House Speaker: Court has no right to block Thai charter-amendment

[robblok]

Where was this all seeing and helpful  court when the constitution has been amended the last 100 times?Oh yes wait, its not political at all.

As i and others explained removing all the checks and balances can lead to a dictatorship and even more corruption.

Show me other changes that are this dangerous for the country and ill believe its political motivated.

Tell me why an independent senate is so bad ? It helps against corruption and total dominance of one party. With this in place people dont have to go to the streets if governments try to do stuff like the get Taksin home amnesty they tried to get approved.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[smutcakes]

Where was this all seeing and helpful court when the constitution has been amended the last 100 times?Oh yes wait, its not political at all.

As i and others explained removing all the checks and balances can lead to a dictatorship and even more corruption.

Show me other changes that are this dangerous for the country and ill believe its political motivated.

Tell me why an independent senate is so bad ? It helps against corruption and total dominance of one party. With this in place people dont have to go to the streets if governments try to do stuff like the get Taksin home amnesty they tried to get approved.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

Independent Senate in Thailand???, do me a favor,like the one appointed by the military. Concentrate on your protein shakes mate, this is not a topic for you.

[fab4]

Interested posters may be interested in these two informative articles before making knee jerk posts about the "evil PTP" and their alleged "riding roughshod over the Laws"

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 1 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113100/constitutiona-amendment-and-guardians-of-thai-democracy-part-1/ and

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 2 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113107/guardian-of-thai-democracy-part-2/

and if you needed any further proof that this is yet another attempt at a judicial coup read this as well

Yingluck and the submitting of the charter amendment to the King : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113913/yingluck-and-the-submitting-of-the-charter-amendment-to-the-king/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+BangkokPundit+(Bangkok+Pundit) Edited November 20, 2013 by fab4

[tingtongteesood]

And this is PRECISELY why the people are protesting and they want this government of crooked idiots out. NOBODY should be above the law, but they all think 'we are the government, we can do whatever we want'. Government should be as the American's say 'By the people, of the people, for the people'. The current government here is unfortunately 'By Thaksin, of Thaksin and for the criminal fugitive on the run' - THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM !!!

[kingalfred]

It doesn't matter who or what it is there's no right to do anything that the government,  PTP and reds don't like.

 

The rule of law here is very simple,  it's their way or not at all.

 

But what about legal experts who claim the court has no right to rule on this case? Will you accept, having examined the constitutional aspects of this closely yourself, that it's very difficult to see how there's a case against the government here? If after careful examination of the facts at hand, you still think PT should be dissolved and MPs banned in a wholly politicized decision, at least that's honest.

 

Ummmm. ... no

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[fab4]

It doesn't matter who or what it is there's no right to do anything that the government, PTP and reds don't like.

The rule of law here is very simple, it's their way or not at all.

But what about legal experts who claim the court has no right to rule on this case? Will you accept, having examined the constitutional aspects of this closely yourself, that it's very difficult to see how there's a case against the government here? If after careful examination of the facts at hand, you still think PT should be dissolved and MPs banned in a wholly politicized decision, at least that's honest.

Ummmm. ... no

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Unfortunately, the typical "knee jerk reaction, not consider any alternative", post. Try reading the legal reasoning on why the Constitutional Court is acting outside its remit. Or not, it's up to you - but it will explain the background of the nightmare conclusion if the CC attempt to dissolve the PTP in a 3rd Judicial Coup.

[fab4]

The amendments are totally and 100% in the jurisdiction of the constitutional court.

The constitution is set up so that true democracy can prevail.

The court is there to protect the constitution and everything within it from being manipulated by parliament. They are the highest court in the land and are there to see that parliament and the senate perform in a democratic way.

The senate appointing system is in place constitutionally to separate it from parliament and to act as a second layer of protection from abuse of power. The whole idea of a senate is that it can't be tampered with by any elected government, lest there is no point in a senate at all.

PTP clearly are abusing their power to force a change in the way the senate is set up, and everyone knows that the ONLY reason for that is to be able to own a majority there and totally control both houses making it a defunct system. Thus making the whole affair, unconstitutional.

