2 February election can be postponed, Constitutional Court rules: Thailand

[Robby nz]

RT@bangkokpundit: 1. EC issues statement to Cabinet that SOE affects election and so it won't be fair and not in accordance with Constitution

They are the ones who are the experts on election law, it is their job to know ....... But of course the pro Govt posters on here believe they know better.

[rubl]

So we now have a ruling and as the gov said they will accept it, good

The two points are the main question here and are the most pressing both in concern and need. so lets look at them for a moment.

1 The amnesty bill also still in question is in all likelihood dead in the water and has been since the negative response, I cannot see the country accepting it being forced in no matter what the opposition to it is far too strong, yes it is possible but very very unlikely to ever happen under these conditions or within the 180 days no matter what. But it is still possible so cannot be ignored.

2 The farmers NEED to be paid. For me this is more pressing and absolutely will not just go away.

So we have point 1 which is a political concern and point 2 which is a real world, life affecting concern. Im going to just look at it from point 2 as the priority but also point 1 which must be also considered.

What is the fastest way to get the farmers paid AND resolve the fears of point 1 ? the farmers should not wait for another 3 months no matter what, whether the election is postponed or goes ahead ( likely into by elections after ) the farmers in all decency should the priority in all this yet its important to deal with 1 at the same time so what to do ?

Well there is a bit of negotiation here of which the EC can help and get its wishes along with the gov. The election can be delayed if the gov decides to and the farmers can be paid if funding can be borrowed.

Seems to me quite simple, allow the funding through for the farmers and delay the election date until after the 180 days, Suthep goes home the democrats register for the election and all parties get out there and start taking it seriously and canvassing etc. In the meantime the caretaker gov pays the farmers life returns to some normality and all heads go away and cool off.

Thailand could take it further. During this time all sides and academics start to draft up concerns and reform ideas along with a public accountable and transparent advisory committee taken from all sides and neutral academics. Preliminary discussion is entered into and reforms start to be made by the next elected government, it would take years to reform properly but the spotlight on the next government would be bright whilst corruption etc is being looked at.... But.... the country NEEDs a democratically elected government in place to preside over reforms not a peoples council that is appointed.

All this can be done,if sides get together as they claim to love their country, and i do believe all sides on some level love thier country even if they are at each others throat.... this is the middle way forward.

So in summary delay the election to deal with point 1 and allow the farmers to be paid with a loan to deal with point 2 ....... everyone get back to normal and contest things in a real election with everyone taking part without all this posturing and bickering.

The wild card here of course is Suthep, his unnamed people council of china and ridiculous demands, it is time for these protesters to go home and believe most would if a delay past the 180 days was given, at the same time it is only right to allow borrowing for the farmers to be paid.

That is my solution and doubt any of it will happen but it is the middle path forwards for everyone, apart from Suthep who i couldnt give a stuff about.

"So we now have a ruling and as the gov said they will accept it, good"

It still early of course, but the ruling only sais the elections can be postponed and tells the government to consult with the EC IF they want to postpone.

There is no agreement yet to postpone.

[icommunity]

For now after reading various news reports, CC ruled

1. It is a POSTPONEMENT.

2. It is constitutional to POSTPONE.

3. 2 Feb royal Decree can be nullified in the form of issuing a new one to supersede it.

4, Selecting a new date is the joint responsibility of EC and government just like before.

I am still not clear on what legal basis CC made the ruling. The only legal basis is that they voted 8-0 that it is constitutional to postpone. Wonder if it is a new election law of CC. EC's reasoning was that they afraid of violence MAY erupt and that of wasting tax payers' money.

I hope the emergency law will help pave the way for a new election date.

More questions: If a Royal Decree can be nullified and superseded by issuing a new one constitutionally, will that set a precedent on future Royal Decree?

Anyway, we need judicial reform. As I said before, our legal system and judiciary are in a mess.

The legal base the CC made the ruling on is the constitution. How they voted is inmaterial in that.

So, you may wonder, but no it's not a new law. As for the Emergency 'Decree' it would seem undemocratic to have elections under such restrictive conditions.

BTW 'our' legal system and judiciary?

Still not clear. What legal basis under the constitution? The only basis is they voted 8-0. I did not say whether it is inmaterial or not.

Have you read the content of this particular Emergency decree?

Yes, 'Our legal system and judiciary. We all Thais are responsible. They don't belong or own by any group or individual.

Read the constitution. It starts with declaring it's legal base. If as you suggest you are Thai you should know that.

2007 Constitution preamble (1997 version near identical)

"

May there be virtue. Today is the eleventh day of the waxing moon in the ninth month of the year of the Pig under the lunar calendar, being Friday, the twenty-forth day of August under the solar calendar, in the 2550th year of the Buddhist Era.

