Senators question PM's authority

[Lite Beer]

Senators question PM's authority
The Sunday Nation

BANGKOK: -- Senators will ask the Constitutional Court to rule on the status of caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra after the unlawful 2011 transfer of former National Security Council chief Thawil Pliensri.

Following the Supreme Administrative Court ruling on Friday that the transfer of Thawil to an advisory role attached to PM's Office was unlawful, Senator Paiboon Nititawan said that tomorrow he and at least one-tenth of all senators would petition the Constitutional Court to rule on the status of the premier.

The petition will state that she abused her power to benefit herself and her party.

But Pheu Thai party-list MP candidate and legal expert Kanin Boonsuwan claimed the court ruling meant an independent entity was interfering in the work of the Administrative Branch without a mandate.

Reshuffling top senior officials required a Cabinet resolution and royal endorsement. Therefore, the court ruling could be deemed interference, Kanin said.

Pheu Thai deputy spokesman Anusorn Iamsa-ard said that despite the ruling the government had the right to pick Paradorn as he was the best person to be in charge of national security.

Responding to anti-government protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban's remark that Thawil was the victim of the so-called Thaksin regime, Anusorn said Paradorn was also a victim as he was transferred during the Abhisit Vejjajiva government. He said that Thawil had worked in harmony with Suthep when the latter was deputy prime minister.

He said Paradorn, as then deputy NSC chief, and then NSC secretary-general Lt-General Surapol Puanayaka were transferred before Thawil got the job.

Anusorn said Thawil would have difficulty working with the Yingluck government and sarcastically remarked that he would be better served spending his time preparing a defence over the 2010 crackdown that killed scores of red shirts.

Abhisit and Suthep have been charged with murder over the crackdown.

The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the Central Administrative Court' ruling in relation to Thawil.

-- The Nation 2014-03-09

[Gsxrnz]

Why do the Thai judiciary bother with all this stuff. Their decisions are totally ignored by everybody and rarely enforced. Surely their time would be better spent at the golf course.

[Thai at Heart]

Why do the Thai judiciary bother with all this stuff. Their decisions are totally ignored by everybody and rarely enforced. Surely their time would be better spent at the golf course.

It would help if the blinking constitution hadn't been written in a way that leads it to have to be interpreted every 2 weeks.

[Robby nz]

Why do the Thai judiciary bother with all this stuff. Their decisions are totally ignored by everybody and rarely enforced. Surely their time would be better spent at the golf course.

Why ?

Because of a little thing called the law which is, and must be, above everything else, in particular greedy, inept, power crazy politicians who would do anything to enrich themselves and cling to power.

Reforms are desperately needed........Right ?

[Thailand]

Why do the Thai judiciary bother with all this stuff. Their decisions are totally ignored by everybody and rarely enforced. Surely their time would be better spent at the golf course.

It would help if the blinking constitution hadn't been written in a way that leads it to have to be interpreted every 2 weeks.

And misinterpreted every other day!

[Fryslan boppe]

The PAD-Dem's keep seeking to function in an Opposition role outside Parliament, and their user-friendly Independent Agencies enable them to do it.

Regardless which side one takes in an issue such as this, it is clearly something that should be Parliamentarized. By obstructing the current election, the opposition is seeking to work outside that Parliamentary system, as could be expected from unelectables.

Since his transfer, while still working for government, Thawil has actively campaigned against it. He has frequently appeared on anti-democrat stages. In the recent past he has campaigned against government policy. Even supported the infamous plot diagram, seemingly being one of those responsible for it, and babbled about no orders being given to gun down red shirts in 2010.

As the NSC boss and former secretary of the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s notorious Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, Thawil proved a hopeless equivocater when he declared: “There was never an order to shoot down red-shirt protesters in 2010...”. When he made that claim, many asked: How dimwitted is Thawil? Does he expect that his blatant misrepresentations are going to be gobbled up as truth by a public that is now aware of events? It got worse when he said the Abhisit regime "did not use force to disperse red-shirt protesters on May 19, 2010. He said they had only asked the protesters to vacate the Ratchaprasong intersection in order to make way for traffic."

It is clear why the Yingluck government needed to move him; if it hadn't he would have worked to undermine the government. It is not surprising that the Elitist courts support him.

