Thaksin Returns As Pm

[ando]

disbanding parties can erode public faith in democracy

There's no reason behind this statement other than trying to scare people.

It's exactly the opposite - allowing parties that commit all kinds of fraud to rule the country is what erodes all faith in democracy.

Plus I am glad you pointed it out. This is in fact two things. First it reveals his (Thaksin’s) hand. Second that hand is mind games. This is nothing more that what I call a seed suggestion. It is similar to looking at something. Eventually others will look to see what you are looking at. At that point their imagination takes over if you don’t specify what you are looking at. So in this case the suggestion is ‘it is better to keep uncle Thaksin.’

There is good and bad about this. The people with a lower education will not see this as a mind game. This is simply because they lack the ability to logically figure it out. They will take it as face value. His support lies in the uneducated, so it fits.

Politicans of every persuasion in every country are basically a bunch of liars and cheats. They manipulte the truth within the limits allowed in order to give false impressions for their own personal benifit. Thailand and Thaksin or who ever comes after him are no different. Same game, different name. Dont kid yourself it will be any different with a different party. All we can hope for is that some of the loopholes will be closed. But of course as is the norm in western democracies, the law is always one step behind the crooks.

The educated people will be able to see it for what it is. He has added the fog so that it is more difficult for the educated so sort it all out.

So I see that Thaksin is in full attack mode now, and that he will do anything to stay on top.

As for the CC issue. As I see it the TRT did break the law and should go down. The democratic party exercised their right as outlined by the law. Any other ruling will show that the court is corrupt.

The only difference is the charges and the procedure. It is still Thaksin behind the scenes. Instead of some slander/ defamation lawsuit, it is this.

Dont know what happened. Try again.

Politicians of every persuasion in every country are basicaly a bunch of compromised, liars.

Thailand is no different. The next non-TRT government is likely to be just as crooked and will try all the same crooked tactics, or rather some more inovative ones.

Thaksin is no bader than the next politicabasicallyl leader, he is just a lot smarter than those before him.

As in the west, the crooks are always one step ahead of the law simply because the law is reactive while the crooks are innovative. Loophbadderinnovativeoles will be closed and new loopholes will be found. But the major problems in the system will be mended as the process continues. It will never end as we see in our own countries. Democracy in Thailand is evolving. The ancient Asian culture of how things have always been done ;-) is not always conducive to western standards of democracy. A cultural change will have to occur before the legal changes can become effective. And as I see it, that is happening. Its happening because people are now empowered to have a say. Every man and woman, no matter how poor or uneducated has an equal right to say how the country should be run.

Edited June 29, 2006 by ando

[ando]

Ando,

Please take care when you quote another person. Post #1019 looks like it is what I said. It is hard to identify your added comments because your font format and color are the same as mine and are included in my quote. Could you fix that up please. Thanks.

Sorry John,

I am having some trouble with these quote things.

No misrepresentation intended.

[hammered]

The McCargo paper on Thaksin and the South provides some possible interesting context to what is currently going on. Quite worrying too. Available on thaistudies.net.

[John K]

Re; ando post #1021

Thaksin has notched that up. He changed the laws. How many times have you heard him say “no law has been broken.” So he is taking it in the opposite direction. The evolution of laws should be to improve the quality of life. That should be the goal of every government. Thaksin has modified that to make it self centered and not for the people. I know this is old news for many but his method is new. Don’t try to hide from the law, simply change it as needed. That is what is motivating the middle class. The poor uneducated have little to lose or gain from the changes. The rich get a piece more or less. The cronies make out well. The middle class know that Thaksin is screwing the country hence them too in some way or another.

So here we are with a drama on a county scale. The PM trying to take the country in the opposite direction of what the King spent 60 years doing. The King’s many projects to help and encourage the people to be self sufficient, while Thaksin skims... (no wrong word).. GOUGES the country with corruption. The money that could be used to build rural Thailand’s infrastructure is now in the bank accounts of Thaksin and his cronies. The problem is the poor and uneducated in the rural parts of Thailand have not a clue what they are missing out on. I am sure it was going on before but not in this big a scale.

As Thaksin has several contingency plans in place, you guys in Isaan should try to identify projects that never got started because of corruption. Then open the eyes of the locals to it. So even if Thaksin comes out on top, he goes down in the election. Bitching here is a good vent but does little to encourage change. Only by educating the people in Thaksin’s base as to how he screwed them will prevent them from getting screwed more by him.

