Pheu Thai vows to defy Constitutional Court's ruling on election

[MunterHunter]

really seems like the ptp are setting up everything for kotee to do his work, he declares he will start shooting if the ptp are removed and the ptp declare they will no abide by the decision, definitely see who is pulling all the strings here. The sooner the courts judge this mob of rodents the better.

I agree.

The courts should not be intimidated by the daily threats of terrorism and anarchy from the PTP militia wing.

The army is more than capable of sorting them out..... more than capable.

Who cares what the interfering a-holes in the western countries say about it... they are already too busy pulling strings and backing terrorists in Syria and Ukraine.

The a-holes from the west can shut down the national economy more or less overnight.

So even if the army came out and seized power on behalf of the Yellow movement - it would only be a pyrrhic victory as they would be left ruling over a bankrupt nation and have to deal with daily guerrilla attacks from their own population - including the watermelon troops.

The big brass know this (even if you don't) and it is why all they are doing is popping up for the odd interview and tending to their bunker flowers.

So keep dreaming sunny boy, your wishes shan't be coming true any time soon

Ahh yes, I clearly remember the west shutting down the national economy at the last coup, or any of the previous coups, and I have no doubt they will shut it down exactly the same way again. (Read: The west don't give a ...., as long as the beaches stay open)

Hate to p*ss on your parade, but the western governments won’t do jack schit. They are all focused on Russia and the sanctions they are going to impose there, when they have turned up the heat on the Ruskies they won’t be able to afford any significant sanctions against Thailand, there may be a few 'token' light weight ones... but really nothing that will affect Thailand or Asia.

Anyhow, thats a moot point, the military won’t throw a coup as you suggest, they don’t need to... this government is hanging itself... in a few days’ time when the election gets voided, the PTP 'refuse to acknowledge' the court’s decision and the UDD militant mafia come screaming into Bangkok, the Military will have the moral right and international support to crush the rebellion, round up their leaders (which include current MP's) and throw them all into a deep dark hole in the ground for the rest of their miserable lives. No coup needed, just simple 'defending the nation from enemies both foreign and domestic.

[SICHONSTEVE]

The PTP's ignorance of the law just plays into the Democrat's hands.

They simply make it too easy to for themselves to be handled like playthings for Suthep and the 'rather clever' Dem's, as Thaksin refers to them as being. Set a trap and fall straight into it head first!! It really is embarrassing to see them operate - they should read the instructions first before rushing into anything!!!

They are the sort of people that would buy a flat-pack self-assembly cabinet unit, take all the pieces out of the box in a hurry, stick those pieces together that nearly fit and wonder why they have half a dozen pieces left over at the end and it looks like a giant sized shoebox!!!!

[siampolee]

HonestQuieBob post # 35

You may want to do a little research into the incestuous nature of how the appointed senators and judges come to be appointed.

You actually mean follow the lead of the Shinwatra clan in its family game of political incest.

[Baerboxer]

I've just read the original post. It is the Nation which is saying PT will defy the court ruling.

The PT spokesman said that they hadn't decided what to do, although they didn't agree that the case should have been brought, and they were suspicious of the EC motivation.

That doesn't read to me like defying the court come what may. Perhaps some of the outrage is "a little bit previous"?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Looking at the OP it seems that they are defying (or whatever word you want to use) not because of the court's decision but because they feel that the the ombudsman shouldn't have forwarded the case to them in the first place.

It does look like they're giving themselves a way out if the court finds in their favour.

One of the changes PTP wanted was to make it so that all petitions to the Constitution Court came via the AG's office. The AG would then, no doubt with their kind help and guidance, decide which if any were forwarded to the court. This did not happen, But, surprise surprise PTP want to act like it did.

PTP the party you can trust to police themselves!

Edited March 19, 2014 by Baerboxer

[Publicus]

Let's clarify something very important.

PTP is presented in the OP as making a statement about the CC's expected ruling on the constitutionality of the Feb 2nd election. Nowhere in the PTP statement is the word "defy" used. The word "defy" is in the header of the Nation OP, written (presumably) by a headline writer, or perhaps an editor. The Nation, not Pheu Thai Party, used the word "defy." As long as that is clear, any among us can of course choose our own word(s) to characterize the posture of the PTP in the matter. Just don't post in quotation marks that either the PTP or the government said it would "defy" the CC ruling.

