Noppadon clarifies on Thai govt's Section 190 amendment bill

[webfact]

Noppadon clarifies on Govt's Section 190 amendment bill

BANGKOK, 14 Oct 2013, (NNT) - Section 190 amendment bill will be done in order to level the nation's play field when dealing with foreign countries, according to Noppadon Pattama,

Noppadon vehemently denied rumors that the bill was in favor of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, his employer, as claimed by opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva.

Earlier the Democrat Party leader made a claim that the amendment of Section 190 of the constitution would allow Mr. Thaksin to exploit it for his planned energy investment in Thailand's neighboring countries.

Mr. Noppadon firmly declared that Mr. Thaksin did not have such a plan, adding that if there was a proof that the former Prime Minister had any energy-related concession, the former Premier would give them up and donate them to the foundation for the mentally-retarded.

As for the Section 190 amendment bill, Mr. Noppadon clarified that the charter change would make the bill clearer and ensure fairness to local businesses when negotiating with foreign companies. He reiterated that the amended bill would facilitate foreign deals regardless of the party controlling the government.


-- NNT 2013-10-14

[winstonc]

donate the money to the mentally retarded.....havnt the government stolen enough already.......

Edited October 14, 2013 by winstonc

[waza]

Say goodbye to more government checks and balances......

Section 190'

“Prior to undertaking any action so as to engage in a treaty under paragraph 2 with a foreign state or international organisation, the Council of Ministers must disclose information concerned to the public, hold the public hearings and address an explanation as to such treaty to the National Assembly. In this regard, the Council of Ministers shall also submit the negotiation framework to the National Assembly for approval.

“Upon having signed a treaty referred to in paragraph 2, the Council of Ministers, before declaring an intention to be bound therewith, must make the contents thereof available to the public and, in cases the implementation thereof impacts the public or small and medium entrepreneurs, must expeditiously, appropriately and fairly resolve or remedy the impacts incurred by the persons concerned.........

“Where arises a problem dealing with paragraph 2, the problem shall be referred to the Constitutional Court for decision. The provisions of section 154 (1) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the making of such referral to the Constitutional Court.”

I can see how this would interfere with Thaksin's deal with Hun Sen over the oil and gas reserves in the Gulf of Thailand

Edited October 14, 2013 by waza

[waza]

donate the money to the mentally retarded.....havnt the government stolen enough already.......

Didnt they make the same claim about Thaksins shares in PTT, when he was found to have thousands of shares he didnt donate them to charity like he promised.

[Thaddeus]

Noppadon couldn't clarify butter.

[siampolee]

August 13th 2013 The Nation The top court for holders of political positions yesterday began the process of indicting former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama for misconduct over a memorandum of understanding to support Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple becoming listed as a World Heritage Site.

Noppadon submitted his account in written form denying the allegations. He was given 60 days to submit more evidence. The former minister has been released on bail of Bt2 million on condition that he does not try to go abroad without written court permission.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission cited Noppadon in 2008 for signing the MoU with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An, supporting that country's proposal to list the Hindu temple as a World Heritage Site. The NACCalleged that the MoU might result in Thailand losing sovereignty of the territory adjacent to Preah Vihear Temple.

Article 190 of the Constitution requires that permission be sought from Parliament before signing any treaty with a foreign country that makes changes to Thai territory. The Constitutional Court in 2008 ruled that the minister violated the charter, as he did not get approval from Parliament first.

However, Noppadon said he still had confidence that his actions at the time were aimed at protecting the territory, rather than losing it.

He said he did not deny signing the document but the Foreign Ministry and many concerned agencies at the time regarded it as a non-binding treaty, and its content made no reference to territorial changes.

"I did not intend to violate the law, but it was not clear what kind of document required parliamentary approval before signing," he said.

Thaddeus post # 5

Noppadon couldn't clarify butter.

The cut and paste in the 1st quote above from the Nation dated August 13th. 2013 backs up your comment 100% Thaddeus.

[Stradavarius37]

donate the money to the mentally retarded.....havnt the government stolen enough already.......

So does that mean Thaksin would be donating the money to his PT friends?

[siampolee]

So does that mean Thaksin would be donating the money to his PT friends?

