Jump to content

Pheu Thai case against Suthep thrown out


webfact

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

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

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by 96tehtarp
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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 by Curt1591
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by mightyatom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...