MP Wiratana Kalayasiri said the Democrats had submitted the censure debate and impeachment motion in the same manner as they had on Friday. Somsak's condition that the Democrats must submit documents to justify their attack is seen as a tactic to snoop into the opposition's information...........However, Somsak said the opposition had failed to submit accompanying documents to support the impeachment move and allegations related to graft. He said he would consult his legal team before tabling the censure motion and authorising the debate.

"The opposition insists that it cannot hand out the documents to the House Speaker although he has the authority to consider putting the motion on parliamentary agenda. He cannot just use his power any way he wants or follow [someone's] order. He must face legal action in those cases. The Democrats will sign to impeach him and take measures against him as allowed by the law," Wiratana said......MP Warong Dechgitvigrom said his scrutiny of the government's rice-pledging scheme would be able to bring about a change in the government.

.http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Democrats-threaten-legal-action-if-Speaker-blocks--30219799.html

I agree its hard to supply documentation of this corrupt practices when Yinglucks administration is concealing the facts and releasing misinformation.

"The said request shall clearly itemise circumstances in which such persons have allegedly committed the act."

That is what the constitution says and that is what Somsak has asked for. What are they impeaching the PM for? An impeachment is a trial, and the defendent is entitled to defend theirself. That is basic law. You can't just say "we want to impeach the PM and we are not going to say why and we are not going to let her defend herself". That is kangaroo court stuff.

Get it right Hammered, they are saying, it may be the oppositions constitutional right to start impeachment proceeding against Yingluck and her cabinet. But first the opposition must provide all evidence to Somsak, who is the self appointed gatekeeper and will judge whether the motion can proceed.

Show me where it says in the constitution that this is the procedure?

"The said request shall clearly itemise circumstances in which such persons have allegedly committed the act".

So you are saying that your interpretation is that a defendant has no right to see any of the evidence against them. That is a kangaroo court.

Dear Hammered, please don't misrepresent my post. To use your analogy, I am saying that a clerk of the court doesn't have the right to demand that all evidence must be forward to them for their judgement on whether the cases merits being forwards to the court for determination. To use your vernacular, he is unconstitutionally acting like a one man kangaroo court or a gatekeeper to block the democratic process.

Head of the Pheu Thai’s legal team, Mr Phichit Chuenbarn, said that the opposition’s claim of confidential documents that could not be included in the motion was a claim which violated Article 271 of the Constitution.

When did PTP start caring about the constitution? You want evidence that they deserve to be impeached?, how about changing the wording of a bill that has already passed a first reading, and then passing the changed bill, clearly unconstitutional. The Prime Minister must be held accountable, if she had any honor she would tender her resignation until the court rules.

Personally, I would love to see Yingluck being grilled.

With a nice BBQ sauce.

Loy Kratong we eat crabs from Myanmar in my family.

I said to the public: Sorry, Yingluck. We have to eat you.

No one understood quickly. 5 minutes later they all eat poo.

Why do PTP wriggle so, when they have an absolute majority in the House, what can they possibly have to fear ?

The know they are walking on thin ice.

They know that they are walking on thin Rice....

Another crazy attempt from the Dems, it never stops. A bunch of cry babies. AV leads the pack.

I believe that the question is how much evidence and material they have to show, and how much have they actual submitted. I can't believe that they have submitted zero reasons.

In a democracy, its good that the PM answers some questions about her actions and decisions.

Personally, I would love to see Yingluck being grilled.

Misogynist!

Personally, I would love to see Yingluck being grilled.

With a nice BBQ sauce.

Loy Kratong we eat crabs from Myanmar in my family.

I said to the public: Sorry, Yingluck. We have to eat you.

No one understood quickly. 5 minutes later they all eat poo.

Beware of the pincers of the Mighty Crab.

Personally, I would love to see Yingluck being grilled.

With a nice BBQ sauce.

Loy Kratong we eat crabs from Myanmar in my family.

I said to the public: Sorry, Yingluck. We have to eat you.

No one understood quickly. 5 minutes later they all eat poo.

Beware of the pincers of the Mighty Crab.

Beware indeed! The pincers are the tastiest part.

They just fancy impeaching someone without giving any evidence?

And these are people from the supposedly intelligent party?

Nobody said they weren't giving any evidence, they are saying that they want to keep it secret until the impeachment hearing.

But Somsak is blocking any chance of a hearing unless he can see the evidence first. Of course he will leak copies straight to Yingluk, Thaksin and everyone else involved. He is in their pockets remember.

AV is probably rightly concerned that all those involved will have everything stitched up with corruption to counter the evidence by the time the hearing comes around.

