Pheu Thai to impeach six charter court judges and Vicha Mahakhun

[jcb2001]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

It is not because the judges are not on the red side ! It is because they are incompetent and not neutral.

Let's say they are just like you, only supports yellow, at any price !

Sure would like to see some evidence in your statement. It is easy to make a statement like this, but shows your incompetence when you are unable to prove it.

[Old Man River]

Way to go to get the "Courts" on your side. Impeach them for doing their jobs. Classic.

Please read the complaint. The court gave direction on the proposed amendments saying that an article by article approach was acceptable.

The government followed that directive. Then the same judges who gave the directive, contradicted their decision by accepting a complaint that says the article by article approach was wrong. Was the guidance and direction wrong? If so, a serious error was made. Or, did the judges intentionally set the government up for a legal challenge by giving erroneous instructions?

The Senate has the power to review the events and to decide if the "judges" acted inappropriately.

Precedents don't exist in Thai law. Usually, a set of facts are just different enough that a previous decision doesn't hold up. Is it fair? I don't think so, but how else can you explain the CC in 2001, ruling that a man who was building a financial empire, would somehow forget that he had given large shares of stock in his companies to his driver and his maid? You might say that was unbelievable, but we know it happened.

On paper what you say makes sense, but without precedents allowed, things are easily explained away.

Let's sit back and watch.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Edited March 8, 2014 by Old Man River

[lostinsurin]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

It is not because the judges are not on the red side ! It is because they are incompetent and not neutral.

Let's say they are just like you, only supports yellow, at any price !

Oh I see they are judges

but you have a higher calling so you judge the judges

No wonder Thailand is in a circus if we have Western educated making comments like this

Please less of the childish remarks.

[Imale]

Way to go to get the "Courts" on your side. Impeach them for doing their jobs. Classic.

Please read the complaint. The court gave direction on the proposed amendments saying that an article by article approach was acceptable.

The government followed that directive. Then the same judges who gave the directive, contradicted their decision by accepting a complaint that says the article by article approach was wrong. Was the guidance and direction wrong? If so, a serious error was made. Or, did the judges intentionally set the government up for a legal challenge by giving erroneous instructions?

The Senate has the power to review the events and to decide if the "judges" acted inappropriately.

It has nothing to do with what you purport.

The amendment of article 190 was to allow the government to sign international deals without having to seek legislative approval. In other words the government could bypass the legislature to negotiate any deals except those related to territorial integrity, sovereignty, laws enacted by parliament and the initiations of free trade. In laymen terms it allows the government to bypass the democratic framework to pass shady deals with countries like, say Dubai.

And when you have governments passing shady deals by bypassing the democratic framework you can guess who would not be far away. Yes, that's right. Our one and only accused, mass murderer, accuses terrorist convicted criminal fugitive. thaksin shinawatra. He ordered the senators and MP's in a Skype address on March12, 1013 (yes yes yingluck is PM) to rush through the article 190 amendment lest they have their allowances cut. That sounds like a guy that could make a few baht of this amendment heay?

Also sounds like a guy that is running things to? Go figure. An unelectable is running the country. But thats another undemocratic story.

The complaint does not deal specifically with Article 190, but with all amendments to the constitution. But since you have brought it up, let me add some background.

The interpretation of the scope of Article 190 was radically broadened by the Constitutional Court's ruling that a joint communique on Preah Vihear signed by the Foreign Minister and his Cambodian counterpart in 2008 did fall under 190 and since the MOFA had not received parliamentary approval, it was unconstitutional. This was news to the MOFA who had been signing such communiques without parliament's say-so for years, and to many lawyers who wondered how a communique (one that specifically mentioned that it was 'without prejudice to the rights' of either country, no less) could be counted as a treaty. The court decision did seem strange and was interpreted by some as deliberately discriminating against the pro-Thaksin govt (the Minister lost his job in the ensuing brouhaha).

