Political chaos in Thailand: 'Courts can resolve crisis'

[webfact]

POLITICAL CHAOS
'Courts can resolve crisis'
OPAS BOONLOM
THE NATION

Senior judge says judiciary can provide solutions to conflict

BANGKOK: -- SUPREME Administrative Court president Hassavut Vititviriyakul has dismissed the idea of dividing the country to end the on-going political crisis, saying the idea is "too far-fetched" and that the courts can help find solutions to bring about peace.

Administrative Court judges are hearing significant cases that have captured public interest, such as challenges against the transfer of former National Security Council chief Thawil Pliansri, the Bt350 billion water management scheme, and the all important rice-pledging scheme.

Hassavut rejected the idea of appointing anyone or any council to unlock the political impasse, saying this wasn't necessary.

However, he said in order for the courts to become an institution people can depend on at times of crisis like this, judges must ensure that they hear cases in a straightforward manner, without political bias.

While Administrative Court judges have political opinions, they should not voice their thoughts publicly, he said.

If judges can make people understand why they arrive at a decision, people should accept court verdicts and not resort to violence, or force, or seek to establish a new body to solve problems.

Appointing a new organisation to solve these problems would raise questions about the righteousness of selection processes and the make-up of an organisation, he said.

"But just when courts begin to hear cases, there was a shooting at the court premises. I don't understand why Thais lack the tolerance to accept different opinions,'' he said.

Hassavut said he had seen differences in opinions between the two political camps build up over a long period of time so he believed it was not possible to force them to accept each other's opinions overnight.

The court president was not optimistic that talks would bring solutions even though he wished the problems would end.

"One side is black and the other is white. If talks mean to compromise then it needs to get grey. "The question is whether it is right. One side is corrupt and the other is not corrupt. To compromise means to be corrupt at one level. We have to ask the people if that is acceptable. The thought that corruption is acceptable - if corrupt people share our interest -- has gradually undermined Thai society,'' he said.

Meanwhile, the political divide has generated the extreme idea of dividing the country as a solution, but Hassavut said the notion was too far-fetched. "Most Thais do not want the conflicts to deteriorate to the point of dividing the country. I am confident deep down everyone still holds a sense of being Thai,'' he said.

However, he admitted it was legally viable to hold a public referendum to see if a majority of people agree with amending the Constitution to divide the country into states and not a single state as it is. "The point is should we allow such a public referendum that adversely affects the country's sovereignty to be held?'' he said.

He dismissed claims that the country should be divided because divisions were too deep to fix. "I want to ask people from the two political camps: have they known each other personally? Is it true they cannot stand one another? They resort to violence because of a lack of conscience. I urge them to exercise the right judgement,'' he said.

-- The Nation 2014-03-03

[bangkokheat]

i cant see how a court making a ruling about something and not been followed thru by police is helping resolve anything

[Thai at Heart]

Courts will provide a solution???

Can they just stick to judging.

[ppmacready]

Courts will provide a solution???

Can they just stick to judging.

Are there ANY red shirt judges?

[bangkokheat]

Courts will provide a solution???

Can they just stick to judging.

Are there ANY red shirt judges?

no, they are all yellow, oops i mean yellow shirts

[ThailandNoob]

Recently the courts ruled that the anti-government demonstrations were non-violent. I should note that this happened after the "popcorn warrior" incident, which was glorified by their leadership.

Before that, the courts ruled that the protests were not seeking to overthrow the elected government. I should note that Suthep had been repeating ad nauseum that he wanted to replace democracy with his unelected people's council.

Going further back, do people remember Samak being kicked out of office for taking money to buy ingredients to use in his cooking show.

I would love for the judiciary to help me "understand how the arrive" at verdicts like these. A lot of Thai people have said similar things to me.

"one side is corrupt and the other is not corrupt"??? What about Suthep in 1995.

Dividing the country into states is the one thing that could head off civil war.

(edited because my phone posted this while I was halfway through posting)

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited March 3, 2014 by ThailandNoob

[kikoman]

Since the present court system came into existence as a military tribunal, that is exactly as it continues to function! the stupidity exhibited in its "peaceful unarmed protest ruling" turnings its back on the rule of law, and ruled on the judges own personal biases.

The court rulings on major cases, have alway back to demands of their masters the ammart, how can anyone be serious about such biased court rulings. Another extremely flawed decision was the purge of the then PM for participating in a cooking show!

The present courts, NACC, and EC must be dissolved and replaced by those people that can make decisions that are good for the country not to certain political groups! The present system if flawed beyond repair, the PDRC did not stop the election in Thailand, the EC did without fulfilling its responsibility to the nation by properly setting up a secure election enviornment for the country to vote their will.

