No use of force against protesters: Civil Court

[rubl]

You should start respecting the rule of law as without it we have anarchy. Anarchy is not democracy by the way.

Instead of denouncing the courts and fighting against a democratic society maybe the questions that need to be asked is what evidence have the courts received to make this judgement? The courts must know something we don't. We are, but internet warriors, most of who cannot speak, read or write Thai. We have a civil court judge making a ruling not based on articles in Bangkok Post and Thai Visa. They have people bringing them evidence, showing them video footage and presenting a case to back up their argument.

Maybe you should replace the PTP lawyer. Seems like he is doing a terrible job according the ruling given. Apparently it is not the courts you should be angry with. It should be the PTP lawyers for not presenting the facts as you have. BUT then, the PTP are never wrong are they and it is more simplistic and easy to blame the courts.

It appears you don't understand the purpose of courts in Thailand- they exist not to guarantee individual rights to justice- not to apply the law as writtent- but to maintain harmony in society. And society of couarse means Bangkok society- everyone in their place-- doing what they must to ensure that the status quo is maintained.

Thaksin sought to modernize society by opening the door to capitalist competition- The feudal system of patronage and 'connections' was in jeopardy. Suthep seeks to rescue Thailand from the threat of the modern and return it to the glory years when the slaves/serfs were happy to grab a frog or rat from a canal and a low hanging fruit. And when any one wanting to join the merchant class would have to prostrate himself to a benefactor.

.

The courts are tio be commended for contributing to this bold step backwards.This is the job that the courts were tasked with-- maintain the 'system' using the authority invested in them.

The 'feudal system of patronage and connections' seems especially alive upcountry in rural areas, like in Isaan

[rubl]

Interesting from twitter link

Dear foreign press:

The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. By preserving the emergency decree in form but invalidating its key contents, the court rendered the decree almost pointless for the government.

Two points need to be stressed:

1. The factual determination in emergency situation falls under jurisdiction of the executive. This is granted by the emergency decree which could be stuck down only by the constitutional court but by letting the decree stay the court and any other courts have no jurisdiction over this issue.

2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.

In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo legitimacy to overthrow the government.

Verapat Pariyawong

https://www.facebook.com/verapat/posts/10200964444627510

Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

[harrry]

Interesting from twitter link

Dear foreign press:

The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. By preserving the emergency decree in form but invalidating its key contents, the court rendered the decree almost pointless for the government.

Two points need to be stressed:

1. The factual determination in emergency situation falls under jurisdiction of the executive. This is granted by the emergency decree which could be stuck down only by the constitutional court but by letting the decree stay the court and any other courts have no jurisdiction over this issue.

2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.

In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo legitimacy to overthrow the government.

Verapat Pariyawong

https://www.facebook.com/verapat/posts/10200964444627510

http://www.verapat.com/p/verapat.html

Indicates the lack of bias.

[h90]

Non-violent protesters who shoot innocent people dead for trying to vote. The courts in Thailand are a sick joke.

when did which protester shoot voter dead?

They shot at people in Laksi and left one man paralysed. Hardly non-violent, regardless of whether they managed to kill anyone.

So than we have figured out that shooting voters dead was just a lie.

So next one..where is the evidence that the protesters shoot on voters?

[h90]

Just as an aside note, the situation in Kiev, Ukrania is still critical with police trying to dislodge anti-government protesters from the Independence Square. Since Tuesday morning there were at least 26 deaths including some police. The EC has been discussing the situation and according to observers it is likely that president Viktor Janukovitsj and his accomplises will be put on a 'black list'

yes because Janukovitsj is pro Russia and the opposition is sponsored by the USA.

Here the government is giving out good oil contracts to US companies, while the opposition want transparency (at least as long as they don't benefit from it themself).

That makes the democratic elected government in Ukraine evil and the opposition freedom fighters. While in Thailand it is the opposite.....

[BeforeTigers]

Let's just recap, here:
• Was it previously legal to use force against peaceful protestors?
• Is it the court's mandate to determine what is and is not a peaceful protests- before the fact?
• Is there anything in there about grenades?

It is a strange privilege to view this mess up close without being compelled to choose a side.
It's inspired me to do that even more in my home country politics.

[MunterHunter]

That makes the democratic elected government in Ukraine evil and the opposition freedom fighters. While in Thailand it is the opposite.....