The Digital Content - MCOT story inserted later in the thread has the Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana speaking to reporters in connection with his appearance before the CC today, saying that the government is ready to follow the court’s ruling no matter how it will be. The statement, however, is NOT presented by Digital Content as a direct quotation of Kuhn Phongthep. The Digital Content - MCOT story attributes the statement to Kuhn Phongthep, but the journal does not quote him as having said those exact words.

While it's not unusual in Asian journalism to omit direct quotes of news story principals - Asian languages and Asian Englishes don't use quotations in the same ways or as much as do native English language nations - the Digital Content - MCOT article should have provided a direct quotation.

The bottom line here however is that people shouldn't confuse the PTP in its statements to the public with the public statements of very senior government officials, especially when the statements can vary considerably in their content. In this instance, time was an important factor, the PTP statement having come early today, the government's statement much later today. People should also know by now to pay attention to quotes or attributed statements in a given Nation article to compare them to the headline the Nation writes to the story. And to read other journals too, which most of us do anyway.

For the record, this is the account provided by Digital Content of the government's statement today in respect of the CC, as taken from the Digital Content - MCOT report posted to the thread:

Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, who represented the caretaker government, told reporters that the royal decree on general election, issued in 2013, did not contradict the Constitution and the authority to organise the poll belongs to the EC.

The Office of the Ombudsman is not empowered to lodge a petition with the charter court, he said, adding that the ruling Pheu Thai Party’s statement objecting the charter court’s authority in the case has nothing to do with the caretaker government.

The government is ready to follow the court’s ruling no matter how it will be, he said.

In other words, each one here needs to be extra especially careful reading the Nation.

Edited March 19, 2014 by Publicus

[DirtFarmer]

LOCAL DRUNK...

you said...

"

."the elite of the elite" Your term is a bit ambiguous and certainly definable according to anyone's particular bias, unless you've defined the elite as the wealthy. Therein lies the problem. You singled no one out as an example in your definition of ."the elite of the elite" You simply paint a broad swath of rhetoric at those that you seem to disagree with. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an elitist. Indeed, I 'm sure that you are . "

If you read the entire article posted above you would have read this...

"The problems with Thailand’s Senate are two-fold. First, it does not allow the members of the minority it is allegedly protecting to vote for their own representatives. Instead, it allows the elite of the elite—a committee composed of judges and appointed officials—to handpick senators. Second, the minority it seeks to protect is not primarily geographic, ethnic, or religious; it is socio-economic. The Senate, along with the judiciary, was intentionally established as a bulwark against popular rule."

Okay so clear now... the elite of the elite...?

Which was the Dems clear agenda then as it is now...period pure and simple power grab,,,

Link http://cogitasia.com/thailands-constitutional-court-highlights-bangkoks-political-conundrum/

Edited March 19, 2014 by DirtFarmer

[HonestQuietBob]

Hate to p*ss on your parade, but the western governments won’t do jack schit. They are all focused on Russia and the sanctions they are going to impose there, when they have turned up the heat on the Ruskies they won’t be able to afford any significant sanctions against Thailand, there may be a few 'token' light weight ones... but really nothing that will affect Thailand or Asia.

Anyhow, thats a moot point, the military won’t throw a coup as you suggest, they don’t need to... this government is hanging itself... in a few days’ time when the election gets voided, the PTP 'refuse to acknowledge' the court’s decision and the UDD militant mafia come screaming into Bangkok, the Military will have the moral right and international support to crush the rebellion, round up their leaders (which include current MP's) and throw them all into a deep dark hole in the ground for the rest of their miserable lives. No coup needed, just simple 'defending the nation from enemies both foreign and domestic.

Said with a confidence that only the naive and ignorant can muster.

So if all you've stated doesn't eventuate in "the next few days", will the tiny,minority, unsupported and unwanted coup mongers pack up thier tents and go home?

Cause we've heard it all before, you know - final push,great victory soon..... blah, blah, blah

The US and Japanese have told the Thai military they're not allowed to participate in politics anymore (they've been naughty boys for far too long).

Thai courts lost all international respect long ago.

Face it,

Team Yingluck is here to stay my friend and there shall be no p*ssing on her parade.