Edited June 29, 2006 by john Krukowski

[chownah]

So here we are with a drama on a county scale. The PM trying to take the country in the opposite direction of what the King spent 60 years doing.

I think that we are not supposed to speculate on the King's actions....I'm not sure if this qualifies as such a speculation but it might. We should be careful about this sort of thing. I think it is better to not bring the Royal Family into these discussions in any manner. I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying. I respect H.M. The King and fully support all of his programs which I firmly believe will improve conditions for everyone in the Kingdom. I do not respect all of what Toxin has done.

I could be wrong about this...I'm just stating my view.

[John K]

So here we are with a drama on a county scale. The PM trying to take the country in the opposite direction of what the King spent 60 years doing.

I think that we are not supposed to speculate on the King's actions....I'm not sure if this qualifies as such a speculation but it might. We should be careful about this sort of thing. I think it is better to not bring the Royal Family into these discussions in any manner. I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying. I respect H.M. The King and fully support all of his programs which I firmly believe will improve conditions for everyone in the Kingdom. I do not respect all of what Toxin has done.

I could be wrong about this...I'm just stating my view.

No speculation, I am simply acknowledging the King has done so much for this country in so many ways. I can’t say enough phrases for the King. What I am saying about the King simply mirrors what all Thais know to be true. Thaksin has acquired so much power and all for self serving reason. Money goes a long way in Isaan, and Thaksin’s government seems to have lost 10 Billion in recent days. If memory serves, Thailand loses about 10,000 ThB per person every year to corruption. In Isaan 10,000 ThB per person... think about it, that is huge money there. Think about a small village of 100 people, that is 1 Million ThB per year. How far would that money go to help a small community like that. And Thaksin offers a few hundred if that for a vote. Like I said they are getting screwed by Thaksin and they don’t even know it. Just some simple talk like that would change a few minds in Isaan I am sure. I know they can do the math.

[penzman]

Personally, I have never believed a single word that came out of Thaksin's mouth. Why? When I first moved here, I bought a book that described acurately his first years in politics and the book mentioned Thaksin reinventing himself on many occasions in front of crowds, television, radio shows and journalists. I, and probably you as well, have seen him in action many times over. There is even a website mentioned earlier in this very topic that clearly shows he's a pathological liar, associating himself with big names , and even if others lie for him, he will approve of it if there's some sort of gain in it for him.

Either he is a pathological liar or suffers from some mental disorder, unfit to run as PM but fit enough to be CEO of whatever business he wants to run, as long as he abides by the laws. Wait until he is asked to testify and starts stumbling all over the barrage of lies he has left behind. He'd better start taking notes and memorize.

One word he'd better look up and remember: PERJURY

[John K]

In other news;

Caretaker PM Thaksin plans to build a lion petting zoo for his Thai political opponents in Kenya. He is presently in negotiations with the Kenyan government for an open air petting zoo that is modeled after the famed Catskill Game Farm of upstate New York.

http://www.catskillgamefarm.com/

Edited June 29, 2006 by john Krukowski

[slimdog]

As for the CC issue. As I see it the TRT did break the law and should go down. The democratic party exercised their right as outlined by the law. Any other ruling will show that the court is corrupt.

I have no problem with your opinion of the TRT party, but as for the Democrats only excerising their rights as outlined by the Law. I think you ought to have a look at the law, in particular the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, Section 2 and Section 63. Also the organic law on the election of members of the House of Representatives Section 44/5.

[Siripon]

Back in 2001 after his first election victory he had to testify in front of The Constitutional Court, the same court as now with many of the same members.

He had stashed a considerable portion of his assets in the names of his gardener, maid, driver,etc and unfortunately had failed to declare them in the required filing of assets.

One can speculate as to the reason, manipulation of stock comes to mind first, but he told the court with a straight face it was 'an honest mistake'(on the part of his wife).

I can't remember offhand how much but it was a lot of money-' yea, I forgot to tell you boys that I'd hidden all that dough, I clean forgot almost half my assets!'

Lying becomes second nature if you get away with it.

[penzman]

Get the book, The Business of Politics. The numbers are all there at the back, it actually may have been revised since

[penzman]

Did I forget to mention he is also shifty?

