Pheu Thai may misunderstand EC rules: EC

[casualbiker]

Someone pointed out earlier that the election had to be scheduled in all constituencies on the same day, which in this case was Feb 2.

But what does the Organic Act on election of members of the house of representatives and installation of senators say? Does not Section 78 allow for the possibility that the election is valid even if in some constituencies balloting could not take place, on condition, of course, that in these circumstances the EC carries out its duty to set a new voting date promptly for these constituencies?

possible.. but it is not really clear exactly what they would do. But agree the have a basis. It would seem that myself and others have been misled slightly.. But i still affirm that the 1st section states one day. so maybe that's where it comes from.

[whybother]

Someone pointed out earlier that the election had to be scheduled in all constituencies on the same day, which in this case was Feb 2.

But what does the Organic Act on election of members of the house of representatives and installation of senators say? Does not Section 78 allow for the possibility that the election is valid even if in some constituencies balloting could not take place, on condition, of course, that in these circumstances the EC carries out its duty to set a new voting date promptly for these constituencies?

My point was that it WAS scheduled for the same day. Test passed.

Other sections then seem to allow for delays if required.

[Puccini]

Someone pointed out earlier that the election had to be scheduled in all constituencies on the same day, which in this case was Feb 2.

I failed to pay attention to the emphasis on "scheduled"

Have there been any claims or have there been reports of evidence that the election was not scheduled for the same day in all constituencies?

[whybother]

Someone pointed out earlier that the election had to be scheduled in all constituencies on the same day, which in this case was Feb 2.

I failed to pay attention to the emphasis on "scheduled"

Have there been any claims or have there been reports of evidence that the election was not scheduled for the same day in all constituencies?

It's possible that the southern provinces that had no candidates didn't have an election scheduled.

[northernjohn]

Question : does the EC know what it stands for ?

And does the EC know what the rules are or do they make them up as they need some new ones in case they really don't know themselves ?

I for myself would not refer to them as " wise men "

It is a learned behavior from watching how the PTP government operate

PTP will only abide by rules / regulations / constitution when it suits them

That's not always true.

Some time they just interpret them while they are in a red shirt bar.

[Puccini]

I believe the Royal decree gave the schedule. The registration of the candidates came after that, and with it the fact that in some constituencies the candidates were physically prevented from accessing the registration locale. I wonder what the Organic Act says about that.

[whybother]

I believe the Royal decree gave the schedule. The registration of the candidates came after that, and with it the fact that in some constituencies the candidates were physically prevented from accessing the registration locale. I wonder what the Organic Act says about that.

I think the only logical thing to do is to have by-elections in any electorate that where voting wasn't started or completed.

That doesn't help in some of the electorates where people didn't vote because of the chance of issues.

[northernjohn]

the "ACT" also states that the national election be drawn in all constituencies on the same day. That was KNOWN to be impossible for many constituencies before the election, therefor not in appliance of the "ACT"

I am genuinely interested in this subject and would be grateful if you or anyone else kindly indicated in what section of the Organic Act on election of members of the house of representatives and installation of senators I can find this, as I have searched for it in vain.

I presume this section:

"“election day” means the day designated as the day of election as prescribed by the

Royal Decree on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives or Senators, as the

case may be;"

but that can be covered by this section slightly:

" Section 78 In the case where the polling at any polling station could not be made

because of the riot, flood, fire, force majeure or another case of necessity, if such event has

occurred prior to the election day, the Committee of polling station shall determine a new

polling place where the voters shall be able to cast a vote conveniently. If the new polling

place cannot be determined, the Committee of polling station shall announce the cancellation

of vote-casting in such station and shall forthwith report such incident to the Election

Commission."

BUT it does not say what can be done! So i can only presume to the EC's consderation.

"MUTATIS MUTANDIS. The necessary changes. This is a phrase of frequent practical occurrence, meaning that matters or things are generally the same, but to be altered, when necessary, as to names, offices, and the like."

puccini. thanks for posting that link. I do note that it is an unofficial translation. I hope some context of words is not missing.

my original statement was from EC statements ( i think, its been a long few weeks)

In my opinion they met the conditions but as you said they gave no answer as to what can be done.