As stated by the Red Shirt leadership they were looking at a legal separation of centralized power in Bangkok, with a separate but equal states that were entrusted with the power in each state much as the United States functions.

Reform of the present system in Thailand is long overdue!

Cheers

Edited March 3, 2014 by kikoman

[whybother]

Recently the courts ruled that the anti-government demonstrations were non-violent. I should note that this happened after the "popcorn warrior" incident, which was glorified by their leadership.

Before that, the courts ruled that the protests were not seeking to overthrow the elected government. I should note that Suthep had been repeating ad nauseum that he wanted to replace democracy with his unelected people's council.

Going further back, do people remember Samak being kicked out of office for taking money to buy ingredients to use in his cooking show.

I would love for the judiciary to help me "understand how the arrive" at verdicts like these. A lot of Thai people have said similar things to me.

"one side is corrupt and the other is not corrupt"??? What about Suthep in 1995.

Dividing the country into states is the one thing that could head off civil war.

(edited because my phone posted this while I was halfway through posting)

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"Going further back, do people remember Samak being kicked out of office for taking money to buy ingredients to use in his cooking show."

That's a new one. I wonder why no one has mentioned that before.

[whybother]

Since the present court system came into existence as a military tribunal, that is exactly as it continues to function! the stupidity exhibited in its "peaceful unarmed protest ruling" turnings its back on the rule of law, and ruled on the judges own personal biases.

The court rulings on major cases, have alway back to demands of their masters the ammart, how can anyone be serious about such biased court rulings. Another extremely flawed decision was the purge of the then PM for participating in a cooking show!

The present courts, NACC, and EC must be dissolved and replaced by those people that can make decisions that are good for the country not to certain political groups! The present system if flawed beyond repair, the PDRC did not stop the election in Thailand, the EC did without fulfilling its responsibility to the nation by properly setting up a secure election enviornment for the country to vote their will.

As stated by the Red Shirt leadership they were looking at a legal separation of centralized power in Bangkok, with a separate but equal states that were entrusted with the power in each state much as the United States functions.

Reform of the present system in Thailand is long overdue!

Cheers

"Since the present court system came into existence as a military tribunal" Huh?? When did that happen? Which court system?

"much as the United States functions."

[chainarong]

The idea of dividing Thailand into states has merit , but not for the reasons of red shirt states , yellow shirt states, this is unworkable , you could have states and the members of parliament could be elected from the mainstream true believers from those states ,same for the senate, like the US or Oz set up. This would then introduce a real people representation, not as it stands now with the nominated wealthy holding the power.

[Chupup]

[focus27]

"But just when courts begin to hear cases, there was a shooting at the court premises. I don't understand why Thais lack the tolerance to accept different opinions,'' he said.

Try looking at how students are taught at school. There is only ever one right answer, and the teacher is always right! Questions are not encouraged as an expression of curiosity but are treated as a challenge to the teacher's authority. That attitude needs a serious change, but that won't happen quickly enough to affect the current situation.

So, back to the judges. I think it is not enough to publicly plead independence, they have to be seen to be independent and unbiased. And that means not bending the rules depending on who is the defendant. Laws are always badly written and always appear to be black and white when in reality human experience is in shades of grey. Having the judges constantly reinterpreting bad laws does not turn them into good laws.

When Thailand became a constitutional monarchy it copied many structures of the UK, but they didn't put in place some form of common law and the rule of precedent. Instead, they rely on statutory law without guidance from previous similar cases, hence the charge that some of them just seem to be making shit up depending on who is in the dock. They don't have to rewrite their statutory laws; they just need to have a mechanism whereby such laws are interpreted fairly and consistently. Then the judges can earn back the respect they demand.

[pisico]

Courts will provide a solution???

Can they just stick to judging.

Are there ANY red shirt judges?

no, they are all yellow, oops i mean yellow shirts

QUOTE:

" to hear cases in a straightforward manner, without political bias."

The usual reasoning of those cloistered in their ivory towers.

Transient character in basic Algebra: Judge=university degree=Ammart=yellow.

No bias, in Thailand?

[binjalin]

Courts will provide a solution???

Can they just stick to judging.

Are there ANY red shirt judges?

no, they are all yellow, oops i mean yellow shirts

QUOTE:

" to hear cases in a straightforward manner, without political bias."

The usual reasoning of those cloistered in their ivory towers.

Transient character in basic Algebra: Judge=university degree=Ammart=yellow.