The PTP are pissed off because they are up against the final layer of protection. The constitutional Court. Which they know they have ZERO power over, and they don't like not having power over something.

The Constitutional court is answerable to one person and one person alone, His majesty the King.

The PTP and their lacky upstart supposedly 'legal experts' and I use that term very loosely, are swimming in very shark infested waters when they start to use terminology such as lese majeste and impeachment of the highest law makers in the country. They have shot themselves squarely in the foot big time attempting this abuse of power to break down the constitution.

The more they come out with threats, and statements pertaining to refusal to observe the constitution or recognise the constitutional court and its rulings, then the more determined the judiciary will be to vote against the amendments and possibly even rile them into banning and dissolving.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

If you read #33 you may find something that will explain that PTP's "lacky upstart lawyers" know what they are talking about but judging by the tone of the rest of the rant you've already made up your mind.

[trevor4]

It seems to me that, yes the Court does have the authority to rule on the amendment.

"The Constitutional Court has been established under the provisions of the new Constitution, Section 255 through Section 268. Under the provisions of Section 268, the decision of the Constitutional Court shall be deemed final and binding on the National Assembly, Council of Ministers, Courts and other State organizations. This makes it clear that there is no appeal from the decisions of the Constitutional Court, and its rules are absolutely final. They must be adhered to by the National Assembly (which includes both the House of Representatives and the Senate), and on the Council of Ministers, which includes the ministers of each and every ministry established under Thai law, on the Courts, including all other Courts, and on other State organizations. The scope of the Constitutional Courts powers is very broad. Section 262 of the Constitution provides that any bill or law which is being considered or has been adopted by the National Assembly, the Constitutional Court decides on the legality of the act, and of all provisions of the act. The court has the power to decide whether the bill or law complies with or is in any way contrary to the Constitution, and has the power to declare the law void, or to declare any part of the law void and unenforceable.

The Constitutional Court also has power to review the application of any pertinent law involved in any case before any court. The Constitutional Court can invoke its jurisdiction either by reference by the court before which the case is pending, or by objection by any party involved in that lawsuit claiming that the provisions of the law are inconsistent with the Constitution. Upon such an objection, the court in which the case is pending must stay (delay) the action and refer it to the Constitutional Court."

Yeah, I believe the court has the authority to rule on cases that affect the constitution. But in this case, no one can tell me how government's amendment of the constitution - again, in this specific case - violates section 68. Nevertheless the judges accepted the petition. So let's see... seems many here just want the court to act regardless of whether it's according to the constitution or not. And that makes a mockery of any concern for the rule of law.

The section of the quote changed to bold makes it quite clear that the Cc has the authority to scrutinise the bill. IMHO section 68 applies because this appears to be an attempt to change the nature of the senate, allowing in persons closely associated to others with political affiliation in an attempt to make the senate a rubber stamp.

So you think amendment to make senate fully elected would violate Section 68 which states: "no person shall....overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution".

Really?

un-highlight your bold overthrow and highlight the OR bit...

acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution

[trevor4]

The section of the quote changed to bold makes it quite clear that the Cc has the authority to scrutinise the bill. IMHO section 68 applies because this appears to be an attempt to change the nature of the senate, allowing in persons closely associated to others with political affiliation in an attempt to make the senate a rubber stamp.

Which is how things were during the Thaksin administration using the 1997 Constitution.

[roger rederer]

Interested posters may be interested in these two informative articles before making knee jerk posts about the "evil PTP" and their alleged "riding roughshod over the Laws"

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 1 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113100/constitutiona-amendment-and-guardians-of-thai-democracy-part-1/ and

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 2 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113107/guardian-of-thai-democracy-part-2/

and if you needed any further proof that this is yet another attempt at a judicial coup read this as well

Yingluck and the submitting of the charter amendment to the King : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113913/yingluck-and-the-submitting-of-the-charter-amendment-to-the-king/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+BangkokPundit+(Bangkok+Pundit)

Uncomfortable reading for anti-government posters on here. A good article from aisiancorrespondant.

Simply writ: This government included change to the constitution as one of it's election manifesto pledges. The electorate acted and returned Yingluck with a landslde victory.