He already is but it's not a ''donation'' it's a performance rated ''stipend''

[jaidam]

Didn't we have this exact charade last year when the esteemed Nopphadol claimed his boss didn't own a single share in PTT, only for the chairman of PTT to come out and say he owned many 10's of thousands. AFAIR he didn't pay out the promised million baht to the person that clarified his lies.

His believers continue to eagerly and thankfully swallow his lies, while the majority of us are left somewhat bewildered by his continued appeal among some sectors of the population.

[fab4]

August 13th 2013 The Nation The top court for holders of political positions yesterday began the process of indicting former foreign minister Noppadon Pattama for misconduct over a memorandum of understanding to support Cambodia's Preah Vihear Temple becoming listed as a World Heritage Site.

Noppadon submitted his account in written form denying the allegations. He was given 60 days to submit more evidence. The former minister has been released on bail of Bt2 million on condition that he does not try to go abroad without written court permission.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission cited Noppadon in 2008 for signing the MoU with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sok An, supporting that country's proposal to list the Hindu temple as a World Heritage Site. The NACCalleged that the MoU might result in Thailand losing sovereignty of the territory adjacent to Preah Vihear Temple.

Article 190 of the Constitution requires that permission be sought from Parliament before signing any treaty with a foreign country that makes changes to Thai territory. The Constitutional Court in 2008 ruled that the minister violated the charter, as he did not get approval from Parliament first.

However, Noppadon said he still had confidence that his actions at the time were aimed at protecting the territory, rather than losing it.

He said he did not deny signing the document but the Foreign Ministry and many concerned agencies at the time regarded it as a non-binding treaty, and its content made no reference to territorial changes.

"I did not intend to violate the law, but it was not clear what kind of document required parliamentary approval before signing," he said.

Thaddeus post # 5

Noppadon couldn't clarify butter.

The cut and paste in the 1st quote above from the Nation dated August 13th. 2013 backs up your comment 100% Thaddeus.

If only it were true.

It was the Constitutional Court that set the precedent of loosely interpreting Article 190 forcing Noppadon to step down as Foreign Minister in 2008 and directly led to the abandonment of the NASA Thai Weather Project

Vague treaty rules sank Nasa project:

The opposition Democrat Party and some senators demanded that the Cabinet bring the proposal before Parliament for its approval in accordance with Article 190 of the Constitution, as they suspected Nasa might have an ulterior motive to conduct the research for military purposes aimed at containing China in Asia-Pacific.The project could drag Thailand into the strategic conflict between China and the US, they said.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

Article 190 of the Constitution says that agreements with foreign countries or international organisations need Parliament's approval if they result in a change in territory or sovereignty over territory; have significant implications for the budget or for social or economic security; or would require the issuance of domestic law to be enforced.

Unfortunately, the Constitution Court set a precedent of loosely interpreting the charter when it ruled on a joint statement signed with Cambodia that simply supported the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear temple in 2008. In its verdict, it said that any document signed with a representative of a foreign government could be regarded as a treaty that "may" make changes in territory or sovereignty or have significant implications for economic and social security. In so ruling, it declared the Preah Vihear joint statement unconstitutional, forcing then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama to step down.

If the term "may" applies to any context, it was not unreasonable for politicians to expect that the court would decide that the Nasa project "may" have a significant impact on the security of the country.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Vague-treaty-rules-sank-Nasa-project-30185430.html

With the Democrat Parties obsessional ploy of gaining back power by any means other than through the ballot box and the CC's erratic rulings the ruling party is held back at every turn just trying to do its job. Where was the CC when Abhisit amended the constitution in early 2011 when he increased the number of party list positions to 125 and decreased the number of elected MPs to 375 thus decreasing the number of seats in the North by 11 seats.

Edited October 14, 2013 by fab4

[klubex99]

I personally am bemused that a self exiled criminal with outstanding criminal convictions is not only still able to run this country with his puppets, but even has the balls to have the country's constitution altered so he can also continue to rape as much money from it as he can.

The Thaksin regime has stolen enough money from the public purse to live in obscene luxury for the rest of their lives even if they lived for another 20,000 years each. So why can't they just stop this plundering behaviour because it is an absolute insult to Thailand and its people.

I love the way the wording 'If proved, he would donate'... meaning 'he is doing it, but without the proof, no pay'.

Educated people would simply deny everything and that is it... Not here... This is Thailand, home of the stupid.