Phrabat Somdet Phra Paramintharamaha Bhumibol Adulyadej Mahitalathibet Ramathibodi Chakkri Narubodin Sayammintharathirat Borommanatthabophit is graciously pleased to proclaim that the President of the National Legislative Assembly addresses royalty that the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State has been evolved in Thailand for more than seventy five years and, through this period of time, the Constitutions had been promulgated, repealed and amended for the compliance with the situation of the nation and the changing circumstances and that the Constituent Assembly and the Constitution Drafting Commission have been established by the provisions of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (Interim), B.E. 2549 so as to prepare the new Constitution for the compatibility of the administration of State affairs in the forthcoming period with due regard to opinions of the public at all steps through the extensive public consultation and all invaluable opinions have been introduced incessantly into drafting process and to the consideration of motions thereon.

This prepared draft Constitution contains the significant principles in maintaining mutual interest of the Thai people in securing of independence and security of the nation, upholding all religions, revering the King as the Head of State and mental representation of the nation, upholding the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State for the administration of State affairs, rendering the crystallised promotion and protection of rights and liberties of the people, strengthening role and participation of the public in the administration of State affairs and in the examination of the exercise of State power, determining the mechanism for efficiently balancing of powers of political institutions both the legislative and the executive in accordance with the parliamentary regime and strengthening the Court and other independent organisations to perform their duties honestly and fairly.

At the completion of drafting process, the Constituent Assembly had published and disseminated the draft Constitution to the public extensively for acknowledgement and then organised the referendum for public approval thereto. The referendum result has shown that the majority of the people having the right to vote resolved approval to the draft Constitution. The President of the National Legislative Assembly then presents the draft Constitution to the King for His Royal signature to promulgate it as the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and the King is graciously pleased in so doing for the compliance with public opinion.

Be it, therefore, commanded by the King that the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand be promulgated to replace, as from the date of its promulgation, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (Interim), B.E. 2549 promulgated on 1st Day of October B.E. 2549.

May the Thai people unite in observing, protecting and upholding the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in order to maintain the democratic regime of government and the sovereign power derived from the Thai people, and to bring about happiness, prosperity and dignity to His Majesty's subjects throughout the Kingdom according to the will of His Majesty in every respect."

More confusion. The constitution does not give the CC judges the liberty to rule as they like. I asked under what basis under the constitution.

[dukebowling]

PT : uh, according to the constitution, we have to have elections...

EC: no...we need to push them back...we screwed up when we wouldn't extend the registration when it was blocked.

PT: but the constitution...

EC: never mind...i'm going to talk to CC...

CC: don't worry about the constitution...it's just a guideline, ok to push back elections...we never follow the constitution anyway...unless it suits our agenda...

[soi41]

EC Boss Favours 3-Month Poll Postponement

By Khaosod English.

BANGKOK:-- Election Commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn said the 2 February election should be postponed by at least 3 months.

He told our correspondent that he plans to propose the deferment to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on 27 January - a day after the scheduled advanced voting session on Sunday.

Mr. Somchai′s comment came after the Constitutional Court ruled that the 2 February can be constitutionally postponed, and granted the joint authority for the poll deferment to the government and the Election Commission (EC).

The verdict effectively invalidates the existing Constitutional requirement which dictates the government to hold a snap election within 60 days since the Prime Minister dissolved the Parliament; Ms. Yingluck dissolved the House in early December.

The Election Commissioner, who has been a vocal advocate of poll postponement, welcomed the verdict.

"The verdict is a good solution," Mr. Somchai said, "It is another door for the government. It doesn′t see the election as a sole solution, but points to legal provision that can postpone the election".

Since the Constitutional Court has removed the mandatory timeframe associated with the election, Mr. Somchai argued, the poll can wait for at least 3 months.

Nevertheless, the advanced voting on 26 January will go ahead as planned, he added.

Source: http://www.khaosod.co.th/en/view_newsonline.php?newsid=TVRNNU1EVTJORGMwTnc9PQ==

-- Khaosod English 2014-01-24

I thought that the EC was adviced to sit down and find a solution with Yingluck??

I am sure they havent met yet, and despite that the chairman of the EC, makes a statement to the press??

What about showing some respect for the person, you are supposed to negotiate with?

If the three months delay is a good idea or not, doesn't really matter, but the caretaker PM shouldn't have to get it from the press!

So much for the unpolitical and neutral Election Commission!!

[icommunity]

A response to

Robby nz, on 24 Jan 2014 - 20:00, said:

Only problem with that one is that it was the EC who asked the question of the CC not the PM so it was the EC who wanted to be sure they were correct in saying the election could be postponed.

It has now been proved they were correct.

Pure red BS that the EC are on the side of the opposition, they could see the futility and waste of time and money in holding an election and said this time and again.

My Reply

The government could not ask because PTP is not the only political party that will take part in the 2 Feb election. They are at least 35 parties taking part and they agreed on the 2 Feb according to Royal Decree. It is the voices of the people through their party that count, not just the EC. The people's vocie must be respected.

You are BS-ting.

If the Govt could not ask then why did you state in your previous post :

The government wanted legal assurance. Won't fall into the trap of some EC commissioners who are on the side of the oppostions.

You are making it up as you go along.

You don't understand how the game is played, what is meant by covering your behind and passing the buck.