Dr. Thaksin told TRT members not to be worried about the resolution on dissolving TRT Party

The Thai Rak Thai Party Leader, Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, has told his party members not to be worried about the resolution of the Office of the Attorney-General, following the proposal to dissolve five political parties yesterday. He has instructed them to perform their duties under the constitutional law. He has assigned them to visit different areas to solicit votes for the next general election on October 15th.

Mr. Yongyut Tiyapairat (ยงยุทธ ติยะไพรัช), the Thai Rak Thai Administrator, said that the current political rift has caused negative impacts on people. However, Dr. Thaksin has reinstructed his party members to continue their roles, adding that the October 15th election will not be cancelled.

Mr. Yongyut has declined to criticize the decision of the Office of the Attorney-General as he said that the process goes in line with the law. However, he is confident that this matter will not lessen his party’s popularity.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 28 June 2006

Thaksin says election date may be changed

Thaksin said Thursday that he is not certain whether the next election will be held on October 15 as scheduled by the Election Commission.

"An election will be definitely held but I am not sure that it will be held on October 15 or not," Thaksin said

The Nation Thu, June 29, 2006

The man loses face more often than you could observe in one of Bangkok's most popular plastic surgery clinics.

[cclub75]

Dr. Thaksin has reinstructed his party members to continue their roles, adding that the October 15th election will not be cancelled.

28 June 2006

Thaksin said Thursday that he is not certain whether the next election will be held on October 15 as scheduled by the Election Commission.

June 29, 2006

The man loses face more often than you could observe in one of Bangkok's most popular plastic surgery clinics.

Not exactly. He just went on ThaiVisa and had a look at my post about "calendar matter" !

Then he realized that elections on october the 15 will be a real challenge...

[lukamar]

As for the CC issue. As I see it the TRT did break the law and should go down. The democratic party exercised their right as outlined by the law. Any other ruling will show that the court is corrupt.

I have no problem with your opinion of the TRT party, but as for the Democrats only exercising their rights as outlined by the Law. I think you ought to have a look at the law, in particular the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, Section 2 and Section 63. Also the organic law on the election of members of the House of Representatives Section 44/5.

Slimdog is correct in his thinking on the Democrats and the sections in the Constitution and the Organic law. It's hard to say how the courts will rule on this or the TRT issue. Although many here will not agree, the charges against the Democrats may well have more weight with the courts than those against the TRT. It would not surprise me, as I have said before that the TRT gets a slap but the others actually take the brunt of the flack and are harder hit. As I have said months ago if you want to screw up the next election and the country all you have to do is boycott and have the election annulled as unconstitutional. The courts have to ensure that will not happen again in the future. While the TRT or members of TRT probably did pay smaller parties they were involved in the democratic process running candidates, the Democrats, who aligned themselves with other groups, worked hard or were part of the process of trying to overthrow the existing government and candidates while not fielding candidates. This well could be looked at as trying to overthrow the government by subversive means by the court.

Time will tell how the courts will handle this but you can't call the court corrupt because they don't happen to rule in the favor of the party that you support.

[John K]

As for the CC issue. As I see it the TRT did break the law and should go down. The democratic party exercised their right as outlined by the law. Any other ruling will show that the court is corrupt.

I have no problem with your opinion of the TRT party, but as for the Democrats only exercising their rights as outlined by the Law. I think you ought to have a look at the law, in particular the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, Section 2 and Section 63. Also the organic law on the election of members of the House of Representatives Section 44/5.

Slimdog is correct in his thinking on the Democrats and the sections in the Constitution and the Organic law. It's hard to say how the courts will rule on this or the TRT issue. Although many here will not agree, the charges against the Democrats may well have more weight with the courts than those against the TRT. It would not surprise me, as I have said before that the TRT gets a slap but the others actually take the brunt of the flack and are harder hit. As I have said months ago if you want to screw up the next election and the country all you have to do is boycott and have the election annulled as unconstitutional. The courts have to ensure that will not happen again in the future. While the TRT or members of TRT probably did pay smaller parties they were involved in the democratic process running candidates, the Democrats, who aligned themselves with other groups, worked hard or were part of the process of trying to overthrow the existing government and candidates while not fielding candidates. This well could be looked at as trying to overthrow the government by subversive means by the court.

