Pheu Thai case against Suthep thrown out

[webfact]

Pheu Thai case against Suthep thrown out
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Constitutional Court yesterday rejected a request by the Pheu Thai Party that Suthep Thaugsuban and 10 other protest leaders be charged with staging their protest with the aim of toppling the democratic system of government.

The court said the case was inadmissible, as the protesters had exercised their constitutional right to protest against the government - initially, against the amnesty bill - and to express their mistrust of the administration.

The Pheu Thai Party had asked the court to rule on whether the antigovernment protest calling on the Yingluck Shinawatra government to step down and hand power to an unelected government to reform the country was in violation of Article 68 of the Constitution. The Association of Constitution for Society had also asked the court to rule on whether the disruption of the election by the antigovernment protesters was also in violation of Article 68.

The court said Suthep and his group might have committed many other violations, such as breaking criminal laws, but said it was the responsibility of agencies under the justice system to charge them under the relevant laws. There were no grounds to rule that the protesters violated Article 68 of the Constitution by attempting to overthrow the democratic system of government or acquire the power to rule the country through unconstitutional means, the court said.


-- The Nation 2014-02-13

[ratcatcher]

BINGO!

[Dr Bruce]

Suthep has said many times that he does not want the election to go ahead but the court has decided that he does not want to stop the democratic proccess.

[TVGerry]

How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny!

[Red Snake]

You win some and you lose some. They say justice is blind, who ever came up with those words most have lived in Thailand.

[ShannonT]

How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny!

Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election.

[englishoak]

No surprises there, hes a protected species

[GentlemanJim]

You win some and you lose some. They say justice is blind, who ever came up with those words most have lived in Thailand.

Seems the only winners every time regardless of outcome are the lawyers!

[Yunla]

He said he wants an unelected Assembly system of government ruled by selected individuals that he sees as worthy. This is by its nature not a democratic system of government. His vague assurances that it would eventually lead to a new electoral system are just that - vague and sketchy assurances. The system he proposed in the meantime is by its very nature anti-democratic and is full of exploitation loopholes that makes Swiss cheese look solid by comparison.

[Lite Beer]

Post Removed:

15.You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

[aussieinthailand]

So just what do you have to say and do to violate sec 68???

[Blackmirage2013]

Some of these court cases are so childish and stupid. They reflect the intelligence of those submitting them.

I have a solution!

Why not hire "Judge Judy" or the equivalent of "Judge Wappner" on the TV show "People's Court"

Have the Pueu Thai and others bring their silly accusations to this court so that someone with balls and common sense can set them straight. We have a lot of much more important things to think about, like accelerating growth in our economy, rather than trying to decide who put the thumbtack on the teacher's chair.

It amazes me how some of these politicians can call themselves adults. I am embarassed to be in the same age group as they are. I will lie about my age from now on to distance myself from them! lols

[Blackmirage2013]

Actually, now I read the comic "Dilbert" right before I read the headlines about this political crisis so that I can keep the same train of thought......

[diehard60]

I would love to read article 68.

[96tehtarp]

Is the written decision on-line yet? I couldn't find it.

Can it be appealed to the Supreme court?

[diehard60]

You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting.

[Luk Mhee]

BINGO!

I second that!

[96tehtarp]

I would love to read article 68.

"Section 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution. ..." Full text here.

Section 69 deals with the right to protest.

"Section 69. A person shall have the right to resist peacefully an act committed for the acquisition of the power to rule the country by a means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution."

So there we have it.

It is against TV forum rules to criticize the judgements of any Thai court of Law.

"15.You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgements of any Thai court of law."

A foreign write-up of what just happened here.

A Thai pro democracy blog write-up here.

Edited February 13, 2014 by 96tehtarp

[chainarong]

I think the key word here is Mistrust , I rest my case on behalf of the good people of Thailand.. Score: 10/10

[96tehtarp]

You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting.

"Section 70. Every person shall have a duty to uphold the nation, religions, the King and the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution.

Section 71. Every person shall have a duty to defend the country, to protect benefits of the nation and to obey the law.

Section 72. Every person shall have a duty to exercise his right to vote at an election." Full text here.

[tx22cb]

I would love to read article 68.

Section 68.

No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

In the case where a person or a political party has committed the act under paragraph one, the person knowing of such act shall have the right to request the Prosecutor General to investigate its facts and submit a motion to the Constitutional Court for ordering cessation of such act without, however, prejudice to the institution of a criminal action against such person.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes a decision compelling the political party to cease to commit the act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order the dissolution of such political party.

In the case where the Constitutional Court issues an order dissolving the political party under paragraph three, the right to vote of the dissolved political party’s leader and executive committee members at the time of the commission of the offence under paragraph one shall be suspended for the period of five years as from the date of such order of the Constitutional Court.

[anon467367354]

He said he wants an unelected Assembly system of government ruled by selected individuals that he sees as worthy. This is by its nature not a democratic system of government. His vague assurances that it would eventually lead to a new electoral system are just that - vague and sketchy assurances. The system he proposed in the meantime is by its very nature anti-democratic and is full of exploitation loopholes that makes Swiss cheese look solid by comparison.

The "elected" government appoints people to positions in the government that were not elected as well, not sure it's that much different.

Every cabinet reshuffle is appointing someone to a position of power they were not voted in to do as well.

[Curt1591]

So just what do you have to say and do to violate sec 68???

Section 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

I believe the word "overthrow" has actually come from Fearless Leader's mouth quite a few times.

Edited February 13, 2014 by Curt1591

[klauskunkel]

You all should read Article 70, 71, and 72. They are very interesting.

"Section 70. Every person shall have a duty to uphold the nation, religions, the King and the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution.

Section 71. Every person shall have a duty to defend the country, to protect benefits of the nation and to obey the law.

Section 72. Every person shall have a duty to exercise his right to vote at an election." Full text here.

too bad the government is not a person...

[mettech]

Thai people are very patient to let the country sinking slowly towards a great lost of revenue and confidence from the rest of the other countries.

[spirit47]

Post Removed:

15.You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

Ups... Im difficult with the small letters...

[Thailand]

Anybody actually read this?

"The court said Suthep and his group might have committed many other violations, such as breaking criminal laws, but said it was the responsibility of agencies under the justice system to charge them under the relevant laws. "

[Artisi]

How many slaps in the face can the PTP idiots take? This is too funny!

Democrats got theirs yesterday already when the courts refused to anull the election.

Sorry no second prize.

[mightyatom]

So how about revoking a load of those arrest warrants then?

Surely all the warrants connected to these protests are now legally invalid. Such as the ones that were issued under charge of sedition, insurrection etc.

That would piss off Chalerm and Tarit.

This is a precedent now, and should be instantly jumped on by the PDRC legal team, and that would secure the release of the leader who's name I can't call to mind.

Edited February 13, 2014 by mightyatom

[mightyatom]

Is the written decision on-line yet? I couldn't find it.

Can it be appealed to the Supreme court?

They are the supreme court......lol