1. Govt dissolves Parliament and calls snap elections, confident that they will be returned to power

2. Democrats, being sure of the same, tries to sabotage the elections by boycotting it

3. With the Dems not participating in the elections, PT is absolutely assured of victory and so pushes ahead with it

4. EC, terrified of the now assured result, tries to convince PT to postpone

5. PT, not wanting to throw away their unexpected gain, cleverly hides behind legalities.

6. In desperation, the EC resorts to the last resort, the CC

7. The CC cleverly rules that the elections can be postponed if both the ED and the Govt jointly agrees

This is now where we are at. Next steps?

8. Govt says we must proceed with elections as the country is unable to function properly and effectively under a caretaker governance (loans, payments to rice farmers, sale of rice etc)

9. EC forced into a corner. They either approve the loans in order to get a postponement of the elections or the elections will go ahead.Either way, checkmate, PT wins......again

Your assumptions, speculation, may be just your analysis is very interesting. Thanks.

[Dogmatix]

Caretaker PM chairs meeting to assess situation, assigns Varathep to clarify with media after charter court ruling on election postponement /MCOT

What has he been told to clarify I wonder. That PT doesn't accept the authority of the Constitutional Court?

[Emptyset]

Despite Khaosod's utterly gratuitous last sentence, the EC has indeed constitutional authority. The Constitution Court has affirmed it, and Khoasod - and the administration - was wrong. The Yingluck administration said that the EC did not have the authority. They also insisted that a delay was unconstitutional. The Constitution Court ruled that assumption was wrong. And the administration - and Khaosod - should get over it. The Yingluck administration - and Khaosod - have egg all over their face. How's that for a Khaosod headline ?

Actually it was the EC that denied they had authority. They continually asked the govt to postpone, doing everything they could to make things difficult, all the while insisting it was their job to run the election, not delay it.

The EC has continually flip-flopped: http://asiancorrespondent.com/118143/thailands-election-commission-reluctant-to-hold-february-2-poll/

The govt though said it was open to negotiations on whether to postpone. But no one wanted to negotiate. So the govt should go ahead and hold it and the EC should do their jobs. There's little point delaying it if other parties aren't willing to discuss a way forward that would result in a successfully held election two or three months down the line.

Many want to vote and are ready to affirm their right to full enfranchisement.

[harrry]

Most of you are forgetting the reasons "why" the election was scheduled in such a rush and "why" the Govt is not keen to postpone it:

1. The 180 days for the Amnesty Bill has not expired yet which they can pass without hinderance if reelected soon

2. The dissatisfaction with payments for the Rice Scheme is growing daily, losing them support from their main power base

They can't and won't postpone.

The 180 days window for the Amnesty Bill no longer applies after the dissolution of parliament but it is not dead. It is held over and can be still be passed by the next government 60 days after it is sworn in.

Point 2 is obviously correct.

On what basis do you consider the bill is held over? Most rules I know do not permit that.

[rubl]

Read the constitution. It starts with declaring it's legal base. If as you suggest you are Thai you should know that.

2007 Constitution preamble (1997 version near identical)

"

May there be virtue. Today is the eleventh day of the waxing moon in the ninth month of the year of the Pig under the lunar calendar, being Friday, the twenty-forth day of August under the solar calendar, in the 2550th year of the Buddhist Era.

Phrabat Somdet Phra Paramintharamaha Bhumibol Adulyadej Mahitalathibet Ramathibodi Chakkri Narubodin Sayammintharathirat Borommanatthabophit is graciously pleased to proclaim that the President of the National Legislative Assembly addresses royalty that the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State has been evolved in Thailand for more than seventy five years and, through this period of time, the Constitutions had been promulgated, repealed and amended for the compliance with the situation of the nation and the changing circumstances and that the Constituent Assembly and the Constitution Drafting Commission have been established by the provisions of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (Interim), B.E. 2549 so as to prepare the new Constitution for the compatibility of the administration of State affairs in the forthcoming period with due regard to opinions of the public at all steps through the extensive public consultation and all invaluable opinions have been introduced incessantly into drafting process and to the consideration of motions thereon.

This prepared draft Constitution contains the significant principles in maintaining mutual interest of the Thai people in securing of independence and security of the nation, upholding all religions, revering the King as the Head of State and mental representation of the nation, upholding the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State for the administration of State affairs, rendering the crystallised promotion and protection of rights and liberties of the people, strengthening role and participation of the public in the administration of State affairs and in the examination of the exercise of State power, determining the mechanism for efficiently balancing of powers of political institutions both the legislative and the executive in accordance with the parliamentary regime and strengthening the Court and other independent organisations to perform their duties honestly and fairly.

At the completion of drafting process, the Constituent Assembly had published and disseminated the draft Constitution to the public extensively for acknowledgement and then organised the referendum for public approval thereto. The referendum result has shown that the majority of the people having the right to vote resolved approval to the draft Constitution. The President of the National Legislative Assembly then presents the draft Constitution to the King for His Royal signature to promulgate it as the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and the King is graciously pleased in so doing for the compliance with public opinion.

Be it, therefore, commanded by the King that the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand be promulgated to replace, as from the date of its promulgation, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (Interim), B.E. 2549 promulgated on 1st Day of October B.E. 2549.