Well, teh parliament isn't a court of law. Declaring it before the hearing is a bit stupid unless of course it is proveable illegality, in which case, they should take it to the coppers.

Another crazy attempt from the Dems, it never stops. A bunch of cry babies. AV leads the pack.

I believe that the question is how much evidence and material they have to show, and how much have they actual submitted. I can't believe that they have submitted zero reasons.

In a democracy, its good that the PM answers some questions about her actions and decisions.

Personally, I would love to see Yingluck being grilled.

So you like watching girls cry then....? Hahahaha. I really want to see it too. 'Let me get back to you in 20 mins, I have to ask my brother how to answer that one....';

Why do PTP wriggle so, when they have an absolute majority in the House, what can they possibly have to fear ?

Someone checking the books?

To the Red shirts, The Taksin et al are god like, and above all laws.

Members of the House of Representatives of not less than one-fourth of the total number of the existing members of the House have the right to lodge with the President of the Senate a complaint in order to request the Senate to pass a resolution under section 274 removing the persons under section 270 from office. The said request shall clearly itemise circumstances in which such persons have allegedly committed the act.

Section 271 of the 2007 Constitution first paragraph above.

How can they itemise lese majeste charges? If they did they would be charged with the crime. I hope lese majeste is not the charge, but the move to impeach without a charge is ridiculous enough for this to possibly be the case.

It's the upper house to decide whether they need more documents or not for the impeachment, not PTP. They also mix it up between impeachment and motion of no confidence, which latter one is MP's privilege and should require no evidence at all on initiation.

It's plain as day Yingluck is afraid to face Apisit, Jurin, Korn etc, and she has good reason to.

A lamb to the slaughter.

It should be impossible to impeach a politician without evidence that supports their indictment.

I have always presumed that P M Thaksin was not Impeached because no evidence exists that could support an indictment for his impeachment.

Impeachment is without doubt the correct way to remove a suspected criminal from Office.

However P M Thaksin appears to have been removed from Office by use of a criminal conspiracy utilising institutions of Thailand that seem themselves to have been corrupted at the time.

The same forces wielded by people that are thought to be criminals themselves, are now trying to remove P M Yingluck from office too.

Thaksin, Somchai, Yingluck.......

Don't you think people are sick to the back teeth of them?

The sad part is the people who could run the country can't get elected (hint they have the tanks). Those are the people that are sick of them. The people who can't run the country are the ones who get elected and they are not sick of them (they don't have the tanks).

So where are the tanks?

How many generals in Pooaah Thai?

Last time the tanks rolled, they were given flowers.

Not by the government they ousted!

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

It's plain as day Yingluck is afraid to face Apisit, Jurin, Korn etc, and she has good reason to.

A lamb to the slaughter.

I doubt whether she is afraid though probably very aware of the Democrat leadership's strengths.

What is beyond dobt is that Abhisit, Korn and Jurin are frightened as kittens that if they play this wrong Yingluck will dissolve parliament and appeal to the Thai people.

It's plain as day Yingluck is afraid to face Apisit, Jurin, Korn etc, and she has good reason to.

A lamb to the slaughter.

I doubt whether she is afraid though probably very aware of the Democrat leadership's strengths.

What is beyond dobt is that Abhisit, Korn and Jurin are frightened as kittens that if they play this wrong Yingluck will dissolve parliament and appeal to the Thai people.

What a profound comment considering that 6 Democrat MP's resigned to join the anti-government protestors, who's goal is to remove the corrupt Yingluck administration and have a general election. Really you need to research this issue more thoroughly as your read is way off the mark.

It's plain as day Yingluck is afraid to face Apisit, Jurin, Korn etc, and she has good reason to.

A lamb to the slaughter.

I doubt whether she is afraid though probably very aware of the Democrat leadership's strengths.

What is beyond dobt is that Abhisit, Korn and Jurin are frightened as kittens that if they play this wrong Yingluck will dissolve parliament and appeal to the Thai people.

What a profound comment considering that 6 Democrat MP's resigned to join the anti-government protestors, who's goal is to remove the corrupt Yingluck administration and have a general election. Really you need to research this issue more thoroughly as your read is way off the mark.

Not sure whether it's that profound.This is an internet forum for expatriates with time on their hands - not a parliamentary select committee.Still one wonders whether the Dems are really that keen on facing the Thai electorate.Much of the evidence suggests they would prefer some kind of judicial deus ex machina involving the dissolution of PTP and a back door shady entry into government - just like last time.Still I would give the Dems a sporting chance at a general election.The PTP and Yingluck are definitely less popular.The trouble is the Dems haven't really capitalised on this and Abhisit is to campaigning what the Mayor of Toronto is to skinny jeans..Still who knows?