It is hard to really say what they are saying in such technical matters as this one when you are not only converting it from one language to another but one culture to another.

I am a strong backer of Suthep and do not believe any other way than his will bring a lasting answer. That being said I deplore him not urging every one to vote. It would not matter who won. The Government would know where it stands. No longer would there be a government so powerful that it didn't need other parties and could shut them down when they disagreed with them.

He should have been urging all of them to vote none of the above. Hard to believe but that would be a message Yingluck would kind of understand. The part she couldn't understand she could have the advisor who advised her on how to vote make it clear to her.

[HD 205]

Title should really read:

"Pheu Thai may misunderstand - EC rules"

[Puccini]

I believe the Royal decree gave the schedule. The registration of the candidates came after that, and with it the fact that in some constituencies the candidates were physically prevented from accessing the registration locale. I wonder what the Organic Act says about that.

Found it in section 108 of the Constitution:

The dissolution of the House of Representatives shall be

made in the form of a Royal Decree in which the day for a new

general election must be fixed within the period of not less than

forty five days but not more than sixty days as from the date of the

dissolution of the House of Representatives and such election day

must be the same throughout the Kingdom.

[casualbiker]

I believe the Royal decree gave the schedule. The registration of the candidates came after that, and with it the fact that in some constituencies the candidates were physically prevented from accessing the registration locale. I wonder what the Organic Act says about that.

i can only presume this:

"MUTATIS MUTANDIS. The necessary changes. This is a phrase of frequent practical occurrence, meaning that matters or things are generally the same, but to be altered, when necessary, as to names, offices, and the like."

Which i think basically. same same but different. I know because of that the EC wanted to postpone and change the date of the election to allow more time to try and find a resolution (dunno if there would have been one, never know now)

[whybother]

Care to explain then why in rural Thailand, more people have voted for Puea Thai on Sunday than in the last election? Those few Democrat-paid farmers blocking the highways are not the majority of rural farmers. Most of them know exactly what is going on politically and are not fooled by Suthep.

Now that I have seen some figures on voter turn outs, I'm just wondering which areas of "rural Thailand" had more people voting for Puea Thai than the last election?

With the North and the North East having a 20% drop in voter turnout (about 75% down to 55%), that would give PTP a pretty large percentage of the vote in those areas.

[Puccini]

This is interesting. I can find nothing in the Organic Act on election of members of the house of representatives and installation of senators about the situation where no persons at all registers as candidate of any party. There is also nothing regarding the situation when access to the registration office for candidacy is blocked.

[englishoak]

This is probably the most half assed run by the EC, disrupted and problematic elections in modern times here. It is also probably also one of the least campaigned by PTP as is hasnt needed to be in light of no major party opposition, why would anyone expect the voting numbers not to be down ?

When an election isnt campaigned earnestly numbers are always down no matter the country. Here is no different.

[casualbiker]

This is interesting. I can find nothing in the Organic Act on election of members of the house of representatives and installation of senators about the situation where no persons at all registers as candidate of any party. There is also nothing regarding the situation when access to the registration office for candidacy is blocked.

i honestly think that this is the get out clause for most legal contracts.. if it ain't covered then

"MUTATIS MUTANDIS. The necessary changes. This is a phrase of frequent practical occurrence, meaning that matters or things are generally the same, but to be altered, when necessary, as to names, offices, and the like."

This covers things that have never happened before.. like the circumstances now. A small amount of flexibility if required. I think it would be an amazingly restrictive document if every scenario were thought through in advance.. not least because the writers would need tremendous fore sight.

Edited February 3, 2014 by casualbiker

[casualbiker]

This is probably the most half assed run by the EC, disrupted and problematic elections in modern times here. It is also probably also one of the least campaigned by PTP as is hasnt needed to be in light of no major party opposition, why would anyone expect the voting numbers not to be down ?

When an election isnt campaigned earnestly numbers are always down no matter the country. Here is no different.

But it needn't have been if the government had only listened to the EC reservations. Your blaming the EC ( who do share blame) without taking the government to task (who also share blame) ! strange thinking!

