308 ex-lawmakers seek postponement of charge clarification

[Lite Beer]

308 ex-lawmakers seek postponement of charge clarification
By Digital Content

BANGKOK, Jan 15 - Some of the 308 ex-lawmakers accused of misconduct in connection with the charter amendment to make the Senate a fully elected body today acknowledged charges to the anti-graft commission and asked for the postponement of the charges clarification until after the February 2 election.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) earlier resolved to press charges against 308 former MPs and senators accused of malfeasance after they voted to pass the charter amendment bill that would alter the composition of the Senate.

Some of the accused lawmakers appeared at NACC headquarters in Nonthaburi on the first day of the charge acknowledgement and were seen by some NACC commissioners.

Pheu Thai MP for Nonthaburi Udomdej Rattanasatien said he was unworried by the charges and ready to clarify the matter.

He reasserted that amending the Constitution is a legislative power.

"I’m confused. If a member of the parliament cannot amend the law, why do we have an election?, asked Mr Udomdej.

As the NACC requires the accused lawmakers to clarify charges within 15 days, Mr Udomdej said the 308 ex-MPs and senators must clarify the charges between Jan 29-31, the date in which he said is really close to the Feb 2 election.

He asked the NACC to delay the charges clarification until after the election as many former MPs have begun their election campaigns during the period.

Mr Udomdej said he is ready to bring more witnesses to testify before the NACC.

Khon Kaen Senator Prasert Prakunsueksaphan said the senators amended the charter on the composition of the Senate out of good faith and not from conflict of interest.

He reasoned that in the past there was also earlier charter amendments on the Senate composition.

Mr Prasert said he would ask the agency to question more witnesses, including former NACC commissioner Somluck Jadkrabuanpol who wrote an article that the members of the parliament are duty-bound to amend the charter.

Pheu Thai MP for Ubon Ratchathani Somkid Chueakong said although the NACC finds grounds that all the 308 ex-lawmakers are guilty, there will be no impact on the election candidacy of alleged former MPs. They can continue their election campaign.

He noted that this is not a criminal case, but an impeachment case requiring three-fifths of the Senate, the number in which he said is not easy to achieve. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2014-01-16

[poisonus]

What is the betting they don't get that postponement?

They know their indictments will kill off their chances in the election, even if postponed till after the election that won't happen. They will be unseated anyway, just making the election even more of a farce than it already is.

That is not even counting the indictments over the rice scam, the loan bill and all their other outstanding fraud charges currently pending at NACC headquarters.

If I were them, I would be thinking more about chartering a 308 seater plane to Dubai before air traffic control gets shut down.

[Tatsujin]

Yes, please postpone the charges so that we can (perhaps) get elected again, have Parliamentary immunity from prosecution and then have 4 more years to rewrite the rules (once again).

[Fryslan boppe]

The question that begs to be asked, is whether the NACC has any jurisdiction in this matter at all. The Constitutional Court dubiously declared the actual process of constitutional amendment under the constitution as unconstitutional but didn't set penalties.... So disgruntled anti-democrats went to the NACC. Instead of deciding that it didn't have the authority to consider the flimsy case, the politicized NACC made up the rules as it went along to get the result the anti-democrats wanted..... Bottom line, at this point, it appears that the politicized judiciary is the preferred coup vehicle, and this NACC thing is one of the initiatives launched by the elites and their street-based coup-mongers to achieve that end.... If it walks like a duck, quackes like a duck, it is in all likelihood an attempted 'judicial coup".

Edited January 15, 2014 by Fryslan boppe

[theslime]

our ducks say quack quack, thai ducks say gup gup

[Misterwhisper]

"'I’m confused. If a member of the parliament cannot amend the law, why do we have an election?', asked Mr Udomdej."

Yes, the legislative can amend existing laws, but when doing so it must adhere to commonly accepted standards of ethics and take heed that the amendment benefits the country, population and democracy as a whole and thus is not unlawful.

To amend laws so they serve your party's agenda or you or your cronies is unethical.

Just being voted in and serving as the government does NOT give you a free pass at amending laws as you see fit, dummy! Does that concept elude you, perhaps? If so, it'd tell volumes about your morality.