[rubl]

I see the yellow brigade are out decrying PT for disputing the legality of the Ombudsman's actions. It must be good to have an intricate knowledge of Thai law so that you can say without a reasonable doubt that the Ombudsman had a right to forward a petition on the poll to the Constitutional Court and that there was a conflict between the Royal Decree on the House dissolution, which stated February 2 as the only election date, and the charter.

Reality is, you just come out to cheer anything that can be construed as negative towards PT and you actually haven't got any idea about the legality of the issues involved.

Reality also works against you, my dear teacher, personally I doubt you have any idea about the legality of the issues involved.

The Pheu Thai party has disputed almost anything against them. Mostly with lots of legal references which they say to confirm their opinion. Mostly in combination with government (Pheu Thai) people saying to accept rulings. That seems to be a bit strange, wouldn't you agree?

[rubl]

Hate to p*ss on your parade, but the western governments won’t do jack schit. They are all focused on Russia and the sanctions they are going to impose there, when they have turned up the heat on the Ruskies they won’t be able to afford any significant sanctions against Thailand, there may be a few 'token' light weight ones... but really nothing that will affect Thailand or Asia.

Anyhow, thats a moot point, the military won’t throw a coup as you suggest, they don’t need to... this government is hanging itself... in a few days’ time when the election gets voided, the PTP 'refuse to acknowledge' the court’s decision and the UDD militant mafia come screaming into Bangkok, the Military will have the moral right and international support to crush the rebellion, round up their leaders (which include current MP's) and throw them all into a deep dark hole in the ground for the rest of their miserable lives. No coup needed, just simple 'defending the nation from enemies both foreign and domestic.

Said with a confidence that only the naive and ignorant can muster.

So if all you've stated doesn't eventuate in "the next few days", will the tiny,minority, unsupported and unwanted coup mongers pack up thier tents and go home?

Cause we've heard it all before, you know - final push,great victory soon..... blah, blah, blah

The US and Japanese have told the Thai military they're not allowed to participate in politics anymore (they've been naughty boys for far too long).

Thai courts lost all international respect long ago.

Face it,

Team Yingluck is here to stay my friend and there shall be no p*ssing on her parade.

you forgot to end with the "IMHO" my friend

[rubl]

LOCAL DRUNK...

you said...

"

."the elite of the elite" Your term is a bit ambiguous and certainly definable according to anyone's particular bias, unless you've defined the elite as the wealthy. Therein lies the problem. You singled no one out as an example in your definition of ."the elite of the elite" You simply paint a broad swath of rhetoric at those that you seem to disagree with. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an elitist. Indeed, I 'm sure that you are . "

If you read the entire article posted above you would have read this...

"The problems with Thailand’s Senate are two-fold. First, it does not allow the members of the minority it is allegedly protecting to vote for their own representatives. Instead, it allows the elite of the elite—a committee composed of judges and appointed officials—to handpick senators. Second, the minority it seeks to protect is not primarily geographic, ethnic, or religious; it is socio-economic. The Senate, along with the judiciary, was intentionally established as a bulwark against popular rule."

Okay so clear now... the elite of the elite...?

Which was the Dems clear agenda then as it is now...period pure and simple power grab,,,

Link http://cogitasia.com/thailands-constitutional-court-highlights-bangkoks-political-conundrum/

Now if only we could have an explanation of "popular rule".

[HonestQuietBob]

LOCAL DRUNK...

you said...

"

."the elite of the elite" Your term is a bit ambiguous and certainly definable according to anyone's particular bias, unless you've defined the elite as the wealthy. Therein lies the problem. You singled no one out as an example in your definition of ."the elite of the elite" You simply paint a broad swath of rhetoric at those that you seem to disagree with. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an elitist. Indeed, I 'm sure that you are . "

If you read the entire article posted above you would have read this...

"The problems with Thailand’s Senate are two-fold. First, it does not allow the members of the minority it is allegedly protecting to vote for their own representatives. Instead, it allows the elite of the elite—a committee composed of judges and appointed officials—to handpick senators. Second, the minority it seeks to protect is not primarily geographic, ethnic, or religious; it is socio-economic. The Senate, along with the judiciary, was intentionally established as a bulwark against popular rule."

