Senate Speaker Nikom indicted for violating Thai Constitution

[webfact]

POLITICS
Senate Speaker indicted by NACC
Khanittha Thepphajorn,
Piyanut Tumnukasetchai
The Nation


Nikom prepares to defend himself against impeachment move.

Nikom faulted for role during charter debate on change to Senate make-up

BANGKOK: -- The position of Parliament President appears to be in vacuum after the National Anti-Corruption Commission voted unanimously yesterday to indict caretaker Senate Speaker and acting Parliament President Nikom Wairatpanij over alleged violation of the Constitution while chairing parliamentary meetings to deliberate a charter amendment bill on the Senate composition.

In case of a deadlock, anti-government protesters expect a new prime minister with political neutrality to be nominated by the Senate Speaker, acting as Parliament President following the dissolution of the House of Representatives. However, political observers did not expect Nikom to nominate such a person.|

The decision of the NACC automatically suspends Nikom from his parliamentary duties pending a decision by the Senate whether to impeach him. He was charged as Parliament vice president over his role while chairing the deliberations on the senatorial charter amendment bill.

The NACC decided to conduct more investigations in the alleged malfeasance case against former Parliament President Somsak Kiatsuranont during the same Parliament deliberations.

Nikom yesterday said he had stopped doing his job and deputy Senate Speaker Surachai Liengboonlertchai would perform the duty as acting Senate Speaker. However, Surachai cannot take charge of the Senate.

Nikom said he would prepare to defend himself before the Senate, which is authorised to impeach him. He believed the Senate would call an extraordinary session to consider the matter in the next 20 days.

Support from at least three-fifths of the Senate is required to impeach a political office holder. An impeachment would result in a five-year ban from politics.

"I will not take any other legal action although I think the NACC's reasons to indict me were unreasonable. Ordering the end to discussions on the request of the [meeting] participants is the duty of the meeting chairman, which was me," he said.

On the question whether it would be possible to propose the selection of an unelected prime minister, as the Parliament President must be the person who submits the name for royal endorsement, Nikom said it would be impossible legally.

Surachai said he would now take over from Nikom but he has yet to study the laws over his authority.

Meanwhile, NACC member Prasart Pongsivapai yesterday said the national anti-graft agency had resolved unanimously to pursue the impeachment of the Senate Speaker because he had acted against the Constitution while chairing parliamentary meetings in September last year on constitutional amendments.

Prasart said that Nikom's actions during those days, such as preventing opposition politicians from debating, were in violation of Article 3 of the Constitution. The clause states that, "The performance of duties of the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers, the Courts, and the constitutional organs as well as State agencies shall be under the rule of law."

He said Nikom would have to stop performing his duties as soon as the NACC indicts him.

The anti-graft agency, according to Prasart, is also investigating criminal allegations against the Senate Speaker.

The Constitutional Court ruled last year that the charter amendment on the Senate composition was unconstitutional, both in terms of changes proposed and the process.

The two faced charges for allegedly performing their duties dishonestly, abusing their authority and violating the ethical code. The NACC decided that it needed more information to make a decision whether to indict Somsak.

Somsak was Parliament President as he was the House Speaker before the House dissolution in December.

Meanwhile, Nikom, the caretaker Senate Speaker before his term as an elected senator ended earlier this month, remained as caretaker Senate Speaker and Parliament vice president.

A total of 73 appointed senators currently remain in the Senate while elections for 77 elected senators have been set for March 30.

Earlier, the NACC also pressed charges against 308 senators and former MPs who had proposed the bill and voted for it. Some 293 of them voted in all three readings, while 15 of them proposed and voted for the bill in some readings.


-- The Nation 2014-03-21

[Dr Bruce]

Am I reading this right? There are only 73 members of the Senate, the elected ones will not be there until after the election.

The 73 non-elected senators will be voting to punish the people who wanted to replace them with elected members.

Seems fair to me.

[rametindallas]

Ms Yingluck is next.

[djjamie]

Yes, very fair Bruce. The senate boasts a compliment of experienced professionals. Elections would effectively eliminate their valuable expertise from the political process. The appointed senators are economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates. Many would be unwilling to campaign and would have their seats filled by PT puppets funded with PTP money if the appointments were removed.

It is critical that senators are not aligned with a political party. Elected senators are not. They are aligned with morality, sensibility and the rule of law thus why they did not vote for any unconstitutional bills.