You consider the Reds/Thaksin/PTP to be freedom fighters and the Protesters/Suthep as evil?

Wow... just wow...

[jollyman]

Conspiracy nutters take note: The court did not support the democrat-led petition to lift the state of emergency. This is obviously further evidence of a judicial coup. Spot on The plot thickens Yellow Bellies every wheres

GOOD LUCK YINGLUCK

Edited February 19, 2014 by jollyman

[chooka]

This whole thing is a joke. You have the criminal courts issuing warrants for police to arrest. You have the civil courts saying you can't. The criminal court is a higher court so what is the purpose of the civil court trying to over rule a higher court.

[djjamie]

Conspiracy nutters take note: The court did not support the democrat-led petition to lift the state of emergency. This is obviously further evidence of a judicial coup. Spot on The plot thickens Yellow Bellies every wheres

GOOD LUCK YINGLUCK

Good luck Suthep. Or as I like to call him. The Mandela of the East.

Edited February 19, 2014 by djjamie

[pookiki]

Interesting from twitter link

Dear foreign press:

The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. By preserving the emergency decree in form but invalidating its key contents, the court rendered the decree almost pointless for the government.

Two points need to be stressed:

1. The factual determination in emergency situation falls under jurisdiction of the executive. This is granted by the emergency decree which could be stuck down only by the constitutional court but by letting the decree stay the court and any other courts have no jurisdiction over this issue.

2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.

In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo legitimacy to overthrow the government.

Verapat Pariyawong

https://www.facebook.com/verapat/posts/10200964444627510

http://www.verapat.com/p/verapat.html

Indicates the lack of bias.

Yes, the man certainly has a 'conflict of interest' in making this statement. However, based on the court's ruling, it would appear to me that a 'protestor' has more rights under the 'gutted' state of emergency law than the average Thai citizen stopped at a police check point. As an earlier poster noted, this will only encourage proxy actors who will fight in the streets on behalf of their respective benefactors. They'll all be in black so you won't know whose side their on by the way.

Edited February 19, 2014 by pookiki

[Bangel72]

Whether people like it or not the current court rulings are/will be setting precedents for the future.

If you feel the actions of the protesters are fully justified and that the court decisions are correct purely based on your current grievances this could turn out to be very short sighted if you do not feel that they would be the right decision regardless of the protest grievance.

The next protest which you do not agree with will have the same rights, they could be blocking your place of business, your home peacefully and unarmed so perfectly within their rights but still taking away the rights from you if you happen to be in their area or work for a business they have a grievance against.

No matter which side you are on there needs to be level heads making the decisions that are not only sensible for the current protests but for every future protest.

I am not commenting specifically on this judgement and not just because I do not fully understand what it means but my point is that sensible unbiased decisions are in everyone's best interest in the long term.

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

It appears you don't understand the purpose of courts in Thailand- they exist not to guarantee individual rights to justice- not to apply the law as writtent- but to maintain harmony in society. And society of couarse means Bangkok society- everyone in their place-- doing what they must to ensure that the status quo is maintained.

It's quite obvious you've never stepped inside a courthouse in Thailand. You are confusing what you've heard about the labor courts with what actually happens in the civil, criminal and other specialty courts. The foundational statute that set up the labor courts allows the court to deviate from both the written code and employment contracts, when to do otherwise would be unjust. No other courts are so empowered.

[Crushdepth]

Conspiracy nutters take note: The court did not support the democrat-led petition to lift the state of emergency. This is obviously further evidence of a judicial coup. Spot on The plot thickens Yellow Bellies every wheres

GOOD LUCK YINGLUCK

'Cos you're going to need it.

Sent from somewhere in the Pacific

[Crushdepth]

Interesting from twitter link

Dear foreign press:

The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. By preserving the emergency decree in form but invalidating its key contents, the court rendered the decree almost pointless for the government.

Two points need to be stressed:

1. The factual determination in emergency situation falls under jurisdiction of the executive. This is granted by the emergency decree which could be stuck down only by the constitutional court but by letting the decree stay the court and any other courts have no jurisdiction over this issue.

2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.

In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo legitimacy to overthrow the government.

Verapat Pariyawong

https://www.facebook.com/verapat/posts/10200964444627510

I knew someone would have to do it. The court upholds the state of emergency...but its a judicial coup to overthrow the government

Hilarious. If I wasn't posting from my phone I would insert some photos of chicken coops here. Possibly with some Photoshop inserted judges and maybe a couple of fat Jatuporns. You'll just have to imagine it.