May the Thai people unite in observing, protecting and upholding the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in order to maintain the democratic regime of government and the sovereign power derived from the Thai people, and to bring about happiness, prosperity and dignity to His Majesty's subjects throughout the Kingdom according to the will of His Majesty in every respect."

More confusion. The constitution does not give the CC judges the liberty to rule as they like. I asked under what basis under the constitution.

Who says that the CC 'judges as they like' ? Do you publicly question a court ruling here ?

As for the basis in the base of the constitution, why not read it, my dear idiotcommunity. maybe have a look at section 204 - 217?

Surely as self-proclaimed Thai you should know those parts

[Tatsujin]

Most of you are forgetting the reasons "why" the election was scheduled in such a rush and "why" the Govt is not keen to postpone it:

1. The 180 days for the Amnesty Bill has not expired yet which they can pass without hinderance if reelected soon

2. The dissatisfaction with payments for the Rice Scheme is growing daily, losing them support from their main power base

They can't and won't postpone.

The 180 days window for the Amnesty Bill no longer applies after the dissolution of parliament but it is not dead. It is held over and can be still be passed by the next government 60 days after it is sworn in.

Point 2 is obviously correct.

Really? I was of the understanding it simply had a 180 day window on it regardless.

[rubl]

Despite Khaosod's utterly gratuitous last sentence, the EC has indeed constitutional authority. The Constitution Court has affirmed it, and Khoasod - and the administration - was wrong. The Yingluck administration said that the EC did not have the authority. They also insisted that a delay was unconstitutional. The Constitution Court ruled that assumption was wrong. And the administration - and Khaosod - should get over it. The Yingluck administration - and Khaosod - have egg all over their face. How's that for a Khaosod headline ?

Actually it was the EC that denied they had authority. They continually asked the govt to postpone, doing everything they could to make things difficult, all the while insisting it was their job to run the election, not delay it.

The EC has continually flip-flopped: http://asiancorrespondent.com/118143/thailands-election-commission-reluctant-to-hold-february-2-poll/

The govt though said it was open to negotiations on whether to postpone. But no one wanted to negotiate. So the govt should go ahead and hold it and the EC should do their jobs. There's little point delaying it if other parties aren't willing to discuss a way forward that would result in a successfully held election two or three months down the line.

Many want to vote and are ready to affirm their right to full enfranchisement.

Long live dear leader!

[Maestro]

Posted Today, 06:14

PDRC plans to block advance voting

The Nation

Posted Today, 17:13

MASS RALLY

Protesters will not obstruct election

BANGKOK: -- Anti-government protests will not do anything to obstruct the advance voting this Sunday or the February 2 election, rally spokesman Akanat Promphan said Friday.

Waiting for the next announcement of of change of mind by the PDRC/PCAD.

[Thai at Heart]

So the court just threw the case right back at the EC. Now what? Can the EC change the date without the government approval? If either side disagree with the other side what happens? Seems the court did a terrible job making a decision here.

Given the line "The Court also clarified that the government and the Election Commission (EC) have the joint authority to postpone the election, namely by issuing a Royal Decree." I would suggest that the Court is saying 'sort it out between yourselves'

Now the ball is back in the Govt's court, do they push ahead and try for the election (it will fail, even if held) or do they back off and agree to postpone... guess its true colours time

.

The government "issues" royal decrees?

Interesting wording. What a crazy interpretation.

[focus27]

Ok. This idiotic Elite serving Constitusion is about 8 years old and was a BS when it was written.

How about lowering the quroum for the Parliment to sit?

What is wrong with 85 percent of seat filled for it to function... or less.

Why can 7-8 provinces not sending MP's hold the whole country to hostage?

Or was this put in place to make sure that exactly this could happen if the Elites needed to scupper parliament?

Instead of flaming, please put in writing why the Parliament could not sit with 20 mps missing? 20 MP's I might add, that chose not to contest and chose to obstruct elections.

We have seen the fudge today and this is because they are now hedging. Maybe believe Suthep does not have the numbers to pull off his coup and are hoping to save their skins so they can come back and re-try this coup again later.

The little weasel Akanat was saying yesterday the really need the donations as some business backers not putting money in as they are afraid they PDRC cannot win. That from the horses mouth!!!

Steady on the flames please.

However much you might not like the constitution it is the highest law in Thailand with regard to how democracy is applied, and it has been approved at referendum by the population.

The reason why a certain number of elected MPs is needed to form a legal parliament, is to ensure that the democratically expressed wishes of Thais are not ignored. That the quorum figure is not set at 100% is, I believe, to allow for parliament to convene while still allowing for some election results to be unconfirmed (red- and yellow-carded candidates).

If the constitution were changed to allow a quorum with 20 MPs missing, why not 30, 40, 50 or 100?

What kind of democracy are you opening the door to then?

Well, the British House of Commons manages with a quorum of just 40 from 650 members to vote. The House of Lords has a quorum of just 30 for a vote to take place - and a quorum of 3, including the Speaker, to hold a debate.

In Thailand, the quorum to vote in the Senate and the House is 50% of existing members. So an assembly can debate and pass laws without full attendance, and without jeopardizing any democratic principles.