Okay so clear now... the elite of the elite...?

Which was the Dems clear agenda then as it is now...period pure and simple power grab,,,

Link http://cogitasia.com/thailands-constitutional-court-highlights-bangkoks-political-conundrum/

Now if only we could have an explanation of "popular rule".

"popular rule" it's pretty self explanatory really.

For context, from the same article cited above:

How does the nation reconcile a growing majority demanding full democracy with a vocal minority, backed by the traditional centers of power, terrified of mob rule?

and

In the end, the Democrats will need to give up more. Demographics and history are against them.

Popular rule literally means "rule by the people"

That's all.

In this day and age, how could anyone be against it?

I bet nobody on this forum would like to see the end of popular rule in their home countries.

Edited March 19, 2014 by HonestQuietBob

[rubl]

LOCAL DRUNK...

you said...

"

."the elite of the elite" Your term is a bit ambiguous and certainly definable according to anyone's particular bias, unless you've defined the elite as the wealthy. Therein lies the problem. You singled no one out as an example in your definition of ."the elite of the elite" You simply paint a broad swath of rhetoric at those that you seem to disagree with. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an elitist. Indeed, I 'm sure that you are . "

If you read the entire article posted above you would have read this...

"The problems with Thailand’s Senate are two-fold. First, it does not allow the members of the minority it is allegedly protecting to vote for their own representatives. Instead, it allows the elite of the elite—a committee composed of judges and appointed officials—to handpick senators. Second, the minority it seeks to protect is not primarily geographic, ethnic, or religious; it is socio-economic. The Senate, along with the judiciary, was intentionally established as a bulwark against popular rule."

Okay so clear now... the elite of the elite...?

Which was the Dems clear agenda then as it is now...period pure and simple power grab,,,

Link http://cogitasia.com/thailands-constitutional-court-highlights-bangkoks-political-conundrum/

Now if only we could have an explanation of "popular rule".

"popular rule" it's pretty self explanatory really.

For context, from the same article cited above:

How does the nation reconcile a growing majority demanding full democracy with a vocal minority, backed by the traditional centers of power, terrified of mob rule?

and

In the end, the Democrats will need to give up more. Demographics and history are against them.

Popular rule literally means "rule by the people"

That's all.

In this day and age, how could anyone be against it?

I bet nobody on this forum would like to see the end of popular rule in their home countries.

"popular rule" is a popular term by some left leaning people and as obfuscation term by others. It has nothing to do with democracy perse. On this wiki page see the paragraph on "Popular rule as a façade", "Political instability" and "Fraudulent elections"

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy ) or read a bit from this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_democracy

Mind you a growing number (and not a majority) of Thai want democracy which means more than "respect my vote till it's counted'. They want transparency of government, they want independent watchdogs, they want government to be and take it's responsibility.

That would include not to try to force through a blanket amnesty bill which even covered Ms. Yinglucks governments first two years. That includes taking the responsibility for the 700++ billion Baht lost in rice scam. That means taking responsibility in getting and executing orders from a criminal fugitive abroad.

[kuthow]

Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, who represented the caretaker government, told reporters that the royal decree on general election, issued in 2013, did not contradict the Constitution and the authority to organise the poll belongs to the EC.

The Office of the Ombudsman is not empowered to lodge a petition with the charter court, he said, adding that the ruling Pheu Thai Partys statement objecting the charter courts authority in the case has nothing to do with the caretaker government.

As delineated earlier in the thread with the specific Sections from the Legal Act, the Ombudsman IS empowered to lodge a petition with the Constitution Court.

[kuthow]

Constitutional Court may decide validity of Feb 2 poll today

Ombudsman Pornpetch Vichitcholachai insisted on the legal power of the Office of the Ombudsman in filing the petition with the Constitution Court

Pornpetch has it right, Phongthep has it wrong.

[MunterHunter]

Hate to p*ss on your parade, but the western governments won’t do jack schit. They are all focused on Russia and the sanctions they are going to impose there, when they have turned up the heat on the Ruskies they won’t be able to afford any significant sanctions against Thailand, there may be a few 'token' light weight ones... but really nothing that will affect Thailand or Asia.