Time will tell how the courts will handle this but you can't call the court corrupt because they don't happen to rule in the favor of the party that you support.

Read post #1014, they did not boycott. They only recommended to select the no vote option. The people made their own choice. Like I was trying to say it is difficult to prove that they have some magic power over people.

On another note if Thaksin is so bold about saying not to worry, it can easily be read as I fixed it already. I paid everyone off, bribed, and so on. I don’t seem to hear that from the others. Nobody can predict the future unless they have provided the blueprints for the design.

[penzman]

He sure has a way of casting doubt over himself with comments like "Do not worry" and meeting OAG members the evening before they submit their case to the court... and then goes on saying he'll go on with his radio show.

My wife couldn't believe his speech to TRT party members yesterday. He spoke as if they were poor victims of a plot while whining that other people were responsible for interfering with Thailand's democratic process Some TRT members were actullay looking at the ceiling when he made more strange comments while others looked like they had just been slapped in the face. He may see a few more jump ship this week.

He's acting stranger than usual.

POLITICAL CRISIS

PM fears 'plot to throw me out'

Thaksin warns top officials to avoid illegal moves to oust him; set to restart radio show

Embattled Thaksin Shinawatra yesterday convened a meeting of top bureaucrats to expose what he termed a plot to depose him, and also announced a plan to restart his controversial weekly radio programme.

The well-timed manoeuvres came amid rumours of a possible coup.

"Confusion persists because charismatic people and some organisations outside of those sanctioned by the Constitution are trying to impose changes, even though they do not have any mandate to do so," Thaksin said.

In his hour-long speech, the caretaker PM portrayed himself as a defender of democratic rule and lashed out at his opponents for trying to dethrone him by undemocratic means.

"Do not confuse democracy with 'democrazy'. Everything will work out in accordance with the established rules," he said, remaining upbeat he can emerge unscathed from the political crisis.

more here on The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/06/30...es_30007674.php

[hammered]

I doubt whether the courts decisions will be in total isolation without considering the politcal realities of the present power struggle. Thaksin and his big businesss alies have challenged traditional power structures (bureaucracy, parts of the military, old families) over the years and have succeeded in reducing the power of many of them. However, now it seems they are fighting back and many of Thaksins earstwhile middle class supporters are in an alliance of convenience with them. Without being on the inside it is impossible to know exactly what is happening or who has the upper hand but it sure looks like a desperate fight in a high stakes game between well matched sides. To see where a compromise can come from is not easy. It may end up being that sooner or later and for the first time in Thai politics there will have to be a clear winner and loser or the situation will just continue.

[chownah]

As for the CC issue. As I see it the TRT did break the law and should go down. The democratic party exercised their right as outlined by the law. Any other ruling will show that the court is corrupt.

I have no problem with your opinion of the TRT party, but as for the Democrats only exercising their rights as outlined by the Law. I think you ought to have a look at the law, in particular the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, Section 2 and Section 63. Also the organic law on the election of members of the House of Representatives Section 44/5.

Slimdog is correct in his thinking on the Democrats and the sections in the Constitution and the Organic law. It's hard to say how the courts will rule on this or the TRT issue. Although many here will not agree, the charges against the Democrats may well have more weight with the courts than those against the TRT. It would not surprise me, as I have said before that the TRT gets a slap but the others actually take the brunt of the flack and are harder hit. As I have said months ago if you want to screw up the next election and the country all you have to do is boycott and have the election annulled as unconstitutional. The courts have to ensure that will not happen again in the future. While the TRT or members of TRT probably did pay smaller parties they were involved in the democratic process running candidates, the Democrats, who aligned themselves with other groups, worked hard or were part of the process of trying to overthrow the existing government and candidates while not fielding candidates. This well could be looked at as trying to overthrow the government by subversive means by the court.

Time will tell how the courts will handle this but you can't call the court corrupt because they don't happen to rule in the favor of the party that you support.

Read post #1014, they did not boycott. They only recommended to select the no vote option. The people made their own choice. Like I was trying to say it is difficult to prove that they have some magic power over people.

On another note if Thaksin is so bold about saying not to worry, it can easily be read as I fixed it already. I paid everyone off, bribed, and so on. I don’t seem to hear that from the others. Nobody can predict the future unless they have provided the blueprints for the design.