Edited March 9, 2014 by Fryslan boppe

[IMA_FARANG]

In any true democracy, the only real defense that the ordinary person has against the government overstepping the limits of it's authority and becoming a tyranny is to continuously question the government's motives.

The law, no matter how powerless it seems sometimes, is the only true card the weak hold against those that would abuse their power.

That's why, even if it seems futile, you should always question the motives of authority .... to make them show what their real motives are.

Never sell your freedom to cheaply, even if lose, make the government pay for their victory.

Otherwise you are just their plaything.

Any government, no matter how honorable it's intentions are, will ever voluntarily work for your interests rather than their interests unless the law forces them to regard your interests as it highest function.

[chainarong]

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

Why do the Thai judiciary bother with all this stuff. Their decisions are totally ignored by everybody and rarely enforced. Surely their time would be better spent at the golf course.

It would help if the blinking constitution hadn't been written in a way that leads it to have to be interpreted every 2 weeks.

Long timers will remember the original version , it is only because they allowed public comment , the academic's got changes made , under great difficulty, abuse , intimidation, violent attacks, the original version was a crack up, you are lucky with what they finally managed to come up with.

[zakk9]

"But Pheu Thai party-list MP candidate and legal expert Kanin Boonsuwan claimed the court ruling meant an independent entity was interfering in the work of the Administrative Branch without a mandate."

So the Constitution Court is an "independent entity" that the cabinet can choose to ignore? Are these guys for real at all? They certainly seem to be above the law. How can they call it a democracy when they refuse to respect the most basic democratic principles?

[Prbkk]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

[Thait Spot]

"But Pheu Thai party-list MP candidate and legal expert Kanin Boonsuwan claimed the court ruling meant an independent entity was interfering in the work of the Administrative Branch without a mandate."

So the Constitution Court is an "independent entity" that the cabinet can choose to ignore? Are these guys for real at all? They certainly seem to be above the law. How can they call it a democracy when they refuse to respect the most basic democratic principles?

Unfortunately these dangerous individuals think that because they got the vote they own the country and everything in it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Prbkk]

"But Pheu Thai party-list MP candidate and legal expert Kanin Boonsuwan claimed the court ruling meant an independent entity was interfering in the work of the Administrative Branch without a mandate."

So the Constitution Court is an "independent entity" that the cabinet can choose to ignore? Are these guys for real at all? They certainly seem to be above the law. How can they call it a democracy when they refuse to respect the most basic democratic principles?

Unfortunately these dangerous individuals think that because they got the vote they own the country and everything in it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

As opposed to those who never got anyone's vote but think they own the country and can dictate to others despite never having stood for public office

[geriatrickid]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

Aligned with the Democrat party of which Suthep was what is euphemistically referred to in political terms as the party "bagman" and most important organizer.

[PepperMe]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

You are very mistaken.

ALL senators are there as a check on the lower house, NOT to represent the people.

Also, nothing in the OP to suggest these are appointed senators.

Also, elected senators are from each province including Dem supporting provinces.

So yes... You are mistaken, and your post makes no sense at all, it is just alluding.

[Thait Spot]

"But Pheu Thai party-list MP candidate and legal expert Kanin Boonsuwan claimed the court ruling meant an independent entity was interfering in the work of the Administrative Branch without a mandate."

So the Constitution Court is an "independent entity" that the cabinet can choose to ignore? Are these guys for real at all? They certainly seem to be above the law. How can they call it a democracy when they refuse to respect the most basic democratic principles?

Unfortunately these dangerous individuals think that because they got the vote they own the country and everything in it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

As opposed to those who never got anyone's vote but think they own the country and can dictate to others despite never having stood for public office

I don't agree with either.

But I do agree that governments should follow the rules and respect the legal institutions without exception.

Failure to do so is a kick in the face of democracy.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Scamper]

" The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the Central Administrative Court' ruling in relation to Thawil. "

This is the only sentence Pheu Thai needs to read. Ever since " Thaksin's shuffle " in the months following the 2011 election, this has steadily gone through the judicial process. There's a good reason the Central Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court came to this decision - it is constitutional, and Pheu Thai's is not. Not only that, but Yingluck had violated four articles of the constitution with this action in 2011, and that now goes to the Constitutional Court. Pheu Thai - as always - no matter how many judicial rulings - smugly stick to how they think things ought to be done.

