Charter court judges 'overstepped authority'

[webfact]

Charter court judges 'overstepped authority'
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Former Pheu Thai party-list MP Chavalit Vichayasuthi and party-list MP candidate Pol General Viroon Phuensaen filed a petition with the Criminal Court yesterday claiming that judges at the Constitutional Court had overstepped their authority by ruling last year that moves to amend the charter regarding the make-up of the Senate were unconstitutional.

Both accused the Constitutional Court judges of violating Articles 157, 83 and 91 of the Criminal Code.

They said Parliament had every right to amend the charter, particularly in a manner that is not construed as overthrowing the current democratic system and the King as head of state that the Constitutional Court accused them of.


-- The Nation 2014-03-12

[Thait Spot]

Ho hum

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Robroona]

Political lawsuits almost on a daily basis must be good news for the lawyers. However, it does get boring after a while as it is difficult to keep track of who is suing who, and what for.

I take my hat off to those TVF members who appear to know and understand all the different paragraphs of the various Constitution, Charters et.

But I feel they need to get out more as it does get pretty anal on here at times

[focus27]

Just because the Constitutional Court doesn't like something, doesn't make it unconstitutional.

A wholly elected Senate would just be going back to the constitution before the military gave themselves some comfy seats in their smash-n-grab coup.

Whether a wholly elected Senate is a good or bad thing is not the issue, but whether it is unconstitutional.

Good to see this judgment challenged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24997184

The problem with changing the current Constitution is that it has to have the agreement of the Senate, and the selected senators are hardly going to give away their nice little earner, are they?! Having said that, the Constitution says that amendments need to be passed by a majority of all members of the whole National Assembly - still difficult but not impossible.

[virtualtraveller]

The sticking point here is that half the country backs a party that believes total power should rest with the legislature which itself results from a pretty flawed system of allowing a lot of unqualified people to vote for MPs. There is regrettably no alternative than one-man-one-vote, so an upper house becomes necessary as a check and balance. Peua Thai don't like check and balances. But the simple answer, in a strictly democratic or political sense, is to ask Peua Thai if they would be happy being in opposition to a party with a blank cheque to legislate away freely to uphold themselves an unfair advantage.

In the case of the senate, it's not about elected versus appointed. In their verdict they explained that the resulting direction of the proposed legislation would clearly be a Senate dominate by the ruling party allies, rendering it useless. Strictly speaking, anything relating to interpretation of the charter and legislative process should be subject to consideration by the courts for clarity. To my mind, a Senate wholly elected by provincial representation and not proportional representation is not democratic, and hands too much vote power to one region of the country - as it happens the stronghold of Peua THai. You can see through their ruse immediately. Thus the explanation by the courts was valid in interpreting this as an affront to the 'spirit of the charter for a fair democracy'.

[djjamie]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. <inflammatory comment removed>

Edited March 12, 2014 by ubonjoe

[wprime]

If it's perfectly legal why don't they amend the charter to dissolve the senate completely? Or better still, dissolve all seats not held by PTP members?

[northernjohn]

Political lawsuits almost on a daily basis must be good news for the lawyers. However, it does get boring after a while as it is difficult to keep track of who is suing who, and what for.

I take my hat off to those TVF members who appear to know and understand all the different paragraphs of the various Constitution, Charters et.

But I feel they need to get out more as it does get pretty anal on here at times

I have often wondered what those constitution wizards are leaving out. It is obvious there are other parts in the constitution that negate the parts they choose to quote.

Just further proof that the constitution needs to have more clarifications in it as well as stiff penalties. Like him or hate him you have to admit Suthep is right the government needs reforming.

Interesting to see his open forums on change allow more time for experts to speak than they do for PDRC members.

Defiantly not a Thaksin way of doing business.

[SOTIRIOS]

........sick sh*t...........

......these sc*m will never let up............

.....haven't 'governed' enough yet.............

[moe666]

Just because the Constitutional Court doesn't like something, doesn't make it unconstitutional.

A wholly elected Senate would just be going back to the constitution before the military gave themselves some comfy seats in their smash-n-grab coup.

Whether a wholly elected Senate is a good or bad thing is not the issue, but whether it is unconstitutional.

Good to see this judgment challenged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24997184

The problem with changing the current Constitution is that it has to have the agreement of the Senate, and the selected senators are hardly going to give away their nice little earner, are they?! Having said that, the Constitution says that amendments need to be passed by a majority of all members of the whole National Assembly - still difficult but not impossible.

