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

[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.

No making it up.

First you said :"The EC has been telling the caretaker PM for some time that it is possible to postpone she has been saying it can not be postponed."

My response to that was:

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

That situation was before EC went to the Court.

Then you came with

"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."

My response

"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."

The government invited all concerned parties for discussion after EC officially wrote a letter to PM to discuss the postponement. The government still wanted legal assurance and therefore called an open discussion which EC commissioners turned down. EC wanted talk with the government only to get some agreements and than talk to the DEM. What do you think the EC was treating all the other political parties? The DEM is not the only party in Thailand.

If EC wanted to be sure, they could have asked the CC from the beginning when the thought of postponing the election came to their minds. However, they have been asking the government to do the postponing and wanted only two-party secret talk and than talk to the DEM and DEM's PDRC. All these secret talk, talk talk - was there any legal assurance that the secret arrangement will be constitutional or will not be challenged in court.

First, you wrote "EC has been telling the caretaker PM" and then after my response you switched to "it was the EC who asked the question of the CC. Your making it up as you went along required of me to response differently under different context.

[geriatrickid]

The body that rendered its interpretation of the 2006 Constitution is not actually a court. It is a tribunal.

The provisions it interpreted are the result of the revised constitution the military junta and Democrats effected.

The interpretation provides a way out of the mess for everyone. It is not necessarily a negative as a postponement would allow the regions where there has been a problem registering candidates to now proceed accordingly. A 30 day period in which to allow the registrations would address the EC's concern about missing candidates. The elections cannot be postponed for long as it will seriously damage the economy and stability of the nation. A new provisional government has to be drawn from the members that were sitting at the time the elections were called or else it risks being seen as illegitimate and could even put Thailand at risk of international sanctions.

One last option available is that the King has the option of asking another group in the house to act as the government until elections are held. It would be "extraordinary" but has occurred before in other countries where there is a sovereign as head of state. A coalition could be cobbled together at the request of the head of state, allowing everyone to save face.

If there is a refusal or inability to co-operate , we may be well on our way to seeing a military attempt to seize power. which would result in a bigger mess. The tribunal decision is an attempt to force a cooling off period.

Edited January 24, 2014 by geriatrickid

[icommunity]

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

Still do not answer my question and comment related to

"February election can be postponed, Constitutional Court rules"

May be your arrogant explained the legal basis on the ruling.

Edited January 24, 2014 by icommunity

[englishoak]

Tatsujin I ran out of likes but i agree it is unlikely the gov will postpone or that suthep will go home on the premise of a delay. There will be only losers here if it continues though of that I have no doubt.

[Crushdepth]

Yingluck's legal team gets it wrong again. It's amazing.

[MaxLee]

An election means, Thaksin wins, Pheu Thai acts, and Yingluck can finally travel to Hawaii,... A Pheu Thai storybook ending...

[Thai at Heart]

Yingluck's legal team gets it wrong again. It's amazing.

Who the hell thought that there was a way to postpone.

Imagine if Thaksin had postponed when the democrats removed their participation previously. I would say it would be very obvious grounds to postpone if the parliamentary opposition fails to pitch up thus making the vote nul and void.

Where would it have ended that time.

[casualbiker]

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.

" EC issues statement to Cabinet that SOE affects election and so it won't be fair and not in accordance with Constitution"

That's why you have a constitution court.. to allow ALL the organic laws to work together.. The laws governing the EC, the laws governing the ombudsman's office etc.. unless the constitution writers have access to a time machine.. and KNOW everything that will happen in the future,, it's how it is.

[Thai at Heart]

They can initiate a process which could legally delay as stated by the CC, but I can't think of one reason why they would initiate this process

Indeed. What would be the point and I think the risk that the parliament is not seated and it creates a mechanism.to.claim that the country is without government and thus in peril is too strong.

They will want to avoid a political vacuum at all costs.

[Cnxforever]

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.

there can be no agreement - Somchai is just another puppet who is instructed what to do.This is all just to win some time to set up another judicial coup and nothing else.

[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?

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.

2007 Constitutional referendum and the subsequent general election were held under military rule. As for the 2007 Constitutional referendum the junta passed a law that made criticism of the draft and opposition to the constitutional referendum a criminal act. It was a national referendum which attracted only about 55.6% turned up and 59.3% voted for.

[fleeing]

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!

The UK does not have a constitution!

More seriously, I presume that the quorum required is for the election of the 'new' PM. Looking at the antics that politicians, not only in Thailand, get up to, this is probably a good idea.

[Dogmatix]

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.