Since it was no longer clear what kind of agreement with a foreign entity did or did not fall under 190, govt officials understandably played safe and sent everything to parliament - MoUs between Thai and foreign universities, contracts between govt agencies and foreign companies, etc., etc. The system was clearly becoming unworkable and not what 190 intended (which was to stop things like the Ministry of Commerce signing Free Trade Agreements in almost total secrecy from parliament, the people and those sections of Thai society who were disadvantaged by them). The amendment was to make 190 more workable by giving it a more precise and narrow scope.

Now there can be discussions about how narrow the scope should be, and it was clearly intended to exclude the interpretation that the Court had suddenly decided to allow, but let us separate the powers here. The Constitution gives parliament, not the courts, the right to amend it. The Constitutional Court's job is to interpret what parliament's constitutional amendments say. It is difficult to understand how the Court can decide (as it did with the amendment to make the Senate wholly elected) that certain amendments are 'unconstitutional' (since they are specifically designed to change the constitution, they must be, by definition) and some are not. The Yingluck govt's experience is that every amendment they propose gets knocked back (often together with a threat of impeachment) while the Abhisit administration was successful in amending the Constitution with regard to the proportion of MPs elected by constituency and by party list - a move blatantly intended to improve the Democrats' chances at the next election.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that double standards are being implied.

[Goat Roper]

My guess is that the PTP and the PM will be around an in control until the end of their elected term of office. Why you ask, because of money. I have often said that above all money rules this country. I will not be surprised at all if PTP continues to warm all the government seats for the next 18 months..

[animatic]

All FORMER PTP members.

Seems these muppets think if they can make an attack that benefits the liege-lord and clan,

they might be brought back into the fold and belly up to the trough again.

[lungmi]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paranoid_personality_disorder

Check it out and you should have some answers.

[TVGerry]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

It is not because the judges are not on the red side ! It is because they are incompetent and not neutral.

Let's say they are just like you, only supports yellow, at any price !

Sure! To the reds, anyone who isn't on the side of the Shins are incompetent and not neutral! That's called Shinawatra democracy!

[AleG]

Just in case the legal threats are not enough of an incentive, a bomb has been defused at the Charter Court today.

[billd766]

Great, it is time for the Judges to be held accountable for their decision, the law not properly or selectively enforced, is bad for the whole country, those that fail to observe the law no matter what colored shirts they wear must be dealt with in a fair manner by any court!

Cheers

Thats a great idea. I agree with you 100%.

Where shall we start? I know let us go back in time to when Thaksin has just won the 2001 election and the judges hearing his assets case be held accountable for not upholding the law.

That would mean that Thaksin WAS guilty after all.

[PepperMe]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

It is not because the judges are not on the red side ! It is because they are incompetent and not neutral.

Let's say they are just like you, only supports yellow, at any price !

Wrong.....

This government pushed this bill through in an illegal way.

Go back to when it was happening last year, and you will see the reason noted by the CC was that the bill to amend the constitution was done in an unconstitutional way.

The obvious no voters of the senate when the senate came to vote were sent home and told that they would reconvene the debate at 9am, then when they were safely out of the way, the vote was held and the bill rammed through its second reading...

This also came on the heels of the first reading in the house of representatives where the vote on the first reading of the bill was also conducted in the early hours and even pro amendment MPs were found to be casting several votes.....all by the same person who is ready to impeach these judges, he is also one of those that the CC has implicated in this unconstitutional and clearly criminal charge.

So this guy is crapping himself as are those PTP who voted this bill through in very dubious circumstances, and all they can do to stop it is to force the impeachment of the judges who will ultimately be their own downfall, and deservedly so.

I repeat.... The case against these idiots is more in line with HOW they tried to amend the constitution, and NOT 'because' they wanted to amend it.

The PTP are taking this too far now, and it is all fueled by desperation to halt LEGAL proceedings against them that are cast iron....... and they know it.

They will fail in this stupid move and they should know that.

All they have achieved with this is to cement their fate at the hands of these judges.

You don't piss off the constitutional court, because they will hit you with the full force and likely start thinking about terms of imprisonment.... They deserve it.

[PepperMe]

My guess is that the PTP and the PM will be around an in control until the end of their elected term of office. Why you ask, because of money. I have often said that above all money rules this country. I will not be surprised at all if PTP continues to warm all the government seats for the next 18 months..