[fab4]

I personally am bemused that a self exiled criminal with outstanding criminal convictions is not only still able to run this country with his puppets, but even has the balls to have the country's constitution altered so he can also continue to rape as much money from it as he can.

The Thaksin regime has stolen enough money from the public purse to live in obscene luxury for the rest of their lives even if they lived for another 20,000 years each. So why can't they just stop this plundering behaviour because it is an absolute insult to Thailand and its people.

I love the way the wording 'If proved, he would donate'... meaning 'he is doing it, but without the proof, no pay'.

Educated people would simply deny everything and that is it... Not here... This is Thailand, home of the stupid.

I just love your interpretation of the Nations reporting of a translation of the original thai. I wouldn't give up your day job to become a lawyer if I were you.

Educate(d) people would prove their accusations before entering the world of hurt that is libel in Thailand.

Edited October 14, 2013 by fab4

[waza]

Thaddeus post # 5

Noppadon couldn't clarify butter.

The cut and paste in the 1st quote above from the Nation dated August 13th. 2013 backs up your comment 100% Thaddeus.

If only it were true.

It was the Constitutional Court that set the precedent of loosely interpreting Article 190 forcing Noppadon to step down as Foreign Minister in 2008 and directly led to the abandonment of the NASA Thai Weather Project

Vague treaty rules sank Nasa project:

The opposition Democrat Party and some senators demanded that the Cabinet bring the proposal before Parliament for its approval in accordance with Article 190 of the Constitution, as they suspected Nasa might have an ulterior motive to conduct the research for military purposes aimed at containing China in Asia-Pacific.The project could drag Thailand into the strategic conflict between China and the US, they said.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

Article 190 of the Constitution says that agreements with foreign countries or international organisations need Parliament's approval if they result in a change in territory or sovereignty over territory; have significant implications for the budget or for social or economic security; or would require the issuance of domestic law to be enforced.

Unfortunately, the Constitution Court set a precedent of loosely interpreting the charter when it ruled on a joint statement signed with Cambodia that simply supported the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear temple in 2008. In its verdict, it said that any document signed with a representative of a foreign government could be regarded as a treaty that "may" make changes in territory or sovereignty or have significant implications for economic and social security. In so ruling, it declared the Preah Vihear joint statement unconstitutional, forcing then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama to step down.

If the term "may" applies to any context, it was not unreasonable for politicians to expect that the court would decide that the Nasa project "may" have a significant impact on the security of the country.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Vague-treaty-rules-sank-Nasa-project-30185430.html

With the Democrat Parties obsessional ploy of gaining back power by any means other than through the ballot box and the CC's erratic rulings the ruling party is held back at every turn just trying to do its job. Where was the CC when Abhisit amended the constitution in early 2011 when he increased the number of party list positions to 125 and decreased the number of elected MPs to 375 thus decreasing the number of seats in the North by 11 seats.

So your saying you support the amending of section 190 because it performed as it was intended, as a safeguard? You also believe the CC safeguards are holding back the agenda of the Yingluck administration?

An agenda proposed and orchestrated by a convicted crimal and fugitive from justice. And you further believe that checks and balances forced on the Yingluck administration are a machination of the Democrat party.

It all sounds like a bit of Red paranoia.

PS:The CC was there. performing its duty at the time Abihist was proposing and the government was amending sections of the constitution. However, everyone including the opposition party felt the amendments were perfectly in order and that a CC ruling was not required.

So no conspiracy there.

Edited October 14, 2013 by waza

[Thait Spot]

I'm sure Wikileaks revealed the details

[fab4]

Thaddeus post # 5

Noppadon couldn't clarify butter.

The cut and paste in the 1st quote above from the Nation dated August 13th. 2013 backs up your comment 100% Thaddeus.

If only it were true.

It was the Constitutional Court that set the precedent of loosely interpreting Article 190 forcing Noppadon to step down as Foreign Minister in 2008 and directly led to the abandonment of the NASA Thai Weather Project

Vague treaty rules sank Nasa project:

The opposition Democrat Party and some senators demanded that the Cabinet bring the proposal before Parliament for its approval in accordance with Article 190 of the Constitution, as they suspected Nasa might have an ulterior motive to conduct the research for military purposes aimed at containing China in Asia-Pacific.The project could drag Thailand into the strategic conflict between China and the US, they said.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

Article 190 of the Constitution says that agreements with foreign countries or international organisations need Parliament's approval if they result in a change in territory or sovereignty over territory; have significant implications for the budget or for social or economic security; or would require the issuance of domestic law to be enforced.