[ggold]

The question that begs to be asked, is whether the NACC has any jurisdiction in this matter at all. The Constitutional Court dubiously declared the actual process of constitutional amendment under the constitution as unconstitutional but didn't set penalties.... So disgruntled anti-democrats went to the NACC. Instead of deciding that it didn't have the authority to consider the flimsy case, the politicized NACC made up the rules as it went along to get the result the anti-democrats wanted..... Bottom line, at this point, it appears that the politicized judiciary is the preferred coup vehicle, and this NACC thing is one of the initiatives launched by the elites and their street-based coup-mongers to achieve that end.... If it walks like a duck, quackes like a duck, it is in all likelihood an attempted 'judicial coup".

National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) deals with corruption

Constitutional Court deals with constitutional matters

Aren't PTP facing both kinds of charges, is it conceivable that they are interlinked when you take the rice scam into consideration?

as for setting penalties, surely that is done when a court finds someone guilty of a crime and then sets out the penalty for that crime, or maybe they would have been accused of pre judging someone as guilty! Is it politicised Judiciary or an independent Judiciary when they act on something, or is it a case of damned if they do damned if they don't bring charges for what they see as an irregularity?

[Scamper]

" Pheu Thai MP for Nonthaburi Udomdej Rattanasatien said he was unworried by the charges and ready to clarify the matter. He reasserted that amending the Constitution is a legislative power. "

He's off to a good start. But the constitution cannot be amended through a simple majority parliamentary vote. But not only would that not be the end of the process, it's not even a beginning. Because - regardless as to the MP strength of opposing parties, a true effort to reach a consensus must be reached. As any country in the world can attest, the test of a constitution is one that protects the voices of the minority, and not as a document to seal monolithic control, which is what Pheu Thai have always been trying to do, with their consistent and calculated assault on the oversight institutions of government, of which the Constitutional Court and the NACC are central. It has been the consistent practice of Pheu Thai to oppose these institutions and their rulings. And it has been the consistent practice of Pheu Thai to put forth amendments to the constitution that cement their hold on power. The recent amendment - to grant Thaksin complete amnesty - brought Thailand to the present crisis.

Pheu Thai MP for Ubon Ratchathani Somkid Chueakong :

" He noted that this is not a criminal case, but an impeachment case requiring three-fifths of the Senate, the number in which he said is not easy to achieve. "

Unless of course you pass a bill that unilaterally gives you complete control of the Senate ! Which goes back to the original point.

[rubl]

this would seem one reason why a reform is needed before an election

[spare5]

Sorry, with BKK shut down, all road closed, could not go to court right now.

Perhaps after you, Suthep.

[ChrisY1]

The question that begs to be asked, is whether the NACC has any jurisdiction in this matter at all. The Constitutional Court dubiously declared the actual process of constitutional amendment under the constitution as unconstitutional but didn't set penalties.... So disgruntled anti-democrats went to the NACC. Instead of deciding that it didn't have the authority to consider the flimsy case, the politicized NACC made up the rules as it went along to get the result the anti-democrats wanted..... Bottom line, at this point, it appears that the politicized judiciary is the preferred coup vehicle, and this NACC thing is one of the initiatives launched by the elites and their street-based coup-mongers to achieve that end.... If it walks like a duck, quackes like a duck, it is in all likelihood an attempted 'judicial coup".

Who knows who has jurisdiction where?....The whole system here in Thailand, appears to be so convoluted and disjointed, that none of the so-called lawmakers seem to have much idea what's going on at any time!

[spirit47]

Traitor of country should be arrest directly...

[icommunity]

How is it that amending the charter on the composition of the Senate is in violation of section 68? It is more opinionated than evidence. The CC judges has therefore violated the principle of justice and evidence. They violated the rights of lawmakers to propose bill, debate on it, scrutinize it and than vote on it. Their ruling is therefore also unconstitutional.

[Spartakos]

But.. But.. He was elected by majority. I don't get it. Doesn't that means that anyone elected into the government have green pass to do whatever they wish? After all the democracy is all about election not the actual part of governing for the benefit of the people. Or did I get it wrong again?