I think you will find that these actions actually scream the opposite.

This is a desperate last ditch effort to attempt to block the impeachment of 308 PTP members, and also some of the senate including the actual man who says he is ready to impeach them before they impeach HIM!

Can't you see that?

Also what remaining term of office are you referring to??? That term expired the second parliament was dissolved and a royal charter for new elections was signed.

So you clearly do have the first clue what the hell you are talking about, and I suggest because of your lack of the most basic political knowledge that you refrain from entering political debate.

You are clearly not qualified at even the lowest level.

Go chat with Kikoman about politics, he also has no clue what he is talking about.

Edited March 8, 2014 by PepperMe

[The Deerhunter]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

Hey, it worked with airline managers.................... Results speak for themselves.

[kingalfred]

Its clear that P. Thai have NEVER accepted court decisions when they are not in their favour,be it the courts interpretation on the constitution or the fugitive founder of the "party" when he ran away from a court decision. The whole crazy incarnation of PT needs drumming out of politics and let their pyscho UDD siblings follow them.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited March 8, 2014 by kingalfred

[fab4]

Way to go to get the "Courts" on your side. Impeach them for doing their jobs. Classic.

Please read the complaint. The court gave direction on the proposed amendments saying that an article by article approach was acceptable.

The government followed that directive. Then the same judges who gave the directive, contradicted their decision by accepting a complaint that says the article by article approach was wrong. Was the guidance and direction wrong? If so, a serious error was made. Or, did the judges intentionally set the government up for a legal challenge by giving erroneous instructions?

The Senate has the power to review the events and to decide if the "judges" acted inappropriately.

It has nothing to do with what you purport.

The amendment of article 190 was to allow the government to sign international deals without having to seek legislative approval. In other words the government could bypass the legislature to negotiate any deals except those related to territorial integrity, sovereignty, laws enacted by parliament and the initiations of free trade. In laymen terms it allows the government to bypass the democratic framework to pass shady deals with countries like, say Dubai.

And when you have governments passing shady deals by bypassing the democratic framework you can guess who would not be far away. Yes, that's right. Our one and only accused, mass murderer, accuses terrorist convicted criminal fugitive. thaksin shinawatra. He ordered the senators and MP's in a Skype address on March12, 1013 (yes yes yingluck is PM) to rush through the article 190 amendment lest they have their allowances cut. That sounds like a guy that could make a few baht of this amendment heay?

Also sounds like a guy that is running things to? Go figure. An unelectable is running the country. But thats another undemocratic story.

The complaint does not deal specifically with Article 190, but with all amendments to the constitution. But since you have brought it up, let me add some background.

The interpretation of the scope of Article 190 was radically broadened by the Constitutional Court's ruling that a joint communique on Preah Vihear signed by the Foreign Minister and his Cambodian counterpart in 2008 did fall under 190 and since the MOFA had not received parliamentary approval, it was unconstitutional. This was news to the MOFA who had been signing such communiques without parliament's say-so for years, and to many lawyers who wondered how a communique (one that specifically mentioned that it was 'without prejudice to the rights' of either country, no less) could be counted as a treaty. The court decision did seem strange and was interpreted by some as deliberately discriminating against the pro-Thaksin govt (the Minister lost his job in the ensuing brouhaha).

Since it was no longer clear what kind of agreement with a foreign entity did or did not fall under 190, govt officials understandably played safe and sent everything to parliament - MoUs between Thai and foreign universities, contracts between govt agencies and foreign companies, etc., etc. The system was clearly becoming unworkable and not what 190 intended (which was to stop things like the Ministry of Commerce signing Free Trade Agreements in almost total secrecy from parliament, the people and those sections of Thai society who were disadvantaged by them). The amendment was to make 190 more workable by giving it a more precise and narrow scope.

