EC member brushes aside govt-initiated forum on election

[webfact]

EC member brushes aside govt-initiated forum on election
By Digital Content

BANGKOK, Jan 14 – An Election Commission (EC) member disagreed with the government’s initiative to hold a large-scale meeting among at least 70 people to discuss resolution of the political stalemate and the Feb 2 general election.

Somchai Srisuthiyakorn, EC member in charge of election administration, said yesterday that a large forum would not be useful and a possible resolution is for the caretaker prime minister to discuss with the EC chairman.

The government has invited representatives of political parties, heads of government agencies and special interest groups, totalling about 70 people, to jointly find resolution to the snap poll impasse.

The EC has repeatedly called on the government to postpone the election following failures to register candidates in 28 constituencies in the South and the possibility of the House of Representatives having less than 95 per cent of MPs necessary for a quorum.

According to the Constitution, the Lower House can only be declared open with the presence of no less than 95 per cent of total MPs.

Mr Somchai said the caretaker prime minister and the EC chairman should reach a conclusion after which the opposition Democrat Party should to join the discussion.

After that, all political parties could be invited to decide on the new election date, he said, adding that the government may ask the Council of State to find a legal possibility for setting a new election date.

Mr Somchai said two conflicting political groupings – the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) and the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) – will possibly accept resolutions reached between the government and the Democrat Party.

“If the EC is invited to join the 70-people forum, I’ll not attend it. The EC will have to decide on whom to assign to join the discussion but not me,” he said.

Mr Somchai said he believed a decision to delay the election will cool down the political temperature, though it may not stop the massive protest. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2014-01-14

[Thailand]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

[GazR]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

Obviously because a delay would allow reforms for the election to take place under different rules.

[Tatsujin]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

Technically they've only refused to take part in the election scheduled for the 2nd February.

If public discussions/polls/referendums were to take place first of all and then elections scheduled following this once a roadmap is in place, I'm sure they will contend, but that's just my thoughts, no "facts" to back it up before anyone jumps down my throat.

[Thailand]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

Obviously because a delay would allow reforms for the election to take place under different rules.

And if any reforms take place and one of the parties still doesn't like them and then refuse to take part in an election then what?

[culicine]

Two people can't come to an agreement - what chance does a group of 70 have?

[virtualtraveller]

If the reform structure is in place and acceptable to all main parties, and the election is seen as putting a temporary govt, from the people, in place but with the reform council completely independent of their influence, I'm confident both sides would agree to contest a May election. It should be clear that the resulting govt lasts only a fixed time, the time it takes to write a new charter, say one-year. Implementing various reforms will take years.

[Prbkk]

Mr Somchai has made his views clear. Perhaps it's time for him to step aside in favour of someone with a more pragmatic approach.

[Scamper]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

[scorecard]

Mr Somchai has made his views clear. Perhaps it's time for him to step aside in favour of someone with a more pragmatic approach.

On the other hand, perhaps he's the one who is being pragmatic / realistic.

[jonclark]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

Obviously because a delay would allow reforms for the election to take place under different rules.

And if any reforms take place and one of the parties still doesn't like them and then refuse to take part in an election then what?

The obvious answer is that discussions need to continue until a broad consensus is reached between all major parties, the consensus then forms the basis for reform.

This will require that all parties enter into the discussion with the mindset of compromise, as opposed to the current attitude which can crudely be summed up as 'victory at all costs'. Sadly i feel most groups through rhetoric and blind hatred have now painted themselves into a corner which makes back tracking, compromise and future reform very difficult.

[LivinLOS]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

[ratcatcher]

Apparently, it is only when these characters, the Shinawatra family, are removed from Thai politics, that the PCAD protests will come to an end with reforms to follow. Apparently.

[JRSoul]

Mr Somchai has made his views clear. Perhaps it's time for him to step aside in favour of someone with a more pragmatic approach.

On the other hand, perhaps he's the one who is being pragmatic / realistic.

Some people's version of a pragmatic is someone who brings their own KY.

[JRSoul]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

I would have thought that the support of ~11 million voters last election would have been sufficient for their elected representatives to have a say. Am I being TOO democratic for you?

[rametindallas]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

The constitution does not mandate Feb. 2 for elections. The constitution allows 180 days which means before May 9. May 4 has been proposed by the EC but Thaksin knows the dormant Amnesty Bill will expire before then so he and his propagandists are hysterical that the election take place Feb. 2. Why are you so strongly in favor of elections on Feb. 2 when it is clear they will be for naught? Are you a Thaksin propagandist? What are your motives for wanting the election on Feb. 2? Instead of putting the idea of waiting down, give us one good reason, besides the fact that they are already scheduled, why they need to be in such a hurry to hold elections.