It's worth repeating (yawn) that the said constitution was drawn up in 2007 by a judiciary appointed by the military that had overthrown the democratically elected government. If that were not reason enough alone to redraw/amend the constitution/charter then <deleted> is?

[hellodolly]

It doesn't matter who or what it is there's no right to do anything that the government, PTP and reds don't like.

The rule of law here is very simple, it's their way or not at all.

I see no problem if Parliament President and House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont .

Will go into the court room and tell them who he is and who he works for. I am sure that will leave them trembling in their boots.

[hellodolly]

It doesn't matter who or what it is there's no right to do anything that the government, PTP and reds don't like.

The rule of law here is very simple, it's their way or not at all.

But what about legal experts who claim the court has no right to rule on this case? Will you accept, having examined the constitutional aspects of this closely yourself, that it's very difficult to see how there's a case against the government here? If after careful examination of the facts at hand, you still think PT should be dissolved and MPs banned in a wholly politicized decision, at least that's honest.

Two things

Who are the legal experts the ones Thaksin is using.

If it is so hard to see where there is a case against them why did they take it? Is there a part of the constitution that makes it Possible?

I personally think they will throw it out.

[robblok]

 

Where was this all seeing and helpful  court when the constitution has been amended the last 100 times?Oh yes wait, its not political at all.

As i and others explained removing all the checks and balances can lead to a dictatorship and even more corruption.

Show me other changes that are this dangerous for the country and ill believe its political motivated.

Tell me why an independent senate is so bad ? It helps against corruption and total dominance of one party. With this in place people dont have to go to the streets if governments try to do stuff like the get Taksin home amnesty they tried to get approved.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

 

 

Independent Senate in Thailand???, do me a favor,like the one appointed by the military. Concentrate on your protein shakes mate, this is not a topic for  you.

Classic tactic of those who have no arguments attack the messenger.

Independence is possible and checks and balances are needed.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[Baerboxer]

It doesn't matter who or what it is there's no right to do anything that the government, PTP and reds don't like.

The rule of law here is very simple, it's their way or not at all.

But what about legal experts who claim the court has no right to rule on this case? Will you accept, having examined the constitutional aspects of this closely yourself, that it's very difficult to see how there's a case against the government here? If after careful examination of the facts at hand, you still think PT should be dissolved and MPs banned in a wholly politicized decision, at least that's honest.

"Ukrit Mongkolnavin, former president of the Parliament and chairman of the government-appointed independent National Rule of Law Commission"

Please note the bold text. How "independent" do you think the NRLC or its chairman are? The Chairman is a former parliament president and was appointed to this "independent" chairman role by the PTP government.

Agree, careful examination, but let's also be careful of the so called "independent" experts.

[Baerboxer]

Interested posters may be interested in these two informative articles before making knee jerk posts about the "evil PTP" and their alleged "riding roughshod over the Laws"

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 1 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113100/constitutiona-amendment-and-guardians-of-thai-democracy-part-1/ and

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 2 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113107/guardian-of-thai-democracy-part-2/

and if you needed any further proof that this is yet another attempt at a judicial coup read this as well

Yingluck and the submitting of the charter amendment to the King : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113913/yingluck-and-the-submitting-of-the-charter-amendment-to-the-king/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+BangkokPundit+(Bangkok+Pundit)

Uncomfortable reading for anti-government posters on here. A good article from aisiancorrespondant.

Simply writ: This government included change to the constitution as one of it's election manifesto pledges. The electorate acted and returned Yingluck with a landslde victory.

It's worth repeating (yawn) that the said constitution was drawn up in 2007 by a judiciary appointed by the military that had overthrown the democratically elected government. If that were not reason enough alone to redraw/amend the constitution/charter then <deleted> is?

Landslide victory.................... oh yes, that's right 48% of the votes cast on an electorate turn out of around 75%. Wow, what a landslide. Guess that's why they have coalition partners too.

Constantly repeating the words "landslide victory", as so many wishful thinking Thaksin sympathizers do, won't change the historical facts. Anymore than whitewashing his conviction and outstanding criminal charges will mean he's suddenly innocent.

