Thai Constitutional Court voids February election

[Gweiloman]

ok, there would be the next one, with the same effect - reds will win the majority, democrats will be losing support (that even if they contest an election).

dems wanted a new parliament, PM dissolved the house, dems boycotted the election. The reds won, election invalidated by yellow's palls from the court, dems call for boycott of the next poll.

the country is going down the drain, not the government, but courts, agencies and fascist mob on the streets running amok, destroying what is left from the reasonable economic, political and social stability.

Ah the usual everybody else is wrong except Puea Thai excuse once again.

We are so misunderstood.

Never mind that what we did may have been wrong.

Never mind that we may have broken laws and the rules of parliament that put us here.

EVERYBODY ELSE is wrong.

Well boo hoo hoo.

Cue for MORE tears from Yingluck and MORE threats and violence from the UDD/Red Shirts.

I think that MOST of the credit for the current state of affairs belongs to the Pheu Thai party and the government. Their greed, stupidity, incompetence, and disregard for the law and ignorance on how to run a country democratically led the country here. More or less if they had played by the rules and put a little thought and competence into governance, none of this would have happened. IMHO.

You would say that of course.

[Gweiloman]

Very interesting point. In reality, the 02 Feb elections has NOT BEEN COMPLETED. So in effect, the CC has ruled on an election IN PROGRESS.

actually. it has been voided because it cannot comply with the constitution in that it could not be completed on a single day (in which it has to do in order for it to be to be validated)!!

Care to expand on how this will affect advance voting? Or are you saying that advance voting will also render an election void?

advanced voting is spelled out in the constitution, so it wouldn't render an election void.

As is by elections for those constituencies that could not complete the voting on the same day.

[Just1Voice]

The court has rule the fact, The Pheu Thai Party MP's are the one pushing PM. Yingluck for all this, they think Democracy is by power,democracy is all about brain and read on the law that govern it, nowadays, even illiterate want to be politician, this is a lesson to all group.

And here I was thinking that most politicians WERE illiterates! Silly me.

[SheungWan]

Well the government has clearly shown that it was incapable of governing the country and so the proper course would be to have resigned (not just to have dissolved the house only to contest the election again).

Putting aside your bias, do you know of any government anywhere in the world who has chosen your "proper course"?

You mean in particular, examples of puppet governments directed from outside who have resigned? Its tricky to find an example of a puppet regime equivalent to that of the Yingluck cabal directed in a similar manner to that of Thaksin. Normally the crooks like the Marcos family just openly flaunt it from the inside.

[fab4]

Actually the CC ruled that the elections were invalid because they were not held on one and the same day. In itself that has nothing to do with the anti-government protests or the blocking of registration/voting booths.

OK Sherlock, so the actions of suthep and his anti democrats had nothing to do with the fact that the election couldn't be held on one day? Is this a special skill you have - completely missing the obvious?

The government was warned by various organisations, EC and others that the elections would not be able to be held on a single day. A court ruling the elections could be postponed was greeted by "we respect the ruling" from Yingluck and "we must go forward" by other Pheu Thai people. The government ignored the warnings, pushed (note, not rushed) the elections and now we blame Suthep?

Yes we blame suthep and for pretty bleeding obvious reasons. Your support for suthep beggars belief at times.

Has it not occurred to you that the government wasn't breaking the law by holding an election. sutheps orders to his minions to blockade the polling stations, capture ballot boxes and physically intimidate voters most certainly was, and now you blame the government?

You deserve suthep.

[SheungWan]

Actually the CC ruled that the elections were invalid because they were not held on one and the same day. In itself that has nothing to do with the anti-government protests or the blocking of registration/voting booths.

OK Sherlock, so the actions of suthep and his anti democrats had nothing to do with the fact that the election couldn't be held on one day? Is this a special skill you have - completely missing the obvious?

The government was warned by various organisations, EC and others that the elections would not be able to be held on a single day. A court ruling the elections could be postponed was greeted by "we respect the ruling" from Yingluck and "we must go forward" by other Pheu Thai people. The government ignored the warnings, pushed (note, not rushed) the elections and now we blame Suthep?

