Civil Court accepts petition against Emergency Decree

[webfact]

Civil Court accepts petition against Emergency Decree



BANGKOK: -- The Civil Court has accepted a petition filed by a protest leader challenging the legitimacy of the Emergency Decree invoked by the government to deal with the protesters.

The court also schedueled a preliminary hearing on February 6 for the petitioner, Mr Thavorn Senniam, a core leader of the People’s Democratic Reform Committee, caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, director of the Centre for Maintaining Peace and Order Chalerm Yubamrung and national police chief, General Adul Saengsingkaeo to testify.

In his petition, Mr Thavorn claimed that the decree was illegal as there was no emergency situation to justify the invocation of the decree.

Mr Thavorn told the press before the court decided to accept his petition that he would accept whatever the ruling to be delivered by the court but vowed to carry on with the protests against the government in a peaceful manner.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/civil-court-accepts-petition-emergency-decree/


-- Thai PBS 2014-01-30

[bigbamboo]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

[xminator]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

[binjalin]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

[JRSoul]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

[Snig27]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Fully agree, but it may be too tricky a concept for the "Dubai" chanters to work through. The judicial system is as broken as any but if anything has to be fixed first, otherwise nothing works. Unfortunately doing so might make things a little less comfortable for the leaders of the crew crying for reform before elections, given their grey pasts, so it's unlikely to happen. Suthep's failure to adhere to the rule of law unless it suits him, completely undermines any credibility as a reformer.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Snig27

[icommunity]

Peaceful protest??? Inciting, Intimidating, threatening and violating the rights of others to overthrow a people elected government.

The people elected government has returned power to the people. Why don't you use a legitimate means to gain legitimate power?

[Artisi]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

Sorry, he is far too busy with PTP policy and directives to make any appearances.

[thesetat2013]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

They must look at the WHO of this case. However I am inclined to think that maybe they dont care the WHO. They will be more worried as to WHO will be in charge after this mess is over.

You scratch my back and I will scratch yours only works if they are in a position to scratch yours.

:-):-):-)

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[newcomer71]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

Deny rights of other citizens for 2 months and deny them the most important of their rights, the right to vote, justify an emergency decree, it's not all about just violence.

Anyway, not that matters that much as there were no changes in the protest management and protection on government side.

It's just farcical, tragic and ridiculous, the whole matter.

[Snig27]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

The point completely eludes you I'm afraid. It is not about the levels of violence, it's about the rule of law, which is the most fundamental building block of a working society. When the rule of law bends to suit a sector of society then it is paramount that the building block is repaired before anything else can be done to "reform".

When we are talking judicial coups (as we are now) and the manipulation of the legal system by one element to extract a result, as happens over and over in Thai politics, then that has to be the primary target for any reform. If you look at most countries with democratic systems the supreme or head court sits above the whole system as a kind of purifier. Sadly in Thailand it hasn't managed to find that balancing point and it is a massive part of the problem. The clamour should be to sort that first - but of course it's not because a broken legal system suits those leading the charge for reform.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Snig27

[Snig27]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

Sorry, he is far too busy with PTP policy and directives to make any appearances.

That added a lot to the conversation.

[davejones]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

What's so wrong with that. Elected governments have to follow laws and rules everywhere in the world. It's the same in Western countries. Governments aren't allowed to overstep the mark. What would you rather, some kind of dictatorship?

[wedders]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

Without attempting to justify violence of any kind, in 2010 there wasn't the same reticence on the part of the forces of order to enforce rulings or disperse gatherings, and you have to see the subsequent disorder and violence in that context. The military crackdowns in wglhich dozens of protesters died preceded the arson attacks, for example.

Today, protesters are being allowed to do pretty much as they please with absolutely no hint of military intervention. So of course it has been relatively peaceful so far, because law - enforcement has been nonexistent.

[Artisi]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

Sorry, he is far too busy with PTP policy and directives to make any appearances.

That added a lot to the conversation.

Depends on your sense of humour or lack thereof, and has your reply added or furthered the nonsense re an appearance of Basil Fawlty.

[Scamper]

This is likely to lead to the Constitution Court at some point, likely through the filing from another petition source. The grounds for the complaint should be that it is unconstitutional for a caretaker administration to impose. And it is certainly unconstitutional to impose restraints on the media. Chalerm has created his own parameters and he has no constitutional right to unilaterally do that, especially under these circumstances. This is the much larger issue - how it has been applied, especially as the argument was that security on the ground necessitated it, as there was already the Internal Security Act in place. The violence that was occurring were the grenades attacks against the protesters - attacks which have not abated or been dealt with in any visibly preventative way since the emergency decree was enacted. This case has a much greater chance of succeeding if all these points are put before the court.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Scamper

[pipkins]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

Did you guys lose your virginity watching TV in 2010 or something. Is that why you are so blinkered an non knowedgable of events preceeding it.

Nearly 100 days in here and PDRC saying it could take 6 more months as well. Civil Court will do what they have already been told to do, so no news here.

[JRSoul]

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

Without attempting to justify violence of any kind, in 2010 there wasn't the same reticence on the part of the forces of order to enforce rulings or disperse gatherings, and you have to see the subsequent disorder and violence in that context. The military crackdowns in wglhich dozens of protesters died preceded the arson attacks, for example.

Today, protesters are being allowed to do pretty much as they please with absolutely no hint of military intervention. So of course it has been relatively peaceful so far, because law - enforcement has been nonexistent.

So you don't remember the violence that occurred before the military crackdown? The military would not have been needed had the police performed their duty.