PTP have openly lied, acted illegally and either can't or don't want to account publicly for large sums of money that have vanished into some black hole. They are owned and controlled by a criminal fugitive who is on record as saying democracy is not his goal, and who previously had to be removed from illegally acting as the PM when he had no authority to do so. (Look up the facts about what happened prior to the military having to remove the usurper Thaksin and see why a democratically elected government was not actually overthrown - but more someone trying illegally to hold on to power was).

[fab4]

Interested posters may be interested in these two informative articles before making knee jerk posts about the "evil PTP" and their alleged "riding roughshod over the Laws"

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 1 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113100/constitutiona-amendment-and-guardians-of-thai-democracy-part-1/ and

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 2 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113107/guardian-of-thai-democracy-part-2/

and if you needed any further proof that this is yet another attempt at a judicial coup read this as well

Yingluck and the submitting of the charter amendment to the King : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113913/yingluck-and-the-submitting-of-the-charter-amendment-to-the-king/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+BangkokPundit+(Bangkok+Pundit)

Uncomfortable reading for anti-government posters on here. A good article from aisiancorrespondant.

Simply writ: This government included change to the constitution as one of it's election manifesto pledges. The electorate acted and returned Yingluck with a landslde victory.

It's worth repeating (yawn) that the said constitution was drawn up in 2007 by a judiciary appointed by the military that had overthrown the democratically elected government. If that were not reason enough alone to redraw/amend the constitution/charter then <deleted> is?

Landslide victory.................... oh yes, that's right 48% of the votes cast on an electorate turn out of around 75%. Wow, what a landslide. Guess that's why they have coalition partners too.

Constantly repeating the words "landslide victory", as so many wishful thinking Thaksin sympathizers do, won't change the historical facts. Anymore than whitewashing his conviction and outstanding criminal charges will mean he's suddenly innocent.

PTP have openly lied, acted illegally and either can't or don't want to account publicly for large sums of money that have vanished into some black hole. They are owned and controlled by a criminal fugitive who is on record as saying democracy is not his goal, and who previously had to be removed from illegally acting as the PM when he had no authority to do so. (Look up the facts about what happened prior to the military having to remove the usurper Thaksin and see why a democratically elected government was not actually overthrown - but more someone trying illegally to hold on to power was).

Thats curious, just looked through those documents again and couldn't find anything about a landslide victory.

And as for the rest of the rant, well.

Lets face it you haven't read any part of the documents and have just replied in the only way you know - knee jerk rejection.

[GrantSmith]

Constitutional Court is ruling otherwise Mr Speaker... Has just mentioned the word "illegal" in reference to some of the processes that took place...

[ggold]

It doesn't matter who or what it is there's no right to do anything that the government, PTP and reds don't like.

The rule of law here is very simple, it's their way or not at all.

But what about legal experts who claim the court has no right to rule on this case? Will you accept, having examined the constitutional aspects of this closely yourself, that it's very difficult to see how there's a case against the government here? If after careful examination of the facts at hand, you still think PT should be dissolved and MPs banned in a wholly politicized decision, at least that's honest.

Could you trust PTP to really know the legality of the courts right or otherwise to rule on this matter? they have railroaded these changes through Parliament without really trying to get a concensus from all parties in Parliament. Blocking every move by the opposition to really debate the constitutional changes. There has to be a legal process that controls what politicians do to avoid what is happening now! stopping dictators from siezing power! that is the job of the constitutional court, surely?

[GrantSmith]

Whilst not mentioning his name directly, the CC just laid the - verbal - smack down on the speaker...

[JRSoul]

Interested posters may be interested in these two informative articles before making knee jerk posts about the "evil PTP" and their alleged "riding roughshod over the Laws"

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 1 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113100/constitutiona-amendment-and-guardians-of-thai-democracy-part-1/ and

Constitutional amendment and the guardians of Thai democracy – Part 2 : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113107/guardian-of-thai-democracy-part-2/

and if you needed any further proof that this is yet another attempt at a judicial coup read this as well

Yingluck and the submitting of the charter amendment to the King : http://asiancorrespondent.com/113913/yingluck-and-the-submitting-of-the-charter-amendment-to-the-king/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+BangkokPundit+(Bangkok+Pundit)

Uncomfortable reading for anti-government posters on here. A good article from aisiancorrespondant.