Yes we blame suthep and for pretty bleeding obvious reasons. Your support for suthep beggars belief at times.

Has it not occurred to you that the government wasn't breaking the law by holding an election. sutheps orders to his minions to blockade the polling stations, capture ballot boxes and physically intimidate voters most certainly was, and now you blame the government?

You deserve suthep.

But we don't deserve Thaksin directing a government unconstitutionally.

[pookiki]

It is a most basic rule in law that a party that prevents another from carrying out legal duties cannot use that illegal blocking as a grounds for a lawsuit. It was not the sitting government that caused the elections to be delayed a day. It was PDRC et al. Crime does pay here, as if we didn't already know that.

+1

Something along the lines of the ultra vires doctrine as applied to corporations. But I wonder if there are any legal experts on the forum that would care to present a more substantial legal argument?

As I have noted earlier, the problem is that the CC will not consider the alleged 'crimes' that were committed to delay the election. That's the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court. In a rational legal system, the reason for the delay would have a direct bearing on the issue of whether the failure to hold the elections on the same day was constitutional or not. The Court's decision also is irrational because there are numerous reasons why all the constituencies in the country could not hold the election on the same day that are not at all related to criminal activity. In legal jargon it is called a 'force majeure'.

[Spalpeen]

When the institutions of the state set themselves against the will of the people, there's only ever going to be one outcome. History shows that pitchforks beat bayonets every time.

Talk us through how the Pol Pot regime was overthrown. Is that recent enough for you?

.

Perfect example of what the old elite are risking here. An election every four years is like the release valve on a pressure cooker. It allows the general public to have their say. If they persist in obstructing democracy it's like welding the pressure release valve shut. Do that for long enough and the peoples frustration will find another release. Some 20 million people......yes, 20,000,000........are believed to have voted on Feb 2nd. How happy do you think they are today?

The Khmer Rouge event was an extreme example of peasants rebelling against an old royalist elite. It should serve as a cautionary tale for all those currently trying to suppress democracy in Thailand.

.

Wiser now?

[Docno]

PTP won 265 seats in the snap election. 251 seats are needed for a majority. The Dems boycotted the election: that's their problem... if you don't play, you can't complain. Even if the election had taken place without the disruption of Suthep's thugs, the PTP would have won. A court ruling and all the bleeting here cannot change that...

[wolfmanjack]

Was there any doubt? The election was a failure. The protestors did their job and stopped the election while the police did nothing at all. Government will blame the EC for this but the fact is the police failed miserably in their jobs to protect the polling stations.

Police did a fine job taking care of the mess the EC created.

As far as I'm aware no one actually died on polling day and that's the most important thing.

The Reds can win elections any day of the week into the distant future, so nothing's been lost, only delayed.

Reds won’t win the next election, and they know it... that’s why they were so scared about this election getting nullified.

They have lost soooooo much support recently, and continue to do so... as I’ve said before, they will be lucky to garner enough votes to become a second party in any future coalition. I don’t think many of the smaller parties will be queuing up at their door when the election is finally done, PTP are in their death throws and with the courts working through a shopping list of offences, PTP will be lucky to still exist come next election.

Even if you are right, thanks to yingluck sending him a little over 1 billion USD thaksin still has plenty of money to buy himself a new party.

[kuthow]

Very interesting point. In reality, the 02 Feb elections has NOT BEEN COMPLETED. So in effect, the CC has ruled on an election IN PROGRESS.

actually. it has been voided because it cannot comply with the constitution in that it could not be completed on a single day (in which it has to do in order for it to be to be validated)!!

Care to expand on how this will affect advance voting? Or are you saying that advance voting will also render an election void?

advanced voting is spelled out in the constitution, so it wouldn't render an election void.

Amazing how some pontificators don't understand even the basics, isn't it?

[NeilSA1]

So all the bars were closed for nothing.

So sad,

their bad.

[geriatrickid]

Ok. There will be a new election.

