Temporary elected 'People's Parliament' proposed: Thailand

[Scamper]

With Ms. Yingluck insisting she's still in power, it's hard to know how negotiations could proceed with any degree of seriousness. Pheu Thai are pretty horrible at negotiations, in any event, as they were horrible in their style of governance, horrible in how they handled parliament, and horrible in how they talked to the independent agencies and judicial system in general. Pheu Thai's slogan was " Thaksin speaks, Pheu Thai listens. " Listening to anyone else was something that Pheu Thai was always biologically adverse to do. Allowing the constitution to speak will be the path towards reform. If the courts proceed unimpeded, the constitution itself will pave the way. Article 7 took effect two days ago. Article 7 allows for an interim period of stability where reform and consensus can be more effectively achieved. It provides an arena for meaningful discussion among the parties, and provides an opportunity for consensus, and for peace.

[bangon04]

"Not having a sitting House or a government that can fully function would put the country at a great disadvantage, he said"

"would put"??

With experts like this, it is no wonder that Chula Uni is hoping to break into the top 200 unis of the world...........He is a leading academic at Thailand's best University.

Edited March 7, 2014 by bangon04

[almafudd]

Proposed by who? Just another random yellow shirt. And why is this even news worthy?

These " journalists" are controlling how we think. Wake up people

"These " journalists" are controlling how we think. Wake up people"

lol

[Bakseeda]

Elected by who?

And why can the election of a people's parliament be completed but not a normal election?

Shannon, surely you know the answer to this question before you asked it.. Obviously you live "up country" and left your brain behind.. come back to civilisation and learn the truth about your beloved PTP... do you have just the slightest idea how much they have cheated and stolen from the Thai taxpayers.. But Oh yes... your wife told you..

[winstonc]

Proposed by who? Just another random yellow shirt. And why is this even news worthy?

These " journalists" are controlling how we think. Wake up people

newsworthy and you replied nice one brains..again..

[3NUMBAS]

a committee of BOY SCOUTS who aren't bent is the only parties you could trust ,everyone else has a hidden agenda so it wont work .

democracy was created to get round this thorny problem.

Thailand led by boy scouts is prolly the sensible option

[ikke]

The only way for this gov to proceed is to break up the PTP and Dem parties and ban all members from politics. Start new with decent law abiding citizens who reallly want to help the people and dont want the position for its power and easy access to enlarge bank accounts. Too bad this will never happen

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Agree 100%, but maybe also all older than 50y should be banned from politics, younger blood of all ranges of citizens would do a lot better than the older and rusty ones.

[ikke]

Elected by who?

And why can the election of a people's parliament be completed but not a normal election?

Shannon, surely you know the answer to this question before you asked it.. Obviously you live "up country" and left your brain behind.. come back to civilisation and learn the truth about your beloved PTP... do you have just the slightest idea how much they have cheated and stolen from the Thai taxpayers.. But Oh yes... your wife told you..

It might help if came up with some numbers if you talk about how much....., but I would be very interested to that numbers from all sides, as you seems to believe they are different from each other.

[Robby nz]

There can be no effective reforms if there is any politicians involved in the process as they all have far to many vested interests.

The first thing that has to be done is put in place a reform group, committee, call it what you want, who will tackle reforms in all sectors, what they come up with would be put to a referendum and the result would be binding with no meddling from politicians.

Not all reforms need not be done before an election, the main reform that needs to be done is to electoral law, in particular as to the qualifications of who can stand as a candidate, once that is done then an election can be held and parliament can be formed and reforms can carry on separate from parliaments work , if work is the correct word.

So how ? Well we have, will have, a fully functioning senate whose job, among other things is to vet bills passed in parliament so if there is no parliament the electoral reforms can be taken directly to the senate for endorsement then on for the normal royal signature. Then elections held under the new rules.

I have already suggested qualifications on another topic and these would be stringent with the idea of getting as honest people as possible who would be prepared to work for the country and the people and not themselves or their families.

No good saying the constitution doesn't allow these things because the constitution was never designed to cope with the situation we have now and trying to apply its every word will get nowhere.