The strange thing in Thailand is the requirement that 95% of the available seats in the House of Representatives must be filled with a member so that the parliamentary session can even start! I don't know if any other countries have similar requirements - I couldn't find anything similar for the Commons.

It does, however, seem a bizarre arithmetic that the House could have a quorum to pass legislation but not enough members to even open for business!

[Thai at Heart]

Despite Khaosod's utterly gratuitous last sentence, the EC has indeed constitutional authority. The Constitution Court has affirmed it, and Khoasod - and the administration - was wrong. The Yingluck administration said that the EC did not have the authority. They also insisted that a delay was unconstitutional. The Constitution Court ruled that assumption was wrong. And the administration - and Khaosod - should get over it. The Yingluck administration - and Khaosod - have egg all over their face. How's that for a Khaosod headline ?

As the Constitution Court says that the EC and the administration - jointly - have the power to delay, it obviously means that the administration will simply keep on their path, dictate to the EC or ignore it completely, and forge ahead. A terrible decision - but it's Pheu Thai - one can't expect them to suddenly be cured of their inclination to make terrible decisions. So the election goes ahead. In Udon Thani it will be a roaring success, and likely will go smoothly through at least most of the North. But the bets stop there, and it's anyone's guess what's going to happen elsewhere. But even if the whole thing went without a hitch, the numbers add up to a quorum-less parliament before it even starts. There is no endgame for the administration. And in the interim, there is an unprecedented lack of consensus in the country, a great deal of unrest, and an unlawful caretaker-imposed emergency decree, as the Yingluck administration is determined to exit the stage by delivering a good, swift kick to the media.

I fail to see the ambiguity in the statement in the constitution.

What role does yingluck take off there is no election?

What a joke.

[Emptyset]

For now after reading various news reports, CC ruled

1. It is a POSTPONEMENT.

2. It is constitutional to POSTPONE.

3. 2 Feb royal Decree can be nullified in the form of issuing a new one to supersede it.

4, Selecting a new date is the joint responsibility of EC and government just like before.

I am still not clear on what legal basis CC made the ruling. The only legal basis is that they voted 8-0 that it is constitutional to postpone. Wonder if it is a new election law of CC. EC's reasoning was that they afraid of violence MAY erupt and that of wasting tax payers' money.

I hope the emergency law will help pave the way for a new election date.

More questions: If a Royal Decree can be nullified and superseded by issuing a new one constitutionally, will that set a precedent on future Royal Decree?

Anyway, we need judicial reform. As I said before, our legal system and judiciary are in a mess.

The legal base the CC made the ruling on is the constitution. How they voted is inmaterial in that.

So, you may wonder, but no it's not a new law. As for the Emergency 'Decree' it would seem undemocratic to have elections under such restrictive conditions.

BTW 'our' legal system and judiciary?

I think he means it's hard to find a constitutional basis for the court's decision (but when did that ever stop them?). Still I haven't read the full ruling yet so I don't know. As for the SOE, many by-elections have been held under it, particularly in the Deep South. And of course the vast majority of the country isn't affected by the SOE. What did you think about the 2007 Constitutional referendum being held under martial law in 35 provinces? If that was all well and good, then there should be no problem with this, particularly as the SOE doesn't prevent election campaigning.

Despite the fact icommunity's English is obviously fluent, his writing suggests he might well be Thai.

[FangFerang]

RT@bangkokpundit: 1. EC issues statement to Cabinet that SOE affects election and so it won't be fair and not in accordance with Constitution

They are the ones who are the experts on election law, it is their job to know ....... But of course the pro Govt posters on here believe they know better.

Really? There were numerous elections under an SOE or whatever was passing for one in the nineteen seventies. And the CC issued a ruling that has nothing to do with what you posted.

[FangFerang]

Most of you are forgetting the reasons "why" the election was scheduled in such a rush and "why" the Govt is not keen to postpone it:

1. The 180 days for the Amnesty Bill has not expired yet which they can pass without hinderance if reelected soon

2. The dissatisfaction with payments for the Rice Scheme is growing daily, losing them support from their main power base

They can't and won't postpone.

First post I've seen today that is downright true and gets to the heart of the matter!

Nothing but a bunch of speculation and BS

Only speculation is as to whether or not PT will postpone. The two points raised are absolute fact.

The two points raised are factual. Further, passing the amnesty bill will only create a vicious circle. I really don't think they will try that again.

Then again, it has been said, "Never underestimate the stupidity of people." Welcome to the merry-go-round that has no Off switch. Just watching it makes people dizzy.

[FangFerang]

Only the misnamed Democratic Party is boycotting the election. The other parties are standing. Why should the election be postponed just because one party and their foot soldiers are causing trouble?

BJT have also called for a postponement since the court ruling.

Good. I want to hear more third party voices an fewer third party explosions....

[Robby nz]

EC Boss Favours 3-Month Poll Postponement

By Khaosod English.

BANGKOK:-- Election Commissioner Somchai Srisutthiyakorn said the 2 February election should be postponed by at least 3 months.

He told our correspondent that he plans to propose the deferment to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on 27 January - a day after the scheduled advanced voting session on Sunday.