And now that Suthep has shown that he can disrupt an election and prevent Thailand from having an elected legally constituted government, are we going to have a repeat for the next election?

There has to be a new election, That's what the CC ruling means.

Now its up to Suthep and the Democrats to respect that ruling and to allow the election to proceed. The EC has enough advance warning to get itself organized and to do its job. Hopefully, this time, the people who attempt to sabotage the election will be arrested and charged immediately.

The military has to decide what it will do.

End result: I predict another PTP election victory and the rout of the Democrat party.

[10Yen]

I'm sure that if the outspoken Farangs have a say in the matter, they will vote with their feet and leave Thailand.

In reality, Farang wont give a toss, and as usual they will only care about what benefits them.

[xminator]

So when the Constitution Court make a unconstitutional ruling, who is there to control them? Impeachment of the judges voted by the Senate? Or will the Constitution Court be able to make a statement on the Senate impeachment of them too?

[kuthow]

Ok. There will be a new election.

And now that Suthep has shown that he can disrupt an election and prevent Thailand from having an elected legally constituted government, are we going to have a repeat for the next election?

There has to be a new election, That's what the CC ruling means.

Now its up to Suthep and the Democrats to respect that ruling and to allow the election to proceed. The EC has enough advance warning to get itself organized and to do its job. Hopefully, this time, the people who attempt to sabotage the election will be arrested and charged immediately.

The military has to decide what it will do.

End result: I predict another PTP election victory and the rout of the Democrat party.

That depends if the real reason the election was nullified is rectified. Otherwise, the next election will be nullified also.

The court reasoned that the election violated Article 108 (2) of the Constitution because no candidates stood in 28 constituencies in eight southern provinces, and thus making it impossible to hold the election on the same day nationwide.

[kuthow]

So when the Constitution Court make a unconstitutional ruling

They didn't.

[issanaus]

It is a most basic rule in law that a party that prevents another from carrying out legal duties cannot use that illegal blocking as a grounds for a lawsuit. It was not the sitting government that caused the elections to be delayed a day. It was PDRC et al. Crime does pay here, as if we didn't already know that.

+1

Something along the lines of the ultra vires doctrine as applied to corporations. But I wonder if there are any legal experts on the forum that would care to present a more substantial legal argument?

As I have noted earlier, the problem is that the CC will not consider the alleged 'crimes' that were committed to delay the election. That's the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court. In a rational legal system, the reason for the delay would have a direct bearing on the issue of whether the failure to hold the elections on the same day was constitutional or not. The Court's decision also is irrational because there are numerous reasons why all the constituencies in the country could not hold the election on the same day that are not at all related to criminal activity. In legal jargon it is called a 'force majeure'.

The CC only had to consider one issue - were voters stopped from exercising their Constitutional right to vote - answer YES. What one or the other political parties did does not change that fact so does not change the simple truth that some voters were disenfranchised.

The CC had to stick to Black Letter Law because otherwise they would be amending the Constitution which is the peoples charter that was voted on in a referendum. The provision in question has no ambiguity, and so is not open to interpretation. This would be beyond the powers of the court.

[sydneyboy]

ok, there would be the next one, with the same effect - reds will win the majority, democrats will be losing support (that even if they contest an election).

dems wanted a new parliament, PM dissolved the house, dems boycotted the election. The reds won, election invalidated by yellow's palls from the court, dems call for boycott of the next poll.

the country is going down the drain, not the government, but courts, agencies and fascist mob on the streets running amok, destroying what is left from the reasonable economic, political and social stability.

Well nothing for you to worry about red shirt, living in London your way out of the firing line.

[Gweiloman]

Ok. There will be a new election.

And now that Suthep has shown that he can disrupt an election and prevent Thailand from having an elected legally constituted government, are we going to have a repeat for the next election?

There has to be a new election, That's what the CC ruling means.

Now its up to Suthep and the Democrats to respect that ruling and to allow the election to proceed. The EC has enough advance warning to get itself organized and to do its job. Hopefully, this time, the people who attempt to sabotage the election will be arrested and charged immediately.