[fab4]

Scamper, on 07 Mar 2014 - 13:54, said:Scamper, on 07 Mar 2014 - 13:54, said:

With Ms. Yingluck insisting she's still in power, it's hard to know how negotiations could proceed with any degree of seriousness. Pheu Thai are pretty horrible at negotiations, in any event, as they were horrible in their style of governance, horrible in how they handled parliament, and horrible in how they talked to the independent agencies and judicial system in general. Pheu Thai's slogan was " Thaksin speaks, Pheu Thai listens. " Listening to anyone else was something that Pheu Thai was always biologically adverse to do. Allowing the constitution to speak will be the path towards reform. If the courts proceed unimpeded, the constitution itself will pave the way. Article 7 took effect two days ago. Article 7 allows for an interim period of stability where reform and consensus can be more effectively achieved. It provides an arena for meaningful discussion among the parties, and provides an opportunity for consensus, and for peace.

You just won't give up will you. Yingluck is still Caretaker PM. You're just echoing a member of the old Junta constitution drafting assembly, so you can guess which side of the fence he's on

Quote

Seree Suwannapanon, deputy chairman of the Constitutional Drafting Assembly [in 2007], stated that the caretaker government will expire no later than April 3.......as of April 3, Yingluck will be former PM and has no power to run the country. In addition, the government has no power to run the country and cannot meet or order civil servants.

Therefore, as of April 3, there is a political vacuum as no caretaker government. The answer is Article 7 and Article 3. When considering history – October 14, 1973 – then there is no option but to request a royally-appointed and neutral PM who can choose a new Cabinet.

Perhaps he ought to consider more recent history, April 2006 in fact. He obviously hasn't learnt from that occasion, and nor have you, or anybody else who harps on about Article 7,

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/04/26/headlines/headlines_30002592.php

It's academic anyway,

Quote

First, the Yingluck Cabinet is a caretaker Cabinet. It is compelled to continue its role under Section 181 until a new Cabinet takes office. Second, there is 180 days under Section 93, paragraph 6 to get to 95% minimum threshold of MPs for the House of Representatives to convene so there is no 60 day deadline.

BP: Normally, within 60 days of the election the caretaker Cabinet will be replaced by a new Cabinet, but Section 181 does not put a maximum timeframe on how long the caretaker Cabinet can continue. It simply states the caretaker Cabinet continues until a new Cabinet takes office. In BP’s view this is clear. There is no expiry date.

Now, you may say this provides a perverse outcome and means a caretaker Cabinet could then seek to continue in power indefinitely by obstructing parliament from sitting and voting on a PM, but this is not what has happened here and it would be unconstitutional anyway for the caretaker Cabinet to obstruct parliament from sitting and voting on a PM.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/120115/will-the-yingluck-government-cease-caretaker/

You want the constitution to speak - it does, but you're pathologically deaf to what it's telling you.

Edited March 7, 2014 by fab4

[ikke]

Clearly yellow propaganda, question is, by who they will be elected ???

Just read a small article on this Charas :

"Where a group claims to represent the Faculty of Political Science at Chulalongkorn University on the anti-democratic stage. Their leader is introduced as Charas Suwanmala, a notorious propagandist for every anti-democratic group from PAD to the current lot."

I don't support red, nor yellow, but please open your eyes, they are all the same and all want power to proceed with corruption, but than for there own pocket.

Problem is, many people think they have the solution, but always the ideas come from Yellow or Red, never anyone neutral so far !

[smedly]

all they need are strict rules procedures and checks and balances plus independent agencies to enforce them and hefty penalties if they are broken, they already have some of these in place and PTP are still trying to dismantle or ignore them, exactly why we have these protests right now and the people are not happy

There should be no need for protests - there should be no need for army intervention, the system needs strengthened so that rogue governments like PTP and their paid redshirt leaders have no option but to play by the rules, everything in our society is governed by rules otherwise it would be chaos, can you imagine how a game of football would go without a ref or rules chaos

any MP caught breaking to rules should be banned from politics for life and not 5 years - how many crooks are back at it 5 - 10 -15 - years later doing the same things over and over, how many of the current administration have already been banned before - that speaks loud and clear for me

[BSJ]

Exactly what is temporary?

Is there a provision in the constitution that allows such a solution?