[icommunity]

The government was not initiating the forum. It was in response to the EC commissioners' letter proposing to postpone 2 Feb election to 4 May. The commissioners, are creating problems instead of solution. The government's stance is still 2 Feb but is willing to adjust if the proposal to postpone by EC commissioners is legal. The attitude of this bunch of commissioners is like AV and the DEM - they demanded the house be dissolved but when it happened they boycotted it. EC commissioners should resolve the problems of candidates not able to register. IMO, there is no law to say that extension or a new date under the circumstances is illegal. The extension was asked not because there was no candidate or that the candidates were not ready. It was asked because candidates were prevented from registering by EC commissioners and officials closing the centers and resignations. Citing logistic or timing are excuses to foil the 2 Feb election. BTW, I am not against EC but the commissioners who did not carry up their duties and responsibility to protect democracy with the King as the Head of the Government.

[airconsult]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

The constitution does not mandate Feb. 2 for elections. The constitution allows 180 days which means before May 9. May 4 has been proposed by the EC but Thaksin knows the dormant Amnesty Bill will expire before then so he and his propagandists are hysterical that the election take place Feb. 2. Why are you so strongly in favor of elections on Feb. 2 when it is clear they will be for naught? Are you a Thaksin propagandist? What are your motives for wanting the election on Feb. 2? Instead of putting the idea of waiting down, give us one good reason, besides the fact that they are already scheduled, why they need to be in such a hurry to hold elections.

I believe you will find section 108 quite clear. http://www.senate.go.th/th_senate/English/constitution2007.pdf

It states on dissolving the house, the election must be held not less than 45 days and not more than 60 days after.

The 180 days is when an election has *already* been held with no result. Then the caretaker government and the EC must schedule new elections within 180 days. Nobody has held an election yet, so 45-60days applies.

[rametindallas]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

The constitution does not mandate Feb. 2 for elections. The constitution allows 180 days which means before May 9. May 4 has been proposed by the EC but Thaksin knows the dormant Amnesty Bill will expire before then so he and his propagandists are hysterical that the election take place Feb. 2. Why are you so strongly in favor of elections on Feb. 2 when it is clear they will be for naught? Are you a Thaksin propagandist? What are your motives for wanting the election on Feb. 2? Instead of putting the idea of waiting down, give us one good reason, besides the fact that they are already scheduled, why they need to be in such a hurry to hold elections.

I believe you will find section 108 quite clear. http://www.senate.go.th/th_senate/English/constitution2007.pdf

It states on dissolving the house, the election must be held not less than 45 days and not more than 60 days after.

The 180 days is when an election has *already* been held with no result. Then the caretaker government and the EC must schedule new elections within 180 days. Nobody has held an election yet, so 45-60days applies.

Since the EC is the highest authority for elections, and they proposed May 4, there must be something you are missing. I will defer to the EC's interpretation before yours.

[Arkady]

The EC seems to have a good point that a letter to the PM suggesting a postponement to the elections should be discussed directly with the EC before inviting a list of extraneous parties to have a panel discussion about it. I think they would be quite right to refuse to attend the panel discussion, should it ever take place.

[icommunity]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

The constitution does not mandate Feb. 2 for elections. The constitution allows 180 days which means before May 9. May 4 has been proposed by the EC but Thaksin knows the dormant Amnesty Bill will expire before then so he and his propagandists are hysterical that the election take place Feb. 2. Why are you so strongly in favor of elections on Feb. 2 when it is clear they will be for naught? Are you a Thaksin propagandist? What are your motives for wanting the election on Feb. 2? Instead of putting the idea of waiting down, give us one good reason, besides the fact that they are already scheduled, why they need to be in such a hurry to hold elections.

The caretaker government's stance is still 2 Feb but is willing to adjust if it is legal. That is why it wanted talks to find a solution since the EC commissioners made a written proposal to the government. It is mischievous for the commissioners to turn around and reject their proposal.

[airconsult]

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

The constitution does not mandate Feb. 2 for elections. The constitution allows 180 days which means before May 9. May 4 has been proposed by the EC but Thaksin knows the dormant Amnesty Bill will expire before then so he and his propagandists are hysterical that the election take place Feb. 2. Why are you so strongly in favor of elections on Feb. 2 when it is clear they will be for naught? Are you a Thaksin propagandist? What are your motives for wanting the election on Feb. 2? Instead of putting the idea of waiting down, give us one good reason, besides the fact that they are already scheduled, why they need to be in such a hurry to hold elections.

I believe you will find section 108 quite clear. http://www.senate.go.th/th_senate/English/constitution2007.pdf

It states on dissolving the house, the election must be held not less than 45 days and not more than 60 days after.