Unfortunately, the Constitution Court set a precedent of loosely interpreting the charter when it ruled on a joint statement signed with Cambodia that simply supported the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear temple in 2008. In its verdict, it said that any document signed with a representative of a foreign government could be regarded as a treaty that "may" make changes in territory or sovereignty or have significant implications for economic and social security. In so ruling, it declared the Preah Vihear joint statement unconstitutional, forcing then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama to step down.

If the term "may" applies to any context, it was not unreasonable for politicians to expect that the court would decide that the Nasa project "may" have a significant impact on the security of the country.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Vague-treaty-rules-sank-Nasa-project-30185430.html

With the Democrat Parties obsessional ploy of gaining back power by any means other than through the ballot box and the CC's erratic rulings the ruling party is held back at every turn just trying to do its job. Where was the CC when Abhisit amended the constitution in early 2011 when he increased the number of party list positions to 125 and decreased the number of elected MPs to 375 thus decreasing the number of seats in the North by 11 seats.

So your saying you support the amending of section 190 because it performed as it was intended, as a safeguard? You also believe the CC safeguards are holding back the agenda of the Yingluck administration?

An agenda proposed and orchestrated by a convicted crimal and fugitive from justice. And you further believe that checks and balances forced on the Yingluck administration are a machination of the Democrat party.

It all sounds like a bit of Red paranoia.

PS:The CC was there. performing its duty at the time Abihist was proposing and the government was amending sections of the constitution. However, everyone including the opposition party felt the amendments were perfectly in order and that a CC ruling was not required.

So no conspiracy there.

No.I am supporting the amendment of Section 190 because its definition is not tight enough. If you read the above carefully you would have seen that. It was because Section 190 was not defined enough that the CC ruled that the treaty signed by Noppodan was ruled unconstitutional - because of that one word "may". A signed treaty with Country "A" will affect Country "B" sovereignty or it won't - there is no "may" about it.

Of course, the Democrats jump on these amendments and build them up to be something scary in the hope of getting the CC to rule against the PTP and maybe get the party dissolved.

That's what they did when they jumped in on the NASA deal threatening Section 68 etc because the CC could rule that the treaty with another country i.e USA may affect Thailands sovereignty and rule it unconstitutional. All this despite the details already been made known to the government at the time, the Democrats, because they had signed a joint statement of intent in 2010!

To my mind the Democrats should be heavily fined or censured in someway for continually wasting the CC time, but they aren't.

[khunken]

It's a pity that Thaksin wouldn't donate himself to the Society for the mentally retarded. Noppadon might even have to tell the truth for once instead of continually lying for his boss. Amazingly, some posters believe him.

[waza]

If only it were true.

It was the Constitutional Court that set the precedent of loosely interpreting Article 190 forcing Noppadon to step down as Foreign Minister in 2008 and directly led to the abandonment of the NASA Thai Weather Project

Vague treaty rules sank Nasa project:

The opposition Democrat Party and some senators demanded that the Cabinet bring the proposal before Parliament for its approval in accordance with Article 190 of the Constitution, as they suspected Nasa might have an ulterior motive to conduct the research for military purposes aimed at containing China in Asia-Pacific.The project could drag Thailand into the strategic conflict between China and the US, they said.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

Article 190 of the Constitution says that agreements with foreign countries or international organisations need Parliament's approval if they result in a change in territory or sovereignty over territory; have significant implications for the budget or for social or economic security; or would require the issuance of domestic law to be enforced.

Unfortunately, the Constitution Court set a precedent of loosely interpreting the charter when it ruled on a joint statement signed with Cambodia that simply supported the World Heritage inscription of Cambodia's Preah Vihear temple in 2008. In its verdict, it said that any document signed with a representative of a foreign government could be regarded as a treaty that "may" make changes in territory or sovereignty or have significant implications for economic and social security. In so ruling, it declared the Preah Vihear joint statement unconstitutional, forcing then foreign minister Noppadon Pattama to step down.

If the term "may" applies to any context, it was not unreasonable for politicians to expect that the court would decide that the Nasa project "may" have a significant impact on the security of the country.