[smileydude]

Its great to hear both sides of the debate because for me everyone who gave an effort to analyze and cared to comment about the election cares about Thai's and Thailand because whether it be the reds or yellows, rich or poor, educated or uneducated, rural or city folk we are all Thai at the end of the day and we are NOT THE PROBLEM. The problem is our system of governance is weak and our institutions of checks and balances ineffective thereby allowing the abuse of power by politicians.

As a Thai, I've had my ear glued to the radio listening to several EC commissioners, legal experts and academics give their opinions.

Even they don't know for sure what to make out of this election. Why?

Because whatever laws and regulations that were were laid out in the past were meant for ordinary circumstances.

But what is taking place to today is unprecedented and way beyond ordinary.

They are looking to the constitutional courts to decide.

Hopefully there is a way out of this mess otherwise all Thai's lose.

Edited February 3, 2014 by smileydude

[englishoak]

This is probably the most half assed run by the EC, disrupted and problematic elections in modern times here. It is also probably also one of the least campaigned by PTP as is hasnt needed to be in light of no major party opposition, why would anyone expect the voting numbers not to be down ?

When an election isnt campaigned earnestly numbers are always down no matter the country. Here is no different.

But it needn't have been if the government had only listened to the EC reservations. Your blaming the EC ( who do share blame) without taking the government to task (who also share blame) ! strange thinking!

The EC imo had a simple task, it didnt perform it well and pretty much played the part of opposing an election which is crazy.... I do lay the blame mostly at the feet of the EC for many reasons but my point in my post was about numbers not the EC

Edited February 3, 2014 by englishoak

[Trembly]

Care to explain then why in rural Thailand, more people have voted for Puea Thai on Sunday than in the last election? Those few Democrat-paid farmers blocking the highways are not the majority of rural farmers. Most of them know exactly what is going on politically and are not fooled by Suthep.

Now that I have seen some figures on voter turn outs, I'm just wondering which areas of "rural Thailand" had more people voting for Puea Thai than the last election?

With the North and the North East having a 20% drop in voter turnout (about 75% down to 55%), that would give PTP a pretty large percentage of the vote in those areas.

I heard on the radio that the turnout for Prachinburi and Nongbualamphu was in excess of 70%, but that in Prachinburi's case the vote was overwhelmingly 'No'. I didn't catch what they said for the latter.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Edited February 3, 2014 by Trembly

[Puccini]

The next milestone in the timeline is this clause from Section 93 of the Constitution:

In the case where, in any general election, there occurs

any event resulting in members of the House of Representatives

being less than four hundred and eighty in number but being not

less than ninety five percent of the total number of members of the

House of Representatives, it shall be deemed that members in

such number duly form the House of Representatives, provided

that action shall be taken for achieving such number of member of

the House of Representatives as provided in this Constitution within

one hundred and eighty days and such members shall hold office

for the remaining term of the House or Representatives.

If I remember correctly, the EC said already before the elections that they will not be able to carry out new elections in all the polling stations where polling cannot be made on 2 February because of "riot, flood, fire, force majeure or another case of necessity"

And there is also the answer to my other puzzle. Where polling could not be done in a constituency because there were no candidates, this was "another case of necessity" under section 78 of the Organic Act.

[Arkady]

 

This is interesting. I can find nothing in the Organic Act on election of members of the house of representatives and installation of senators about the situation where no persons at all registers as candidate of any party. There is also nothing regarding the situation when access to the registration office for candidacy is blocked.

 

The situation of no one registering at all for a constituency, either due to being blocked or to lack of interest, was clearly not envisaged in the Organic Act.

The Royal Decree establishes the date of the election and the constitution specifies that it shall all take place one day (I am not sure of the constitutional basis for advance voting and overseas voting). The date of candidate registration is fixed at a certain limit from the date of the Royal Decree.

A major problem is that there is no way to re-open or extend candidate registration once it is closed, since the time limit is fixed by the Organic Act. That is why a new Royal Decree will be required. It will need to repeal the previous Royal Decree and announce the date of a new general election (after the constitutional court has annulled the election due to the fact that it is incomplete and therefore impossible to hold it all on the same day).