Now there can be discussions about how narrow the scope should be, and it was clearly intended to exclude the interpretation that the Court had suddenly decided to allow, but let us separate the powers here. The Constitution gives parliament, not the courts, the right to amend it. The Constitutional Court's job is to interpret what parliament's constitutional amendments say. It is difficult to understand how the Court can decide (as it did with the amendment to make the Senate wholly elected) that certain amendments are 'unconstitutional' (since they are specifically designed to change the constitution, they must be, by definition) and some are not. The Yingluck govt's experience is that every amendment they propose gets knocked back (often together with a threat of impeachment) while the Abhisit administration was successful in amending the Constitution with regard to the proportion of MPs elected by constituency and by party list - a move blatantly intended to improve the Democrats' chances at the next election.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that double standards are being implied.

In a nutshell, thank you for that post. Unfortunately those that need to read this explanation, along with GK's post earlier, refuse to believe that this is anything other than the PTP hitting back for vindictive reasons.

[djjamie]

It has nothing to do with what you purport.

The amendment of article 190 was to allow the government to sign international deals without having to seek legislative approval. In other words the government could bypass the legislature to negotiate any deals except those related to territorial integrity, sovereignty, laws enacted by parliament and the initiations of free trade. In laymen terms it allows the government to bypass the democratic framework to pass shady deals with countries like, say Dubai.

And when you have governments passing shady deals by bypassing the democratic framework you can guess who would not be far away. Yes, that's right. Our one and only accused, mass murderer, accuses terrorist convicted criminal fugitive. thaksin shinawatra. He ordered the senators and MP's in a Skype address on March12, 1013 (yes yes yingluck is PM) to rush through the article 190 amendment lest they have their allowances cut. That sounds like a guy that could make a few baht of this amendment heay?

Also sounds like a guy that is running things to? Go figure. An unelectable is running the country. But thats another undemocratic story.

The complaint does not deal specifically with Article 190, but with all amendments to the constitution. But since you have brought it up, let me add some background.

The interpretation of the scope of Article 190 was radically broadened by the Constitutional Court's ruling that a joint communique on Preah Vihear signed by the Foreign Minister and his Cambodian counterpart in 2008 did fall under 190 and since the MOFA had not received parliamentary approval, it was unconstitutional. This was news to the MOFA who had been signing such communiques without parliament's say-so for years, and to many lawyers who wondered how a communique (one that specifically mentioned that it was 'without prejudice to the rights' of either country, no less) could be counted as a treaty. The court decision did seem strange and was interpreted by some as deliberately discriminating against the pro-Thaksin govt (the Minister lost his job in the ensuing brouhaha).

Since it was no longer clear what kind of agreement with a foreign entity did or did not fall under 190, govt officials understandably played safe and sent everything to parliament - MoUs between Thai and foreign universities, contracts between govt agencies and foreign companies, etc., etc. The system was clearly becoming unworkable and not what 190 intended (which was to stop things like the Ministry of Commerce signing Free Trade Agreements in almost total secrecy from parliament, the people and those sections of Thai society who were disadvantaged by them). The amendment was to make 190 more workable by giving it a more precise and narrow scope.

Now there can be discussions about how narrow the scope should be, and it was clearly intended to exclude the interpretation that the Court had suddenly decided to allow, but let us separate the powers here. The Constitution gives parliament, not the courts, the right to amend it. The Constitutional Court's job is to interpret what parliament's constitutional amendments say. It is difficult to understand how the Court can decide (as it did with the amendment to make the Senate wholly elected) that certain amendments are 'unconstitutional' (since they are specifically designed to change the constitution, they must be, by definition) and some are not. The Yingluck govt's experience is that every amendment they propose gets knocked back (often together with a threat of impeachment) while the Abhisit administration was successful in amending the Constitution with regard to the proportion of MPs elected by constituency and by party list - a move blatantly intended to improve the Democrats' chances at the next election.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that double standards are being implied.

In a nutshell, thank you for that post. Unfortunately those that need to read this explanation, along with GK's post earlier, refuse to believe that this is anything other than the PTP hitting back for vindictive reasons.

That is a swell "PTP official" statement from Prompong Nopparit.