Mr. Somchai′s comment came after the Constitutional Court ruled that the 2 February can be constitutionally postponed, and granted the joint authority for the poll deferment to the government and the Election Commission (EC).

The verdict effectively invalidates the existing Constitutional requirement which dictates the government to hold a snap election within 60 days since the Prime Minister dissolved the Parliament; Ms. Yingluck dissolved the House in early December.

The Election Commissioner, who has been a vocal advocate of poll postponement, welcomed the verdict.

"The verdict is a good solution," Mr. Somchai said, "It is another door for the government. It doesn′t see the election as a sole solution, but points to legal provision that can postpone the election".

Since the Constitutional Court has removed the mandatory timeframe associated with the election, Mr. Somchai argued, the poll can wait for at least 3 months.

Nevertheless, the advanced voting on 26 January will go ahead as planned, he added.

Source: http://www.khaosod.c...TJORGMwTnc9PQ==

-- Khaosod English 2014-01-24

I thought that the EC was adviced to sit down and find a solution with Yingluck??

I am sure they havent met yet, and despite that the chairman of the EC, makes a statement to the press??

What about showing some respect for the person, you are supposed to negotiate with?

If the three months delay is a good idea or not, doesn't really matter, but the caretaker PM shouldn't have to get it from the press!

So much for the unpolitical and neutral Election Commission!!

The EC is clearly stating their position before they sit down with the caretaker Govt and discuss whether a postponement can take place, that is if Yingluck and co will meet with them.

Two possible things that can happen, PT can meet with the EC and discuss as recommended by the CC, or they can ignore the court and carry on as before.

Should they choose to meet then there are two more things that can happen.

They can agree to a postponement or can reject a postponement.

If a postponement is agreed to then a new date will be set and an election will go ahead from there.

If not then the EC will carry on and organize a futile election.

Anyway how do you know the Caretaker PM got the CC decision from the press?

I would suspect the decision was given to the two parties before the press release, if you have proof otherwise please post it.

[Publicus]

Ok. This idiotic Elite serving Constitusion is about 8 years old and was a BS when it was written.

How about lowering the quroum for the Parliment to sit?

What is wrong with 85 percent of seat filled for it to function... or less.

Why can 7-8 provinces not sending MP's hold the whole country to hostage?

Or was this put in place to make sure that exactly this could happen if the Elites needed to scupper parliament?

Instead of flaming, please put in writing why the Parliament could not sit with 20 mps missing? 20 MP's I might add, that chose not to contest and chose to obstruct elections.

We have seen the fudge today and this is because they are now hedging. Maybe believe Suthep does not have the numbers to pull off his coup and are hoping to save their skins so they can come back and re-try this coup again later.

The little weasel Akanat was saying yesterday the really need the donations as some business backers not putting money in as they are afraid they PDRC cannot win. That from the horses mouth!!!

Steady on the flames please.

About 90 or more % of the 2007 constitution is identical to the 1997 version. The only real black blob is the 'coup makers' amnesty'.

The dissolution of parties is in both, the 2007 version only got 5-year ban added.

Read all about the 1997, 2007 constitutions and what's good or bad about it.

http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/1997/

http://www.asianlii.org/th/legis/const/2007/

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

Each constitution has major flaws that have in leaps and bounds led Thailand directly to the present chaos of events and circumstances. Indeed, the 2007 constitution built on obviously avoidable major flaws contained in the 1997 constitution, thus compounding Thailand's problems.

For instance, one major flaw of the 2007 constitution, which was written by a coup appointed commission, is that it continued the 1997 constitution's incestuous culture of judges appointing successor judges without any external accountability or external review by the society or the government. The elites continue to appoint - the elites.

Another major and obvious flaw of the 2007 constitution is that It also continued the 1997 constitution's destructive practice of judges participating in vetting and appointing members to comprise the Election Commission and the Counter Corruption Commission, among other "independent" agencies. The two agencies along with the constitutional court judges involved in appointing members of each agency are presently the principal agencies actively undermining the democratically elected government.

Compounding Thailand's contemporary and confounding problems of the moment, the 2007 constitution introduced another incestuous provision, which is that judges and other members of the elites appoint half the Senate, a new and onerous anti-democracy article that compounds the present crisis of democracy and which has contributed significantly to undermining the legitimately elected democratic government.

Further, neither the 1997 nor the 2007 constitution respectively address the vital matter of Thailand's "deep state" politics and society, so both are inherently flawed and thus counter productive from the standpoint of democracy and the rule of law.

There is much more wrong about each constitution.

However, the ultimate failure of each constitution is the failure, the unwillingness of the elites to tame the military, to in fact bring the military under the control of the elected civilian government authority. Indeed, given Thailand's history of coups, it is an absolute necessity that the Thai constitution be explicit that any attempt at military mutiny, i.e., a coup d'état, must irreversibly result in the death penalty, executed in the public square.

[Nowhereman60]

Most of you are forgetting the reasons "why" the election was scheduled in such a rush and "why" the Govt is not keen to postpone it:

1. The 180 days for the Amnesty Bill has not expired yet which they can pass without hinderance if reelected soon

2. The dissatisfaction with payments for the Rice Scheme is growing daily, losing them support from their main power base

They can't and won't postpone.