No bias, in Thailand?

there is no law of "precedent" here - each judge makes up his own "findings" without reference

it needs a complete overhaul

Edited March 3, 2014 by binjalin

[geriatrickid]

Judges must ensure that they hear cases in a straightforward manner, without political bias. While Administrative Court judges have political opinions, they should not voice their thoughts publicly, he said.

Laudable and praiseworthy statements. The catch is in getting the judiciary to respect that sentiment.

[lostinsurin]

Recently the courts ruled that the anti-government demonstrations were non-violent. I should note that this happened after the "popcorn warrior" incident, which was glorified by their leadership.

Before that, the courts ruled that the protests were not seeking to overthrow the elected government. I should note that Suthep had been repeating ad nauseum that he wanted to replace democracy with his unelected people's council.

Going further back, do people remember Samak being kicked out of office for taking money to buy ingredients to use in his cooking show.

I would love for the judiciary to help me "understand how the arrive" at verdicts like these. A lot of Thai people have said similar things to me.

"one side is corrupt and the other is not corrupt"??? What about Suthep in 1995.

Dividing the country into states is the one thing that could head off civil war.

(edited because my phone posted this while I was halfway through posting)

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"Going further back, do people remember Samak being kicked out of office for taking money to buy ingredients to use in his cooking show.

"

That's a new one. I wonder why no one has mentioned that before.

And today you are being childish, go to your room!

[TheReporter]

The court is equally corrupted, which is why its rulings or decisions are not being respected and accepted by the people

[falangadang]

The problem is a lot more deep seated than decisions that are made by the Courts.

This goes to corruption within the ranks of those responsible for facilitation such schemes as water management etc which the courts cannot control and which take on a life of their own when being implemented.

Fix the corruption permissiveness culture in Thai society and you will fix the problems.

Until that happens just expect more of the same!

[rickirs]

"Senior judge says judiciary can provide solutions to conflict." I am sure they all have their own personal political beliefs but they do not have the authority to provide solutions to conflict. They have the authority to rule on cases brought to the court in an unprejudicial, unbiased manner irrespective of their political beliefs based only on law and fact. All Thai courts should remain nuetral to the ongoing political conflict to preserve their credibility as judges. If any judges want to become involved in conflict resolution they should resign their office to do so. I believe there will be no volunteers.

[smovi57]

Since the present court system came into existence as a military tribunal, that is exactly as it continues to function! the stupidity exhibited in its "peaceful unarmed protest ruling" turnings its back on the rule of law, and ruled on the judges own personal biases.

The court rulings on major cases, have alway back to demands of their masters the ammart, how can anyone be serious about such biased court rulings. Another extremely flawed decision was the purge of the then PM for participating in a cooking show!

The present courts, NACC, and EC must be dissolved and replaced by those people that can make decisions that are good for the country not to certain political groups! The present system if flawed beyond repair, the PDRC did not stop the election in Thailand, the EC did without fulfilling its responsibility to the nation by properly setting up a secure election enviornment for the country to vote their will.

As stated by the Red Shirt leadership they were looking at a legal separation of centralized power in Bangkok, with a separate but equal states that were entrusted with the power in each state much as the United States functions.

Reform of the present system in Thailand is long overdue!

Cheers

You are a sick puppy. Cheers

[bigbamboo]

There are just too many different courts in Thailand and nobody quite seems to understand how they work. I guess it's all part of the transparency that Thailand is not known for.

[Stan7444]

Recently the courts ruled that the anti-government demonstrations were non-violent. I should note that this happened after the "popcorn warrior" incident, which was glorified by their leadership.

Before that, the courts ruled that the protests were not seeking to overthrow the elected government. I should note that Suthep had been repeating ad nauseum that he wanted to replace democracy with his unelected people's council.

Going further back, do people remember Samak being kicked out of office for taking money to buy ingredients to use in his cooking show.

I would love for the judiciary to help me "understand how the arrive" at verdicts like these. A lot of Thai people have said similar things to me.

"one side is corrupt and the other is not corrupt"??? What about Suthep in 1995.

Dividing the country into states is the one thing that could head off civil war.

(edited because my phone posted this while I was halfway through posting)

Sent from my IS11T using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

“A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within”. Will & Ariel Durant, The Story of Civilization (1935).

[Stan7444]

The idea of dividing Thailand into states has merit , but not for the reasons of red shirt states , yellow shirt states, this is unworkable , you could have states and the members of parliament could be elected from the mainstream true believers from those states ,same for the senate, like the US or Oz set up. This would then introduce a real people representation, not as it stands now with the nominated wealthy holding the power.

Just think for a moment why the Dems and establishment wish to keep the Senate 50% elected and 50% selected and by whom they are chosen. All about keeping centralized control and not about free elections with the vote of the people determining the composition of the Senate.