Did they boycott....or not....that is the question. If my memory serves me correctly there were several meetings between the various opposition parties just before the April election and immediately after such meetings there were announcements made as to which parties would be boycotting and which parties were not sure. I don't know for sure what went on at the meetings and I don't know for sure what was discussed.....but....if the meetings discussed boycotting and if people engaged in discussions about boycotting as a strategy and if those in favor of boycotting argued for it and presented information to presuade others to boycott.......then......it is clear that there was collusion to boycott...then there was an alliance of political parties who were organized together for the purpose of boycotting the elections...for the purpose of thwarting the democratic process. It seems fairly obvious to me that it is likely that the opposition political parties did conspire to boycott the elections and it is fairly obvious to me that it is likely that this is against the law and specifically is grounds for dissolution of the parties because the actions (the meetings and discussions) were undertaken specifically in the guise of political parties and the meetings were called specifically by political parties as meetings to undertake the business of political parties. Contrast this with the charges against TRT. The alleged payments to small political parties have not been shown to have been arranged at any official TRT meetings and they have not been shown to have been discussed by the leadership of TRT acting as the authority to act in the parties name. I think it is very likely that the courts will see that it was an official act of the opposition parties to collude to thwart democracy and that it was the unauthorized act of a few renegade TRT members that broke the law in giving financial support to the small parties.

Just to clarify what my position on this is......I am against dissolving political parties as a matter of principle. I have posted about this in the past and will give a short rendition here. The power to abolish a political party is anti-democratic. People have the right of free association and they have the right to organize for political purposes. If some people in a political party break a law they should be punished but to dissolve the political party in which they have membership is destroying the right to associate of all of the other members of that party. In the US all political parties are allowed as long as they do not advocate the violent overthrow of the government (I think). This is one of the main pillars of democracy.

[Martin]

Thaksin is 'going through the motions' in public, but we will never know what is happening behind the scenes.

I sense that the Courts are doing the same, but as slowly as possible, in order to give as much time as possible for the 'off-stage' wheeling and dealing, aimed at getting a package that saves the face of the whole lot of groups in the higher levels of the hierarchy.

Whatever happens, the 'managers' won't want to be seen by the 'lower orders' as having been incapable of managing one of their own who 'dropped them in it'.

I haven't seen or heard anything that mentions Temasek/Singapore in all this.

I assume they are doing the sensible 'damage limitation' thing of keeping absolutely silent, and just hoping that whatever can be cobbled together in Thailand doesn't hurt their relationship with their much-bigger fellow member of ASEAN, who just happens to be their major source of rice.

I'll bet there are questions being asked of the top people in Temasek, and the appropriate Minister, as to how they didn't foresee that they might be held to be 'buyers of stolen property'!!!

There is such potential for the General Election, when it does come, to degenerate into a Thai v. Chinese-Thai slanging match that there will be worries amongst the political-thinking members of Chinese diasporas in all Asian countries. I'll bet they take a very jaundiced view of Thaksin for letting this little lot loose.

[lukamar]

Read post #1014, they did not boycott.

Few on this forum will agree with you on that one, even to disagree with me. The Democrats indeed did boycott the election process and aligned themselves with the PAD and others, while doing so.

For those that don't remember......

Monday, 27 February 2006, 11:56 GMT BBC News

Thai opposition to boycott poll

Mr Thaksin has faced growing calls for his resignation Thailand's three main opposition parties have decided not to contest a snap election called by Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra for 2 April.

The announcement came after Mr Thaksin refused to agree to their proposals for political reform.

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva made the announcement, flanked by Chart Thai and Mahachon party members.

Mr Thaksin dissolved parliament and called the snap poll on Friday, after mounting calls for him to resign.

The opposition parties "will not stand any candidates in the election" scheduled for 2 April, Mr Abhisit told reporters after the three parties held a joint meeting on Monday.

The parties had threatened to boycott the poll unless Mr Thaksin agreed a series of demands.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4754836.stm

Edited June 30, 2006 by lukamar

[Martin]

Re post #1036 from 'penzman' about Thaksin's performance 'on-stage- in front of his TRT member:

Is Thaksin giving way to the stress?

If so, there may be a way out.

Let the symptoms develop a bit further, then announce that his wife has taken him to Hawaii (never to return) for 'some much needed rest and recuperation' like the Marcos couple did.