[icare999]

The question that begs to be asked, is whether the NACC has any jurisdiction in this matter at all. The Constitutional Court dubiously declared the actual process of constitutional amendment under the constitution as unconstitutional but didn't set penalties.... So disgruntled anti-democrats went to the NACC. Instead of deciding that it didn't have the authority to consider the flimsy case, the politicized NACC made up the rules as it went along to get the result the anti-democrats wanted..... Bottom line, at this point, it appears that the politicized judiciary is the preferred coup vehicle, and this NACC thing is one of the initiatives launched by the elites and their street-based coup-mongers to achieve that end.... If it walks like a duck, quackes like a duck, it is in all likelihood an attempted 'judicial coup".

my wife and many could not care less if it got rid of Taksin HE is/was expert at using judiciary to sneak out of his wrong doings so even if your right which I don't think you are old saying of he who lives by sword etc

Taksin may at long last be getting his own medicine back but as I said do you think anyone against him cares how its done and many would prefer a more permanent solution

Well done Suphet and all who at last have made a stand against Taksin's vile government

[tomacht8]

"As the NACC requires the accused lawmakers to clarify charges within 15 days, Mr Udomdej said the 308 ex-MPs and senators must clarify the charges between Jan 29-31, the date in which he said is really close to the Feb 2 election."

Can not be a problem, because nobody pay money for votes. Right?

must clarify?
This is an investigation that probably needs more time.

Edited January 15, 2014 by tomacht8

[bigbamboo]

The question that begs to be asked, is whether the NACC has any jurisdiction in this matter at all. The Constitutional Court dubiously declared the actual process of constitutional amendment under the constitution as unconstitutional but didn't set penalties.... So disgruntled anti-democrats went to the NACC. Instead of deciding that it didn't have the authority to consider the flimsy case, the politicized NACC made up the rules as it went along to get the result the anti-democrats wanted..... Bottom line, at this point, it appears that the politicized judiciary is the preferred coup vehicle, and this NACC thing is one of the initiatives launched by the elites and their street-based coup-mongers to achieve that end.... If it walks like a duck, quackes like a duck, it is in all likelihood an attempted 'judicial coup".

Unless it's a pigeon. They go 'coup, coup.'

[fab4]

this would seem one reason why a reform is needed before an election

What reform would you suggest rubi?

Perhaps the reform could discuss why it was perfectly legal to propose an all elected senate in the 1997 Constitution without threatening the overthrow of the State, then perfectly OK for the military Junta to change the constitution so that the Senate was half elected and half selected, but when the PTP try to reverse that situation, suddenly it's illegal?

Of course I understand that logic is not a requirement for any of sutheps fanboyz, but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, the dems are trying to regain power by yet another judicial coup?

[rubl]

this would seem one reason why a reform is needed before an election

What reform would you suggest rubi?

Perhaps the reform could discuss why it was perfectly legal to propose an all elected senate in the 1997 Constitution without threatening the overthrow of the State, then perfectly OK for the military Junta to change the constitution so that the Senate was half elected and half selected, but when the PTP try to reverse that situation, suddenly it's illegal?

Of course I understand that logic is not a requirement for any of sutheps fanboyz, but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, the dems are trying to regain power by yet another judicial coup?

I suggest nothing. With Thailand being a barely democratic country any Western style fair play is meaningless.

Perhaps the reform could discuss why independent checks and balances are really needed because there are too many who would undo them if they had a chance.

Of course that logic may not be understood by some. Especially those who only want elections with Shinawatras involved and continue preaching that winning elections is the main aspect of a democracy. Welcome to the Democratic State of Thaksin.

[SamMunich]

Folks, we can talk and talk about this issue of whether lawmakers are allowed to make that kind of changes to the constitution or not or under what circumstances. It would be much better to read the verdict of the Constitutional Court first. Then we understand the subject much better and make comment much more to the point. I think I saw a post on Bangkok Pundit some time ago, where he published (actually: re-published ) the important points of that verdict.

In general lawmakers should be able to make, change or abolish any law, but that's just in general. However the court had sensible reasons to deny the parliament to make that changes to the constitution.