Edited March 9, 2014 by Scamper

[gabruce]

The PAD-Dem's keep seeking to function in an Opposition role outside Parliament, and their user-friendly Independent Agencies enable them to do it.

Regardless which side one takes in an issue such as this, it is clearly something that should be Parliamentarized. By obstructing the current election, the opposition is seeking to work outside that Parliamentary system, as could be expected from unelectables.

Since his transfer, while still working for government, Thawil has actively campaigned against it. He has frequently appeared on anti-democrat stages. In the recent past he has campaigned against government policy. Even supported the infamous plot diagram, seemingly being one of those responsible for it, and babbled about no orders being given to gun down red shirts in 2010.

As the NSC boss and former secretary of the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s notorious Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, Thawil proved a hopeless equivocater when he declared: “There was never an order to shoot down red-shirt protesters in 2010...”. When he made that claim, many asked: How dimwitted is Thawil? Does he expect that his blatant misrepresentations are going to be gobbled up as truth by a public that is now aware of events? It got worse when he said the Abhisit regime "did not use force to disperse red-shirt protesters on May 19, 2010. He said they had only asked the protesters to vacate the Ratchaprasong intersection in order to make way for traffic."

It is clear why the Yingluck government needed to move him; if it hadn't he would have worked to undermine the government. It is not surprising that the Elitist courts support him.

biased much?

[binjalin]

The PAD-Dem's keep seeking to function in an Opposition role outside Parliament, and their user-friendly Independent Agencies enable them to do it.

Regardless which side one takes in an issue such as this, it is clearly something that should be Parliamentarized. By obstructing the current election, the opposition is seeking to work outside that Parliamentary system, as could be expected from unelectables.

Since his transfer, while still working for government, Thawil has actively campaigned against it. He has frequently appeared on anti-democrat stages. In the recent past he has campaigned against government policy. Even supported the infamous plot diagram, seemingly being one of those responsible for it, and babbled about no orders being given to gun down red shirts in 2010.

As the NSC boss and former secretary of the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s notorious Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, Thawil proved a hopeless equivocater when he declared: “There was never an order to shoot down red-shirt protesters in 2010...”. When he made that claim, many asked: How dimwitted is Thawil? Does he expect that his blatant misrepresentations are going to be gobbled up as truth by a public that is now aware of events? It got worse when he said the Abhisit regime "did not use force to disperse red-shirt protesters on May 19, 2010. He said they had only asked the protesters to vacate the Ratchaprasong intersection in order to make way for traffic."

It is clear why the Yingluck government needed to move him; if it hadn't he would have worked to undermine the government. It is not surprising that the Elitist courts support him.

another good post - and he was on the PDRC stage ranting so he has shown his political bias towards the ammart and of course the Courts seek to favour him as he is 'one of them'

[gabruce]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

I find your bias against an appointed Senate insulting to Democratic countries with appointed senates. The US isn't the only country in the world.

[Baerboxer]

The PAD-Dem's keep seeking to function in an Opposition role outside Parliament, and their user-friendly Independent Agencies enable them to do it.

Regardless which side one takes in an issue such as this, it is clearly something that should be Parliamentarized. By obstructing the current election, the opposition is seeking to work outside that Parliamentary system, as could be expected from unelectables.

Since his transfer, while still working for government, Thawil has actively campaigned against it. He has frequently appeared on anti-democrat stages. In the recent past he has campaigned against government policy. Even supported the infamous plot diagram, seemingly being one of those responsible for it, and babbled about no orders being given to gun down red shirts in 2010.

As the NSC boss and former secretary of the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s notorious Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situation, Thawil proved a hopeless equivocater when he declared: “There was never an order to shoot down red-shirt protesters in 2010...”. When he made that claim, many asked: How dimwitted is Thawil? Does he expect that his blatant misrepresentations are going to be gobbled up as truth by a public that is now aware of events? It got worse when he said the Abhisit regime "did not use force to disperse red-shirt protesters on May 19, 2010. He said they had only asked the protesters to vacate the Ratchaprasong intersection in order to make way for traffic."

It is clear why the Yingluck government needed to move him; if it hadn't he would have worked to undermine the government. It is not surprising that the Elitist courts support him.

You do spout a diatribe. Unfortunately quantity doesn't mean quality, or sense.

