Thai politics: A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

[webfact]

THAI TALK
Thai politics: A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma
Suthichai Yoon
The Nation



BANGKOK: -- Can the snap election scheduled for February 2 be postponed? If the caretaker government and the Election Commission don't see eye to eye, who's going to decide? If the ballot-casting exercise is to be carried out, how messy will it get? And who will be responsible for the consequences?

Less than 10 days from the scheduled date, those questions remain unanswered. Chaos promises to prevail until the very last minute.

The EC is at loggerheads with the Yingluck government over whether the polls can be delayed. The country is virtually divided right down the middle.

The independent election agency says that even if the poll is held on the scheduled date, there won't be a parliament to speak of since the probability of producing the required 95 per cent of the total number of MPs is very low. So far, 28 constituencies, all of them in the South, have registered not a single candidate. Another 22 have only one candidate each. The law requires that if there is no contest in any constituency, the lone candidate must get at least 20 per cent of the total number of votes and exceed the "No" votes cast.

There is also the problem of a lack of volunteers from local government agencies to man the polling booths. The number of missing officials is as high as 100,000 and the Interior Ministry isn't offering any assurance it can fill that huge gap.

The government hit back by declaring that the law authorises the EC to conduct an election. Period. It doesn't empower the agency to postpone an election. The EC responded by saying that the government could proceed with the ballot-casting on February 2 but that it would be held responsible for the consequences.

There is obviously no love lost between the two. Instead of sitting down with the five Election Commissioners, Premier Yingluck sent invitations to 70-odd representatives from various political parties, academics and business leaders to discuss the election date. With the majority of the attendants being members of the 53 parties "contesting" the upcoming election, the conclusion was predictable: The polls must be held on schedule.

The tricky question is what happens if the February 2 election doesn't produce over 95 per cent of the 500 MPs?

Under Article 93, if the number of MPs falls below 475, by-elections will have to be held within 180 days to come up with a number higher than 475 in order to convene the first parliamentary session.

Another technical question arises: When does one start the countdown for the 180-day period?

Another clause in the Constitution - Article 127 - stipulates that within 30 days of the election, the first House session must be convened. But then, if the number of MPs fails to reach 475, the first House meeting can't be held.

Things get complicated because the current stalemate is unprecedented. When the charter writers were debating the constitutional drafts years ago, they couldn't possibly have imagined a situation as entangled as this.

With the first deadline drawing very close, the only option left is to ask the Constitutional Court to rule on the conflicting positions. But then, there are conflicts within the conflicts: Even if the court could hand down a verdict on the issue before February 2, there is still the question of whether the caretaker government will accept a decision if it goes against its present position.

The ruling Pheu Thai Party has more than once publicly declared that it doesn't have to accept every verdict of the Constitutional Court.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, it's a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.


-- The Nation 2014-01-23

[focus27]

The drafters of the constitution were obviously not logicians. Mind you, a "caretaker" government can continue without the House... mmm... maybe they were

Also, where does the 500 come from, I thought there were 480 MPs - and 95% of that is 456. I may be wrong - have to dash now!!!

[JAG]

The drafters of the constitution are to be congratulated. It is working perfectly. If the correct circumstances are created a government of which the establishment does not approve cannot survive in any meaningful way, no matter what its electoral mandate.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited January 23, 2014 by JAG

[rogerdee123]

Maybe the proper word should be "Enema" instead of "Enigma"

[focus27]

The drafters of the constitution were obviously not logicians. Mind you, a "caretaker" government can continue without the House... mmm... maybe they were

Also, where does the 500 come from, I thought there were 480 MPs - and 95% of that is 456. I may be wrong - have to dash now!!!

My error - yes 500 - was 480 in the constitution text.