Smash - and - grab what, read up a bit on what was going on before flapping your gums, there was no legal government at the time as Big T had not been approved by the King. The army stepped in to halt a power grab by Big T

[fab4]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy.

A post based on the opinions of 1090 people in a poll. Then a comment like this

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up"

It's no wonder why you need to keep on asking for a definition of democracy....................................

Edited March 12, 2014 by ubonjoe

[rametindallas]

Political lawsuits almost on a daily basis must be good news for the lawyers. However, it does get boring after a while as it is difficult to keep track of who is suing who, and what for.

I take my hat off to those TVF members who appear to know and understand all the different paragraphs of the various Constitution, Charters et.

But I feel they need to get out more as it does get pretty anal on here at times

In every country, anal people are needed to be watchdogs over the tedium of nonstop, criminal behavior by governments. If they were to get out more, they might miss something. I, for one, am appreciative of those watchdogs.

[Thait Spot]

You can see how strongly the PTP believes in this by the people taking action.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[animatic]

Collating power into one set of sweaty hands in $1,000 gloves is the sole aim of those charter amendments, and as per habit is designed to abrogate the necessary check and balance function of the Senate. Why would there be so much stink about this if someone didn't see a route to great profit by trying all methods to remove a block on their aims? And others see it as the fastest route to hell on earth, and move all objects to block those moves?

The net affect is what the court is deciding against.

ie. altering the powers of the state to benefit one block, and that is counter to the meaning and intent of democracy. Yes one man one vote is the ideal, if that does not remove the actual intent and understanding of the voters when they cast ballots. Just because you voted as you are instructed, doesn't mean it is your actual intent to do so, if not instructed or manipulated by the powerful.

Edited March 12, 2014 by animatic

[rickirs]

Seems Thailand should just abolish the parliament system of government and substitute the Court System to govern the country. It seems to be making all the decisions for both left and right on a daily basis. And since no one court is bound by any other court decision, just "cut to the chase" and eliminate all the different courts and retain only the Supreme Court. It is the only institution that has authority over all Thailand institutions anyways except for the armed foces. The Supreme Court members are all appointed by the King so in essence Thailand would return to a pure monarchy form of government. Since the armed forces pledge allegiance to the King, you have political harmony and political opposition parties would cease to exist. Surely not as strange as how the current goevrnment system operates now.

[Scamper]

Pheu Thai's public intention last week to remove six of the nine Constitutional Court judges through impeachment has now taken another step. It would be flabbergasting if a lower court were to move to impeach an upper court. It is laughable. Such an action would be considered similarly ridiculous in relation to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Constitutional Court is the final authority. Does it mean that they are infallible ? Certainly not, any move than the U.S. Supreme Court is. But that's the system. And as that's the system you accept the judgments. And yet, in the world of Thaksin and Pheu Thai - everything is game. Just the thought of this alone - by accusing the upper court of " overstepping their authority " should send a chill down the spine of anyone versed in the birth of totalitarianism. The first step is always to go after the courts. It's always been Thaksin's target. And after the Thaksin weekend Pheu Thai beach party it remains his primary target. Pheu Thai have never, ever respected the courts or court rulings. They are constantly at odds with them. Constantly battling them. Pheu Thai's stance has therefore been continually dangerous and treacherous and a threat to the rule of law. The rule of law must be respected. Period. Any move to try to derail that is a threat to the judicial system.

[rametindallas]

Just because the Constitutional Court doesn't like something, doesn't make it unconstitutional.

A wholly elected Senate would just be going back to the constitution before the military gave themselves some comfy seats in their smash-n-grab coup.

Whether a wholly elected Senate is a good or bad thing is not the issue, but whether it is unconstitutional.

Good to see this judgment challenged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24997184

The problem with changing the current Constitution is that it has to have the agreement of the Senate, and the selected senators are hardly going to give away their nice little earner, are they?! Having said that, the Constitution says that amendments need to be passed by a majority of all members of the whole National Assembly - still difficult but not impossible.

Smash - and - grab what, read up a bit on what was going on before flapping your gums, there was no legal government at the time as Big T had not been approved by the King. The army stepped in to halt a power grab by Big T

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 20% of the electorate (not 20% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 20% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

[rubl]

I assume the two gentlemen only filed a petition as 'concerned' citizens, but certainly not as Pheu Thai members. I mean we just had caretaker deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana from the Pheu Thai led caretaking government saying "I'm not worried about the CC ruling on the 2.2 trillion bill as we respect the court's verdict."

[rubl]

Just because the Constitutional Court doesn't like something, doesn't make it unconstitutional.