Anyhow, thats a moot point, the military won’t throw a coup as you suggest, they don’t need to... this government is hanging itself... in a few days’ time when the election gets voided, the PTP 'refuse to acknowledge' the court’s decision and the UDD militant mafia come screaming into Bangkok, the Military will have the moral right and international support to crush the rebellion, round up their leaders (which include current MP's) and throw them all into a deep dark hole in the ground for the rest of their miserable lives. No coup needed, just simple 'defending the nation from enemies both foreign and domestic.

Said with a confidence that only the naive and ignorant can muster.

So if all you've stated doesn't eventuate in "the next few days", will the tiny,minority, unsupported and unwanted coup mongers pack up thier tents and go home?

Cause we've heard it all before, you know - final push,great victory soon..... blah, blah, blah

The US and Japanese have told the Thai military they're not allowed to participate in politics anymore (they've been naughty boys for far too long).

Thai courts lost all international respect long ago.

Face it,

Team Yingluck is here to stay my friend and there shall be no p*ssing on her parade.

To quote you...

Said with a confidence that only the naive and ignorant can muster.

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post has been removed.

[bigbamboo]

Prior to 2007 the predessors to the Constitutional Court repeatedly ruled in favor of the Thaksin political parties. In 2007 when the Democrats grabbed power through the military coup and rewrote the Constitution, it re-established the Constitutional Court with partisan judges aligned with or sympathetic to the Democratic party through their appointments by a government lacking any significant opposition party with the removal of Thaksin's party.

The Constitutional Court members know where their allegiance lies and has become de facto a powerful tool of the Democrat party as evidenced by its consistent rulings against the PTP with minimal, flawed, or lacking evidence coming largely from the Democrats/PDRC. And so PTP's perceived partisan discrimination by the Court is real and its frustration is a natural response to the corruption of the Court's intended judicial fairness.

So another words, screw the courts and get on with raping the country?

PS. PTP has had years to change the judges , any reason why they have not? And if they have, any reason why new judges do not support them ? Besides the obvious of course

You may want to do a little research into the incestuous nature of how the appointed senators and judges come to be appointed.

Does it involve nepotism and cronyism...... like the current government?

[tilac2]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

[Dap]

This is the game changer we all feared. Pheu Thai have outdone even themselves. They haven't just defied a Constitutional Court ruling. They will defy a Constitutional Court ruling whatever it is ! Not only that, but the Constitutional Court can now take it's place of honour among Pheu Thai's list of targets. They now include no less than six independent agencies, including the Election Commission and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, as well as the Civil Court and the Criminal Court. Is there anyone left ? Pheu Thai, the UDD, and most particularly the man behind it all - Thaksin - are now completely out of control. Thaksin has clearly placed his bets. Instead of allowing the legal system to do what it is supposed to do, he would rather risk chaos from his insane UDD leaders. If he can't have what he wants, he'll take everyone down with him. But one thing is certain. Thaksin has lost. He has lost every moral argument he ever pretended to pose. If he prefers acting like a tyrant, then let him order his hotel chambermaids about. What he doesn't count on is that the Thai people - by and large - are decent, decent people, who respect the rule of law and do not bend to terror or intimidation. The Thai people will prevail over Thaksin - because they are head over heels more mature than he ever will be. The Thai people are frankly tired of it and they want to move on. And they've earned it.

To paraphrase Churchill, "This is not the end of this government. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps the end of the beginning."

Well said

[hawker9000]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

So funny. A lecture on representative democracy from someone contemptuous of courts and the rule of law.

[englishoak]

What rule of law ?

[Publicus]

Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, who represented the caretaker government, told reporters that the royal decree on general election, issued in 2013, did not contradict the Constitution and the authority to organise the poll belongs to the EC.

The Office of the Ombudsman is not empowered to lodge a petition with the charter court, he said, adding that the ruling Pheu Thai Partys statement objecting the charter courts authority in the case has nothing to do with the caretaker government.

As delineated earlier in the thread with the specific Sections from the Legal Act, the Ombudsman IS empowered to lodge a petition with the Constitution Court.

That remains one of the issues before the court for it to determine. I for one expect the court to agree, which then will give it its constitutional basis to proceed on the question of nullifying the election. Until tomorrow however, when the CC rules accordingly, it remains an open question.