Old mate in the OP however is a different story and he has worked for governments backed by Thaksin in the past and is widely thought to be supportive of yingluck as well. In 2006 senate elections forbid candidates from belonging to a political party or from campaigning as well. Despite the ban 103 seats went to supporters of TRT, whilst 35 were won by candidates associated with the party's ally, TNP. BTW - thaksin was bypassing the parliament to set up free trade agreements with his wall street buddies around that time as well. Why? Because he would not have got approval if he did it "democratically"

Just wait for the terrorist leaders wife from Udon to win a seat in the senate. That is one automatic vote for anything the PTP want to push through irrespective of whether it is majority driven, legel or moral.

​Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nikom, your gone you pretentious biased senator.

[Dr Bruce]

Jamie

That is my main concern, they are not elected and we are supposed to believe that they are independant.

How did the "economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates" get the jobs which qualified them to be senators? Did they have conections?

The Group Of 40 is well known for always supporting the Democrat party. In the UK we have a non-elected upper house but changes over recent years have stripped them of most of thier powers.

Do you have a non-elected upper house in Oz?

[smedly]

Now there's an honest face if you ever saw one

When I scrolled back up to look at the picture again I'd swear his nose had extended slightly

[chainarong]

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

Yes, very fair Bruce. The senate boasts a compliment of experienced professionals. Elections would effectively eliminate their valuable expertise from the political process. The appointed senators are economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates. Many would be unwilling to campaign and would have their seats filled by PT puppets funded with PTP money if the appointments were removed.

It is critical that senators are not aligned with a political party. Elected senators are not. They are aligned with morality, sensibility and the rule of law thus why they did not vote for any unconstitutional bills.

Old mate in the OP however is a different story and he has worked for governments backed by Thaksin in the past and is widely thought to be supportive of yingluck as well. In 2006 senate elections forbid candidates from belonging to a political party or from campaigning as well. Despite the ban 103 seats went to supporters of TRT, whilst 35 were won by candidates associated with the party's ally, TNP. BTW - thaksin was bypassing the parliament to set up free trade agreements with his wall street buddies around that time as well. Why? Because he would not have got approval if he did it "democratically"

Just wait for the terrorist leaders wife from Udon to win a seat in the senate. That is one automatic vote for anything the PTP want to push through irrespective of whether it is majority driven, legel or moral.

​Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nikom, your gone you pretentious biased senator.

U have a point , the other alternative is like Oz where the lower house is filled with cronies and the balance of power in the senate (House of review) is the lunatic fringe like the greens , PUParty, the sex party the, yeah well , and all because of the cringe in the lower house , they can't be trusted ,sounds like Thai politics

[djjamie]

Jamie

That is my main concern, they are not elected and we are supposed to believe that they are independant.

How did the "economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates" get the jobs which qualified them to be senators? Did they have conections?

The Group Of 40 is well known for always supporting the Democrat party. In the UK we have a non-elected upper house but changes over recent years have stripped them of most of thier powers.

Do you have a non-elected upper house in Oz?

Maybe I am Canadian. They don't have an elected senate. They have an appointed senate and it has served them well for 140 years. That is beside the point though. Thailand is neither the UK nor Canada. Apples for oranges argument there. The voter base for one do not go to terrorist schools in the north of the UK and the average schooling level of a UK resident or Canadian is not a 7th grade education.

An appointed senate reflects diversity of the Thai people. Women, visible minorities are too often poorly represented if senators are elected. PTP despise the voice of minority groups. The Deputy PM called minority groups garbage.

Improving Policy. An appointed senate could help ensure that policy is based on a wider variety of input based on compromise and consensus among diverse perspectives. PTP hate this fact. They want complete control.

Balancing Power. An appointed senate serves as a check on the concentration of power in the hands of the PM. PTP hate this. thaksin wants complete control.

Elected senators are percieved to be anti 1 principle of democracy supporters simply because they support all the other principles of democracy. They encourage morality and use there knowledge and experience to seriously judge legislation and laws for the betterment of society.

​Imagone the terrorist wife in the senate. If it has a PTP stamp she won't give second thought to a stamp of approval whether it be legal, constitutional or otherwise. She will then be impeached and the process will go one ad nauseam.

​Keep the senators unbiased, experienced and under all circumstances keep criminals out of it unless you want a terrorist wife there who harbored and extracted her husband out of Thailand to escape criminal charges.

Edited March 21, 2014 by djjamie

[ShannonT]

Interesting. The speaker of the Senate would the the person that chooses the name of the next PM for royal endorsement in case Yingluck leaves office early. Will be interesting to see who replaces him and if this was yet another step in the undemocratic overthrow attempt of the PDRC.