It seems perfectly obvious to me that the government knew this would be the case when it decided to go ahead and spend state funds on the election. The Constitutional Court had ruled that the PM and the EC could postpone the election but the government doesn't recognise the authority of the court and said the ruling was not backed up by anything in the Constitution. The strategy may be to be to continue the defiant attitude towards the court by arguing that it has no authority to annul the elections and present itself yet again as a martyr trying to defend democracy in the international arena.

Implicit in the court's ruling about the PM and the EC having authority to postpone the election seems to me to be the need to revoke the Royal Decree and issue a new one setting a new election date. Otherwise there would have been no means to get around the issue of 28 constituencies with no candidates. If this is case, it is a pity that the court didn't spell it out.

[Gweiloman]

I presume this section:

"“election day” means the day designated as the day of election as prescribed by the

Royal Decree on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives or Senators, as the

case may be;"

but that can be covered by this section slightly:

" Section 78 In the case where the polling at any polling station could not be made

because of the riot, flood, fire, force majeure or another case of necessity, if such event has

occurred prior to the election day, the Committee of polling station shall determine a new

polling place where the voters shall be able to cast a vote conveniently. If the new polling

place cannot be determined, the Committee of polling station shall announce the cancellation

of vote-casting in such station and shall forthwith report such incident to the Election

Commission."

BUT it does not say what can be done! So i can only presume to the EC's consderation.

"MUTATIS MUTANDIS. The necessary changes. This is a phrase of frequent practical occurrence, meaning that matters or things are generally the same, but to be altered, when necessary, as to names, offices, and the like."

puccini. thanks for posting that link. I do note that it is an unofficial translation. I hope some context of words is not missing.

my original statement was from EC statements ( i think, its been a long few weeks)

In my opinion they met the conditions but as you said they gave no answer as to what can be done.

It is hard to really say what they are saying in such technical matters as this one when you are not only converting it from one language to another but one culture to another.

I am a strong backer of Suthep and do not believe any other way than his will bring a lasting answer. That being said I deplore him not urging every one to vote. It would not matter who won. The Government would know where it stands. No longer would there be a government so powerful that it didn't need other parties and could shut them down when they disagreed with them.

He should have been urging all of them to vote none of the above. Hard to believe but that would be a message Yingluck would kind of understand. The part she couldn't understand she could have the advisor who advised her on how to vote make it clear to her.

Oh believe you me. YL and her party knows only too well what the message is. We foreigners like to think that we are cleverer than the Thais. Yes, in many ways we are. But let's not forget that some of them have been playing this game since before we were born.

There are some voters who have such a superiority complex that all they can do is to resort to name calling. Fortunately, you have been not one of them so you will understand when I say that they (PT) are grandmasters in the game if chess politicking.

[Arkady]

 

I believe the Royal decree gave the schedule. The registration of the candidates came after that, and with it the fact that in some constituencies the candidates were physically prevented from accessing the registration locale. I wonder what the Organic Act says about that.

i can only presume this:

"MUTATIS MUTANDIS. The necessary changes. This is a phrase of frequent practical occurrence, meaning that matters or things are generally the same, but to be altered, when necessary, as to names, offices, and the like."

Which i think basically. same same but different. I know because of that the EC wanted to postpone and change the date of the election to allow more time to try and find a resolution (dunno if there would have been one, never know now)

 

I think there are two problems with this interpretation of "mutatis mutandis" (with the changes that needed to be made having been made) here.

1. This normally refers to textual changes, e.g. if the pronoun "he" had been used in an agreement, it can be understood to have been changed to "she" in the case of a woman. It does not apply to complete changes of meaning, such as negating the effect of a fixed term for registration of candidates.

2. Neither the constitution, the Royal Decree, nor the Organic Act have a "mutatis mutandis" provision.

[Puccini]

Let's do the numbers (and dates)

1. There are 480 seats in the House of Representatives.
2. When at least 95%, which is 456, members of the House are elected "it shall be deemed that members in such number duly form the House of Representatives" (Section 93 of the Constitution)
3. The first sitting of the National Assembly, ie the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall take place within 30 days from the election of the House of Representatives (Section 127 of the Constitution), which means not later than 4 March 2014.