You may have taken note the EC also asserts the OB does not have the authority to initiate a cause of action in the CC. I expect that given the CC's inherent biases, the CC will agree with the OB, ruling against both the government and the EC to instead accept the OB's filing and then go ahead to nullify the election.

So the government will continue as the Caretaker Government and with the EC organize and see the country through a new GE in which the DP will have to participate. But then the fahlang article-by-article constitutional experts on the illegitimate 2007 coup written constitution have your own law books and legal resources.

After all the dust and commotion of the past several months, the only actual question after tomorrow is can you guys chase YS out from being the next prime minister. If it's not Yingluck, it probably will be Surapong, or so it seems. Personally, I'd like to see you guys get Chalerm, but then again the country needs and deserves much better. Chalerm however got Article 181 right while the TVF constitutional experts couldn't get your briefs to hold up in court.

[hawker9000]

What rule of law ?

You do know what courts are for, right? You know, like what they DO? What it is they render decisions based on? Why they exist? The part they play in a democracy?

If not, I expect I can find an idle, underachieving fourth grader somewhere who can explain it to you.

[englishoak]

What rule of law ?

You do know what courts are for, right? You know, like what they DO? What it is they render decisions based on? Why they exist? The part they play in a democracy?

If not, I expect I can find an idle, underachieving fourth grader somewhere who can explain it to you.

sigh* childish insults, is that the best you can do little one ?

The system here my dear boy has no precedence meaning each case must start as if its the first ever like it tried, ergo there is no standard to follow ergo it is totally open to both corruption and blatant incompetence and bad rulings. It has all of the latter hence my quip

climb out of your sandpit and understand the system here for what it is and not where you come from boy.

[kuthow]

Caretaker Deputy Prime Minister Phongthep Thepkanjana, who represented the caretaker government, told reporters that the royal decree on general election, issued in 2013, did not contradict the Constitution and the authority to organise the poll belongs to the EC.

The Office of the Ombudsman is not empowered to lodge a petition with the charter court, he said, adding that the ruling Pheu Thai Partys statement objecting the charter courts authority in the case has nothing to do with the caretaker government.

As delineated earlier in the thread with the specific Sections from the Legal Act, the Ombudsman IS empowered to lodge a petition with the Constitution Court.

That remains one of the issues before the court for it to determine. I for one expect the court to agree, which then will give it its constitutional basis to proceed on the question of nullifying the election. Until tomorrow however, when the CC rules accordingly, it remains an open question.

You may have taken note the EC also asserts the OB does not have the authority to initiate a cause of action in the CC. I expect that given the CC's inherent biases, the CC will agree with the OB, ruling against both the government and the EC to instead accept the OB's filing and then go ahead to nullify the election.

I expect the CC's inherent ability to read the Ombudsman Act will be the determining factor in agreeing with the OB's legal right to file the case.

[hawker9000]

What rule of law ?

You do know what courts are for, right? You know, like what they DO? What it is they render decisions based on? Why they exist? The part they play in a democracy?

If not, I expect I can find an idle, underachieving fourth grader somewhere who can explain it to you.

sigh* childish insults, is that the best you can do little one ?

The system here my dear boy has no precedence meaning each case must start as if its the first ever like it tried, ergo there is no standard to follow ergo it is totally open to both corruption and blatant incompetence and bad rulings. It has all of the latter hence my quip

climb out of your sandpit and understand the system here for what it is and not where you come from boy.

Funnier than I could have even hoped for. Ah yes, IOW, just another petulant little schoolyard somebody who smiles when electoral decisions suit him, and whines at court decisions that don't. Another competitor for the comedy awards.

[Publicus]

What rule of law ?

You do know what courts are for, right? You know, like what they DO? What it is they render decisions based on? Why they exist? The part they play in a democracy?

If not, I expect I can find an idle, underachieving fourth grader somewhere who can explain it to you.

Courts here unyieldingly show their unrelenting purpose as preserving and enforcing the rule of the traditional centers of power against the historically excluded who demand inclusion and empowerment by standard democratic means.

In a nutshell pal.

[englishoak]

What rule of law ?

You do know what courts are for, right? You know, like what they DO? What it is they render decisions based on? Why they exist? The part they play in a democracy?

If not, I expect I can find an idle, underachieving fourth grader somewhere who can explain it to you.

sigh* childish insults, is that the best you can do little one ?