In fact, there were no grounds to doubt the scientific merits of the project. The opposition party has been familiar with it since Nasa signed a joint statement of intent with the Science Ministry's Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) in September 2010, during the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Vague-treaty-rules-sank-Nasa-project-30185430.html

With the Democrat Parties obsessional ploy of gaining back power by any means other than through the ballot box and the CC's erratic rulings the ruling party is held back at every turn just trying to do its job. Where was the CC when Abhisit amended the constitution in early 2011 when he increased the number of party list positions to 125 and decreased the number of elected MPs to 375 thus decreasing the number of seats in the North by 11 seats.

So your saying you support the amending of section 190 because it performed as it was intended, as a safeguard? You also believe the CC safeguards are holding back the agenda of the Yingluck administration?

An agenda proposed and orchestrated by a convicted crimal and fugitive from justice. And you further believe that checks and balances forced on the Yingluck administration are a machination of the Democrat party.

It all sounds like a bit of Red paranoia.

PS:The CC was there. performing its duty at the time Abihist was proposing and the government was amending sections of the constitution. However, everyone including the opposition party felt the amendments were perfectly in order and that a CC ruling was not required.

So no conspiracy there.

No.I am supporting the amendment of Section 190 because its definition is not tight enough. If you read the above carefully you would have seen that. It was because Section 190 was not defined enough that the CC ruled that the treaty signed by Noppodan was ruled unconstitutional - because of that one word "may". A signed treaty with Country "A" will affect Country "B" sovereignty or it won't - there is no "may" about it.

Of course, the Democrats jump on these amendments and build them up to be something scary in the hope of getting the CC to rule against the PTP and maybe get the party dissolved.

That's what they did when they jumped in on the NASA deal threatening Section 68 etc because the CC could rule that the treaty with another country i.e USA may affect Thailands sovereignty and rule it unconstitutional. All this despite the details already been made known to the government at the time, the Democrats, because they had signed a joint statement of intent in 2010!

To my mind the Democrats should be heavily fined or censured in someway for continually wasting the CC time, but they aren't.

What are the changes the PTP want to make? Because Noppadon clarifies on Govt's Section 190 amendment bill, didnt clarify it.

Edited October 14, 2013 by waza

[rubl]

"Earlier the Democrat Party leader made a claim that the amendment of Section 190 of the constitution would allow Mr. Thaksin to exploit it for his planned energy investment in Thailand's neighboring countries.

Mr. Noppadon firmly declared that Mr. Thaksin did not have such a plan, adding that if there was a proof that the former Prime Minister had any energy-related concession, the former Premier would give them up and donate them to the foundation for the mentally-retarded."

Somehow it seems k. Noppadon is giving an answer to a question not asked. He just says Thaksin has no plan (as yet?), but he doesn't say whether or not the changes would allow Thaksin to exploit it. He does stress "that the amended bill would facilitate foreign deals regardless of the party controlling the government." In a way it seems k. Noppadon just confirms the Democrat party leaders claim.

[waza]

"Earlier the Democrat Party leader made a claim that the amendment of Section 190 of the constitution would allow Mr. Thaksin to exploit it for his planned energy investment in Thailand's neighboring countries.

Mr. Noppadon firmly declared that Mr. Thaksin did not have such a plan, adding that if there was a proof that the former Prime Minister had any energy-related concession, the former Premier would give them up and donate them to the foundation for the mentally-retarded."

Somehow it seems k. Noppadon is giving an answer to a question not asked. He just says Thaksin has no plan (as yet?), but he doesn't say whether or not the changes would allow Thaksin to exploit it. He does stress "that the amended bill would facilitate foreign deals regardless of the party controlling the government." In a way it seems k. Noppadon just confirms the Democrat party leaders claim.

Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra will visit Cambodia on Friday to attend a conference on the Asian economy - not to negotiate petroleum resources in the countries' overlapping claims area in the Gulf of Thailand as speculated, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen said yesterday. http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Thaksin-to-visit-Cambodia-on-Friday-Hun-Sen-30165134.html

[jbrain]

the former Premier would give them up and donate them to the foundation for the mentally-retarded.

Some qualified beneficiary's positioned in the current government spring to mind.

[fab4]

No.I am supporting the amendment of Section 190 because its definition is not tight enough. If you read the above carefully you would have seen that. It was because Section 190 was not defined enough that the CC ruled that the treaty signed by Noppodan was ruled unconstitutional - because of that one word "may". A signed treaty with Country "A" will affect Country "B" sovereignty or it won't - there is no "may" about it.