So many people keep saying that - but why don't you relax? A new government can't be seated on Feb3, it will have to wait on the results of by-elections in the 28 blocked constituencies. By the time that is over, the 180 days will be up.

Thanks, I'm not an idiot and I do know they can't take office (if they win) on Feb 3rd.

What they can probably do however is take office BEFORE 10th May which is the date the 180 days expires. Get it now?

Let's see, 60 days minimum after the election to schedule by-elections (1st round)..... that takes you into April.

Now, if still no candidate gets 20% of the vote in 16 of them, another 30 days until the next round, then another 30 for the final. That's June.

So we now have a ruling and as the gov said they will accept it, good

The two points are the main question here and are the most pressing both in concern and need. so lets look at them for a moment.

1 The amnesty bill also still in question is in all likelihood dead in the water and has been since the negative response, I cannot see the country accepting it being forced in no matter what the opposition to it is far too strong, yes it is possible but very very unlikely to ever happen under these conditions or within the 180 days no matter what. But it is still possible so cannot be ignored.

2 The farmers NEED to be paid. For me this is more pressing and absolutely will not just go away.

So we have point 1 which is a political concern and point 2 which is a real world, life affecting concern. Im going to just look at it from point 2 as the priority but also point 1 which must be also considered.

What is the fastest way to get the farmers paid AND resolve the fears of point 1 ? the farmers should not wait for another 3 months no matter what, whether the election is postponed or goes ahead ( likely into by elections after ) the farmers in all decency should the priority in all this yet its important to deal with 1 at the same time so what to do ?

Well there is a bit of negotiation here of which the EC can help and get its wishes along with the gov. The election can be delayed if the gov decides to and the farmers can be paid if funding can be borrowed.

Seems to me quite simple, allow the funding through for the farmers and delay the election date until after the 180 days, Suthep goes home the democrats register for the election and all parties get out there and start taking it seriously and canvassing etc. In the meantime the caretaker gov pays the farmers life returns to some normality and all heads go away and cool off.

Thailand could take it further. During this time all sides and academics start to draft up concerns and reform ideas along with a public accountable and transparent advisory committee taken from all sides and neutral academics. Preliminary discussion is entered into and reforms start to be made by the next elected government, it would take years to reform properly but the spotlight on the next government would be bright whilst corruption etc is being looked at.... But.... the country NEEDs a democratically elected government in place to preside over reforms not a peoples council that is appointed.

All this can be done,if sides get together as they claim to love their country, and i do believe all sides on some level love thier country even if they are at each others throat.... this is the middle way forward.

So in summary delay the election to deal with point 1 and allow the farmers to be paid with a loan to deal with point 2 ....... everyone get back to normal and contest things in a real election with everyone taking part without all this posturing and bickering.

The wild card here of course is Suthep, his unnamed people council of china and ridiculous demands, it is time for these protesters to go home and believe most would if a delay past the 180 days was given, at the same time it is only right to allow borrowing for the farmers to be paid.

That is my solution and doubt any of it will happen but it is the middle path forwards for everyone, apart from Suthep who i couldnt give a stuff about.

I'd give a thumbs up to that compromise solution, seems reasonable.

Frogs don't have thumbs so you lose there. Why should the government postpone the election if the anti government protesters are not going to block the election. my thumb up go with the 2nd of Feb and let the chips fall where they may. Plus it makes the Democracies look like idiots for not contesting the election.

[saakura]

So now the whole country knows that it can be postponed within the constitution.

Over to you madam caretaker PM.

If i am not mistaken, madam caretaker PM had even before this judgement agreed for talks to discuss possible postponement if there is a legal basis for it. But madman Suthep has clearly stated daily that he will only accept an unelected council of 400 members, 100 of whom will be appointed by his group.

[Old Man River]

So the court just threw the case right back at the EC. Now what? Can the EC change the date without the government approval? If either side disagree with the other side what happens? Seems the court did a terrible job making a decision here.

Well... I think the full reading might be better than this summary - it still doesn't say *what* the basis of delaying an election should be. The reasons listed in the constitution don't seem to apply here, but if the court has not said clearly that these protests constitute a "National" emergency, then I think the government is still on thin ice if it agrees to delay.

It doesn't say they should, it just says there is a mechanism to do so.

I'm guessing here, but section 187 says the King can has the prerogative to issue a decree not contrary to the law (this is separate the emergency one). Presumably the EC and the Government need to agree on a mutually satisfactory date (good luck!), and then request that such a decree be issued to move the election date.

Agree.

There is no incentive for the PTP to initiate a delay. The Dem's have eliminated themselves and the PTP might as well start the election/bi-election process.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Thai at Heart]

For now after reading various news reports, CC ruled

1. It is a POSTPONEMENT.

2. It is constitutional to POSTPONE.

3. 2 Feb royal Decree can be nullified in the form of issuing a new one to supersede it.

4, Selecting a new date is the joint responsibility of EC and government just like before.

I am still not clear on what legal basis CC made the ruling. The only legal basis is that they voted 8-0 that it is constitutional to postpone. Wonder if it is a new election law of CC. EC's reasoning was that they afraid of violence MAY erupt and that of wasting tax payers' money.