[tezzainoz]

Interesting. The speaker of the Senate would the the person that chooses the name of the next PM for royal endorsement in case Yingluck leaves office early. Will be interesting to see who replaces him and if this was yet another step in the undemocratic overthrow attempt of the PDRC.

It is undemocratic for one person to force his opinions onto others

anything the PDRC does s always undemocratic

but if the Government ripp off every one at least it is democratic

[wprime]

Jamie

That is my main concern, they are not elected and we are supposed to believe that they are independant.

How did the "economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates" get the jobs which qualified them to be senators? Did they have conections?

The Group Of 40 is well known for always supporting the Democrat party. In the UK we have a non-elected upper house but changes over recent years have stripped them of most of thier powers.

Do you have a non-elected upper house in Oz?

The Australian system won't work in Thailand because Thai politicans are less accountable for their actions, and so Thailand needs more checks and balances to ensure a fair and progressive system. If Thailand is to adopt an entirely elected governance, then she needs stricter penalties for corruption - try passing that through the lower house.

[HonestQuietBob]

Yes, very fair Bruce. The senate boasts a compliment of experienced professionals. Elections would effectively eliminate their valuable expertise from the political process. The appointed senators are economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates. Many would be unwilling to campaign and would have their seats filled by PT puppets funded with PTP money if the appointments were removed.

It is critical that senators are not aligned with a political party. Elected senators are not. They are aligned with morality, sensibility and the rule of law thus why they did not vote for any unconstitutional bills.

Old mate in the OP however is a different story and he has worked for governments backed by Thaksin in the past and is widely thought to be supportive of yingluck as well. In 2006 senate elections forbid candidates from belonging to a political party or from campaigning as well. Despite the ban 103 seats went to supporters of TRT, whilst 35 were won by candidates associated with the party's ally, TNP. BTW - thaksin was bypassing the parliament to set up free trade agreements with his wall street buddies around that time as well. Why? Because he would not have got approval if he did it "democratically"

Just wait for the terrorist leaders wife from Udon to win a seat in the senate. That is one automatic vote for anything the PTP want to push through irrespective of whether it is majority driven, legel or moral.

​Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nikom, your gone you pretentious biased senator.

The senate boasts a compliment of appointed, that is unelected, cronies. These cronies all have two things in common, they are all diehard yellows and none of them would be senators if the choice was left to the good people of the nation instead of their own crony peers. You will notice that there is no rice farmers, taxi drivers or day labourers in the list of occupations held by the appointed senators, just one more fact highlighting the unrepresentative nature of this swill.

So, yes you are correct Bruce, the aim of the Suthepsta's is to have this tiny minority of less than 100 unelected yellow individuals appoint a new PM.

It is what I believe the Yellows call true or absolute democracy (no ballots required) and as the DJ will tell you himself, this system does not break any of his much loved "15 principles of democracy"

What a ridiculous farce this is, only the most foolish of fools could agree with it.

[kurtgruen]

Just another piece in the puzzle and it's all coming together. The side Suthep is on, played their game of chess very well so far. Excellent strategy.

[AleG]

Yes, very fair Bruce. The senate boasts a compliment of experienced professionals. Elections would effectively eliminate their valuable expertise from the political process. The appointed senators are economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates. Many would be unwilling to campaign and would have their seats filled by PT puppets funded with PTP money if the appointments were removed.

It is critical that senators are not aligned with a political party. Elected senators are not. They are aligned with morality, sensibility and the rule of law thus why they did not vote for any unconstitutional bills.

Old mate in the OP however is a different story and he has worked for governments backed by Thaksin in the past and is widely thought to be supportive of yingluck as well. In 2006 senate elections forbid candidates from belonging to a political party or from campaigning as well. Despite the ban 103 seats went to supporters of TRT, whilst 35 were won by candidates associated with the party's ally, TNP. BTW - thaksin was bypassing the parliament to set up free trade agreements with his wall street buddies around that time as well. Why? Because he would not have got approval if he did it "democratically"

Just wait for the terrorist leaders wife from Udon to win a seat in the senate. That is one automatic vote for anything the PTP want to push through irrespective of whether it is majority driven, legel or moral.

​Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nikom, your gone you pretentious biased senator.

The senate boasts a compliment of appointed, that is unelected, cronies. These cronies all have two things in common, they are all diehard yellows and none of them would be senators if the choice was left to the good people of the nation instead of their own crony peers. You will notice that there is no rice farmers, taxi drivers or day labourers in the list of occupations held by the appointed senators, just one more fact highlighting the unrepresentative nature of this swill.