[binjalin]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

What's so wrong with that. Elected governments have to follow laws and rules everywhere in the world. It's the same in Western countries. Governments aren't allowed to overstep the mark. What would you rather, some kind of dictatorship?

oh you mean like the one Suthep proposes? no I would not

but you seem to like the idea of constant court appearances (completely unbiased of course) and the idea that a government cannot issue an emergency decree

this country is being dragged to the abyss of procrastination where no government will ever get anything done as everything will be challenged in court - it's an absurdity which ever shade your shirt is

[wedders]

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

Without attempting to justify violence of any kind, in 2010 there wasn't the same reticence on the part of the forces of order to enforce rulings or disperse gatherings, and you have to see the subsequent disorder and violence in that context. The military crackdowns in wglhich dozens of protesters died preceded the arson attacks, for example.

Today, protesters are being allowed to do pretty much as they please with absolutely no hint of military intervention. So of course it has been relatively peaceful so far, because law - enforcement has been nonexistent.

So you don't remember the violence that occurred before the military crackdown? The military would not have been needed had the police performed their duty.

There was a couple of dozen protesters killed before as well yes, as well as the guy whose name escapes me taken out by a sniper while he was talking. Hundreds injured, mostly protesters.

But the general stance of the authorities was considerably more 'robust' throughout, compared to today. No strategic points were occupied. No blockade of Bangkok. Think back even further to PAD's airport occupation, and how much that cost the country. There is a clear pattern, a different approach in handling crises, dictated by the Army.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[JRSoul]

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

The point completely eludes you I'm afraid. It is not about the levels of violence, it's about the rule of law, which is the most fundamental building block of a working society. When the rule of law bends to suit a sector of society then it is paramount that the building block is repaired before anything else can be done to "reform".

When we are talking judicial coups (as we are now) and the manipulation of the legal system by one element to extract a result, as happens over and over in Thai politics, then that has to be the primary target for any reform. If you look at most countries with democratic systems the supreme or head court sits above the whole system as a kind of purifier. Sadly in Thailand it hasn't managed to find that balancing point and it is a massive part of the problem. The clamour should be to sort that first - but of course it's not because a broken legal system suits those leading the charge for reform.

"the rule of law, which is the most fundamental building block of a working society" yet when somebody appeals to a court and they agree to hear a case , contrary to the interests of the government, it immediately becomes a 'judicial coup'.

If the rule of law is so important, please explain the suborning of the DSI, and the refusal it to intervene when the government clearly acts corruptly, and the reduction in funding of all independent agencies meant to keep the government actions within the law. Why do Thaksin's political parties continually blatantly break electoral law? Is it to invite judicial intervention and create more political division?

[spirit47]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

If you dont have any knowledge about basic rights, why you not learn about or shut up. to demonstrate is one of this basic rights...

[JRSoul]

Are you so lacking in discernment that you can see no difference in the levels of violence now as compared to 2010? Can you also not see that the majority of the violence is directed AT the protesters and not FROM them, yet the SoE is aimed solely at restricting/reducing the protests, not curbing the violence.

I must admit though that the SoE is a vehicle to enable greater police powers, and in both 2010 and now, they don't even attempt action. The similarity ends there.

Did you guys lose your virginity watching TV in 2010 or something. Is that why you are so blinkered an non knowedgable of events preceeding it.

Nearly 100 days in here and PDRC saying it could take 6 more months as well. Civil Court will do what they have already been told to do, so no news here.

I remember quite well the unnecessary 2006 election some 14 months into term of a large majority government that has been the root cause of much of today's division. It was called to distract from dissent over Thaksin's corruption. 8 years on and it's deja vu all over again. But who needs reform when we can keep making the same mistakes.

[rreddin]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Whether you are correct or not does not matter. It is the perception of double standards that is very damaging.

[Prbkk]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

If you dont have any knowledge about basic rights, why you not learn about or shut up. to demonstrate is one of this basic rights...

To demonstrate or protest is a legitmate right but only when doing so does not have a significantly detrimental imapct on the lives of others. This protest crossed that line weeks ago

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed.

[JRSoul]

I used to think America was the litigation capital of the world but clearly it has nothing on Thailand.

Thailand doesn't need a parliament building, just a massive courthouse.

People think corruption is just money changing hands. Skimming projects. The other kind of corruption is worse. The kind where connections and heritage give you advantages. Scratch my back I will scratch yours.

Now it is possible the democrats rewrote the rules after 2010 so the PDRC can get away with whatever they want this time, but I have not seen any such changes so a difference in ruling from 2010 is double standards. That would mean the court is not looking at the law, but have their mind on the WHO of the case they got.

Whether you are correct or not does not matter. It is the perception of double standards that is very damaging.

And there are any number of paid propagandists who will spread that false perception.

[leggo]

The immaturity of Thai politicians never ceases to amaze me - if they are not careful they'll become the laughing stock of the Asean block.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Nickymaster]

Yes of course the court will accept the petition.

It's a joke that the government declares a SOE against peaceful protestors. The only violence we have witnessed is violence AGAINST the protestors. The police has no clue who the guys are that throw hand grenades and kill guards and a protest leader even though they have images and videos in some cases.

[binjalin]

how can this possibly be? the elected government taken to court against a decree? it's farcical I'm expecting Basil Fawlty to walk in at any minute

If you dont have any knowledge about basic rights, why you not learn about or shut up. to demonstrate is one of this basic rights...

oh basic rights? yes I learned about that in school... let me think... oh yes I believe it mentions the RIGHT to vote? demonstrate peacefully does not include stopping peoples RIGHT to VOTE

so i suggest you go back to primary school and learn the basics about human RIGHTS