The 180 days is when an election has *already* been held with no result. Then the caretaker government and the EC must schedule new elections within 180 days. Nobody has held an election yet, so 45-60days applies.

Since the EC is the highest authority for elections, and they proposed May 4, there must be something you are missing. I will defer to the EC's interpretation before yours.

The EC has been wrong before - and these commissioners were only appointed in December - perhaps they should get legal advice on the constitution. Your faith in them is misplaced.

[rametindallas]

The EC seems to have a good point that a letter to the PM suggesting a postponement to the elections should be discussed directly with the EC before inviting a list of extraneous parties to have a panel discussion about it. I think they would be quite right to refuse to attend the panel discussion, should it ever take place.

Exactly. The EC must remain, in appearance and in deed, neutral.

[icommunity]

IMO, EC commissioners acted illegally in talking to groups that seek to foil the Royal decree on 2nd Feb election. The talks were secret and not transparent for we do not know what they have agreed to or colluded. Now they turned around as if they have make the proposal. Another item that they failed to protect democracy with the King as the Head of State.

Sorry, On my previous post, I made a mistake on the different of Head of Government and Head of State.

[icommunity]

Why should the Democrats join any discussion related to an election they have refused to take part in?

I would have thought that the support of ~11 million voters last election would have been sufficient for their elected representatives to have a say. Am I being TOO democratic for you?

Their 11 million voters can stay out of the 2 Feb voting if they want. Isn't that a democratic decision? BTW, the DEM is not the only political party in Thailand. Do you know how many parties are willing to bring forward their policies and ask for the people's mandate?

[xminator]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

Based on what rules can the caretaker government postpone the elections? It can not. Its a process set in motion to ensure a caretaker government can not cling to power by postponing the elections.

[rametindallas]

IMO, EC commissioners acted illegally in talking to groups that seek to foil the Royal decree on 2nd Feb election. The talks were secret and not transparent for we do not know what they have agreed to or colluded. Now they turned around as if they have make the proposal. Another item that they failed to protect democracy with the King as the Head of State.

Sorry, On my previous post, I made a mistake on the different of Head of Government and Head of State.

I know why Dr. Thaksin doesn't want elections delayed (he needs money to prop up his populist schemes before the Reds find out they are living in a house of cards), but why are you, personally, so upset at the prospect of a delay in the voting? What are your personal motives for wanting a delay? How will a delay affect you? So many posters are angry at he thought of a delay and none of them give a reason why a delay is bad. This is especially puzzling when one considers the fact that even is the elections were held on Feb. 2, it would be for naught since not enough representatives would be elected to form a government. Inquiring minds want to know!

[icommunity]

The EC seems to have a good point that a letter to the PM suggesting a postponement to the elections should be discussed directly with the EC before inviting a list of extraneous parties to have a panel discussion about it. I think they would be quite right to refuse to attend the panel discussion, should it ever take place.

EC commissioners have already held secret talks with those who wanted to seize power illegally. They were not transparent. We don't know what they have agreed or colluded. Further more, there is no law saying that it can be postponed except that if the election failed to get any result, another election should be held within 180 day. And this is not a postponement.

[Thaddeus]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

Based on what rules can the caretaker government postpone the elections? It can not. Its a process set in motion to ensure a caretaker government can not cling to power by postponing the elections.

Whereas, in this case, a caretaker government is desperately trying to hang on to power by holding them.

[icommunity]

As the world turns and ponders on the age-old fundamental questions - can Pheu Thai think ? - and if so, will they make the obvious decision and acquiesce to the EC's suggestion and delay the election ? Or will they barrel ahead, full cylinders thrusting - gleefully towards an election that will result in a parliament that cannot be opened ? We have to give Pheu Thai a lot of time for this decision. It's really tough.

On the other hand, stop thinking. Just do it.

You mean the constitutionally mandated schedule for elections ??

That constitution that the democrats are so adamant to defend ??

The constitution does not mandate Feb. 2 for elections. The constitution allows 180 days which means before May 9. May 4 has been proposed by the EC but Thaksin knows the dormant Amnesty Bill will expire before then so he and his propagandists are hysterical that the election take place Feb. 2. Why are you so strongly in favor of elections on Feb. 2 when it is clear they will be for naught? Are you a Thaksin propagandist? What are your motives for wanting the election on Feb. 2? Instead of putting the idea of waiting down, give us one good reason, besides the fact that they are already scheduled, why they need to be in such a hurry to hold elections.

Please read - http://www.senate.go...itution2007.pdf to enlighten you.

It states on dissolving the house, the election must be held not less than 45 days and not more than 60 days after.

The 180 days is when an election has *already* been held with no result. Then the caretaker government and the EC must schedule new elections within 180 days.