Thaksin Returns As Pm

[hammered]

So what do people expect from todays meeting? Will TRT go to the constitutional court, or will there be a joint panel or will there not be enough evidence, or will for some reason there be a delay? Seems liek we have a few hours to kill before the verdict.

[stumonster]

The meeting last night should have been recorded - I don't doubt a deal was offered by mr 't'.

[slimdog]

OAG proposes dissolution of Thai Rak Thai, Democrat, three other parties

A public prosecution committee resolved Tuesday to ask the Constitution Court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai, Democrat and three other small parties.

OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang said the committee, headed by deputy attorney-general Chaikasem Nitisiri, vote unanimously to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and Article 66 of the Political Party Act.

He said the committee the committee also voted unanimously to ask the court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai for allegedly violating Article 66 of the Political Party Act.

Atthapol said the committee would submit the cases to the attorney-general to endorse to forward the cases to the Constitution Court.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingne...newsid=30007431

[tettyan]

OAG proposes dissolution of Thai Rak Thai, Democrat, three other parties

A public prosecution committee resolved Tuesday to ask the Constitution Court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai, Democrat and three other small parties.

OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang said the committee, headed by deputy attorney-general Chaikasem Nitisiri, vote unanimously to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and Article 66 of the Political Party Act.

He said the committee the committee also voted unanimously to ask the court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai for allegedly violating Article 66 of the Political Party Act.

Atthapol said the committee would submit the cases to the attorney-general to endorse to forward the cases to the Constitution Court.

The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingne...newsid=30007431

Can someone please outline what the Democrats are being charged with? Other than a VCD recording showing a 3-month long party member with no executive position in the party coaching small party leaders on how to testify against TRT?

[slimdog]

The fact-finding committee headed by deputy attorney-general Chaikasem Nitisiri, vote unanimously to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy, which is a violation to Article 66 of the Political Party Act, said OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang.

He said the committee the committee also voted unanimously to ask the court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai for allegedly violating Article 66 of the Political Party Act by allegedly bankrolling small parties to contest the April elections.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/27...es_30007427.php

[sriracha john]

Attorney general's office urges dissolving TRT, Democrat

Bangkok (dpa) - Thailand's Attorney General's Office on Tuesday resolved that five of the country's political parties, including the ruling Thai Rak Thai and the six-decades'-old Democrats, should be dissolved for committing fraud in the April 2 election.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/b...s.php?id=105563

[penzman]

Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy, which is a violation to Article 66 of the Political Party Act, said OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang.

Because they chose not to run in the April 2 election?

[tettyan]

The fact-finding committee headed by deputy attorney-general Chaikasem Nitisiri, vote unanimously to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy, which is a violation to Article 66 of the Political Party Act, said OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/27...es_30007427.php

I saw that part, but is there anyone discussing how the Democrats allegedly "violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy"? We have the Nam report on the case to dissolve TRT, but where's the smoking gun on the Democrats?

[tettyan]

Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy, which is a violation to Article 66 of the Political Party Act, said OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang.

Because they chose not to run in the April 2 election?

By that logic, Chart Thai and Mahachon should be dissolved too. But I don't remember the constitution saying anywhere that political parties are required to run candidates for elections.

[sriracha john]

Can someone please outline what the Democrats are being charged with? Other than a VCD recording showing a 3-month long party member with no executive position in the party coaching small party leaders on how to testify against TRT?

BANGKOK : Thai electoral authorities have ruled that the opposition boycott of snap polls in April was illegal, just days after they accused the ruling party of vote fraud, a spokesman has said.

The decision leaves both the opposition Democrat Party and the ruling Thai Rak Thai facing separate charges that could result in the dissolution of their parties.

"The Democrat Party was found guilty of six violations of election law that threaten national security, including encouraging people to (boycott)," Election Commission spokesman Prasert Sutthison told AFP.

"Such violations could lead to the dissolution of the party, the same penalty that Thai Rak Thai could face," he added.

AFP

[sriracha john]

The charge of encouraging people to boycott will be difficult to prove without clear worded statements to that effect. I don't recall ANY such occurence during the run-up to the election. Also they are charged with encouraging people to NOT vote, which is illegal. As I recall, it was encouraging people to abstain from voting by selecting the NO vote... which is, of course, a different situation and NOT illegal.