So, yes you are correct Bruce, the aim of the Suthepsta's is to have this tiny minority of less than 100 unelected yellow individuals appoint a new PM.

It is what I believe the Yellows call true or absolute democracy (no ballots required) and as the DJ will tell you himself, this system does not break any of his much loved "15 principles of democracy"

What a ridiculous farce this is, only the most foolish of fools could agree with it.

What a ridiculous farce this is, only the most foolish of fools could agree with it.

That's because what you posted is a fantasy stemming from your own prejudices, pipkins, a strawman you build up for the sole purpose of easily tearing it down. It's a very pathetic argument strategy.

First example of a fantasy: The senate boasts a compliment of appointed, that is unelected, cronies. These cronies all have two things in common, they are all diehard yellows and none of them would be senators if the choice was left to the good people of the nation instead of their own crony peers.

Cite that all the appointed senators are Yellow Shirts. Have none? then don't make things up.

Second example of a fantasy: You will notice that there is no rice farmers, taxi drivers or day labourers in the list of occupations held by the appointed senators, just one more fact highlighting the unrepresentative nature of this swill.

How many rice farmers, taxi drivers and day labourers form part of the elected segment of the senate? How many are members of PTP government and MPs for that matter? None, that's how many.

A fully elected senate would not mean that taxi drivers, farmers and day labourers would suddenly fill up the senate. In case you didn't know a requierement to be a senator is a bachelors degree, that was also a requirement for being an MP until the evil junta changed that in the constitution so that rice farmers, taxi drivers and day labourers could also get a chance of beign elected to parliament.

Article 107 and Article 125 of the old constitution demanded politicians must have a Bachelor's degree to be candidates for Parliament's House of Representatives and Senate.

Only about 10 percent of Thailand's 65 million population has a B.A. degree, according to the Thai Labor Solidarity Committee which wants to delete that requirement so more working class people, and elite figures who do not have a degree, can achieve power.

Coup mongering elitist bastards!

Third: So, yes you are correct Bruce, the aim of the Suthepsta's is to have this tiny minority of less than 100 unelected yellow individuals appoint a new PM.

Suthepistas, how quaint. Can you cite who are those Suthepistas want 100 unelected Yellow Shirts to appoint a new MP? Hint: unsubstantiated bleatings in Panthip or Line don't count as a valid citation.

Fourth: It is what I believe the Yellows call true or absolute democracy (no ballots required)

You really love to talk about Yellows, don't you pipkins? It saves you the effort to actually identify actual people and actual statements from those people so that you can spout whatever unsubstantiated argument you dream up to demean the people who are against Thaksin's government and his minions.

Edited March 21, 2014 by AleG

[Scamper]

" Prasart said that Nikom's actions during those days, such as preventing opposition politicians from debating, were in violation of Article 3 of the Constitution. "

Indeed, we all remember that period when Thaksin's initiatives - the remaking of the Senate and the amnesty bill - were thrown into a flurry of unilateral activity. Thaksin had assumed that he'd be able to get everything through. This was his long-awaited " push ". He thought that there would be little resistance from the public. But in the rush, all sorts of unconstitutional things happened. Debates were denied. Bills were continually revised in the midst of the process and resubmitted. The amnesty bill itself found itself suddenly revised about two weeks before its passage - when the clause that included Thaksin - that Pheu Thai had all along strenuously denied would materialize - but that everyone else suspected would - indeed materialized. This is what started the national outrage. But Thaksin was adamant, and so he turned a blind eye. He was going to get it through, no matter what. The bill was rushed through passage in the middle of the night. The Senate bill was similarly rushed through late at night, when a debate that was promised - was suddenly broken at the last minute. The Senate bill was deemed by the Constitutional Court as being unconstitutional - both in content and in process. The NACC is on firm footing here. All this was documented. Pheu Thai may be used to doing things behind closed doors, but when it comes to public institutions like the house and the senate, everything is in full view. These procedures were blatantly violated. And now justice is being done.

[Dogmatix]

Ms Yingluck is next.

