Question remains on proposed delay of Feb 2 election
By Digital Content



BANGKOK, Dec 27 – Thailand’s Election Commission (EC) has expressed optimism on possible dialogue between conflicting parties to end political conflict and pave the way for general election on a suitable date.

Somchai Srisuthiyakorn, EC member for election administration, said there was sufficient time to find a resolution and understanding so that Thailand will have a fruitful and constructive election.

The EC yesterday urged the government to postpone the snap poll, scheduled for February, in light of unresolved political violence.

Mr Somchai said the EC has continuously assessed the political dispute and agreed that the election, though held as scheduled, would not solve problems in society and conflicting factions should hold talks to reach understanding and agreement.

Varathep Ratanakorn, minister of the PM’s Office/deputy agriculture minister, said the government has yet to coordinate with the EC but it believed that an election delay will contribute to more violence and unrest.

“If we have an election in 60 days, we will have new cabinet members and national legislators sooner,” he said.

He said the government has reiterated its support to a reform forum – a proposal that has been turned down by protesters, especially the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) and the opposition party.

“Since the EC has offered to mediate, it should urge the PDRC to join (the forum),” said Mr Varathep.

PDRC spokesman Akanat Promphan said his group is waiting to see what the government and EC will do about postponing the February 2 general election.

He said the party-list candidacy registration, held at the Thai-Japanese sports stadium in Din Daeng yesterday, was unscrupulous as candidates were allowed to submit their documents before the official hour.

He said the PDRC stood firm on its original stand for national reform before an election is held.

“An election delay must be made to pave the way for reform, and not for the caretaker government to stay longer for its pre-election campaign,” said Mr Akanat. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2013-12-27

??? Which dialogue ???

I am not for one or another side, but it's clear that Yingluck made some steps to try to meet protester demands, while on Suthep side there's only intransigence and no avail to any dialogue. Just read the last sentence of this article...

So how Khun Somchai can be optimisitic about two sides having a dialogue?

I really don't get the PDRC. On the one hand, they state that the Constitution is the abiding law of the land. So if, in fact, the Constitution states that elections must be held no less than 45 days and no more than 60 days after house dissolution, they disagree with the Constitution now and want to ride rough shod over it?

They then blame the EC for allowing registration to take place before the official opening time of the office because they were outsmarted by the EC who are merely doing their jobs and allowing common sense to prevail to allow for candidates to register? They're like kids in a kindergarten continually crying when someone steals the jam out of their doughnuts.

Perhaps it would be more prudent of the PDRC to actually showcase where in the Constitution is says that the election mandates can be changed? That might be a start. PT says it can't. PDRC says it must be - so show us all how it can be changed within the laws of the Constitution please.

There is a royal decree saying that elections should take place Feb 2.

Did Little Sister clear this with Big Brother in Dubai.

He"s in charge anyhow, and the only "electoral reform" he will ever agree to is to accept the title "Great Leader and Dictator for Life".

No matter what his hired flunkies say.

As "Pink Floyd" said ,"All in all, it's just another brick in the wall".

The government still insists on going through with an election, that many fear will spark more violence and unrest. And the promise of " new " cabinet ministers likely will not inspire confidence in those who see this administration all too transparently. It is remarkable, though, that the Thaksin calling points of the administration are as tepid and unimaginative as they are. It is if the administration has entered a sleeping mode, and one that seems oblivious as to the unrest on the ground.

Clearly Thailand is in politically uncharted territory and the guidelines which govern its politics are being stretched to their elastic maximum.

The idea that an election is a panacea to the current deadlock is rather simplistic. The government has in the last two years made significant mistakes which has led to an almost complete breakdown of the bond of trust between a large swath of the population and the ruling party. An election which would probably return PTP to power but will not repair that shattered bond, irrespective of how 'democratic' the election is.

If the election takes place there are likely to be a number of seat unfilled especially in Bangkok and Southern Thailand. How will this affect the stability of the government and more importantly how will the people of these places feel towards the government after giving them the democratic middle finger by not voting.

Without reform before an election YL may well find herself being sworn into office with tens of thousands of protesters outside fighting with police. Has the election solved anything?

Suthep has made it very clear under no circumstances does he want an election. So why delay it? He just

wants to be anointed supreme leaded. End of story.

Mr Somchai said the EC has continuously assessed the political dispute and agreed that the election, though held as scheduled, would not solve problems in society and conflicting factions should hold talks to reach understanding and agreement.

I wonder what game the Election Commission (EC) is playing. To me, it looks like the EC is helping Suthep's Committe to set the stage for seizing the power under section 7 of the constitution. I shall have to go back and re-read the Organic Act on Election to see if it is really the EC's job to "assess the political dispute" and refuse to organise an election on the decreed date if the EC agrees that such election "would not solve problems in society"

Isn't every election always a political dispute? Aren't there always problems in society that need solving? Has any election solved all these problems?

An election with millions voting no, ( if the Democrat supporters do that) is meaningless.

There is a royal decree saying that elections should take place Feb 2.

I believe that there is a legislative law that said it had to be done within 60 days on the dissolution of the Assembly, and a Royal decree for the Feb. 2nd election date was issued. I am not sure that they could not again get a new decree for a March 3rd date issued, or whatever date they should choose.

I really don't get the PDRC. On the one hand, they state that the Constitution is the abiding law of the land. So if, in fact, the Constitution states that elections must be held no less than 45 days and no more than 60 days after house dissolution, they disagree with the Constitution now and want to ride rough shod over it?

...

At the moment Suthep is interested only in section 7 of the constitution and and he is trying hard to bring about a situation that would allow his committee to claim that they have seized control of the government and get their interim constitution ratified. Create enough anarchy to make it impossible to hold elections within the deadline prescribed by the constitution and Suthep has a case for which "no provision under this Constitution is applicable". This is his declared game plan. With their request to Yingluck to postpone the election, the Election Commission is supporting this plan.