Pheu Thai party opposes charter court's ruling

[Misterwhisper]

Just imagine the other scenario:

Constitution Court rules the Feb 2 election is legitimate. PTP shortly afterwards issues a statement declaring that it fully respects and accepts without any reservations the court's judgment, because it obviously was just, rightful and fair and in the democratic spirit and blah blah blah.

Pheua Thai only accepts and respects what Pheua Thai wants. Nothing more, nothing less.

And that is exactly why they should NOT be in power.

Yingluck asserting for the umpteenth time under crocodile tears, "But we come from a democratic election" (and that's why we can do whatever we want, no matter how inept we are), displays clearly the disgusting arrogance this bunch of cronies, sycophants and acolytes has upheld all along.

Edited March 21, 2014 by Misterwhisper

[drand11]

I hope PT and the Reds are smart enough to, for now, put this ruling aside and focus on the election. Go get the win, and put Suthep, the courts, and the elite into another box.

I also think that if the PT wins, Yingluk should not be the PM. She needs to step aside now and let others take the lead. It is not about Yingluk, it is about letting the nation move onward. She will be festered/threatened by the courts if she remains and it will not serve the people of Thailand well. That's my 10 cents.

[focus27]

Independent law academic Verapat says Constitutional Court overrules charter

BANGKOK: -- Independent law academic Verapat Pariyawong said the Constitutional Court had overruled the constitution as the Charter allowed for elections to be staged at a later date if all the House seats were not occupied.

The charter stated that if 95 per cent of all House of Representative seats were occupied members could convene. It requires the seats to be fully occupied within 180 days.

There are 500 House of Representative constituencies.

"In my view, the Constitutional Court has ruled in a way that is against the constitution both in terms of the content and the process," Verapat said.

"However, the court did not bring the cause of the [problems related to] the election in the 28 constituencies, the obstruction of the election, into consideration.

-- The Nation 2014-03-21

That is exactly what I've been saying.

Therefore it is right!

[Baerboxer]

I hope PT and the Reds are smart enough to, for now, put this ruling aside and focus on the election. Go get the win, and put Suthep, the courts, and the elite into another box.

I also think that if the PT wins, Yingluk should not be the PM. She needs to step aside now and let others take the lead. It is not about Yingluk, it is about letting the nation move onward. She will be festered/threatened by the courts if she remains and it will not serve the people of Thailand well. That's my 10 cents.

PTP are not a political party who elect leaders in the sense of a Western democracy. They are owned, controlled and ruled by one man. Do as they are told or they are removed. Yingluck is simply a proxy because he's scared to come back with an Amnesty and only trusts family members in key roles.

What has she personally done since taking office? She isn't the leader and doesn't even appear to get a say in the cabinet or when it's going to be reshuffled.

The Shins are the controlling force in PTP - take them out and its unlikely PTP will survive. All of the previous incarnations have one thing in common, which is the same with PTP. They are Thaksin proxy parties and vehicles for his personal rule.

Sadly, there is no credible opposition either.

[webfact]

Pheu Thai Party opposes charter court ruling on invalid election
By English News



BANGKOK, March 22 - Thailand's ruling Pheu Thai Party issued a statement opposing the Constitutional Court ruling's to nullify the Feb 2 election, saying the charter court has no authority to accept the case for consideration.

The move of the Pheu Thai Party came as the Constitutional Court ruled six against three votes to nullify the election, reasoning a failure to hold the balloting nationwide on the same day as stipulated by the Constitution.

Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said that the Ombudsman had no authority to forward the issue concerning the validity of the election for the charter court's consideration, while the court also had no authority to accept such request.

Mr Prompong said the court's decision has caused problems to the public and that despite the new election to be held, the election might be invalid again if there are disruptions like that on Feb 2.

The spokesman said the Pheu Thai Party is planning to file charges against the Democrat Party, PDRC leader Suthep Thaugsuban and the Election Commission (EC) for their roles which led to the invalidity of the election, causing the state to lose Bt3 billion of budget in holding the polling.