A wholly elected Senate would just be going back to the constitution before the military gave themselves some comfy seats in their smash-n-grab coup.

Whether a wholly elected Senate is a good or bad thing is not the issue, but whether it is unconstitutional.

Good to see this judgment challenged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24997184

The problem with changing the current Constitution is that it has to have the agreement of the Senate, and the selected senators are hardly going to give away their nice little earner, are they?! Having said that, the Constitution says that amendments need to be passed by a majority of all members of the whole National Assembly - still difficult but not impossible.

Smash - and - grab what, read up a bit on what was going on before flapping your gums, there was no legal government at the time as Big T had not been approved by the King. The army stepped in to halt a power grab by Big T

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 20% of the electorate (not 20% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 20% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

Maybe start with

2006, January 22 or 23 - New law became legal this day, abolishing the 49% foreign ownership of Telecomm assets

[djjamie]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy.

A post based on the opinions of 1090 people in a poll. Then a comment like this

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up"

It's no wonder why you need to keep on asking for a definition of democracy....................................

Thank you Fab4, you have highlighted a very very important aspect of what I am arguing.

A poll is a cross section of the population. That cross section is a litmus test of what the population want. The poll does not represent 850 rice farmers and then the "rest". It represents a broad cross section of the population. If the poll did represent 850 rice farmers one could imagine the figure more at 90% that didn't understand what a senator does.

As I have stated previously dictatorships provide a stronger incentive (rice scheme) to a narrow supporter base (rice farmers) and neglect the overall broader population of Thailand. This is documented and researched by academics and if you care to read it here then by all means please do. It is easy to manipulate a narrow supporter base to garner votes, but a true democratic government offers incentives to a broad cross section.

Thanks again for highlighting this, but I still can't help notice that you deflect answering my arguable strong points of why changing the senate make up would be counter productive to democracy and instead cherry pick 9 words out of the whole post and then say a smart ass comment "It's no wonder you need to keep on asking for a definition of democracy". That really does not further your argument on senate make up and quit frankly, having been the one that has asked you what the principles of democracy are only to get nothing in return says more about your lack of understanding of democracy.

So do you feel criminals in the senate amending the very laws that persecuted those criminals is democratic or at the least morally right?

Please try to answer without changing the subject, cherry picking, belittling me, demonizing the DEM's or the PDRC or adding any smart ass comments. Or will that limit your reply to "………"

Edited March 12, 2014 by ubonjoe

[rametindallas]

Just because the Constitutional Court doesn't like something, doesn't make it unconstitutional.

A wholly elected Senate would just be going back to the constitution before the military gave themselves some comfy seats in their smash-n-grab coup.

Whether a wholly elected Senate is a good or bad thing is not the issue, but whether it is unconstitutional.

Good to see this judgment challenged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24997184

The problem with changing the current Constitution is that it has to have the agreement of the Senate, and the selected senators are hardly going to give away their nice little earner, are they?! Having said that, the Constitution says that amendments need to be passed by a majority of all members of the whole National Assembly - still difficult but not impossible.

Smash - and - grab what, read up a bit on what was going on before flapping your gums, there was no legal government at the time as Big T had not been approved by the King. The army stepped in to halt a power grab by Big T

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 20% of the electorate (not 20% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 20% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

Maybe start with

2006, January 22 or 23 - New law became legal this day, abolishing the 49% foreign ownership of Telecomm assets

The day before the sale, Thaksin's rubber stamp Parliament did change the law that limited the sale of a domestic telecoms to a foreign entity to 25%. This 25% is standard in almost all countries. The law was changed to allow the Shinawatra family to sell 49% of ShinCorp to Singapore. The fact that the sale had been planned (at 49%) for months before the vote meant that Thaksin pulled a 'fast one' on the Thai public and endangered the sovereignty and security of their telecoms. For a Thai, there was nothing to like and everything to dislike as illustrated by the massive protests that followed. In actuality, more than 49% of ShinCorp was purchased by Singapore through the use of nominees and straw corporations.

[Gunna]

Just because the Constitutional Court doesn't like something, doesn't make it unconstitutional.

A wholly elected Senate would just be going back to the constitution before the military gave themselves some comfy seats in their smash-n-grab coup.

Whether a wholly elected Senate is a good or bad thing is not the issue, but whether it is unconstitutional.

Good to see this judgment challenged.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-24997184

The problem with changing the current Constitution is that it has to have the agreement of the Senate, and the selected senators are hardly going to give away their nice little earner, are they?! Having said that, the Constitution says that amendments need to be passed by a majority of all members of the whole National Assembly - still difficult but not impossible.

