributed to the press.

The court earlier admitted a petition through the Ombudsman seeking to invalidate the April 2 general election on grounds of a rushed election date, re-positioning of the polling booths, alleged bankrolling of small parties by a major party to field candidates in certain constituencies, and a lack of formal reviews of Election Commission resolutions.

''I understand the judges have wrapped up their statements, ready to be presented,'' Mr Pan said. He denied the judges worked under duress.

Mr Pan is one of the majority judges who previously threw out a request by a group of senators for a legal interpretation whether the 73-billion-baht sale of shares in Shin Corp to the Singapore government's investment arm, Temasek, constituted conflict of interest. Mr Thaksin's family founded and held controlling stakes in the telecom giant.

Mr Pan was also among the majority judges who acquitted Mr Thaksin of asset concealment early in his prime ministership.

Another judge, Manit Vithayatem, conceded he was under some pressure, saying his decision will not be swayed by public sentiment. ''If it's right, then it's right. That's all there is to it. How can I act otherwise?'' he said.

Gen Saiyud Kerdpol, chairman of the People's Network for Elections (P-Net) and one of the co-petitioners in the poll legitimacy issue, believed the court would rule to annul the polls, which Thai Rak Thai was the only major party to contest.

He insisted the four election commissioners have no option but to resign if the verdict is to invalidate the poll.

I agree. If the poll is voided, it's all been a huge waste of precious resources and and largely due directly to the EC's mishandling. Holding them accountable for this is minimal.

Vorajet Phakheerat, of Thammasat University's law faculty, said an invalidation would likely be based on ''adulterated votes'' as a result of polling booths arranged in a way which robbed voters of their right to secrecy. Another basis could also be that the EC allowed losers in the April 2 polls to stand in other constituencies in the subsequent by-elections.

Thai Rak Thai convened a high-level caucus where faction stalwarts were told not to put away campaign posters from last month's elections. The MPs-elect were specifically instructed not to give media interviews after the verdict is handed down.

Democrat secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban said the party is prepared to take part in a new general election after boycotting the April 2 polls.

The People's Alliance for Democracy renewed demands for Mr Thaksin to keep his pledge not to take the job of prime minister again.

In an open letter, the alliance, instrumental for Mr Thaksin's current political hiatus, maintained Mr Thaksin is the root of all problems and social division.

hahahaha... that Sodhi... what a kidder.. always joking around...

actually, a letter is fairly tame... and hopefully won't constitute as "chest-pounding" by ando's standards...

- BP

[jdinasia]

My standing questions are .... will there be 90+ days before new elections?

will the work be done on the Constitution BEFORE the next elections or not?

[LaoPo]

1. My standing questions are .... will there be 90+ days before new elections?

2. will the work be done on the Constitution BEFORE the next elections or not?

1. Personally I would think indeed 90+ days but certainly after the holiday season (millions of tourists in LOS...), so end August but better September.

2. No idea.

LaoPo