I hope the emergency law will help pave the way for a new election date.

More questions: If a Royal Decree can be nullified and superseded by issuing a new one constitutionally, will that set a precedent on future Royal Decree?

Anyway, we need judicial reform. As I said before, our legal system and judiciary are in a mess.

The legal base the CC made the ruling on is the constitution. How they voted is inmaterial in that.

So, you may wonder, but no it's not a new law. As for the Emergency 'Decree' it would seem undemocratic to have elections under such restrictive conditions.

BTW 'our' legal system and judiciary?

I think he means it's hard to find a constitutional basis for the court's decision (but when did that ever stop them?). Still I haven't read the full ruling yet so I don't know. As for the SOE, many by-elections have been held under it, particularly in the Deep South. And of course the vast majority of the country isn't affected by the SOE. What did you think about the 2007 Constitutional referendum being held under martial law in 35 provinces? If that was all well and good, then there should be no problem with this, particularly as the SOE doesn't prevent election campaigning.

Despite the fact icommunity's English is obviously fluent, his writing suggests he might well be Thai.

Hilariously, the 2007 election that was held including the referendum on the constitution was carried out with the SOE in effect to cover huge wedges of the pro thaksin area.

What an amazing interpretation.

[Thai at Heart]

So the court just threw the case right back at the EC. Now what? Can the EC change the date without the government approval? If either side disagree with the other side what happens? Seems the court did a terrible job making a decision here.

Well... I think the full reading might be better than this summary - it still doesn't say *what* the basis of delaying an election should be. The reasons listed in the constitution don't seem to apply here, but if the court has not said clearly that these protests constitute a "National" emergency, then I think the government is still on thin ice if it agrees to delay.

It doesn't say they should, it just says there is a mechanism to do so.

I'm guessing here, but section 187 says the King can has the prerogative to issue a decree not contrary to the law (this is separate the emergency one). Presumably the EC and the Government need to agree on a mutually satisfactory date (good luck!), and then request that such a decree be issued to move the election date.

Agree.

There is no incentive for the PTP to initiate a delay. The Dem's have eliminated themselves and the PTP might as well start the election/bi-election process.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

They cannot delay. They risk creating a vacuum where the parliament is not seated.

[indyuk]

If Thailand's general election does not take place within the 60 days of the dissolution of parliament Thailand will have abandoned Democracy. Since it appears that many Thai institutions and their leaders seem to be behind a seditionist that used money to buy an 'anti Shinawatra Family mob' with a view to destroying a second democratically elected government within ten years it is clear that the professionally engaged Thai citizens are technically part of Suthep's mob themselves. That being so Thailand will never achieve democracy. This is because they will never be able to draft a credible charter that can lawfully exclude the majority of the electorate from participating in the governance of their own country.

Further; Since most Thai politicians are considered corrupt the wish to exclude the Shinawatra's from office must be racially driven. I base this observation on the long standing hatred of some elite Thai families and their offspring have for Thai families of Chinese Decent that have risen to elite status.

If the Thai institutions and their professional employees, lawyers and judges do not ensure that the electorate can elect a new Parliament on February 2nd 2014 I believe that Thailand will never be able to return to being a democratic nation.

[Thai at Heart]

If Thailand's general election does not take place within the 60 days of the dissolution of parliament Thailand will have abandoned Democracy. Since it appears that many Thai institutions and their leaders seem to be behind a seditionist that used money to buy an 'anti Shinawatra Family mob' with a view to destroying a second democratically elected government within ten years it is clear that the professionally engaged Thai citizens are technically part of Suthep's mob themselves. That being so Thailand will never achieve democracy. This is because they will never be able to draft a credible charter that can lawfully exclude the majority of the electorate from participating in the governance of their own country.

Further; Since most Thai politicians are considered corrupt the wish to exclude the Shinawatra's from office must be racially driven. I base this observation on the long standing hatred of some elite Thai families and their offspring have for Thai families of Chinese Decent that have risen to elite status.

If the Thai institutions and their professional employees, lawyers and judges do not ensure that the electorate can elect a new Parliament on February 2nd 2014 I believe that Thailand will never be able to return to being a democratic nation.

Never is a long time, but God knows what system they will come up with. Strangely, there are sino thais on all sides of the discussion. I think they just want rid of thaksin because he doesn't play by the traditional rules.

This decision though seems to be made on the hoof. This cannot have been planned by Sutheps crowd.

[bubblegum]

The government must continue with the elections as planned. If the PDRC were to agree to a 60 day postponement on the basis that they would participate and not disrupt the rescheduled election - fine, the government could agree to that, but the PDRC don't want a postponement - they want a cancellation and that, the government cannot give into. So Feb 2nd will take place and the majority of the seats will be democratically decided. Then there will be by-elections in the 28 seats in which the PDRC prevented candidate registration and in any seats in Bangkok and the South where they manage to disrupt the poll and that process will continue until 95% of the seats are filled then parliament can convene. Which will be months away ....and this aint going to be fun place to live in the while.

You have too many "if's" "would" "not disturb" "could" in your post