The system here my dear boy has no precedence meaning each case must start as if its the first ever like it tried, ergo there is no standard to follow ergo it is totally open to both corruption and blatant incompetence and bad rulings. It has all of the latter hence my quip

climb out of your sandpit and understand the system here for what it is and not where you come from boy.

Funnier than I could have even hoped for. Ah yes, IOW, just another petulant little schoolyard somebody who smiles when electoral decisions suit him, and whines at court decisions that don't. Another competitor for the comedy awards.

Sorry i dont have a horse in this race just making it clear the judicial system is as screwed up and broken as the rest of it, dont see the PDRC, democrats or PTP bringing that one up though do you ? why would that be yathink ?

Need help there ? There is no interest in breaking or changing the Status Quo, never has been, its always about keeping the top at the top and the bottom firmly at the bottom ol son. True one group is more interested and fearful of that change than the other... ill leave you to work out who that might be.

[rubl]

Sorry i dont have a horse in this race just making it clear the judicial system is as screwed up and broken as the rest of it, dont see the PDRC, democrats or PTP bringing that one up though do you ? why would that be yathink ?

Need help there ? There is no interest in breaking or changing the Status Quo, never has been, its always about keeping the top at the top and the bottom firmly at the bottom ol son. True one group is more interested and fearful of that change than the other... ill leave you to work out who that might be.

"clear the judicial system is as screwed up"

Any news on the reforms?

[rubl]

replying to Ruble:

There's nothing obscure about "popular rule". It connotes rule by a majority, as elected through some form of representative democracy. Certainly there are some problems with such systems, as you mention, but that doesn't mean we should abandon the systems. Indeed the people would be very annoyed if these systems of one man one vote were abanodoned.

However, some Thais and falangs on this forum do want to abandon representative democracy. In its place, they want a "people's council" that will then work out what kind of "democracy" they shall grant to the people. But that would almost certainly be a less democrcratic system. They and other right-wingers have had such plans for a long time. Sondhi and his fellow yellow shirts wanted to do something of the sort in the period following Thaksin's overthrow: they even suggested that the lower house should be partly appointed! (Remember that the upper house is already part appointed - it was changed that way by the Generals in 2007). Clearly they want to partially disenfranchise the people from Isan because they are considered to be disloyal, stupid, uneducated, not proper Thais (Lao/Cambodian), dark skinned. This is in contrast to the white-skinned Thai-Chinese who now run Thailand. However, at some point these racist "high-class" Thai-Chinese are going to have to reconcile themselves to the fact that the Isan people are every bit their equal - indeed, I would argue, are their superiors in some respects.

Probably, as you say, the Yingluck government has made mistakes, and the rice scheme could be one of them (but I still have not seen any statistics on this). If so, the electorate should have the chance to elect a different government at an election. And they would indeed have had this chance were it not for the illegal activities of the insurrectionist Suthep and his fellow outlaws.

By the way, you seem to assume that the convictions against Thaksin were 'safe' legally speaking. Sorry, but I wouldn't accept that. A safe conviction depends on a reliable legal system based on neutral judges. Does Thailand have neutral judges? Hmm... or are they part of the ammart system that has kept this country amongst the most unequal in Asia for generations? [sorry I cannot say for reasons as below].

Compare with Malaysia, where a political leader has been unjustly convicted for sodomy on probably trumped-up evidence. Is the Thai system any better? [sorry, I am unable to spell this out further for reasons we all might know].

Lots of obfuscation, incorrect assumptions, half-truths and more manure.

The Yingluck government has an attitude of "respect your vote till it's counted" with "thank you * 3, please go home now, we have a mandate". Just like the rule of the people is very popular in countries with "Democratic" in their official country name.

The Yingluck government HAS made mistakes, they assumed that with a 'mandate' they could ignore all and push for big brothers safe return. A passport to a criminal fugitive, imagine. 700++ billion lost in a rice scam and no accounting, only conflicting numbers.

As for Thaksin's convictions, well as far as I know there's only one, for "conflict of interests". The other cases await his return to be able to continue. None seems to be 'trumped up"

As for 'amart', well always nice to say 'amart' in a post which tries to absolve Thaksin the innocent Amply Rich billionair criminal fugitive.