[sriracha john]

There were no "threats to national security" as I see the events as their actions were in accordance with the Democratic principles of the Constitution.. eg. free speech, free assembly, etc.

The only "threat" was to the continued tyrannical rule of a despot who has put "his people" in charge of all facets of the government, such as the EC, resulting in these ridiculous charges... the Courts will sort that out hopefully and provided that Thaksin's puppet strings don't extend to the Court as much as they do to the EC.

I will like to see how they justify these charges that they threatened national security... attempting to toss out a dictator not counting.

Edited June 27, 2006 by sriracha john

[cclub75]

The endless thai comedia del arte goes on, and on and on.

What will be the next step ? Critics and public are impatient to know : dissolution of.... Thailand itself ?

That could be a superb "final" : yes let's change the name of the country.

[slimdog]

As the sub-commitee panel investigatng the Democratic party didn't leak their report, it is a little difficult to say exactly what charges were found to be valid. An earlier report on the Nation's web site did mention Article 44 of the constitution:

Section 44.

A person shall enjoy the liberty to assemble peacefully and without arms. The restriction on such liberty under paragraph one shall not be imposed except by virtue of the law specifically enacted for the case of public assembling and for securing public convenience in the use of public places or for maintaining public order during the time when the country is in a state of war, or when a state of emergency or martial law is declared.

However they may have meant Article 44 of the Organic law on the Election of members of the House of Representatives and Senate:

Section 44.

No candidate nor any person shall commit any act to induce electors to cast a ballot for him or her or other candidate or any political party or to abstain from voting for any candidate or political party by the following means:

(1) Providing, giving, offering, promising to give or preparing to give properties or any other benefits which can be calculated in money value to any person;

(2) Giving, offering or promising to give money, properties or any other benefits whether directly or indirectly to the community, association, foundation, temple, education institution, asylum or any other institution;

(3) Advertising for an election by organizing an entertainment;

(4) Treating or promising to treat any person with meals;

(5) Deceiving, forcing, threatening, intimidating, slandering or inducing the misunderstanding in the popularity of any candidate or political party.

Take your pick...

[Hermano Lobo]

TRT, The Democrats et al, get dissolved.

What is left ? Loads of MP's without a party.

Is this anarchy ? Will this be a vacuum ?

Nature abhors a vacuum and 'something' will rush in

to fill the void.

But what ?

This could well be unprecedented in politics.

The blame should surely lie at the door of Thaksin, TRT

and their vassal the Election Commission.

What next ?

Edited June 27, 2006 by Hermano Lobo

[hammered]

Looks to me like they'll both be dissolved and come back in some other guise. Apparently the executives cannot become executives again in new parties for a few years but can become ordinary members and as such be proposed as ministers by their parties. I bet old Banharn is smiling he will end up as the only party leader not discreedited and so will probably end up being PM!. Amazing Thailand.

Kind of hope I am wrong though.

[penzman]

So the ball has now been thrown onto the next court. Delays, delays. Anyone seen any dates on rulings yet?

[tettyan]

Can someone please outline what the Democrats are being charged with? Other than a VCD recording showing a 3-month long party member with no executive position in the party coaching small party leaders on how to testify against TRT?

BANGKOK : Thai electoral authorities have ruled that the opposition boycott of snap polls in April was illegal, just days after they accused the ruling party of vote fraud, a spokesman has said.

The decision leaves both the opposition Democrat Party and the ruling Thai Rak Thai facing separate charges that could result in the dissolution of their parties.

"The Democrat Party was found guilty of six violations of election law that threaten national security, including encouraging people to (boycott)," Election Commission spokesman Prasert Sutthison told AFP.

"Such violations could lead to the dissolution of the party, the same penalty that Thai Rak Thai could face," he added.

AFP

Apparently, logic is not taught in Thai law schools. Boycotting an election that was later invalidated (ruled illegal) is also illegal? Where does the constitution say that?

Perhaps the lead sentence in the article should read as follows:

BANGKOK : Thai electoral authorities have ruled that the opposition boycott of snap polls in April was illegal, just weeks after the country's highest court ruled the snap polls to be illegal.