The reality however is quite different. Article 190 is important because it involves the Kings concerns exercised through the government in making international agreements and, therefore, the govt have to strictly adhere to this legal requirement. This approval from the parliament is also a must so that there is a forum for deviating opinions to be raised and debated and so details of the agreements can be made available to the people for the sake of transparency. (This reminds me of the lack of transparency involving the water management scheme and the lack of transparency of the rice scheme). This amendment of article 190 will make a lack of transparency "legal" which is why thaksin said he will punish his ministers and senators if they don't push it. thaksin hates transparency.

Amending article 190 amounts to dismantling the parliaments powers as well as increasing the powers of the government which will affect the check and balance mechanism which would lead to (surprise, surprise) complete dictatorial domination of powers by the govt, These acts are unconstitutional and don't conform with democratic rule.

It is pertinent to add that the PTP also quickly wrapped up the debate on the charter amendment and it might be added that in line with their dictatorial tendencies denied the opposition the right to debate these amendments. (This reminds me of the lack of debate involving the water management scheme until the courts forced the PTP to debate it).

​It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the PTP want to stifle the voice of the majority remove the democratic right to debate and at the same time ensure transparency is another victim in their attempt to gain total and complete power.

Edited March 8, 2014 by djjamie

[rreddin]

Way to go to get the "Courts" on your side. Impeach them for doing their jobs. Classic.

Please read the complaint. The court gave direction on the proposed amendments saying that an article by article approach was acceptable.

The government followed that directive. Then the same judges who gave the directive, contradicted their decision by accepting a complaint that says the article by article approach was wrong. Was the guidance and direction wrong? If so, a serious error was made. Or, did the judges intentionally set the government up for a legal challenge by giving erroneous instructions?

The Senate has the power to review the events and to decide if the "judges" acted inappropriately.

If, in any jurisdiction, anywhere in the World, the courts make a serious error they acknowlede it and explain where and why they erred. Of course this is couched in judical language, so do not expect to see them say in writing (although they may say so privately) "sorry chaps we f****d up".

If what Tatsujin says is correct, the court has made an error serious enough to call into question its competency. The impartiality of the court is in question if, on the othehand, it deliberately failed to follow its previous guidance in the matter, without explaing why it did so and without giving the government the opportunity of making representations before any decision was made. Either way, it was a major failing..

[tezzainoz]

Great, it is time for the Judges to be held accountable for their decision, the law not properly or selectively enforced, is bad for the whole country, those that fail to observe the law no matter what colored shirts they wear must be dealt with in a fair manner by any court!

Cheers

and of coarse that includes corrupt MP's

So you agree we get rid of Yingluck and her corrupt government and then turn our attention on getting rid of corrupt judges

Only problem is Yingkuck is innocent until proven guilty... But hey good idea!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yingluck and her other MPs are a guilty as anything

why do you think they are trying so hard to not have to face the people of the justice system

It does not take much to see Thaskin has so much built up inside, this is it

he is shooting all barrels he must win of he will take his place in history as a dictator that lost his chance

[tezzainoz]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

It is not because the judges are not on the red side ! It is because they are incompetent and not neutral.

Let's say they are just like you, only supports yellow, at any price !

Oh I see they are judges

but you have a higher calling so you judge the judges

No wonder Thailand is in a circus if we have Western educated making comments like this

Please less of the childish remarks.

a threat to throw out judges because they don't agree with you re shirt government is children talk

so you have no repect for judges

again I say No wonder Thailand is in a circus if we have Western educated making comments like this

[Goat Roper]

Great, it is time for the Judges to be held accountable for their decision, the law not properly or selectively enforced, is bad for the whole country, those that fail to observe the law no matter what colored shirts they wear must be dealt with in a fair manner by any court!

Cheers

and of coarse that includes corrupt MP's

So you agree we get rid of Yingluck and her corrupt government and then turn our attention on getting rid of corrupt judges

Only problem is Yingkuck is innocent until proven guilty... But hey good idea!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Yingluck and her other MPs are a guilty as anything

why do you think they are trying so hard to not have to face the people of the justice system

It does not take much to see Thaskin has so much built up inside, this is it

he is shooting all barrels he must win of he will take his place in history as a dictator that lost his chance

Not to mention his family's fortune and their assets in Thailand.

[Moruya]

And now for something completely different....

You've put the music in my head now and it won't go away!!!