The military has to decide what it will do.

End result: I predict another PTP election victory and the rout of the Democrat party.

That depends if the real reason the election was nullified is rectified. Otherwise, the next election will be nullified also.

The court reasoned that the election violated Article 108 (2) of the Constitution because no candidates stood in 28 constituencies in eight southern provinces, and thus making it impossible to hold the election on the same day nationwide.

You seem to have some comprehension or communication problem. You start off by implying that the ruling has more than meets the eye - "if the real reason the election was nullified is rectified"

and then go on to repeat the courts reasoning.

So what is the real reason the election was nullified? Obviously because PTP would have won and we can't be having that right?

Hypocrisy in full showing.

[xminator]

So when the Constitution Court make a unconstitutional ruling

They didn't.

That is a disputed statement.

[kuthow]

It is a most basic rule in law that a party that prevents another from carrying out legal duties cannot use that illegal blocking as a grounds for a lawsuit. It was not the sitting government that caused the elections to be delayed a day. It was PDRC et al. Crime does pay here, as if we didn't already know that.

+1

Something along the lines of the ultra vires doctrine as applied to corporations. But I wonder if there are any legal experts on the forum that would care to present a more substantial legal argument?

As I have noted earlier, the problem is that the CC will not consider the alleged 'crimes' that were committed to delay the election. That's the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court. In a rational legal system, the reason for the delay would have a direct bearing on the issue of whether the failure to hold the elections on the same day was constitutional or not. The Court's decision also is irrational because there are numerous reasons why all the constituencies in the country could not hold the election on the same day that are not at all related to criminal activity. In legal jargon it is called a 'force majeure'.

The CC only had to consider one issue - were voters stopped from exercising their Constitutional right to vote - answer YES.

The CC only had to consider one issue - were there suffiicient number of constituencies with candidates

- answer NO.

[Gweiloman]

As I have noted earlier, the problem is that the CC will not consider the alleged 'crimes' that were committed to delay the election. That's the jurisdiction of the Criminal Court. In a rational legal system, the reason for the delay would have a direct bearing on the issue of whether the failure to hold the elections on the same day was constitutional or not. The Court's decision also is irrational because there are numerous reasons why all the constituencies in the country could not hold the election on the same day that are not at all related to criminal activity. In legal jargon it is called a 'force majeure'.

The CC only had to consider one issue - were voters stopped from exercising their Constitutional right to vote - answer YES.

The CC only had to consider one issue - were there suffiicient number of constituencies with candidates

- answer NO.

Fail.

The reason they gave was that elections could not be held in one day meaning this is what they considered. Amazing how some posters don't even understand the basics of law.

[fab4]

OK Sherlock, so the actions of suthep and his anti democrats had nothing to do with the fact that the election couldn't be held on one day? Is this a special skill you have - completely missing the obvious?

The government was warned by various organisations, EC and others that the elections would not be able to be held on a single day. A court ruling the elections could be postponed was greeted by "we respect the ruling" from Yingluck and "we must go forward" by other Pheu Thai people. The government ignored the warnings, pushed (note, not rushed) the elections and now we blame Suthep?

Yes we blame suthep and for pretty bleeding obvious reasons. Your support for suthep beggars belief at times.

Has it not occurred to you that the government wasn't breaking the law by holding an election. sutheps orders to his minions to blockade the polling stations, capture ballot boxes and physically intimidate voters most certainly was, and now you blame the government?

You deserve suthep.

But we don't deserve Thaksin directing a government unconstitutionally.

Contest an election then.

[kuthow]

Ok. There will be a new election.

And now that Suthep has shown that he can disrupt an election and prevent Thailand from having an elected legally constituted government, are we going to have a repeat for the next election?

There has to be a new election, That's what the CC ruling means.

Now its up to Suthep and the Democrats to respect that ruling and to allow the election to proceed. The EC has enough advance warning to get itself organized and to do its job. Hopefully, this time, the people who attempt to sabotage the election will be arrested and charged immediately.