[marquess]

Looks to me like they'll both be dissolved and come back in some other guise. Apparently the executives cannot become executives again in new parties for a few years but can become ordinary members and as such be proposed as ministers by their parties. I bet old Banharn is smiling he will end up as the only party leader not discreedited and so will probably end up being PM!. Amazing Thailand.

Kind of hope I am wrong though.

Is this the price we have to pay for getting rid of square head? Is it too high a price? The Thai people will have to be the best judges.

[John K]

OK stepping way back this is how I see this.

1) Thaksin is the center of all of this. He it the thorn that won’t come out and causing the inflamation.

2) The EC is clearly a puppet of Thaksin, and they are trying to take everyone down to more or less level the playing field. This could just be spitefulness on Thaksin’s part. (If I go so does everyone else) I think that may fit his psychological profile.

3) I don’t know of anything the democrats did recently, but no doubt there could be some old skeletons in their closet. At any rate we will need to wait and see. It is possible all they did was piss of Thaksin and the EC obliged by planting some false evidence or trumping up false charges.

4) Thaksin could have sealed his fate yesterday by seeing the OAG. If the OAG did anything other that what they did, the office could be seen as another Thaksin puppet.

5) The bright side of all of this is it may be the reset button has been pushed allowing a brand new government in from the bottom up. It should stymie corruption for a bit.

Right now this is like a huge chess game. Depending on how many moves ahead you are thinking the picture changes. From that point of view it is very impressive. Unfortunately it is the type of thinking a CEO faces daily, so without saying we all know who is the most practiced player in this game.

[John K]

Martin;

I know you are planting but some input would be nice about now. What do the Thais in Isaan think?

[hammered]

Looks to me like they'll both be dissolved and come back in some other guise. Apparently the executives cannot become executives again in new parties for a few years but can become ordinary members and as such be proposed as ministers by their parties. I bet old Banharn is smiling he will end up as the only party leader not discreedited and so will probably end up being PM!. Amazing Thailand.

Kind of hope I am wrong though.

Is this the price we have to pay for getting rid of square head? Is it too high a price? The Thai people will have to be the best judges.

To be honest it is impossible to know how this will eventually pan out although Thai people who should know seem to think Thaksin is finished. If however, the square one is to be removed I'm sure it will involve a lot of sacriffice in one way or another as quite honsetly we are talking about the most powerful, richest and well connected politician in Thailand ever. Removing people like this is never easy, and in this case we are probably also talking about the most intransient and stubborn politician in Thailand ever.

[cclub75]

Apparently, logic is not taught in Thai law schools. Boycotting an election that was later invalidated (ruled illegal) is also illegal? Where does the constitution say that?

Excellent point !

Anyway, maybe it's just a game of saving face.

All the main parties go in front of CC, for dissolution. But of course, not with the same charges (obviously charges against TRT are the real one, the real offensive).

So, no jealous. Everybody treated the same.

Then CC takes its decision.

[Martin]

I don't think that the folk in Isaan are going to be spending any time thinking about how this political dust is swirling in Bangkok.

When the dust settles and there is an election in the offing, politicians will make an appearance and it will be up to them to explain the situation that Thailand has ended up with.

It is a bit like a journey on a wartime troop train, where some of the passengers (like us on this forum) are interested in the route that the train is taking and wondering where we may end up, and others say "Just tell me where we are when we've got there".

[chownah]

"....... Boycotting an election that was later invalidated (ruled illegal) is also illegal? Where does the constitution say that?

.............."

I don't know if the Democrats are guilty of anything....but....it seems to me to make sense that telling people to boycott an election would be against the law regardless of whether the election was legal, was ruled illegal, or was canceled and never held at all. Conspiring to bomb a building is illegal reagardless of whether you actually bomb the building or not. Robbing a bank is illegal whether you get any money or not. I believe that the constitution says that it is illegal to encourage people to boycott an election....it does not qualify this depending on any characteristic of the election...or even if the election is even held.

That's my view....it could be wrong.

Chownah

[John K]

The fact-finding committee headed by deputy attorney-general Chaikasem Nitisiri, vote unanimously to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy, which is a violation to Article 66 of the Political Party Act, said OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang.