Sent from somewhere in the Pacific

Edited February 19, 2014 by Crushdepth

[bigbamboo]

Good. No more idiotic pushes to disband the protestors. Now that the court has ruled against using violence, they can't legally disband the protestors. If they try and someone dies, Chalerm and his band of official thugs can be held liable.

Guess it's back to being caretaker at the Jobcentre for Chalerm then.

Edited February 19, 2014 by bigbamboo

[geriatrickid]

The court has basically taken the ability to maintain law and order, to enforce the law, away from the civilian government. It sets a precedent and effectively undermines the authority of the government. I believe that upon appeal the judgement would have to be reversed. The fundamental right of protest would remain, but a legally elected government must have the ability to ensure that laws are enforced. The alternative is anarchy, which is perhaps what these judges want.

[Crushdepth]

The court has basically taken the ability to maintain law and order, to enforce the law, away from the civilian government. It sets a precedent and effectively undermines the authority of the government. I believe that upon appeal the judgement would have to be reversed. The fundamental right of protest would remain, but a legally elected government must have the ability to ensure that laws are enforced. The alternative is anarchy, which is perhaps what these judges want.

Depends what you think 'force' is. Bullet through the head reasonable?

By the way do you still think the rice scheme is a good idea ?

Sent from somewhere in the Pacific

[bigbamboo]

The court has basically taken the ability to maintain law and order, to enforce the law, away from the civilian government. It sets a precedent and effectively undermines the authority of the government. I believe that upon appeal the judgement would have to be reversed. The fundamental right of protest would remain, but a legally elected government must have the ability to ensure that laws are enforced. The alternative is anarchy, which is perhaps what these judges want.

Yes, I'm going to miss this government's ability to ensure laws are enforced.

[chooka]

The court has basically taken the ability to maintain law and order, to enforce the law, away from the civilian government. It sets a precedent and effectively undermines the authority of the government. I believe that upon appeal the judgement would have to be reversed. The fundamental right of protest would remain, but a legally elected government must have the ability to ensure that laws are enforced. The alternative is anarchy, which is perhaps what these judges want.

Depends what you think 'force' is. Bullet through the head reasonable?

By the way do you still think the rice scheme is a good idea ?

Sent from somewhere in the Pacific

I don't think the poor police officer or his family thought that was reasonable for just going to work. I agree with you it was not reasonable action against a young man just doing his job, You and I stand together to salute this young man.

[zaphodbeeblebrox]

Interesting from twitter link

Dear foreign press:

The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. By preserving the emergency decree in form but invalidating its key contents, the court rendered the decree almost pointless for the government.

Two points need to be stressed:

1. The factual determination in emergency situation falls under jurisdiction of the executive. This is granted by the emergency decree which could be stuck down only by the constitutional court but by letting the decree stay the court and any other courts have no jurisdiction over this issue.

2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.

In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo legitimacy to overthrow the government.

Verapat Pariyawong

https://www.facebook.com/verapat/posts/10200964444627510

To suggest that the declaration of an SOE is completely within the domain of the executive branch of government is intellectually dishonest. The legal basis for the SOE arises out of the Thai Constitution (1997).

Section 218

For the purpose of maintaining national or public safety or national economic security, or averting public calamity, the King may issue an Emergency Decree which shall have the force as an Act.

The issuance of an Emergency Decree under paragraph one shall be made only when the Council of Ministers is of the opinion that it is the case of emergency and necessary urgency which is unavoidable.

In the next succeeding sitting of the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers shall submit the Emergency Decree to the National Assembly for its consideration without delay. If it is out of session and it would be a delay to wait for the opening of an ordinary session, the Council of Ministers must proceed to convoke an extraordinary session of the National Assembly in order to consider whether to approve or disapprove the Emergency Decree without delay. If the House of Representatives disapproves it or approves it but the Senate disapproves it and the House of Representatives reaffirms its approval by the votes of not more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of the House, the Emergency Decree shall lapse; provided that it shall not affect any act done during the enforcement of such Emergency Decree.

If the Emergency Decree under paragraph one has the effect of amending or repealing any provisions of any Act and such Emergency Decree has lapsed in accordance with paragraph three, the provisions of the Act in force before the amendment or repeal shall continue to be in force as from the day the disapproval of such Emergency Decree is effective.