A constitution should be written as one would a computer program, ensuring that there are no infinite loops or dilemmas. Amendments serve the purpose of 'debugging' the code, or sometimes clarifying words that have attained a new meaning (possibly due to technology). As there is one important part of the Thai constitution that cannot be discussed, it seems pointless to discuss any of it in great detail. Indeed, the apparent dilemma in the above article is a false dilemma as there is an obvious solution that cannot be discussed.

There is, I think, a more interesting dilemma. The Prime Minister must be an MP, but the Ministers don't have to be. So, if the House of Representatives cannot convene because there are not enough MPs, new by-elections need to take place, but in the meantime the PM is no longer an MP. This seems to leave it open that the PM may have to step down even though the caretaker government is still in place. A decision to replace a PM can be taken by the National Assembly which would then consist of just the Senate. :-) I may be wrong... again ;-)

[Thait Spot]

The drafters of the constitution were obviously not logicians. Mind you, a "caretaker" government can continue without the House... mmm... maybe they were

Also, where does the 500 come from, I thought there were 480 MPs - and 95% of that is 456. I may be wrong - have to dash now!!!

My error - yes 500 - was 480 in the constitution text.

A constitution should be written as one would a computer program, ensuring that there are no infinite loops or dilemmas. Amendments serve the purpose of 'debugging' the code, or sometimes clarifying words that have attained a new meaning (possibly due to technology). As there is one important part of the Thai constitution that cannot be discussed, it seems pointless to discuss any of it in great detail. Indeed, the apparent dilemma in the above article is a false dilemma as there is an obvious solution that cannot be discussed.

There is, I think, a more interesting dilemma. The Prime Minister must be an MP, but the Ministers don't have to be. So, if the House of Representatives cannot convene because there are not enough MPs, new by-elections need to take place, but in the meantime the PM is no longer an MP. This seems to leave it open that the PM may have to step down even though the caretaker government is still in place. A decision to replace a PM can be taken by the National Assembly which would then consist of just the Senate. :-) I may be wrong... again ;-)

The PM is a party list candidate.

How can the party list be calculated until the by-elections have taken place?

Interesting

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[noitom]

The drafters of the constitution are to be congratulated. It is working perfectly. If the correct circumstances are created a government of which the establishment does not approve cannot survive in any meaningful way, no matter what its electoral mandate.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The perfect crime.

[noitom]

Joseph Heller called it - Catch-22

[ddavidovsky]

As there is one important part of the Thai constitution that cannot be discussed, it seems pointless to discuss any of it in great detail. Indeed, the apparent dilemma in the above article is a false dilemma as there is an obvious solution that cannot be discussed.

Indeed. All discussion of the Thai political crisis, on both sides, is utterly pointless given that the root problem of Thai politics - the existence of an alternative power base outside of elected government - cannot be discussed. The people have little idea of how this works and the crowds on the streets, who are no doubt sincere in their intention to fight against corruption, have no idea how deeply they are being used and deceived. They just can't see it. The phrase 'elephant in the room' is particularly apt in Thailand.

[Suradit69]

Thai politics: A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

And yet there's no shortage of Thai Visa political "experts," many of whom are otherwise totally clueless about the Thai language and Thai culture or even how to deal with the most basic day-to-day issues of life in Thailand, for which they desperately seek guidance on Thai Visa forums. The last usually demonstrating the blind-leading-the-blind metaphor.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Suradit69

[focus27]

A constitution should be written as one would a computer program, ensuring that there are no infinite loops or dilemmas. Amendments serve the purpose of 'debugging' the code, or sometimes clarifying words that have attained a new meaning (possibly due to technology). As there is one important part of the Thai constitution that cannot be discussed, it seems pointless to discuss any of it in great detail. Indeed, the apparent dilemma in the above article is a false dilemma as there is an obvious solution that cannot be discussed.

There is, I think, a more interesting dilemma. The Prime Minister must be an MP, but the Ministers don't have to be. So, if the House of Representatives cannot convene because there are not enough MPs, new by-elections need to take place, but in the meantime the PM is no longer an MP. This seems to leave it open that the PM may have to step down even though the caretaker government is still in place. A decision to replace a PM can be taken by the National Assembly which would then consist of just the Senate. :-) I may be wrong... again ;-)

The PM is a party list candidate.