He said the committee the committee also voted unanimously to ask the court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai for allegedly violating Article 66 of the Political Party Act by allegedly bankrolling small parties to contest the April elections.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/27...es_30007427.php

Why Consider the TRT and a much more solid to dissolve the others? Is it a hint?

[John K]

"....... Boycotting an election that was later invalidated (ruled illegal) is also illegal? Where does the constitution say that?

.............."

I don't know if the Democrats are guilty of anything....but....it seems to me to make sense that telling people to boycott an election would be against the law regardless of whether the election was legal, was ruled illegal, or was canceled and never held at all. Conspiring to bomb a building is illegal reagardless of whether you actually bomb the building or not. Robbing a bank is illegal whether you get any money or not. I believe that the constitution says that it is illegal to encourage people to boycott an election....it does not qualify this depending on any characteristic of the election...or even if the election is even held.

That's my view....it could be wrong.

Chownah

Asking, telling, recommending to someone not to vote is only a suggestion. Ultimately a person will make their own decision as to what to do or not do. Even a person who is hypnotized will not do what they don’t want to do. If that was the case Bill Gates would be poor now. So if this is the case then it will be difficult to prove the Democrats have such a power, and if they did why not use it on Thaksin and avoid all of this.

[Netfan]

It looks now as if "proof" will have nothing to do with these charges against the Democrats and smaller parties. It's a case of a spoiled child saying "if i can't play no one can". Doesn't matter what the consequences to the country are.

Which leads me to ask this question: Is it a case of Dr. T knowing what he's done is corrupt (for lack of a better word) or is it that he truly believes that he has done no wrong? And which is worse?

[chownah]

"....... Boycotting an election that was later invalidated (ruled illegal) is also illegal? Where does the constitution say that?

.............."

I don't know if the Democrats are guilty of anything....but....it seems to me to make sense that telling people to boycott an election would be against the law regardless of whether the election was legal, was ruled illegal, or was canceled and never held at all. Conspiring to bomb a building is illegal reagardless of whether you actually bomb the building or not. Robbing a bank is illegal whether you get any money or not. I believe that the constitution says that it is illegal to encourage people to boycott an election....it does not qualify this depending on any characteristic of the election...or even if the election is even held.

That's my view....it could be wrong.

Chownah

Asking, telling, recommending to someone not to vote is only a suggestion. Ultimately a person will make their own decision as to what to do or not do. Even a person who is hypnotized will not do what they don’t want to do. If that was the case Bill Gates would be poor now. So if this is the case then it will be difficult to prove the Democrats have such a power, and if they did why not use it on Thaksin and avoid all of this.

If you read my post carefully I hope that you will see that it has nothing at all to do with anything that the Democratic party is alleged to have done. The first sentence of my post states clearly, " I don't know if the Democrats are guilty of anything." My post is a discussion of how the law might be interpreted and not whether there should be such a law and not about anyone who has or might have actually broken any law......so I believe that your response is not to the point of my post.

Chownah

Edited June 27, 2006 by chownah

[hammered]

The fact-finding committee headed by deputy attorney-general Chaikasem Nitisiri, vote unanimously to ask the Constitution Court to dissolve the Democrat, Prachatipatai Kaona Party, Patana Chat Thai Party, and Thai Ground Party for allegedly violating the Constitution and carrying actions deemed detrimental to democracy, which is a violation to Article 66 of the Political Party Act, said OAG spokesman Atthapol Yaisawang.

He said the committee the committee also voted unanimously to ask the court to consider dissolving the Thai Rak Thai for allegedly violating Article 66 of the Political Party Act by allegedly bankrolling small parties to contest the April elections.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/27...es_30007427.php

Why Consider the TRT and a much more solid to dissolve the others? Is it a hint?

Well none of the leaders of the other parties had a cosy chat with anyone from the OAG yesterday! Seriously it would probably be a good ida to check out what was said in Thai before pinpointing the wording in an English translation.

Many Thai people I talk to dont expect the constitutional court to find against Thaksin anyway considering its previous history, and how it has political appointees on its body. Funnily though these same people think Thaksin has had it. I'm past figuring this one out.