If the House of Representatives and the Senate approve the Emergency Decree, or if the Senate disapproves it but the House of Representatives reaffirms its approval by the votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of the House, such Emergency Decree shall continue to have the force as an Act.

The Prime Minister shall cause the approval or disapproval of the Emergency Decree to be published in the Government Gazette. In case of disapproval, it shall be effective as from the day following the date of its publication in the Government Gazette.

The consideration of an Emergency Decree by the Senate and the House of Representatives in case of reaffirmation of the Emergency Decree must take place at the first opportunity when such Houses hold their sittings.

[pookiki]

Interesting from twitter link

Dear foreign press:

The Thai civil court's order today is one step closer to full scale judicial coup. By preserving the emergency decree in form but invalidating its key contents, the court rendered the decree almost pointless for the government.

Two points need to be stressed:

1. The factual determination in emergency situation falls under jurisdiction of the executive. This is granted by the emergency decree which could be stuck down only by the constitutional court but by letting the decree stay the court and any other courts have no jurisdiction over this issue.

2. The constitutional court's ruling only binds the civil court legally but not factually. That means the civil court is bound by legal interpretation but there is no judicial basis for the civil court to rely on factual determination by the constitutional court. The constitutional court determined the facts at one point in time but facts change by minute, therefore it is judicially impossible and legally illogical for the civil court to disregard the current situation and conveniently rely on the constitutional court's ruling.

In sum, the civil court basically teamed up with the constitutional court in attempts to intervene in the executive domain, where the court has no accountability, and pave ways for the protestors to claim pseudo legitimacy to overthrow the government.

Verapat Pariyawong

https://www.facebook.com/verapat/posts/10200964444627510

To suggest that the declaration of an SOE is completely within the domain of the executive branch of government is intellectually dishonest. The legal basis for the SOE arises out of the Thai Constitution (1997).

Section 218

For the purpose of maintaining national or public safety or national economic security, or averting public calamity, the King may issue an Emergency Decree which shall have the force as an Act.

The issuance of an Emergency Decree under paragraph one shall be made only when the Council of Ministers is of the opinion that it is the case of emergency and necessary urgency which is unavoidable.

In the next succeeding sitting of the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers shall submit the Emergency Decree to the National Assembly for its consideration without delay. If it is out of session and it would be a delay to wait for the opening of an ordinary session, the Council of Ministers must proceed to convoke an extraordinary session of the National Assembly in order to consider whether to approve or disapprove the Emergency Decree without delay. If the House of Representatives disapproves it or approves it but the Senate disapproves it and the House of Representatives reaffirms its approval by the votes of not more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of the House, the Emergency Decree shall lapse; provided that it shall not affect any act done during the enforcement of such Emergency Decree.

If the Emergency Decree under paragraph one has the effect of amending or repealing any provisions of any Act and such Emergency Decree has lapsed in accordance with paragraph three, the provisions of the Act in force before the amendment or repeal shall continue to be in force as from the day the disapproval of such Emergency Decree is effective.

If the House of Representatives and the Senate approve the Emergency Decree, or if the Senate disapproves it but the House of Representatives reaffirms its approval by the votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of the House, such Emergency Decree shall continue to have the force as an Act.

The Prime Minister shall cause the approval or disapproval of the Emergency Decree to be published in the Government Gazette. In case of disapproval, it shall be effective as from the day following the date of its publication in the Government Gazette.

The consideration of an Emergency Decree by the Senate and the House of Representatives in case of reaffirmation of the Emergency Decree must take place at the first opportunity when such Houses hold their sittings.

If this is true, why didn't the court quash the SOE in its entirety? For all practical purposes they did, but if your legal argument is correct then the court would have no other choice but to declare the SOE invalid.

[kuka]

Why is the Civil court system making rulings on Criminal offenses?

It should go through the Criminal courts since crimes are being committed.

Edited February 19, 2014 by kuka

[moe666]

Well maybe this will bring about the Foreign and Labor Minsters being leashed in a proper place. Those two with the aid of the DSI have created more problems since they came on the scene, than a pack of rabid monkeys.

All three of them must have had a lonely time growing up, they seem the type that tortured the neighborhood pets when they were approaching adulthood, while the other boys were pursuing the girls. If tickets are sold when they are brought justice, someone stands to make a killing. Just not sure Thailand has accomadation large enough to handle the propestive spectators.