Can you point to any of these "elite Thai families and their offspring" that are not also of Chinese origin themselves? Think you have lost the plot.

[icommunity]

This is a reply to

casualbiker, on 24 Jan 2014 - 22:01, said:

" EC issues statement to Cabinet that SOE affects election and so it won't be fair and not in accordance with Constitution"

That's why you have a constitution court.. to allow ALL the organic laws to work together.. The laws governing the EC, the laws governing the ombudsman's office etc.. unless the constitution writers have access to a time machine.. and KNOW everything that will happen in the future,, it's how it is.

My response

The Constitution gave power to CC to rule without any legal basis? Based only on personal opinions, speculation, imagination, conjecture? Where is the principle of justice and evidence. In Thai's current legal system, judges can be impeached, but judges and Senators are appointing each other.

"EC issues statement to Cabinet that SOE affects election......" Sorry, I missed this one. Wonder if EC commissioners red the whole content of the SOE?

BTW, I do not against CC and all independent agencies. I have doubt on the way judges and officials conduct, investigate and rule on complaints. On ground level, except those oppositions of the government, people are losing faith and trust in these judges and official. The people's feeling of haplessness could create problems to the Country's well being.

Forgot to mention. I have been replying to many rebuttals and if possible - all. Some posters may think I have a full time job here. One already said that. BTW, I have ten more days for my vacation. I will continue to share my thoughts and will not be intimidated to stop. May be a little less frequent after ten more days.

[Dogmatix]

The key question now being discussed on Skype by the square/red-faced man over the water and his flapper in Bangkok must be this:

"We always relied on advice from our legal eagles that postponing the election would be unconstitutional, so we never addressed the question of why we would not postpone it, if we could. Now that we can, we need an answer to that question rather urgently."

[Dogmatix]

The answer from the government seems likely to be that postponing the election is going to be conditional on no boycott by the Dems and no obstruction of registration of candidates or polling by the PDRC and related groups.

The opposition is bound to demand that that the government agrees to resign after rescheduling the election and that, meanwhile, there will some reforms put in place that will be binding on the next government. Otherwise the opposition can boycott and disrupt the elections again. Meanwhile, the government can't pay the farmers and won't have much opportunity to thieve from the taxpayers. If Poo stamps her foot and says she will go ahead with the Feb 2 elections anyway, after her conditions are rejected, the EC will likely either resign the night before or have the results voided completely.

[whybother]

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.

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

Most of it was written in 1997.

[Thaddeus]

Forgot to mention. I have been replying to many rebuttals and if possible - all. Some posters may think I have a full time job here. One already said that. BTW, I have ten more days for my vacation. I will continue to share my thoughts and will not be intimidated to stop. May be a little less frequent after ten more days.

Have you never stopped and thought that maybe if you has spent less time posting, you may have had more time for a holiday?

When this country was just a holiday destination for me, the last thing that I would do would be to log on to a forum, unless it paid for the flight.

[chadintheusa]

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.

So only an election that takes place on Feb 2 can save democracy? Thanks for playing the race card as well, nice touch. The current government has been controlled by an unelected resident of Dubai and has sought to excercise complete control over the senate, the military and to prevent any limits on its power. The PT doesn't want democracy, they want unlimited power. The fact is that a poll held on Feb 2 will result in a government which cannot even open parliament due to a lack of seats being filled. So according to your "logic" Thailand will never be able to return to being a democratic nation. That is nonsense, by taking an all or nothing viewpoint is why negotiation and reform is impossible for the current cast of characters.

[chadintheusa]

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.

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

Most of it was written in 1997.

Unfortunately you can't pick and choose what parts of the constitution you like and ignore the rest. Why not run the parliament with just 50% then? Or maybe just the maybe just one seat that represents the district of Dubai. A virtual one party election held on Feb 2 will not solve anything, even if they could re start parliament after.

[tallfarang]

Just got home, maybe this has been answered, apologies if it has. Bars are closed tomorrow night, does that mean elections are going ahead or they haven't made a decision and they are closed in case they still go through?

[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.

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.

Huh? That was exactly my point, that if you thought the 2007 referendum was fine you can hardly raise questions over the SOE and this election - *particularly* as the SOE does not prevent election campaigning, only illegal demonstrations (e.g. invading public buildings). Not sure what your point is, cuz I think we actually agree. lol.

Anyway, as I thought the court apparently did not refer to the constitution or organic election law in coming to their judgement but cited 2006 as a precedent. But 2006 was completely different. In any case, it's rather too late to postpone now, particularly with no sign of agreement with the Democrats in sight.