Simply writ: This government included change to the constitution as one of it's election manifesto pledges. The electorate acted and returned Yingluck with a landslde victory.

It's worth repeating (yawn) that the said constitution was drawn up in 2007 by a judiciary appointed by the military that had overthrown the democratically elected government. If that were not reason enough alone to redraw/amend the constitution/charter then <deleted> is?

Landslide victory.................... oh yes, that's right 48% of the votes cast on an electorate turn out of around 75%. Wow, what a landslide. Guess that's why they have coalition partners too.

Constantly repeating the words "landslide victory", as so many wishful thinking Thaksin sympathizers do, won't change the historical facts. Anymore than whitewashing his conviction and outstanding criminal charges will mean he's suddenly innocent.

PTP have openly lied, acted illegally and either can't or don't want to account publicly for large sums of money that have vanished into some black hole. They are owned and controlled by a criminal fugitive who is on record as saying democracy is not his goal, and who previously had to be removed from illegally acting as the PM when he had no authority to do so. (Look up the facts about what happened prior to the military having to remove the usurper Thaksin and see why a democratically elected government was not actually overthrown - but more someone trying illegally to hold on to power was).

Thats curious, just looked through those documents again and couldn't find anything about a landslide victory.

And as for the rest of the rant, well.

Lets face it you haven't read any part of the documents and have just replied in the only way you know - knee jerk rejection.

I'll give you a hint - he was referring to the immediate prior post not yours.

Still too hard? I'll highlight it for you.

[trevor4]

Somebody nudge House Speaker and Pheu Thai MP Somsak Kiatsuranon awake.

November 20, 2013 1:54 pm
The Constitutional Court ruled Wednesday that it has authority to review the petitions against charter amendments on senatorial elections and senators' qualification.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Court-says-it-has-authority-to-review-case-30220116.html

[GrantSmith]

It's not only ruling that it can rule on it, it's sticking the boot right in...

There's not much going the way of PTP & Co. in this....

Court's just ruled that the ammendment would "allow domination of power, thus destroying the checks and balances"

[GrantSmith]

Pretty close vote though 5:4 on Article 68 and 6:3 on the charter amendment...

Edited November 20, 2013 by GrantSmith

[GrantSmith]

PTP won't be dissolved

[Thai at Heart]

It seems to me that, yes the Court does have the authority to rule on the amendment.

"The Constitutional Court has been established under the provisions of the new Constitution, Section 255 through Section 268. Under the provisions of Section 268, the decision of the Constitutional Court shall be deemed final and binding on the National Assembly, Council of Ministers, Courts and other State organizations. This makes it clear that there is no appeal from the decisions of the Constitutional Court, and its rules are absolutely final. They must be adhered to by the National Assembly (which includes both the House of Representatives and the Senate), and on the Council of Ministers, which includes the ministers of each and every ministry established under Thai law, on the Courts, including all other Courts, and on other State organizations. The scope of the Constitutional Courts powers is very broad. Section 262 of the Constitution provides that any bill or law which is being considered or has been adopted by the National Assembly, the Constitutional Court decides on the legality of the act, and of all provisions of the act. The court has the power to decide whether the bill or law complies with or is in any way contrary to the Constitution, and has the power to declare the law void, or to declare any part of the law void and unenforceable.

The Constitutional Court also has power to review the application of any pertinent law involved in any case before any court. The Constitutional Court can invoke its jurisdiction either by reference by the court before which the case is pending, or by objection by any party involved in that lawsuit claiming that the provisions of the law are inconsistent with the Constitution. Upon such an objection, the court in which the case is pending must stay (delay) the action and refer it to the Constitutional Court."

Yeah, I believe the court has the authority to rule on cases that affect the constitution. But in this case, no one can tell me how government's amendment of the constitution - again, in this specific case - violates section 68. Nevertheless the judges accepted the petition. So let's see... seems many here just want the court to act regardless of whether it's according to the constitution or not. And that makes a mockery of any concern for the rule of law.