[mic6ard]

Court in LOS solve problem??? Didn't he notice how people rise up in opposition to any decision not going their way?

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

"But just when courts begin to hear cases, there was a shooting at the court premises. I don't understand why Thais lack the tolerance to accept different opinions,'' he said.

Try looking at how students are taught at school. There is only ever one right answer, and the teacher is always right! Questions are not encouraged as an expression of curiosity but are treated as a challenge to the teacher's authority. That attitude needs a serious change, but that won't happen quickly enough to affect the current situation.

So, back to the judges. I think it is not enough to publicly plead independence, they have to be seen to be independent and unbiased. And that means not bending the rules depending on who is the defendant. Laws are always badly written and always appear to be black and white when in reality human experience is in shades of grey. Having the judges constantly reinterpreting bad laws does not turn them into good laws.

When Thailand became a constitutional monarchy it copied many structures of the UK, but they didn't put in place some form of common law and the rule of precedent. Instead, they rely on statutory law without guidance from previous similar cases, hence the charge that some of them just seem to be making shit up depending on who is in the dock. They don't have to rewrite their statutory laws; they just need to have a mechanism whereby such laws are interpreted fairly and consistently. Then the judges can earn back the respect they demand.

Thailand uses a civil law system found in continental Europe, Russia, most of Asia including Japan and former French colonies. The judiciary can adjust rules to social change and new needs, by way of interpretation and "creative" jurisprudence. It can follow social and cultural practices as well. Unlike the other common law countries, however, Thailand does not use the the jury system to determine innocence or guilt; that is the sole domain of the judge(s). So Thailand's judicial system produces a process that is potentially less transparent, allows corruption, and increases the likelihood of wrongful convictions.

[Thai at Heart]

"But just when courts begin to hear cases, there was a shooting at the court premises. I don't understand why Thais lack the tolerance to accept different opinions,'' he said.

Try looking at how students are taught at school. There is only ever one right answer, and the teacher is always right! Questions are not encouraged as an expression of curiosity but are treated as a challenge to the teacher's authority. That attitude needs a serious change, but that won't happen quickly enough to affect the current situation.

So, back to the judges. I think it is not enough to publicly plead independence, they have to be seen to be independent and unbiased. And that means not bending the rules depending on who is the defendant. Laws are always badly written and always appear to be black and white when in reality human experience is in shades of grey. Having the judges constantly reinterpreting bad laws does not turn them into good laws.

When Thailand became a constitutional monarchy it copied many structures of the UK, but they didn't put in place some form of common law and the rule of precedent. Instead, they rely on statutory law without guidance from previous similar cases, hence the charge that some of them just seem to be making shit up depending on who is in the dock. They don't have to rewrite their statutory laws; they just need to have a mechanism whereby such laws are interpreted fairly and consistently. Then the judges can earn back the respect they demand.

One side has thaksin, the other the red bull idiot.

Enough said.

[Scamper]

The courts were intended to address conflicts and they will address this one. The respect for the law is tantamount, however. The legal system must be allowed to proceed.

[Bluespunk]

Since the present court system came into existence as a military tribunal, that is exactly as it continues to function! the stupidity exhibited in its "peaceful unarmed protest ruling" turnings its back on the rule of law, and ruled on the judges own personal biases.

The court rulings on major cases, have alway back to demands of their masters the ammart, how can anyone be serious about such biased court rulings. Another extremely flawed decision was the purge of the then PM for participating in a cooking show!

The present courts, NACC, and EC must be dissolved and replaced by those people that can make decisions that are good for the country not to certain political groups! The present system if flawed beyond repair, the PDRC did not stop the election in Thailand, the EC did without fulfilling its responsibility to the nation by properly setting up a secure election enviornment for the country to vote their will.

As stated by the Red Shirt leadership they were looking at a legal separation of centralized power in Bangkok, with a separate but equal states that were entrusted with the power in each state much as the United States functions.

Reform of the present system in Thailand is long overdue!

Cheers

Military tribunal introduced the present court system? When was this?

The NACC and the EC are upholding the law, the investigation of the rice scheme is long overdue. You just don't like the fact they will not do as PT say they should do, but instead stick to the law.

The red shirts have decided this must happen have they, a minority group. I thought you didn't like minority groups dictating to the majority.

As for new courts, who will decide how these are to be run? And who will choose these new judges?

Still nice to see you've joined the reform movement.

Edited March 3, 2014 by Bluespunk

[smileydude]

Nothing will be resolved as long as those involved in this power struggle intend to hang on to that power.