[Mudcrab]

Looks like the PTP are desperate for a coup, for all the reasons mentioned in a multitude of posts made recently.

[Bangmod]

Will there ever be a time in Thailand that politicians start to lead the country, and not only fight each other in the courts, slander others and lead the country back to the stone ages...

[ianf]

Great, it is time for the Judges to be held accountable for their decision, the law not properly or selectively enforced, is bad for the whole country, those that fail to observe the law no matter what colored shirts they wear must be dealt with in a fair manner by any court!

Cheers

This is the first time that I have totally agreed with you.

Now let's apply this to Thaksin. He was acquitted on some charges and found guilty on others.

He has a number of court cases facing him.

But he ran away like a frightened little boy.

He has been sentenced to 2 years in the slammer.

But he won't come back, claiming that the courts are biased against him ......

...... even though they acquitted him on other charges.

Now now Kiko, please tell Thaksin to come back and serve his time.

After all respect for the law is paramount.

And it's the cornerstone of Democracy!

[Basil B]

Maybe the judges should sue for defamation.

[than]

Only Senate can impeach them , but It will be hard for PT to impeach judge, there are only appointed senator and a majority are against PT

[GeckosDiving]

I guess the red shirts didn't do their jobs well enough to intimidate them eh?

Typical Shinawatra democracy. If the judges are not on your side and cannot be bought or initimidated, replace them with your own!

It is not because the judges are not on the red side ! It is because they are incompetent and not neutral.

Let's say they are just like you, only supports yellow, at any price !

---------------------------

Typical Red Comment !!

It's my football and Im going home.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[pmugghc]

Basically what they are saying is that the CC cannot and should not accept cases. Renders it impotent. No one can petition the CC to give a ruling on something. There's nothing in this to suggest the CC were biased, the issue here is their authority to consider a case, and if they can't then who can and if no one can then what recourse does the public have for justice. Insane. The only question here is for the Puea Thai to show evidence that the CC were clearly biased or inconsistent in the eventual verdict or that the grounds for accepting the case were flimsy. Same old story, blank cheque democracy. Were the shoe on the other foot and a Dem govt were legislating away any PT advantages in the election process they would be using the courts themselves for 'fairness'. We have a major problem in our country if the most popular party get everyone to believe courts should have no authority over the legislative branch. Legislature dominated by one party can then legislate a virtual monopoly, unchallenged.

I don't remember the details but wasn't one of PTP's proposed "reforms" to force all cases to be vetted and approved by the Attorney General (= PTP's guy) thereby stopping the CC to accept cases the PTP didn't like?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[pmugghc]

Pheu Thai's final push against the rule of law. They are stepping up their full-frontal attacks on the Constitutional Court and the NACC, adding to a list which already includes the EC - whom they've also threatened to take to court, as well as the Civil Court, whom they have now defied by pressing on with a deportation order, even though the Civil Court in one of its provisions strictly forbade them from doing that. No matter, Pheu Thai will simply clear the deck of any judicial opposition. Could it be any more crystal clear how much of an enormous threat Thaksin and Pheu Thai are ? Thaksin is clearly pulling out all the stops. All the anger, all the resentment he has stored up over these years against all these institutions and anyone he regards as his " enemies " ( i.e. anyone who does not support him or does not do as he wishes ) - all of this has just bubbled up inside him, and now it's all pouring out in all directions. It's more desperation that anything. He does not know what else to do. It is only the only tune he knows how to play. Everything, every ambition he has harboured over the years is coming crashing down. He can't stand it, and so we have this final push to clear the slate. In addition, there is this dangerous climate of a secession movement. Prayuth will not be able to stand back much longer. But if the courts themselves are threatened, it will likely be impossible for him not to act. The army has a sworn obligation to protect the constitution and the rule of law. The courts must be allowed to proceed without threat and without intimidation.

Our TVF Thai Rouge brigade often accuse the judiciary of a "judicial coup". But you hit the nail on the head, PTP's assault on the judiciary is the real coup.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[MaxLee]

"If you're not for us you're against us. If you're posing the law and cause us to lose face, you're dead"

Redemocracy