[JRSoul]

Fair point and I'll read up on that again when I'm not working

What I am saying, is physically there is no reason why parliament should not be able to function if 20 or so MP's decide not to contest and then obstruct others from doing it.

The CC are pontificating and trying to run PT out of Government. If they want to attain any respect or semblence of Neutrality, they could let parliament sit without anybody from the South until such time as elections can be held. If the people of the south really want to dissenfranchise themselves, let them live under majority rule as everybody else must.

There are solution and compromises out there to be had, but this is just a one sided attack on democracy by people who are staing that they are educated and neutral.... They are neither.

How very interesting! What happened to 1 man 1 vote, respect my vote, equal representation and all the other supposedly democratic <deleted> you spout? If parliament was missing 20 or so MPs from Isaan rather than the south, would that be equally acceptable to you?

[JRSoul]

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!

You are looking at 2 different matters. The 95% rule is ensuring that nearly every voter has a representative. The others are more concerned with how many bother/need to show up and vote.

[JRSoul]

2007 Constitutional referendum and the subsequent general election were held under military rule. As for the 2007 Constitutional referendum the junta passed a law that made criticism of the draft and opposition to the constitutional referendum a criminal act. It was a national referendum which attracted only about 55.6% turned up and 59.3% voted for.

Which is significantly more voters than those who voted for PTP in the 2011 election.

[webfact]

Poll can be deferred: court
Chanikarn Phumhiran,
Piyanut Tumnukasetchai,
Praphan Jindalertudomdee
The Nation


A reporter reads a statement by the Constitutional Court about its ruling that the February 2 election can be rescheduled and that the government and the Election Commission should discuss the matter.

BANGKOK: -- THE FEBRUARY 2 election can only be postponed if the ongoing protests are brought to an end and there is no boycott of the election, a government figure said yesterday following a Constitutional Court ruling that the polls can be rescheduled.

PM's Office Minister Varathep Ratanakorn said caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has been informed of the ruling, and would discuss the matter with the Election Commission (EC) if she was formally invited by the agency, he said.

"The election should be postponed on condition that the protesters cease their rallies and there is no blockade or boycott of the election," Varathep said. "If there are still attempts to interrupt the election, there is no use in postponing it."

Suthep Thaugsuban, leader of the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC), said last night that protesters would campaign for national reform before elections at all polling booths in Bangkok during advance voting tomorrow. "It's every citizen's right to peacefully express his opinion. If the rally makes it difficult for voters to get into polling stations, please excuse us, as the space is limited," he said.

Former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who is believed to be pulling the strings behind the scenes, has been made aware of the court ruling, a source close to him said yesterday.

Thaksin reportedly agreed that the push to hold the election on February 2 would only lead to violence as anti-government protesters have threatened to interrupt voting, the source said. By deferring the poll, pressure faced by the government would shift to Suthep, the source quoted Thaksin saying.

The eight Constitutional Court judges present backed the rescheduling of the election yesterday, though most of them said it would be a joint responsibility for the caretaker prime minister and the EC chief to discuss the issue.

The court said the two should decide whether the election should be rescheduled and if so, a new royal decree issued on when it should be held. In the ruling, the court also cited the rescheduling of the 2006 election, when a royal decree was issued to defer the election date.

On Wednesday, the EC had asked the Constitutional Court to consider if the election could be rescheduled and if the government and the EC were authorised to set a new election date.

Charupong Ruangsuwan, leader of the ruling Pheu Thai Party, said the Constitution allows for a snap election to be held within 45 to 60 days after the dissolution of the House of Representatives. Hence, he said, the election could be postponed to no later than May 6.

EC secretary-general Puchong Nutrawong said the commission respected the court's ruling and would hold an urgent meeting this afternoon before contacting the premier as soon as possible. He said the EC might ask to meet Yingluck either on Monday or Tuesday.

"If there is a new royal decree on the election date, the whole [election] process would go back to square one," he said.

Issara Boonyoung, an adviser to the Business Housing Association, said the court's verdict should ease the political tension. He said that it was still up to the caretaker government to decide whether to accept the ruling and discuss it with the EC.

A Pheu Thai Party source said the party expects the election to be postponed by at least six months, adding the party's strategic panel had come to this conclusion at a meeting on Thursday night.

At the meeting, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang reportedly warned that independent agencies could take measures against Pheu Thai's interests, going so far as to dissolve the party, the source, who asked not to be named, said.