How can the party list be calculated until the by-elections have taken place?

Interesting

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

At a general election Thais have two votes: one for their constituency MP and another from a party list under proportional representation. There are only by-elections for constituency MPs. The percentages from the party lists are fixed at general elections; an MP can be replaced by another from the same party. If we get to the point that some constituencies have "late" elections, and if they are deemed to be by-elections, then only the constituency MP can be voted for. If they are deemed to be still part of the general election then, you're right, the MPs elected under the party lists will probably have to wait.

Just to add to the confusion, a quorum for the House is 50% of its members, so the House could be quorate but still unable to be in session because of other articles discussed above. Truly mangled. In contrast, the British House of Commons requires a quorum of just 40 members (6%) to vote on bills.

Edited January 23, 2014 by focus27

[Cricketnut]

If the Democrats had their crap together and formulated reforms that the people could collectively agree to and reign in Suthep, the country would not be in this position. Yingluck did a superb job in thwarting Suthep goals by agreeing to his demands and the Democrats have nothing to offer to the people otherwise they would have been voted in... How many years now? 1992 rings a bell.

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[kirk0233]

As there is one important part of the Thai constitution that cannot be discussed, it seems pointless to discuss any of it in great detail. Indeed, the apparent dilemma in the above article is a false dilemma as there is an obvious solution that cannot be discussed.

Indeed. All discussion of the Thai political crisis, on both sides, is utterly pointless given that the root problem of Thai politics - the existence of an alternative power base outside of elected government - cannot be discussed. The people have little idea of how this works and the crowds on the streets, who are no doubt sincere in their intention to fight against corruption, have no idea how deeply they are being used and deceived. They just can't see it. The phrase 'elephant in the room' is particularly apt in Thailand.

If LM was eliminated there would be no mystery surrounding the deal making and out of sight meddling that is occuring and democracy could take hold. Of course, this is exactly the reason LM is not eliminated.

[Scamper]

As the reasoned arguments in this article are becoming more and more in the public consciousness now - indeed, what will happen ? It will by definition be a constitutional crisis, because there are two conflicting parts of the electoral act that are in conflict with each other in this particular unprecedented situation - the imperative to open parliament within 30 days of an election, and the stipulation that parliament can only be opened if it is at least 95 % occupied. As the writer points out, this situation was deemed outside the realm of possibility. And yet - here we are - ten days before an election - with no constitutional mechanism to open parliament. But the precedent does not stop there. Not only has this never happened before, but never before has an 60 day emergency decree been invoked on the eve of an election. But it doesn't stop there. This is an administration that has continually ignored Constitutional Court rulings, in any event. This is an administration that is bent on forming its own rules, and paving its own path - regardless as to what anyone else - including the courts - say.

[smutcakes]

If the elections are postponed I hope the EC can account for and return the balance of the 3.8 billion baht provided to hold the election.

[Bluespunk]

'Thai politics: A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Suthichai Yoon'

Don't flatter yourselves. It's not an enigma, a mystery or a riddle. It's a refusal to rule in a legitimate, honest, conciliatory manner. It's a refusal to see govt as anything but an opportunity to enrich yourself and protect your cliques privileges. It's a refusal to rule by the law and fight corrupt practices.

[jackr]

I don't think we should paraphrase the great Sir Winston on this one, it's more a case of SNAFU.

[laobali]

Thai politics: A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

And yet there's no shortage of Thai Visa political "experts," many of whom are otherwise totally clueless about the Thai language and Thai culture or even how to deal with the most basic day-to-day issues of life in Thailand, for which they desperately seek guidance on Thai Visa forums. The last usually demonstrating the blind-leading-the-blind metaphor.

And your point is?