The amendments are totally and 100% in the jurisdiction of the constitutional court.

The constitution is set up so that true democracy can prevail.

The court is there to protect the constitution and everything within it from being manipulated by parliament. They are the highest court in the land and are there to see that parliament and the senate perform in a democratic way.

The senate appointing system is in place constitutionally to separate it from parliament and to act as a second layer of protection from abuse of power. The whole idea of a senate is that it can't be tampered with by any elected government, lest there is no point in a senate at all.

PTP clearly are abusing their power to force a change in the way the senate is set up, and everyone knows that the ONLY reason for that is to be able to own a majority there and totally control both houses making it a defunct system. Thus making the whole affair, unconstitutional.

The PTP are pissed off because they are up against the final layer of protection. The constitutional Court. Which they know they have ZERO power over, and they don't like not having power over something.

The Constitutional court is answerable to one person and one person alone, His majesty the King.

The PTP and their lacky upstart supposedly 'legal experts' and I use that term very loosely, are swimming in very shark infested waters when they start to use terminology such as lese majeste and impeachment of the highest law makers in the country. They have shot themselves squarely in the foot big time attempting this abuse of power to break down the constitution.

The more they come out with threats, and statements pertaining to refusal to observe the constitution or recognise the constitutional court and its rulings, then the more determined the judiciary will be to vote against the amendments and possibly even rile them into banning and dissolving.

Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

I disagree. The original intention was that cases to the cc can Only be submitted by the attorney general who is a political appointee.

So, the original idea was that the government of the day would have the right to tinker. Bear in mind, when this constitution was written, they thought they had squished trt and Thaksin.

These people are that arrogant that they would never have considered what that loop hole meant. So now, the cc had interpreted the law so that anyone can request to them directly to interpret whether something maybe constitutional before it becomes law.

All a little minority report. I am no fan of what is going on here, but I believe the cc has over stepped its remit.

[robblok]

It's not only ruling that it can rule on it, it's sticking the boot right in...

 

There's not much going the way of PTP & Co. in this....

 

Court's just ruled that the ammendment would "allow domination of power, thus destroying the checks and balances"

Thanks for the update, too bad PTP wont be disbanded but again they are whipped.

I hope the constitution court will rule about the 2 trillion baht bill too and burn it. Probably not but one can live in hope.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[trevor4]

Thai court rules against charter amendments

BANGKOK Wed Nov 20, 2013 7:25am GMT

(Reuters) - Thailand's Constitutional Court ruled on Wednesday that government efforts to amend the constitution were illegal, but stopped short of dissolving the ruling Puea Thai Party and its coalition lawmakers who supported the amendments.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/11/20/uk-thailand-politics-court-idUKBRE9AJ0B420131120

[Thait Spot]

PTP won't be dissolved

Maybe not.

But I am sure they will have a fit of pique.

Must be licking their wounds now

Then their firebrands will take some som tum and lao khao and shoot from the hip about perceived injustice

And stomp off somewhere with steam coming out of their ears

What next?

[GrantSmith]

PTP won't be dissolved

Maybe not.

But I am sure they will have a fit of pique.

Must be licking their wounds now

Then their firebrands will take some som tum and lao khao and shoot from the hip about perceived injustice

And stomp off somewhere with steam coming out of their ears

What next?

Apparently they'll reveal all at around 8pm... Should be edge of the seat stuff!

[backtonormal]

The red cheerleaders here don't seem to understand that in a corrupt country like Thailand checks and balances are vital. The Government has done all they can to remove them and put cronies in important places so they can control it all. If they can control the senate too there is no end to the corruption and theft of the countries money. A impartial senate will also check future goverments. Its important that the checks and balances are restored in all of the bodies to undo what the reds have done. This is the only way to ensure a fair and as less corrupt a Thailand as possible. I would not mind a red government that is in charge if there are independent bodies to check it, not like it is now. With independent bodies we would not have been in the mess we are now. Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

From this I am to believe that there was no corruption before 2000.. The people trying to stop Thaksin are the same people who were raping this countrys coffers for decades.. and they know Thaksin back will push their snouts from the trough...for ever. If you were trousering billions would you go down without a fight