Meanwhile, EC member Somchai Srisuthiyakorn said he did not think advance voting would be possible in Surat Thani tomorrow. "There is a lack of volunteers to man poll units in the South. Surat Thani lacks 80 per cent of electoral staff. More importantly, ballot cards heading for Surat Thani have been blocked in Chumphon."

Once the court ruling was announced, PM's secretary-general Suranand Vejjajiva tweeted: "To postpone or not, that is the question?!?"

Issara Boonyoung, an adviser to the Business Housing Association, said the court's verdict should ease the political tension. He said that it was still up to the caretaker government to decide whether to accept the ruling and discuss it with the EC.

On Wednesday, the EC had asked the Constitutional Court to consider if the election could be rescheduled and if the government and the EC were authorised to set a new election date. A source, who asked not to be named, said the judges voted 7-1 on the second point.

A Pheu Thai Party source said the party expects the election to be postponed by at least six months, adding the party's strategic committee had come to this conclusion at a meeting on Thursday night.

At the meeting, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang reportedly warned that independent agencies could take measures against Pheu Thai's interests, going so far as to dissolve the party, the source, who asked not to be named, said.

Meanwhile, in a surprise move, leaders of the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) resolved yesterday not to obstruct the election but let the people decide what is best. PDRC spokesman Akanat Promphan announced yesterday that the anti-government protest movement would not stop voters from exercising their rights in advance voting tomorrow or on election day next Sunday.

Akanat said he did not know what was behind the decision, especially after PDRC leader Suthep Thaugsuban had announced on Thursday that the February 2 election would not be allowed to take place or succeed. He added that Suthep would lead a march from the Ratchaprasong intersection to seek more support.

Meanwhile, as many as 7,000 police officers will be deployed at polling stations nationwide tomorrow to allow advance voting and deter anti-government protesters, Metropolitan Police deputy chief Pol Maj-General Chanthawit Ramasuta said yesterday.

However, police are under strict orders from national police chief Pol General Adul Saengsingkaew to use non-violent means, such as negotiations, to deal with protesters.

Violence could still occur over the weekend as anti-government protesters are expected to engage in various activities to disrupt advance voting.

Chanthawit said extra police personnel had been called in to maintain peace and order at Bangkok-based polling stations and to cope with any possible disruptions by protesters, who might "do whatever it takes" to stop advance voting.

Separately, Bhum Jai Thai Party candidates yesterday issued a statement calling on the government to defer the election until things become peaceful.

The statement was read out at a press conference, which included candidates Boonjong Wongtrairat, Sophon Saram and Prajak Kaewklahan.


-- The Nation 2014-01-25

[Emptyset]

2007 Constitutional referendum and the subsequent general election were held under military rule. As for the 2007 Constitutional referendum the junta passed a law that made criticism of the draft and opposition to the constitutional referendum a criminal act. It was a national referendum which attracted only about 55.6% turned up and 59.3% voted for.

Which is significantly more voters than those who voted for PTP in the 2011 election.

Yes votes for 2007 Constitution: 14,727,306

Votes for PT in 2011: 15,744,190

[JRSoul]

"At the meeting, caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang reportedly warned that independent agencies could take measures against Pheu Thai's interests, going so far as to dissolve the party"

First the party would have had to commit illegal acts of a sufficiently serious nature to warrant this. It appears that Chaturon is aware of such acts.

[JRSoul]

2007 Constitutional referendum and the subsequent general election were held under military rule. As for the 2007 Constitutional referendum the junta passed a law that made criticism of the draft and opposition to the constitutional referendum a criminal act. It was a national referendum which attracted only about 55.6% turned up and 59.3% voted for.

Which is significantly more voters than those who voted for PTP in the 2011 election.

Yes votes for 2007 Constitution: 14,727,306

Votes for PT in 2011: 15,744,190

Hmmm. Must have been a large increase in the number of eligible voters, or the percentage figures posted here were wrong.

48% of 65% = 31.2% of voters

59% of 55.6% = 32.8

[Emptyset]

2007 Constitutional referendum and the subsequent general election were held under military rule. As for the 2007 Constitutional referendum the junta passed a law that made criticism of the draft and opposition to the constitutional referendum a criminal act. It was a national referendum which attracted only about 55.6% turned up and 59.3% voted for.

Which is significantly more voters than those who voted for PTP in the 2011 election.

Yes votes for 2007 Constitution: 14,727,306

Votes for PT in 2011: 15,744,190

Hmmm. Must have been a large increase in the number of eligible voters, or the percentage figures posted here were wrong.

48% of 65% = 31.2% of voters

59% of 55.6% = 32.8

Yep, almost two million more registered voters for the 2011 election.