So what happens if the EC fails to hold new elections in the many constituencies where polling could not be done on 2 February because of riots or other necessities to bring the number of elected members to at least 456 by 4 March? Can the National Assembly nevertheless have its first sitting not later than 4 March, and within 30 days thereafter choose the Prime Minister for Royal appointment as required by Section 172 of the constitution?

[Puccini]

Seeing the scenario painted by Arkady in post #111 I agree that this is the most likely to happen, if Suthep does not spring a surprise like a coup. Therefore, Thailand will probably continue with the caretaker government for a few more months. Can't do much harm, I guess.

[aimbc]

I believe this headline is wrong: to me it appears that the EC does not understand its role in facilitating independent elections on behalf of the people , WITHOUT FEAR or FAVOUR.

Oh...does this apply to the law enforcement not bring to justice the the criminal who illegally amended the constitution. And never subpoena transactions and paper work regarding the rice scheme, even there was enough evidence that there is something wrong? Without fear or favor?

You are not them and you don't know the laws.

Get real dude! Game over!

[JRSoul]

Let's do the numbers (and dates)

1. There are 480 seats in the House of Representatives.
2. When at least 95%, which is 456, members of the House are elected "it shall be deemed that members in such number duly form the House of Representatives" (Section 93 of the Constitution)
3. The first sitting of the National Assembly, ie the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall take place within 30 days from the election of the House of Representatives (Section 127 of the Constitution), which means not later than 4 March 2014.

So what happens if the EC fails to hold new elections in the many constituencies where polling could not be done on 2 February because of riots or other necessities to bring the number of elected members to at least 456 by 4 March? Can the National Assembly nevertheless have its first sitting not later than 4 March, and within 30 days thereafter choose the Prime Minister for Royal appointment as required by Section 172 of the constitution?

Which part of WHEN don't you understand?

[whybother]

Let's do the numbers (and dates)

• There are 480 seats in the House of Representatives.
• When at least 95%, which is 456, members of the House are elected "it shall be deemed that members in such number duly form the House of Representatives" (Section 93 of the Constitution)
• The first sitting of the National Assembly, ie the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall take place within 30 days from the election of the House of Representatives (Section 127 of the Constitution), which means not later than 4 March 2014.

So what happens if the EC fails to hold new elections in the many constituencies where polling could not be done on 2 February because of riots or other necessities to bring the number of elected members to at least 456 by 4 March? Can the National Assembly nevertheless have its first sitting not later than 4 March, and within 30 days thereafter choose the Prime Minister for Royal appointment as required by Section 172 of the constitution?

Just a note, there are 500 seats - 375 constituency and 125 party list.

Sent from my phone ...

[casualbiker]

I believe the Royal decree gave the schedule. The registration of the candidates came after that, and with it the fact that in some constituencies the candidates were physically prevented from accessing the registration locale. I wonder what the Organic Act says about that.

i can only presume this:

"MUTATIS MUTANDIS. The necessary changes. This is a phrase of frequent practical occurrence, meaning that matters or things are generally the same, but to be altered, when necessary, as to names, offices, and the like."

Which i think basically. same same but different. I know because of that the EC wanted to postpone and change the date of the election to allow more time to try and find a resolution (dunno if there would have been one, never know now)

I think there are two problems with this interpretation of "mutatis mutandis" (with the changes that needed to be made having been made) here.

1. This normally refers to textual changes, e.g. if the pronoun "he" had been used in an agreement, it can be understood to have been changed to "she" in the case of a woman. It does not apply to complete changes of meaning, such as negating the effect of a fixed term for registration of candidates.

2. Neither the constitution, the Royal Decree, nor the Organic Act have a "mutatis mutandis" provision.

Arkady. I got that from the copy of the organic ACT that Puccini kindly put up. It's referenced to several times. Am I reading it wrong?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Konini]

From the OP

He referred to an electoral law which stipulates that the EC could postpone an election for seven days in a constituency that is interrupted by chaos or depends on situation.

I think it's very telling that the electoral law of a country includes this stipulation.