Re-schedule the election for a date far enough ahead that they all have a couple of months to register some new parties and for previous MPs to decide which they will join and then start the 90 day period.

Then the petitions to the Courts asking for dissolutions would all drop, as those parties would, technically, no longer exist (although some of the 'new' parties would be very like some of the 'old' ones in terms of the faces that they were putting on their election posters.

[Jai Dee]

Reform Advocate believes situation will turn favorable if two big parties dissolve

Reform advocate Prawase Wasi (ประเวศ วะสี) views that it will be a blessing in disguise if the Thai Rak Thai (TRT) and Democrat parties are dissolved.

Dr. Prawase said dissolution of those two big parties should not be seen as a blow to democracy but a good opportunity to restructure Thailand’s political system.

Dr. Prawase said brand-new political groups could be formed and new ideas implemented to solve national problems. The old political structure has a lot of problems itself so it could not contribute much to national development, he said

He said it would always be in the best interest of the country if political parties stopped competing for power and started working together in harmony for the progress of the nation.

TRT and the Democrat could be disbanded if the Constitution Court found they had undermined democracy in connection with the April 2 snap election as charged by the Election Commission.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 30 June 2006

[Jai Dee]

PM tells government officials to set aside worries about political situation

Caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra tells government officials to put aside their concerns about political problems but follow His Majesty the King’s advices, adhere to constitutional rules and continue working for their country.

Pol. Lt. Co. Thaksin ordered senior officials at a meeting yesterday to accelerate several projects and ensure their continuity until the new government is set up.

Pol. Lt. Col. Thaksin said those projects include the 30-baht medical care, Ua-arthorn (เอื้ออาทร) housing construction, distribution of land to poor people, relief assistance to victims of disasters, control of prices of farm products and promotion of alternative fuels.

He also asked them to speed up solving drug, traffic and economic problems.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 30 June 2006

[ando]

Technical points of law aside, the judges have to be wondering if it would be in the best interests of democracy and the country in general if they dissolve one of the major political parties and not the other. Blind justice may well hand power to the surviving political party before the dissolved parties members can form a viable opposition. I am guessing that in order to provide some political semblance of democracy and political stability, they either must both go down or they both survive with a few battle scars.

[ando]

Sondi/PADs stated aim is to oust the democratically elected leader of Thailand through street protests. That seems a little undemocratic to me when a fraction of 1% of the countries voters can act to over-rule the wishes of the majority of the countries voters which incidentally outnumber the PAD protesters about 100:1. Still, I think that one has been to court and PAD won it on the grounds that it was a legitimate political protest.

If things don't go down the way PAD and Sondhi want and they take to the streets again it might be seen as an attempt to overthrow the rule of law decided in the countries court rather than simply a political protest. And the tolerance shown to PADs previous protests may not be so forthcoming. Apart from a lot of huffing and puffing and threats, I cant see that PAD has any further legitimate role in the process at hand. I think Sondi and his key organizers would have to know that too. If the protesters have to be hosed down and moved off the streets, it is certain that the organizers would face some very serious charges.

[Plus]

Chownah, your assessment of charges against Democrats is based on one single premise - that it's illegal for political parties to boycott elections, or to persuade others from running in elections. I think you mixed that with persuading voters to boycott elections.

Slimdog left some pointers on the previous page:

I have no problem with your opinion of the TRT party, but as for the Democrats only exercising their rights as outlined by the Law. I think you ought to have a look at the law, in particular the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand, Section 2 and Section 63. Also the organic law on the election of members of the House of Representatives Section 44/5.

Section 2 - Thailand is a democracy...

Section 63 - No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the 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.... and it ends stating that political parties can be dissolved in Thailand

How did boycotting elections equals to "overthrow the democratic regime", and boycoting is directly opposite to "acquire the power"?

I don't see how Demos broke any of the rules here.

Article 44/5 - Deceiving, forcing, threatening, intimidating, slandering or inducing the misunderstanding in the popularity of any candidate or political party.

What exactly did Demos break here? I don't see anything, at least at first sight.

[Jai Dee]

Thaksin says election date may be changed

Thaksin said Thursday that he is not certain whether the next election will be held on October 15 as scheduled by the Election Commission.

"An election will be definitely held but I am not sure that it will be held on October 15 or not," Thaksin said

Source: The Nation - 30 June 2006

[ando]

Hey Plus,

how does this sound?