Yippee

[Dogmatix]

" Prasart said that Nikom's actions during those days, such as preventing opposition politicians from debating, were in violation of Article 3 of the Constitution. "

Indeed, we all remember that period when Thaksin's initiatives - the remaking of the Senate and the amnesty bill - were thrown into a flurry of unilateral activity. Thaksin had assumed that he'd be able to get everything through. This was his long-awaited " push ". He thought that there would be little resistance from the public. But in the rush, all sorts of unconstitutional things happened. Debates were denied. Bills were continually revised in the midst of the process and resubmitted. The amnesty bill itself found itself suddenly revised about two weeks before its passage - when the clause that included Thaksin - that Pheu Thai had all along strenuously denied would materialize - but that everyone else suspected would - indeed materialized. This is what started the national outrage. But Thaksin was adamant, and so he turned a blind eye. He was going to get it through, no matter what. The bill was rushed through passage in the middle of the night. The Senate bill was similarly rushed through late at night, when a debate that was promised - was suddenly broken at the last minute. The Senate bill was deemed by the Constitutional Court as being unconstitutional - both in content and in process. The NACC is on firm footing here. All this was documented. Pheu Thai may be used to doing things behind closed doors, but when it comes to public institutions like the house and the senate, everything is in full view. These procedures were blatantly violated. And now justice is being done.

And don't forget that the Amnesty Bill is still a live bill that can be passed through a simple majority vote in the House of Representatives 60 days after convocation. It was not rejected by the Senate which has no power to reject legislation. It was only suspended. No doubt Thaksin will order it passed, if he is able to form a new government. He has gone this far. What would another few months of protests matter, if can get his 46 billion back, quash the other 8 or 9 criminal cases pending against him and eventually come home a free man?

[SOTIRIOS]

...with the level of criminality, violence, etc by this government.....

...one would think that just 'rounding up the lot of them' would be a great service to Thailand and the Thai people....

....how much more money has to be lost....

...how many more people trying to uphold justice and the constitution have to be attacked....or worse....

...while the population is constantly being fed with this psycho fiction of reality....as an excuse...and distraction....

....the country is being destroyed...."Yeah, but look at me, I have a boo-boo on my ankle"....

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

[rubl]

Am I reading this right? There are only 73 members of the Senate, the elected ones will not be there until after the election.

The 73 non-elected senators will be voting to punish the people who wanted to replace them with elected members.

Seems fair to me.

With the senate normally having 150 senators, with support from at least three-fifths of the Senate is required to impeach a political office holder, I guest there will not be much voting going on for a while

PS just to be absolutely clear three-fifths of 150 is about 89.99 senators

[djjamie]

" Prasart said that Nikom's actions during those days, such as preventing opposition politicians from debating, were in violation of Article 3 of the Constitution. "

Indeed, we all remember that period when Thaksin's initiatives - the remaking of the Senate and the amnesty bill - were thrown into a flurry of unilateral activity. Thaksin had assumed that he'd be able to get everything through. This was his long-awaited " push ". He thought that there would be little resistance from the public. But in the rush, all sorts of unconstitutional things happened. Debates were denied. Bills were continually revised in the midst of the process and resubmitted. The amnesty bill itself found itself suddenly revised about two weeks before its passage - when the clause that included Thaksin - that Pheu Thai had all along strenuously denied would materialize - but that everyone else suspected would - indeed materialized. This is what started the national outrage. But Thaksin was adamant, and so he turned a blind eye. He was going to get it through, no matter what. The bill was rushed through passage in the middle of the night. The Senate bill was similarly rushed through late at night, when a debate that was promised - was suddenly broken at the last minute. The Senate bill was deemed by the Constitutional Court as being unconstitutional - both in content and in process. The NACC is on firm footing here. All this was documented. Pheu Thai may be used to doing things behind closed doors, but when it comes to public institutions like the house and the senate, everything is in full view. These procedures were blatantly violated. And now justice is being done.

Arguing for the benefits of democracy over dictatorship, Cass Sunstein wrote, “...a democracy allows wide criticism and debate by many minds, thus avoiding ‘many a disaster.’ (the disasters of which you have highlighted above) In a totalitarian system, criticisms and suggestions are neither wanted nor heeded. ‘Even the leaders tend to believe their own propaganda; they live in cocoons.’ It may be said, however, that this cocooning effect may exist not only in a dictatorship but in a democracy as well.

There are 2 other instances of the PTP showing this dictatorial trait as well. yinglucks inability and fear to debate anyone on anything as well as the water management scheme which only through a court judgement forced the PTP to open public forums to encourage debate which turned out to be a farce anyway, but that's another story.

[The Deerhunter]

Pipkins heay? Well if Bob keeps his condescension up he will share the same fate as pipkins.

If Pipkins could be reborn as Bob wouldn't it follow that Bob could be reborn as Tom, Dick or Harry?

Anyway, I thought there was a rule about commenting on forum moderation?

Maybe it's you that will end up sharing Pipkins fate.

Or reborn as "Thaksin's Hot Little Sis's Biggest Admirer" Or is that too long an Avatar name?