But farangs will still have pay double to watch the proceedings!

I get the Thai price as I have a drivers license

[Dogmatix]

Having read the Khao Sod article it seems there literally nothing left of the Emergency Decree except the immunity to officers who enforce it. But there is nothing lleft to enforce.

No doubt Chalerm, Tarit, YL et al will refuse to recognise the authority of the court again but that will lead to criminal prosecutions, if they try to continue enforcing the SOE and courts won't approve arrest warrants under it. Rules of evidence are tougher under other laws.

I am not sure if the ruling is retroactive which could lead to prosecutions for actions already undertaken under the decree.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Dogmatix

[whybother]

It appears you don't understand the purpose of courts in Thailand- they exist not to guarantee individual rights to justice- not to apply the law as writtent- but to maintain harmony in society. And society of couarse means Bangkok society- everyone in their place-- doing what they must to ensure that the status quo is maintained.

Thaksin sought to modernize society by opening the door to capitalist competition- The feudal system of patronage and 'connections' was in jeopardy. Suthep seeks to rescue Thailand from the threat of the modern and return it to the glory years when the slaves/serfs were happy to grab a frog or rat from a canal and a low hanging fruit. And when any one wanting to join the merchant class would have to prostrate himself to a benefactor.

.

The courts are tio be commended for contributing to this bold step backwards.This is the job that the courts were tasked with-- maintain the 'system' using the authority invested in them.

For a decade now, the system has been under threat. The courts will see that these threats are nullified- starting by removing this government with its alien ideas about the open market, individual rights, and the social contract. SOCIAL contract? HAH When you have an army at your behest, you don't need a SOCIAL CONTRACT to legitimize rule.

"Thaksin sought to modernize society by opening the door to capitalist competition- The feudal system of patronage and 'connections' was in jeopardy."

You're kidding aren't you? That's what Thaksin used to get the power he got. Nothing changed in the north/north-east in relation to feudalism. Thaksin used the feudalism that was there and bought the poo yai's and rich business people. The people basically didn't change who they voted for after Thaksin came along. The people that they voted for had just been bought off by Thaksin.

[suthep songserm]

Conspiracy nutters take note: The court did not support the democrat-led petition to lift the state of emergency. This is obviously further evidence of a judicial coup.

Roswell has a more logical explanation than this court judgement...

I do finally agree with you on something - must be the full moon

Simple. They're sending messages if you read between the lines. You now have both courts stating that the protests are legal and peaceful. Now the door is open to laying charges much more easily against those in Govt.

........after having their shares of 25 Million baht from PDRC and their supporters yesterday. I predict more mysterious shootings and bombing to take place. History will repeat itself. Very sad and stressing.

[whybother]

The court has basically taken the ability to maintain law and order, to enforce the law, away from the civilian government. It sets a precedent and effectively undermines the authority of the government. I believe that upon appeal the judgement would have to be reversed. The fundamental right of protest would remain, but a legally elected government must have the ability to ensure that laws are enforced. The alternative is anarchy, which is perhaps what these judges want.

Depends what you think 'force' is. Bullet through the head reasonable?

By the way do you still think the rice scheme is a good idea ?

Sent from somewhere in the Pacific

I don't think the poor police officer or his family thought that was reasonable for just going to work. I agree with you it was not reasonable action against a young man just doing his job, You and I stand together to salute this young man.

I think CrushDepth was referring to the protester that got a bullet through the head.

[JohnThailandJohn]

"not to use force against peaceful protesters"

Is it considered peaceful if they are breaking the law such as blocking entry to government buildings by way of trespass and threat?

A time has to come when enough is enough and people learn just because they think they are right they cannot damage the country until they get their way. As long as these groups (Red, Yellow etc.) continue to be rewarded and protected, voting will remain useless. Let bad leaders run their course/term and be voted out or use the court and political process to get them removed. Peaceful protests are to bring attention to a subject to encourage change and not to force change through intimidation and illegal activities.

[seajae]

The abc news in Australia is reporting that the ptp forces have said this wasnt to disperse the protesters but only to arrest those with warrants against them. It also said the that they denied any live ammuniton was issued and that only rubber bullets were used by police and that all the live ammunition etc was used by the other side. Once again we see the ptp clearly lying about this as the guns they were shown with do not work with rubber bullets and they did not have any attachments fitted anyway so they could have only fired live ammunition. The lies continue for chalerm and the ptp.