Of course, the Democrats jump on these amendments and build them up to be something scary in the hope of getting the CC to rule against the PTP and maybe get the party dissolved.

That's what they did when they jumped in on the NASA deal threatening Section 68 etc because the CC could rule that the treaty with another country i.e USA may affect Thailands sovereignty and rule it unconstitutional. All this despite the details already been made known to the government at the time, the Democrats, because they had signed a joint statement of intent in 2010!

To my mind the Democrats should be heavily fined or censured in someway for continually wasting the CC time, but they aren't.

What are the changes the PTP want to make? Because Noppadon clarifies on Govt's Section 190 amendment bill, didnt clarify it.

I don't know why I bothered with all that before, you obviously didn't read it..

Treaties made with other countries by Thailand will either affect Thailands sovereignty or they won't. There should be no maybe - except that there is and the CC rules on it using their definition at the time. To remove this uncertainty is the aim of the government. The result: treaties that are made that don't affect the sovereignty of Thailand e.g the NASA Project do not need to be debated in Parliament, have public hearings etc etc.

If you read Article 190 as it is now you can see the "wooliness" of the definition of what type of treaty needs the full bells and whistles approach and what doesn't.

As I said, the Democrats are stirring up scare stories at every turn trying to make themselves relevant. It's their MO,"only good at talking".

Edited October 14, 2013 by fab4

[bigbamboo]

Noppadon is an intelligent man but with his record coupled with being a lawyer would you trust him?

[gabruce]

 

No.I am supporting the amendment of Section 190 because its definition is not tight enough. If you read the above carefully you would have seen that. It was because Section 190 was not defined enough that the CC ruled that the treaty signed by Noppodan was ruled unconstitutional - because of that one word "may". A signed treaty with Country "A" will affect Country "B" sovereignty or it won't - there is no "may" about it.

Of course, the Democrats jump on these amendments and build them up to be something scary in the hope of getting the CC to rule against the PTP and maybe get the party dissolved.

That's what they did when they jumped in on the NASA deal threatening Section 68 etc because the CC could rule that the treaty with another country i.e USA may affect Thailands sovereignty and rule it unconstitutional. All this despite the details already been made known to the government at the time, the Democrats, because they had signed a joint statement of intent in 2010!

To my mind the Democrats should be heavily fined or censured in someway for continually wasting the CC time, but they aren't.

What are the changes the PTP want to make? Because Noppadon clarifies on Govt's Section 190 amendment bill, didnt clarify it.

I don't know why I bothered with all that before, you obviously didn't read it..

Treaties made with other countries by Thailand will either affect Thailands sovereignty or they won't. There should be no maybe - except that there is and the CC rules on it using their definition at the time. To remove this uncertainty is the aim of the government. The result: treaties that are made that don't affect the sovereignty of Thailand e.g the NASA Project do not need to be debated in Parliament, have public hearings etc etc.

If you read Article 190 as it is now you can see the "wooliness" of the definition of what type of treaty needs the full bells and whistles approach and what doesn't.

As I said, the Democrats are stirring up scare stories at every turn trying to make themselves relevant. It's their MO,"only good at talking".

 

Just to clarify. Are you saying that the only change that they are making is to change the word "may" to "will" (I know it must be the thai equivalent) without other changes as well?

One small problem with the word "will" is that it's more nebulous. It's much more difficult to prove "will" than "may" until after the fact.

I think I could argue convincingly that the sun "may" rise in the morning, and that you could NOT with 100% certainty say that it "will" rise. Granted that it's approaching near certainty, however I would worry that courts would be forced to rule that it's impossible to prove "will", so the government of the day could just say that it "won't" or maybe that it "may", and therefore there is no reason to present it to the public.

[waza]

 

No.I am supporting the amendment of Section 190 because its definition is not tight enough. If you read the above carefully you would have seen that. It was because Section 190 was not defined enough that the CC ruled that the treaty signed by Noppodan was ruled unconstitutional - because of that one word "may". A signed treaty with Country "A" will affect Country "B" sovereignty or it won't - there is no "may" about it.

Of course, the Democrats jump on these amendments and build them up to be something scary in the hope of getting the CC to rule against the PTP and maybe get the party dissolved.