[mikemac]

Interesting. The speaker of the Senate would the the person that chooses the name of the next PM for royal endorsement in case Yingluck leaves office early. Will be interesting to see who replaces him and if this was yet another step in the undemocratic overthrow attempt of the PDRC.

Hope you red cheerleaders can handle it, lots of grief heading your way, climaxing in the whole rotten PTP barrel going up in smoke.

[HonestQuietBob]

Interesting. The speaker of the Senate would the the person that chooses the name of the next PM for royal endorsement in case Yingluck leaves office early. Will be interesting to see who replaces him and if this was yet another step in the undemocratic overthrow attempt of the PDRC.

Hope you red cheerleaders can handle it, lots of grief heading your way, climaxing in the whole rotten PTP barrel going up in smoke.

That's how it played out in 2006 and 2008, not how it's going to end this time.

The anti-democrats have been given ample time, opportunity and leeway to learn how to respect the voice of the people.

They haven't learnt a thing.

Sadly, there'll be no more kid gloves.

This time it ends very poorly for the minority Suthepsta's.

Thailand is now a democratic nation, end of story

[MunterHunter]

That's how it played out in 2006 and 2008, not how it's going to end this time.

The anti-democrats have been given ample time, opportunity and leeway to learn how to respect the voice of the people.

They haven't learnt a thing.

Sadly, there'll be no more kid gloves.

This time it ends very poorly for the minority Suthepsta's.

Thailand is now a democratic nation, end of story

It will be, just as soon as Yingluck and the rest of the Thaksin Parasites are in jail...

[HonestQuietBob]

That's how it played out in 2006 and 2008, not how it's going to end this time.

The anti-democrats have been given ample time, opportunity and leeway to learn how to respect the voice of the people.

They haven't learnt a thing.

Sadly, there'll be no more kid gloves.

This time it ends very poorly for the minority Suthepsta's.

Thailand is now a democratic nation, end of story

It will be, just as soon as Yingluck and the rest of the Thaksin Parasites are in jail...

This tit for tat crap could go on forever.

What is certain is that this is the last roll of the dice for the anti-deomcacy movement in Thailand.

Lose this time and it's all over for them.

They've used every trick in the book now and failed every time.

They are currently all in, sitting back with their fingers crossed, praying for a miracle

[marcusd]

Will the PTP or UDD accept this?. They already said they will defend THEIR democracy.

Is this the beginning of the wheels falling off the Cart?

Marcusd. Via tapatalk

[fab4]

Jamie

That is my main concern, they are not elected and we are supposed to believe that they are independant.

How did the "economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates" get the jobs which qualified them to be senators? Did they have conections?

The Group Of 40 is well known for always supporting the Democrat party. In the UK we have a non-elected upper house but changes over recent years have stripped them of most of thier powers.

Do you have a non-elected upper house in Oz?

Maybe I am Canadian. They don't have an elected senate. They have an appointed senate and it has served them well for 140 years. That is beside the point though. Thailand is neither the UK nor Canada. Apples for oranges argument there. The voter base for one do not go to terrorist schools in the north of the UK and the average schooling level of a UK resident or Canadian is not a 7th grade education.

An appointed senate reflects diversity of the Thai people. Women, visible minorities are too often poorly represented if senators are elected. PTP despise the voice of minority groups. The Deputy PM called minority groups garbage.

Improving Policy. An appointed senate could help ensure that policy is based on a wider variety of input based on compromise and consensus among diverse perspectives. PTP hate this fact. They want complete control.

Balancing Power. An appointed senate serves as a check on the concentration of power in the hands of the PM. PTP hate this. thaksin wants complete control.

Elected senators are percieved to be anti 1 principle of democracy supporters simply because they support all the other principles of democracy. They encourage morality and use there knowledge and experience to seriously judge legislation and laws for the betterment of society.

​Imagone the terrorist wife in the senate. If it has a PTP stamp she won't give second thought to a stamp of approval whether it be legal, constitutional or otherwise. She will then be impeached and the process will go one ad nauseam.

​Keep the senators unbiased, experienced and under all circumstances keep criminals out of it unless you want a terrorist wife there who harbored and extracted her husband out of Thailand to escape criminal charges.

So, your views on the ever independant "Gang of 40"? Did I miss them?

To be perfectly honest I gave up reading after your childish jibes about terrorist schools and 7th grade education.

Was there anything important after?

[djjamie]

Jamie

That is my main concern, they are not elected and we are supposed to believe that they are independant.

How did the "economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates" get the jobs which qualified them to be senators? Did they have conections?