He said the party will ask its MP candidates nationwide to seek compensations for damages which have been caused to them as a result of the court ruling.

Meanwhile, the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) today said that the group will continue its demonstration pressuring for reform before election.

PDRC spokesman Akanat Prompan said the PDRC will discuss again on its next move, but said that this is a good opportunity to push ahead political reform before holding the new election which may take around five to six months. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2014-03-22

[fvw53]

I understand the CC voted 6 against 3 to cancel the election of 2 February.

Does somebody have a text in which each of the 3 judges in the minority clarify their position?

[Dogmatix]

I understand the CC voted 6 against 3 to cancel the election of 2 February.

Does somebody have a text in which each of the 3 judges in the minority clarify their position?

It usually takes a few days before the full texts are made public.

[JamesDean3]

it is expected from Pheu Thai to react only one way.

[Dogmatix]

As far as the PT Party is concerned the Constitutional Court has no authority to accept any case for consideration. It is supposed to just sit there for decorative purposes as far as they are concerned.

The Constitution does indeed specify that the Ombudsman should petition the court regarding laws that violate the Constitution but it does not say that the Ombudsman is prohibited from petitioning over any other issue. Article 28 gives anyone the right to take legal action over violations of the Constitution. If the violation is covered by other laws, they should file suits in lower courts under those laws. The clear implication is that, if the violation of the Constitution is not covered by other laws, the complainant must petition the Constitutional Court. In this case, it is pretty clear that the issue of whether a general election should be held on one day or not is not covered under other laws. Therefore the Ombudsman was correct in petitioning the Constitutional Court on behalf of the complainant.

Under the PT Party's interpretation, there isn't any clear way for anyone to petition the Constitutional Court at all. Only the Attorney-General may petition under Article 68 (will never happen while the A-G remains a political appointment prone to corruption) and only the Ombudsman made petition over unconstitutional laws. No one may petition over any other article of the Constitution. PT hires these so called legal experts to try to pull the wool over the public's eyes. Most Thai journalists are too stupid and ignorant to read the Constitution for themselves and challenge this arrant nonsense. All they can do is quote "experts".

Edited March 22, 2014 by Dogmatix

[Crushdepth]

I oppose Phuea Thai's relentless stupidity.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[mikemac]

The "would" in your reply suggests that you don't agree that the ruling today is based on the law and the right decision. Maybe just my poor understanding of that queer language called English

Uncle rubl, try learning "trollspeak", would be more useful when reading "certain" comments.

[mikemac]

The PTP mantra is to oppose anything that does not fit in with it's plan to bleed the country dry, and to support fully anything that supports their evil plan, no matter how illegal, immoral or heartless.

Little wonder this sick party attracts such low-life supporters, both Thai and foreigners.

Reminds me of the time an ABC interviewer asked an Aboriginal activist what he thought of the One Nation Party, he replied that he thought they were great for the country, that they flushed all the snakes out of the long grass.

[Crushdepth]

Independent law academic Verapat says Constitutional Court overrules charter

BANGKOK: -- Independent law academic Verapat Pariyawong said the Constitutional Court had overruled the constitution as the Charter allowed for elections to be staged at a later date if all the House seats were not occupied.

The charter stated that if 95 per cent of all House of Representative seats were occupied members could convene. It requires the seats to be fully occupied within 180 days.

There are 500 House of Representative constituencies.

"In my view, the Constitutional Court has ruled in a way that is against the constitution both in terms of the content and the process," Verapat said.

"However, the court did not bring the cause of the [problems related to] the election in the 28 constituencies, the obstruction of the election, into consideration.

-- The Nation 2014-03-21

That is exactly what I've been saying.

Therefore it is right!

It's wrong. The 180 day remedy mentioned in Article 93 only applies if the house has *not less* than 95% occupancy. If it's less (and it is) it does not apply.