-- Conspiring with other parties to boycott the election with the intent of preventing the TRT candidate from representing the people with less than 20% of the vote and thus denying the TRT the ability to form government. If I am not mistaken the charges go further than that. There are allegations that the Democrats actually paid smaller parties to boycott the election.

The case before the Constitutional Court is not just a simple one of parties exercising their right not to field a candidate, but rather one of a conspiracy to deny participation in order to gain political advantage outside the the legal parameters of the democratic process.

[Jai Dee]

Attorney General fights off criticism

Attorney General Pachara Yutidhammadamrong yesterday refuted allegations that his office had adopted double standards in processing the proposed disbandment of the Thai Rak Thai and Democrat parties, maintaining that the cases were processed with prudence and fairness.

Pachara was reacting to accusations of double standards from political and academic circles. “I am not affected by the criticism that the OAG has not been fair in making its decision to dissolve the five parties,” he said.

“The investigative committee has exercised its best judgment without taking anyone’s side.”

Pachara added that summaries of the cases are currently being made for his consideration and that he has yet to endorse the committee’s recommendations.

OAG spokesman Attathapol Yaisawang, pictured, said the revised cases would be submitted to the Constitutional Court on Monday.

Attathapol said the TRT party is accused of having hired two small parties to contest the April 2 election to avoid having to win 20 percent the votes as required by the Constitution in constituencies where its candidates were running unchallenged.

The Democrats are accused of paying a small party to accuse TRT of hiring it to contest the election and of inciting the public in Songkhla province to prevent candidates from registering to compete in by-elections on April 23.

However, the OAG may decide to drop charges that relate to Democrat requests to invoke Article 7 of the Constitution to royally appoint a prime minister and the boycotting of the April general election. Charges that the Democrats conspired with the People’s Alliance for Democracy to topple the government and incited the public to boycott the poll may also be dropped.

The minor parties were charged with allowing themselves to be hired to contest the election and of falsely accusing parties of having hired them.

Despite Pachara’s insistence that the public prosecutors had behaved impartially, political commentators said the OAG had been inconsistent in its dealings with the TRT and the Democrats.

“The charges that have been made against the Democrats are practically unfounded,” said Surat Horachaikul, political scientist at Chulalongkorn University.

“What they have done and the charges they face do not fit,” he told ThaiDay.

“Suthep [Thaugsuban, Democrat secretary-general]’s muckraking into TRT election fraud is not the same thing as hiring them to smear TRT.”

Surat added that he thought the OAG had a secret political agenda.

“Were the charges against the Democrats built up so that there is no space for the court to rule otherwise?”

Suthep was simply trying to prove that the TRT party had committed election fraud, Surat said. The political scientist added that the Election Commission (EC) had based its findings against the Democrats on circumstantial evidence and accused the EC of having failed to deal decisively with TRT.

“What Suthep did should have been done by the EC,” Surat said.

Surat added that public confidence in various supposedly independent agencies had been justifiably eroded.

“The public does not trust the Constitutional Court, the OAG or the EC because of the way they had interpreted the law,” he said.

“There is actually nothing complicated about the current problems. These agencies are formulating legal conjectures to confuse the public,” he said. “It is like they are trying to find ways to satisfy their political interests, while at the same time trying to maintain their own credibility,” he said, adding that decisions made by these supposedly independent bodies served a political agenda.

“The only positive thing is that problems move to a higher level,” he said. “Eventually, problems will reach a breaking point and the country will be left to pick up the pieces.”

Source: ThaiDay - 30 June 2006

[chownah]

Chownah, your assessment of charges against Democrats is based on one single premise - that it's illegal for political parties to boycott elections, or to persuade others from running in elections. I think you mixed that with persuading voters to boycott elections.

.

You might be right....I don't know....I mostly was trying to show that the opposition parties did meet as political parties and did (apparently) agree together and form strategies together for the purpose of invalidating the election. Maybe this is legal...maybe not. I think the issue can not be summed up with the statement that since the political parties did not tell voters to boycott the election they are off scott free....I think there is still the question as to whether them working together officially as political parties can be construed as being boycotting or in some other way illegal...don't know for sure.

Again, I want to state that I'm against the dissolution of political parties as a matter of principle.