The Group Of 40 is well known for always supporting the Democrat party. In the UK we have a non-elected upper house but changes over recent years have stripped them of most of thier powers.

Do you have a non-elected upper house in Oz?

Maybe I am Canadian. They don't have an elected senate. They have an appointed senate and it has served them well for 140 years. That is beside the point though. Thailand is neither the UK nor Canada. Apples for oranges argument there. The voter base for one do not go to terrorist schools in the north of the UK and the average schooling level of a UK resident or Canadian is not a 7th grade education.

An appointed senate reflects diversity of the Thai people. Women, visible minorities are too often poorly represented if senators are elected. PTP despise the voice of minority groups. The Deputy PM called minority groups garbage.

Improving Policy. An appointed senate could help ensure that policy is based on a wider variety of input based on compromise and consensus among diverse perspectives. PTP hate this fact. They want complete control.

Balancing Power. An appointed senate serves as a check on the concentration of power in the hands of the PM. PTP hate this. thaksin wants complete control.

Elected senators are percieved to be anti 1 principle of democracy supporters simply because they support all the other principles of democracy. They encourage morality and use there knowledge and experience to seriously judge legislation and laws for the betterment of society.

​Imagone the terrorist wife in the senate. If it has a PTP stamp she won't give second thought to a stamp of approval whether it be legal, constitutional or otherwise. She will then be impeached and the process will go one ad nauseam.

​Keep the senators unbiased, experienced and under all circumstances keep criminals out of it unless you want a terrorist wife there who harbored and extracted her husband out of Thailand to escape criminal charges.

So, your views on the ever independant "Gang of 40"? Did I miss them?

To be perfectly honest I gave up reading after your childish jibes about terrorist schools and 7th grade education.

Was there anything important after?

Gang of 40? I explained what my views are on an elected senate. Can't make it anymore clearer really. No one wants criminals being the last say on abdicating changes in Thai law which is what senators do.

Apologies on not sending links on the other points. Look up the average education level here. Might need to do some maths to get the figure though. I am sure your able to do that? Polls even suggested that 63% of Thai;s don't even know what a senators job entails yet they vote for them. You may say that the poll is not representative of the broad population. OK then. Say the rice farmers where unrepresented. That would then increase the % to higher than 63%. Either way no agenda driven argument can defend these results. If you don't understand what your voting, but vote simply because of a propaganda driven agenda subtext then that is not an educated vote.

As for the terrorist schools, feel free to look at this link here. That school was the brain child of an accused terrorist jatuporn and another accused terrorist, nattuwat. They teach hate and demonization of opposition parties. Not democracy. And to reinforce this hate and demonizing tactic the UDD use at their "schools" I need not look further that the TVF members when they reply to posters with demonizing and condescending phrases.

The anti democratic impulses of these two UDD leaders make it pretty clear that they adhere to the vindictive accused terrorist, accused mass murderer, convicted criminal fugitive that (here is the kicker) is unelectable and is the leader of a party that fights for democracy! lol. Perplexing to say the least.

I must say it gets repetitive and annoying to constantly repeat the following - That condescension is not required and says more about you than it does me when replying forum members. Childish? I can say a lot about about your comments and misinformed ideals as well, but I left that talk behind when I left primary school. It is also non constructive in this forum when trying to drive home a rebuttal.

Stop demonizing, condescending, belittling and any other form of intimidation that is a typical UDD trait. I assume your an educated westerner so you can articulate a response right? The UDD have an excuse not to. They have on average a 7th grade education as I have already highlighted. You don't.

Cheers.

[retarius]

Yes, very fair Bruce. The senate boasts a compliment of experienced professionals. Elections would effectively eliminate their valuable expertise from the political process. The appointed senators are economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates. Many would be unwilling to campaign and would have their seats filled by PT puppets funded with PTP money if the appointments were removed.

It is critical that senators are not aligned with a political party. Elected senators are not. They are aligned with morality, sensibility and the rule of law thus why they did not vote for any unconstitutional bills.

Old mate in the OP however is a different story and he has worked for governments backed by Thaksin in the past and is widely thought to be supportive of yingluck as well. In 2006 senate elections forbid candidates from belonging to a political party or from campaigning as well. Despite the ban 103 seats went to supporters of TRT, whilst 35 were won by candidates associated with the party's ally, TNP. BTW - thaksin was bypassing the parliament to set up free trade agreements with his wall street buddies around that time as well. Why? Because he would not have got approval if he did it "democratically"

Just wait for the terrorist leaders wife from Udon to win a seat in the senate. That is one automatic vote for anything the PTP want to push through irrespective of whether it is majority driven, legel or moral.

​Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nikom, your gone you pretentious biased senator.

This is total nonsense...the majority are retired generals from army and police....

[djjamie]

Yes, very fair Bruce. The senate boasts a compliment of experienced professionals. Elections would effectively eliminate their valuable expertise from the political process. The appointed senators are economists, scientists, businessmen, judges, lawyers, professors, engineers, social workers, doctors, public servants and consumer advocates. Many would be unwilling to campaign and would have their seats filled by PT puppets funded with PTP money if the appointments were removed.

It is critical that senators are not aligned with a political party. Elected senators are not. They are aligned with morality, sensibility and the rule of law thus why they did not vote for any unconstitutional bills.

Old mate in the OP however is a different story and he has worked for governments backed by Thaksin in the past and is widely thought to be supportive of yingluck as well. In 2006 senate elections forbid candidates from belonging to a political party or from campaigning as well. Despite the ban 103 seats went to supporters of TRT, whilst 35 were won by candidates associated with the party's ally, TNP. BTW - thaksin was bypassing the parliament to set up free trade agreements with his wall street buddies around that time as well. Why? Because he would not have got approval if he did it "democratically"

Just wait for the terrorist leaders wife from Udon to win a seat in the senate. That is one automatic vote for anything the PTP want to push through irrespective of whether it is majority driven, legel or moral.

​Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nikom, your gone you pretentious biased senator.

The senate boasts a compliment of appointed, that is unelected, cronies. These cronies all have two things in common, they are all diehard yellows and none of them would be senators if the choice was left to the good people of the nation instead of their own crony peers. You will notice that there is no rice farmers, taxi drivers or day labourers in the list of occupations held by the appointed senators, just one more fact highlighting the unrepresentative nature of this swill.

So, yes you are correct Bruce, the aim of the Suthepsta's is to have this tiny minority of less than 100 unelected yellow individuals appoint a new PM.

It is what I believe the Yellows call true or absolute democracy (no ballots required) and as the DJ will tell you himself, this system does not break any of his much loved "15 principles of democracy"

What a ridiculous farce this is, only the most foolish of fools could agree with it.

What a ridiculous farce this is, only the most foolish of fools could agree with it.

That's because what you posted is a fantasy stemming from your own prejudices, pipkins, a strawman you build up for the sole purpose of easily tearing it down. It's a very pathetic argument strategy.

First example of a fantasy: The senate boasts a compliment of appointed, that is unelected, cronies. These cronies all have two things in common, they are all diehard yellows and none of them would be senators if the choice was left to the good people of the nation instead of their own crony peers.

Cite that all the appointed senators are Yellow Shirts. Have none? then don't make things up.

Second example of a fantasy: You will notice that there is no rice farmers, taxi drivers or day labourers in the list of occupations held by the appointed senators, just one more fact highlighting the unrepresentative nature of this swill.

How many rice farmers, taxi drivers and day labourers form part of the elected segment of the senate? How many are members of PTP government and MPs for that matter? None, that's how many.

A fully elected senate would not mean that taxi drivers, farmers and day labourers would suddenly fill up the senate. In case you didn't know a requierement to be a senator is a bachelors degree, that was also a requirement for being an MP until the evil junta changed that in the constitution so that rice farmers, taxi drivers and day labourers could also get a chance of beign elected to parliament.

Article 107 and Article 125 of the old constitution demanded politicians must have a Bachelor's degree to be candidates for Parliament's House of Representatives and Senate.

Only about 10 percent of Thailand's 65 million population has a B.A. degree, according to the Thai Labor Solidarity Committee which wants to delete that requirement so more working class people, and elite figures who do not have a degree, can achieve power.

Coup mongering elitist bastards!

Third: So, yes you are correct Bruce, the aim of the Suthepsta's is to have this tiny minority of less than 100 unelected yellow individuals appoint a new PM.

Suthepistas, how quaint. Can you cite who are those Suthepistas want 100 unelected Yellow Shirts to appoint a new MP? Hint: unsubstantiated bleatings in Panthip or Line don't count as a valid citation.

Fourth: It is what I believe the Yellows call true or absolute democracy (no ballots required)

You really love to talk about Yellows, don't you pipkins? It saves you the effort to actually identify actual people and actual statements from those people so that you can spout whatever unsubstantiated argument you dream up to demean the people who are against Thaksin's government and his minions.

Bob - Not gonna reply AleG heay? Can't debate facts? Gotto keep your replies short and fact free?