[FangFerang]

Suthep was allowed a .....relief of absence for a murder charge, but those legislators who tried to change the charter will not be given the same leeway. This is a judicial coup -- it smells like a judicial coup, it walks like a judicial coup, and it quacks like a judicial coup.

They should have cultivated (tea money) relationships with more people than the poor.. the poor are great for votes, but power players make the difference in the next endgame (and there is no real endgame, just the most recent and next coming).

In short, it is a lost war, even if they win the battle. The entire international community will decry the result and complain....but people will still visit and invest here. The infrastructure will not collapse. Until the retaliation starts....

I am only concerned about the retaliation in the aftermath. Make as many jokes as you want about red shirt supporters being clumsy thugs, but if if any of them had your physical address they could take you with out a few ounces of C4 and no one would ever know what hit you, or even care about it.

We are either looking at the overthrow of a corrupt democracy and an uncivil guerrilla war, or the continued rape of a country's economy and electoral system. Neither scenario plays out well in my mind. Neither one. They have not and will not sit down to really negotiate. It has been true for more than twenty years here.

Do you really think that Thaksin, who supposedly spent billions buying votes, would not and could not use those billions to smuggle weapons through the golden triangle and any number of other 'porous border points', along with drugs to fund a program of 'freedom fighter' violence? Really. Do you really think he would not find open arms and willing hands to train for such actions (if they are not already trained)? If you truly believe so, you would never win a game of chess. Ever. You are not thinking more than one move ahead. Both sides are highly intelligent, despite their (to the west) clumsy intrigues. They have the same intrigues we do, they just use 1950's sound effects.

• I don't like knowing I am right about this, and I have no inside information whatsoever, but you are wrong if you think this whole thing will be over either way by an election, an appointed council, or coup of judicial or miltary origins. That is why the military has not intervened, because the events in the south show that a few determined people can stymie 60,000 troops. It is what it is. The military is armed for direct confrontation. Their equipment and tactics have real limitations, and quite definite limitations in regards to urban and guerrilla warfare.

Both sets of leaders are pretending that will be the end of it.

They are both lying, and both fear what I am talking about. One side fears it because they will never again enjoy public power, and the other side fears it because they will never again enjoy private power. But they will both push it to the bitter end, and then sign a peace treaty and go back to their posh penthouses.

Please believe me, this is not something I want to happen or encourage. Please believe me, I am not trying to state absolutes so I can say 'I told you so' later, but this is the simple and terrifying prospect that is the result of what is going on. It won't happen right away. Things will be quiet for awhile, and then a kaboom here, a kaboom there, and another kaboom, and another, and suddenly people will be saying "how could this happen in Bangkok?". And everyone will suffer, except of course those who never fight at the front lines, the "Invisible Hands" that the father of modern economics, a brilliant Scotsman Adams, wrote about.

It is the public that are pawns in this stalemate. And neither player will leave their chair until it becomes obvious to everyone that there are players, and chairs. Everyone needs somewhere to sit.

Then hopefully someone will pull the rug out from under both of them so they can let everyone else get on with their lives. History says otherwise, but I still hope for it.

Thai people deserve better than this charade. They deserve, at least, a more refined and less violent charade...like we have in the west.

Edited January 15, 2014 by FangFerang

[Baerboxer]

How is it that amending the charter on the composition of the Senate is in violation of section 68? It is more opinionated than evidence. The CC judges has therefore violated the principle of justice and evidence. They violated the rights of lawmakers to propose bill, debate on it, scrutinize it and than vote on it. Their ruling is therefore also unconstitutional.

Did PTP follow parliamentary rules, allow all debating time, and make sure voting was correct and in accordance with procedures?

Do you know more about Thai Law and its interpretation than judges? What is your qualification(s)?

Or is it simply that any rulings that don't support your political view must be wrong ?

[EricBerg]

Traitor of country should be arrest directly...

Difficult to do... him in Dubai. Perhaps Interpol can help.

Edited January 15, 2014 by EricBerg

[scorecard]

this would seem one reason why a reform is needed before an election

What reform would you suggest rubi?