Simple question- did YL have the authority under law to act as she did and did she follow the correct procedures in doing so?

It would appear not.

You can wine on all you like about "if's" and "but's" and who did what in the past and might have said that etc etc. YL has been badly advised on many occasions and therefore acted in ways which don't follow the law, procedures and rules. These procedures are in place to stop abuses of power, cronyism, nepotism and attempted weakening of checks and balances - things PTP are very familiar with.

This appears yet another example.

[Baerboxer]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

I find your bias against an appointed Senate insulting to Democratic countries with appointed senates. The US isn't the only country in the world.

His idea of an elected senate equates to a politburo. He has no idea how democratic countries operate - he favors the Thaksin approved version of "democracy" i.e a family fiefdom.

[rubl]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

The implied suggestion is interesting. The topic is about different issues though.

BTW both elected and appointed senators have to fulfill the same set of requirements. Read the Constitution on this.

[benny1616]

with this higly corrupt court is the outcome clear. the goverment from yingluck is illegal only the yellows have the right to rule thailand :-D by the way, in phuket, a stonghold of the yellows no wonder reigns mafias like tuk tuk, taxi, longtailboats and so on. and almost all of this mafias are yellows :-D

[fab4]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

The implied suggestion is interesting. The topic is about different issues though.

BTW both elected and appointed senators have to fulfill the same set of requirements. Read the Constitution on this.

So why is there a group of Senators called the "Group of 40" who are consistently anti government (if it's a Thaksin associated one), if all Senators fulfill the same set of requirements and are supposedly resolutely independant and "apolitical" ?

[SICHONSTEVE]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

The implied suggestion is interesting. The topic is about different issues though.

BTW both elected and appointed senators have to fulfill the same set of requirements. Read the Constitution on this.

So why is there a group of Senators called the "Group of 40" who are consistently anti government (if it's a Thaksin associated one), if all Senators fulfill the same set of requirements and are supposedly resolutely independant and "apolitical" ?

The group of 40 senators are the sensible and clever ones that were making sure that this government was kept in check!!

[diehard60]

Why do the Thai judiciary bother with all this stuff. Their decisions are totally ignored by everybody and rarely enforced. Surely their time would be better spent at the golf course.

Why ?

Because of a little thing called the law which is, and must be, above everything else, in particular greedy, inept, power crazy politicians who would do anything to enrich themselves and cling to power.

Reforms are desperately needed........Right ?

You guys here have to remember that the present constitution was written by the army after to coup and was not changed by abhisit and suthep when they were in power. Which they had all the time to do that but never did as it helped them become richer also.

[diehard60]

"But Pheu Thai party-list MP candidate and legal expert Kanin Boonsuwan claimed the court ruling meant an independent entity was interfering in the work of the Administrative Branch without a mandate."

So the Constitution Court is an "independent entity" that the cabinet can choose to ignore? Are these guys for real at all? They certainly seem to be above the law. How can they call it a democracy when they refuse to respect the most basic democratic principles?

Well suthep and his thugs act above the law everyday of the week.

[diehard60]

if I'm not mistaken, these would be the appointed senators rather than those elected? IE, the beneficiaries of patronage rather than those elected to represent the people?

You are very mistaken.

ALL senators are there as a check on the lower house, NOT to represent the people.

Also, nothing in the OP to suggest these are appointed senators.

Also, elected senators are from each province including Dem supporting provinces.

So yes... You are mistaken, and your post makes no sense at all, it is just alluding.

I dont ever remember my family voting for any senators. And I have been here for 22 + years now.

[diehard60]

" The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the Central Administrative Court' ruling in relation to Thawil. "

This is the only sentence Pheu Thai needs to read. Ever since " Thaksin's shuffle " in the months following the 2011 election, this has steadily gone through the judicial process. There's a good reason the Central Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court came to this decision - it is constitutional, and Pheu Thai's is not. Not only that, but Yingluck had violated four articles of the constitution with this action in 2011, and that now goes to the Constitutional Court. Pheu Thai - as always - no matter how many judicial rulings - smugly stick to how they think things ought to be done.

I did not know thaksin was PM in 2011. Gee this is news.

[whybother]

I dont ever remember my family voting for any senators. And I have been here for 22 + years now.

That says a lot about your posts, given that there have been 3 senate elections in that time.