Smash - and - grab what, read up a bit on what was going on before flapping your gums, there was no legal government at the time as Big T had not been approved by the King. The army stepped in to halt a power grab by Big T

When Dr. Thaksin was PM, he dissolved Parliament because of protests over his tax free sale of 49% of his telecom business to Singapore's Sovereign Wealth Fund. During the new elections, his TRT party broke the election law that states when a party has no opposition candidate in a district, they must win 20% of the electorate (not 20% of the votes cast). The Democrat Party boycotted the elections and TRT was running unopposed in many districts. It is difficult to get enough turnouts to get 20% of the electorate so the TRT party paid other, smaller parties to run against them and got caught and the election was nullified by the EC. Thaksin had 60 days to hold new elections after the previous elections were voided but failed to do so. At the end of those 60 days, his mandate to govern was over and he moved out of Government House and a Deputy PM was installed as caretaker PM to facilitate new elections. After a couple of weeks, Dr. Thaksin moved back into government house and there was no power to stop him. Though Dr. Thaksin was in Government House acting as PM, he had no legal authority to be there. When the Army moved in, they did not oust a sitting PM but they did oust a pretender and power grabber. Who else was going to enforce Constitutional rules that should be enforced by the Executive Branch of Government? In this case, The Executive Branch had been coopted by a pretender (Dr. Thaksin) who was not following the Constitution that he was supposed to obey. The Army is the Last Resort to prevent dictatorship and abuse at the highest levels. I repeat, Dr. Thaksin was not a legal PM when the Army moved in and in fact, when the Army held elections, they did not prevent the installation of a government by Dr. Thaksin's nominee, K. Samak, after he won. Now you can see why so many people can never trust an undemocratic figure as Dr. Thaksin has proved himself to be.

Actually the coup was more than four months AFTER the judgment and he STILL hadn't held new elections.

2006

January 23 - The Shinawatra family announce the sale of its controlling stake in telecom company Shin Corp. to Singapore's state-owned Temasek Holdings for a tax-free $1.9 billion.

February 24 - Thaksin dissolves parliament, calls for snap elections on April 2 amid protests and mounting criticism over his family's sale of shares in Shin Corp.

March 5 - Tens of thousands attend rally by newly formed People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) to call for Thaksin's resignation for alleged abuse of power, corruption and business conflicts of interest.

April 3 - Thaksin claims victory after snap election, which opposition parties boycotted over corruption allegations. Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party was the only major party to participate.

May 8 - Constitutional Court rules April election invalid.

September 19 - Military seizes power in a bloodless coup following series of PAD rallies, while Thaksin is at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

source: Thailand timeline 2001-2011

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/01/thailand.timeline/index.html?iref=allsearch

Excellent explanation, thanks.

[WhizBang]

Oh, Please.

The inmates are running the asylum.

[SICHONSTEVE]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand.

A post based on the opinions of 1090 people in a poll. Then a comment like this

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up"

It's no wonder why you need to keep on asking for a definition of democracy....................................

We don't keep on asking for a definition of democracy....we just dispute your version!!!!

[ubonjoe]

A inflammatory reply and quotes of it removed.

[djjamie]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand.

A post based on the opinions of 1090 people in a poll. Then a comment like this

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up"

It's no wonder why you need to keep on asking for a definition of democracy....................................

We don't keep on asking for a definition of democracy....we just dispute your version!!!!

Steve - They can't even give me A version. They can't tell me one principle of democracy. Instead I am belittled, demonized and called names. Kinda like what the red shirts do come to think of it.

I respectfully ask them to rebut the comments instead of belittling the author of the post. Belittling is easy. My kids do it. They are 3 and 5 years old.

Is asking about their thoughts on criminals being in the senate top much to ask? Is asking for their views on the majority not wanting an amnesty that parliament passed at 307 - 0 to much to ask?

Nothing…Nothing at all? Just a dig and a belittling.

[SICHONSTEVE]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand.

A post based on the opinions of 1090 people in a poll. Then a comment like this

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up"

It's no wonder why you need to keep on asking for a definition of democracy....................................

We don't keep on asking for a definition of democracy....we just dispute your version!!!!

Steve - They can't even give me A version. They can't tell me one principle of democracy. Instead I am belittled, demonized and called names. Kinda like what the red shirts do come to think of it.

I respectfully ask them to rebut the comments instead of belittling the author of the post. Belittling is easy. My kids do it. They are 3 and 5 years old.

Is asking about their thoughts on criminals being in the senate top much to ask? Is asking for their views on the majority not wanting an amnesty that parliament passed at 307 - 0 to much to ask?