Perhaps the reform could discuss why it was perfectly legal to propose an all elected senate in the 1997 Constitution without threatening the overthrow of the State, then perfectly OK for the military Junta to change the constitution so that the Senate was half elected and half selected, but when the PTP try to reverse that situation, suddenly it's illegal?

Of course I understand that logic is not a requirement for any of sutheps fanboyz, but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, the dems are trying to regain power by yet another judicial coup?

And again you say things less than truthful. The military junta did not change the constitution and you know it.

[englishoak]

you can add the NACC to the corrupted list then

Maybe what the entire Thai political class, judges and half the countries departments need to do is all go reside in Dubai.

[aimbc]

this would seem one reason why a reform is needed before an election

What reform would you suggest rubi?

Perhaps the reform could discuss why it was perfectly legal to propose an all elected senate in the 1997 Constitution without threatening the overthrow of the State, then perfectly OK for the military Junta to change the constitution so that the Senate was half elected and half selected, but when the PTP try to reverse that situation, suddenly it's illegal?

Of course I understand that logic is not a requirement for any of sutheps fanboyz, but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, the dems are trying to regain power by yet another judicial coup?

If a judicial coup was to happen, guess what, who's fault is it. The administration. With all the corruption and underhandedness, they have tied the noose around their own neck. So you can call a Judicial coup, I call it justice.

[aimbc]

Thai people deserve better than this charade. They deserve, at least, a more refined and less violent charade...like we have in the west.

yes, because the more refined and less violent charade would be the American Civil War. yeah...great example.

[englishoak]

The law was designed for the precise propose of dissolving parties and banning executives. This time around to get the judicial coup removing Yingluck and PT from power on the grounds of Section 68 would mean the Court would need to disregard the the actual wording of Section 68 making such a decision a farce.

The Justice system isnt metering out justice if it flaunting or disregarding its own laws. Then again that will be nothing new here.

[fab4]

What reform would you suggest rubi?

Perhaps the reform could discuss why it was perfectly legal to propose an all elected senate in the 1997 Constitution without threatening the overthrow of the State, then perfectly OK for the military Junta to change the constitution so that the Senate was half elected and half selected, but when the PTP try to reverse that situation, suddenly it's illegal?

Of course I understand that logic is not a requirement for any of sutheps fanboyz, but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, the dems are trying to regain power by yet another judicial coup?

And again you say things less than truthful. The military junta did not change the constitution and you know it.

Playing the "whybother pedantic card" are we, scorecard. The military junta set up a constitution drafting assembly which changed the constitution

The military junta-appointed Constitution Drafting Assembly unanimously approved the draft in July 2007,despite a lot of public controversy about several clauses. The junta passed a law making it illegal to publicly criticize the draft.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Constitution_of_Thailand

There was some controversy surrounding the drafting of the new, permanent constitution by the committee selected by the National Assembly. The selection of committee members was fraught with turmoil, voting irregularities, and claims of bribery. Almost immediately, the committee was faced with pressure to include specific provisions in the new constitution. Different political, religious, and social groups attempted to bribe, sway, and threaten the committee into including provisions which protected or advanced their particular interests. http://www.constitutionnet.org/country/constitutional-history-thailand

So don't accuse me of lying again.

Edited January 16, 2014 by fab4

[fab4]

this would seem one reason why a reform is needed before an election

What reform would you suggest rubi?

Perhaps the reform could discuss why it was perfectly legal to propose an all elected senate in the 1997 Constitution without threatening the overthrow of the State, then perfectly OK for the military Junta to change the constitution so that the Senate was half elected and half selected, but when the PTP try to reverse that situation, suddenly it's illegal?

Of course I understand that logic is not a requirement for any of sutheps fanboyz, but don't you think that maybe, just maybe, the dems are trying to regain power by yet another judicial coup?

If a judicial coup was to happen, guess what, who's fault is it. The administration. With all the corruption and underhandedness, they have tied the noose around their own neck. So you can call a Judicial coup, I call it justice.

Perhaps you can explain the facts I mentioned in my post rather than just reply with the usual knee jerk reactionary, "it's the governments fault".