That's what they did when they jumped in on the NASA deal threatening Section 68 etc because the CC could rule that the treaty with another country i.e USA may affect Thailands sovereignty and rule it unconstitutional. All this despite the details already been made known to the government at the time, the Democrats, because they had signed a joint statement of intent in 2010!

To my mind the Democrats should be heavily fined or censured in someway for continually wasting the CC time, but they aren't.

What are the changes the PTP want to make? Because Noppadon clarifies on Govt's Section 190 amendment bill, didnt clarify it.

I don't know why I bothered with all that before, you obviously didn't read it..

Treaties made with other countries by Thailand will either affect Thailands sovereignty or they won't. There should be no maybe - except that there is and the CC rules on it using their definition at the time. To remove this uncertainty is the aim of the government. The result: treaties that are made that don't affect the sovereignty of Thailand e.g the NASA Project do not need to be debated in Parliament, have public hearings etc etc.

If you read Article 190 as it is now you can see the "wooliness" of the definition of what type of treaty needs the full bells and whistles approach and what doesn't.

As I said, the Democrats are stirring up scare stories at every turn trying to make themselves relevant. It's their MO,"only good at talking".

 

Just to clarify. Are you saying that the only change that they are making is to change the word "may" to "will" (I know it must be the thai equivalent) without other changes as well?

One small problem with the word "will" is that it's more nebulous. It's much more difficult to prove "will" than "may" until after the fact.

I think I could argue convincingly that the sun "may" rise in the morning, and that you could NOT with 100% certainty say that it "will" rise. Granted that it's approaching near certainty, however I would worry that courts would be forced to rule that it's impossible to prove "will", so the government of the day could just say that it "won't" or maybe that it "may", and therefore there is no reason to present it to the public.

Thats the way I read it too, but his logic is so convoluted and his arguement so absurd I reject it completely and have no wish to read anymore of his incredible posts. After all why would one bother to go through all this trouble to change one word?

Edited October 14, 2013 by waza

[MikeOboe57]

Noppadon said in an e-mail to the media that Thaksin had been invited to testify to the CSCE in the middle of the month over the crackdowns on red-shirt protesters in April and May. The commission sent the invitation a few days ago and Thaksin has accepted it, he said. http://asiancorrespondent.com/43398/thaksin-to-go-to-the-us/

Noppadon is known to say a lot that later turns out to be, how to put it politely, pulled out of somebody's starfish. In the above case Thaksin never got even remotely close to the CSCE as they are not interested in Asian affairs. I wonder why anyone still wants to print the mutterings of this man. He should be ignored by the media.

[waza]

Interesting that the charter changes to section 190 and the amnesty bill are being railroaded through cabinet with such haste. Plus the ISA has been expanded to include when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague will give its decision on Nov. 11 about which country should administer a 4.6-square kilometer (1.8-square mile) tract of land surrounding the 11th century Preah Vihear temple...

The dispute along the Thai-Cambodian border in the Preah Vihear temple area could develop into a heated conflict among Thais if the International Court of Justice's clarification on the case does not favour Thailand, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has warned.

Lately, Abhisit and “friends” have even accused Yingluck Shinawatra’s government of selling out disputed territory around the Preah Vihear temple in exchange for individual-interest deals on the overlapping claims area.

Thaksin and two of his proxy governments under late Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat were accused of exchanging support for Phnom Penh to list the Preah Vihear Temple as a World Heritage Site in return for interest in a petroleum concession in the Gulf of Thailand.

Thailand signed the MoU with Cambodia in 2001 to negotiate on the areas claimed by both sides in the gulf, which is believed to have abundant reserves of gas. The negotiations over the past years have never made any progress over profit-sharing in the joint development area.

After all it was Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama, a Thaksin's PPP government minister, that endorsed Cambodia's application to have the Preah Vihear temple registered as a UNESCO World Heritage Site without first consulting Parliament on the matter. His resignation followed the 8-1 judgment by the Thai Constitutional Court that he had violated Article 190 of Thailand's 2007 Constitution, which calls for a public debate and Cabinet-level approval before such authorization can take place. The very same article now in cabinet for amendment.

Edited October 25, 2013 by waza

[slapout]

It appears that we have the "incompent" proposing and writting law, the same, translating to the general population, and a judical system, reported to be make up of compentent people, graduates of law, knowledgable in law who seem to be setting on the sidelines, waiting to retire.