Nothing…Nothing at all? Just a dig and a belittling.

I wouldn't let it bother you one bit Jamie, you're posts (like scampers and a few others I could name) are well thought out and have intelligent content in them. Theirs (the red goons) version of democracy is one thing and one thing only - getting more votes than others in flawed and bought elections (not bribery so much nowadays) but with unaffordable, ill-conceived populist policies being the means used to garner those votes.

We all know that once you have gained the trust of governing the nation through elections then you have to be accountable (and responsible) in your actions. They have clearly fallen foul on both accounts and simply cannot see this.

Despite their flagrant corruption and abuses of parliament they still view themselves as the government. What other country is ruled from afar with their 'useless' sister (with zilch political experience) acting as the go-between and the messenger??

Don't worry, we will have the last laugh when this trash is turfed out and the Shinawatra clan's grip on power is a thing of the past!!!

Ignore and just laugh at them in contempt as that is all they deserve. Keep up the good posts, I enjoy reading them!!!

Don't let them bait you and you will prevail!!

[lostinsurin]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand.

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand."

I will again take the opportunity to point out that no such schools exist in Thailand,

your words are an insult to the country you are a guest in.

Most school teachers and school directors and those of the Education board are because of their position in Thailand of a yellow political persuasion and as I mentioned earlier this is not taken into the classroom.

[SICHONSTEVE]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand.

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand."

I will again take the opportunity to point out that no such schools exist in Thailand,

your words are an insult to the country you are a guest in.

Most school teachers and school directors and those of the Education board are because of their position in Thailand of a yellow political persuasion and as I mentioned earlier this is not taken into the classroom.

Good to see you back and glad that you are now proffering up sensible posts now rather than your mindless rants containing blatant falsehoods.

Can you not see that these teachers, school directors and administrators are, on the whole, of the yellow persuasion due to their superior upbringing and intelligence levels. I think that this also applies with the Thai visa posters (just my personal opinion mind you) based on the actual substance of those posts emanating rom both camps!!

[djjamie]

65% of voters don't even know what a senators position entails.

So before one even looks at proposing changing the make up the voters have to be educated as to what the senators role is to ensure they vote for the most appropriate person and not just a red shirt leaders wife because she is popular and will vote yes on anything the PTP put to the senate. That is undemocratic.

For instance when over 60% (yep, thats a majority just like 43%) did not want the amnesty bill did the northern voters know it was still passed through parliament with a vote of 307 - 0? That doesn't sound like parliament MP's are reflecting the wishes of their electorate. That is not the kicker though. Thailand's stability was on the brink, millions of protestors took to the streets, 7000 police were called to protect parliament, the majority didn't want the bill, it would absolve the PM's brother as well as 25 000 other corrupt citizens and yet the senate still took 12 hours to debate it.

Now these northern voters need to imagine when the red shirt leaders wife, who harbored her fugitive husband and smuggled him across to Laos to live for 9 months to avoid prosecution, is sitting in that senators seat and would vote for the amnesty. The PTP minsters son's driver who won a vote through bribery or connections will also vote for the amnesty. Change the make up of the senate and the voters wishes will become inconsequential. They are ready are in parliament under PTP, but this will rubber stamp that now. Ludicrous that after all the laws the red shirt leaders wife and her husband broke she will now be responsible for drafting and passing legislation or make amendments to the existing laws. Criminals deciding on law amendments. That's PTP logic.

Across countries, education and democracy are highly correlated. The lack there of in Thailand is glaring and the consequences of 65% voting for something that they do not understand the ramifications of are unimaginable. The amnesty bill being a prime example.

Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand.

"Educate the northerners and then change the senate make up. Stop these northern red shirt radicalization indoctrination schools that teach more about demonizing opposition and filling there brains with hatred than they teach about democracy. These schools are more at home on the Pakistan / Afghanistan border, not in northern Thailand."

I will again take the opportunity to point out that no such schools exist in Thailand,

your words are an insult to the country you are a guest in.

Most school teachers and school directors and those of the Education board are because of their position in Thailand of a yellow political persuasion and as I mentioned earlier this is not taken into the classroom.

So you pointing out there are no red shirt schools is not dissimilar to Tida stating we do not support succession when she was on a stage two weeks earlier supporting succession.

Here are those red shirt radicalization schools who's existence of which you deny.

http://thairedshirts.org/2013/04/08/udd-political-schools-in-context/

And the leaders behind these schools are accused terrorists. Nattawut and Jatuporn.

Edited March 12, 2014 by djjamie