The military has to decide what it will do.

End result: I predict another PTP election victory and the rout of the Democrat party.

That depends if the real reason the election was nullified is rectified. Otherwise, the next election will be nullified also.

The court reasoned that the election violated Article 108 (2) of the Constitution because no candidates stood in 28 constituencies in eight southern provinces, and thus making it impossible to hold the election on the same day nationwide.

You seem to have some comprehension or communication problem. You start off by implying that the ruling has more than meets the eye - "if the real reason the election was nullified is rectified"

and then go on to repeat the courts reasoning.

So what is the real reason the election was nullified? Obviously because PTP would have won and we can't be having that right?

Hypocrisy in full showing.

Reviewing your other posts where you couldn't even grasp the basics of how elections are done (post 301), it's not surprising you struggle with the clearly legal and straight-forward logical reason (refer to my quote above) the election was considered null and void. Edited March 21, 2014 by kuthow

[NeilSA1]

When the institutions of the state set themselves against the will of the people, there's only ever going to be one outcome. History shows that pitchforks beat bayonets every time.

You may be correct with your 'pitchforks' statement.

BANGKOK 20 March 2014 (NNT) — Disgruntled farmers will today gather in an attempt to pressure the government to call it quits, says the President of Thai Farmers.

[kingstonkid]

What are the odds of the UDD or the PT not doing something stupid this weekend?

Chalerm and Jatuporn, now ther is a pair to not have in a card game. Unless of course jokers are wild,

her is hoping that Suthep is wrong and the there are not mass protests that start riots

[kuthow]

So when the Constitution Court make a unconstitutional ruling

They didn't.

That is a disputed statement.

Only if you are disputing that a sufficient number of constituiences had candidates running.

That's a pretty hollow dispute.

[The Deerhunter]

Would be interesting to know what grounds for voiding the elections.

.

Contempt for the democratic wishes of the Thai people.

20mln citisens voted in this election. The court invalidated their political choice. The court is in the pockets of the ruling class

A whole can of worms have been opened here. This has given carte blanche to anyone who does not want elections to be held in Thailand. The only way to then stop the protestors is to bring in the RTA or RTP which will then result in violence and bloodshed.

If this ever happens in the future, all will remember that this is PDRC'S legacy to Thailand.

Long live the King.

Lets see........... Reds violent for many years, particularly so 4 years ago. Get snotty because people don't like Thaksin stealing darn near the entire treasury and in tne mean time thay have corrupted the voting system. PDRC come on stage (every day & night for over 4 months, like a Thai My Fair Lady" except it is exactly the opposite of that. Reds can't govern, disolve parliament. Election called in 2nd month of protests. Only PTP & cronie parties stand.because the electoral system has been corrupted Election fails. You suggest that the only only solution is to call in the army, (or the police???????????????????) and the result will be "violence & bloodshed" And the blame will be on the PDRC.

How do you work that out. Hasn't anyone told you that blaming the victims not tne criminals is just silly and wrong?. And are you a coup monger?

Long live the King........ And, eventually, a happy fairly represented democratic people of Thailand

[fab4]

Ok. There will be a new election.

And now that Suthep has shown that he can disrupt an election and prevent Thailand from having an elected legally constituted government, are we going to have a repeat for the next election?

There has to be a new election, That's what the CC ruling means.

Now its up to Suthep and the Democrats to respect that ruling and to allow the election to proceed. The EC has enough advance warning to get itself organized and to do its job. Hopefully, this time, the people who attempt to sabotage the election will be arrested and charged immediately.

The military has to decide what it will do.

End result: I predict another PTP election victory and the rout of the Democrat party.

Unfortunately he already made his position more than clear last night

Prior to the Constitutional Court ruling, protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban, who was a deputy prime minister under the previous Democrat-led government, told his supporters in a speech on Thursday there would be no compromise.

"If the court rules the election void, don't even dream that there will be another election. If a new election date is declared, then we'll take care of every province and the election won't be successful again," he said.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/21/uk-thailand-protest-idUKBREA2K05420140321