EDITORIAL
Reform, or just same old power play?
The Nation

Suthep Thaugsuban vows to inaugurate a new era for Thailand, but his methods are depressingly familiar

BANGKOK: -- If democratic reform really is the ultimate goal of the anti-government protesters, as they claim, one has to wonder why their leader, Suthep Thaugsuban, last Saturday proposed the equivalent of a coup d'etat.

Suthep announced that, if his movement gained "sovereign" status, he would seek royal endorsement for the appointment of a new prime minister. As "the people's representative", he would nominate a new premier once the Constitutional Court disqualified caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

"This time we will seize Thailand," he said. "Sovereignty belongs to the people and the government has already committed suicide by dissolving the House of Representatives on December 9. We, the people, have the right to sovereignty."

Unless it was a slip of the tongue, this choice of words suggests a power-hungry politician rather than the leader of a mass movement promising "better things" for Thailand.

The Constitution stipulates that sovereign power belongs to the people, but that His Majesty the King exercises that power through Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the courts.

As per democratic norms, the installation of a new prime minister, Cabinet and national assembly comes via the people exercising their sovereign power in elections.

The Constitution does not permit sovereignty to be used in any other way to install a government. A protest movement, no matter how large and no matter how appealing its leader, does not have the constitutional power to install a prime minister.

Using unconstitutional force in any form - military, civilian or twisted judicial rulings —to topple a government and install a new one is equivalent to a coup d'etat.

If a coup, judicial or otherwise, is the planned route to power, it is pointless and senseless to talk about the need for reform. Our history offers plenty of proof that seizing power from an elected government does not lead to reform but merely perpetuates the old cycle of political power plays and the decline of democratic values.

If toppling elected governments unconstitutionally really did lead to positive change, we would not be in this mess. Suthep would have had no need to take the battle to the streets if the 2006 coup had led to reforms and the purging of corrupt politicians.

If they accept that their "enemy", former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, abused power and overrode the rule of law, why are Suthep and his movement willing to do the same to achieve their goal? Two wrongs never make a right.

Suthep and the veteran intellectuals behind him are old enough, if not mature enough, to know that democratic reform is a process, not an end in itself.

However good the laws, they can still be twisted and abused if politicians maintain the status quo of self-serving power plays. Suthep blames Thaksin for abasing the rule of law and the Constitution, but says he would do the same. In this context, what's the point of talking about reform?


-- The Nation 2014-04-08

Suthep needs to pull his head in. And if he doesn't then the judiciary with forceful Army backing need to deal to him. He is the same necessary evil that Thaksin is in exposing the bull crap that the puppet PM parrots off as democracy in Thailand. Suthep's only claim is another thorn in the side of the Thaksin family power grab. Outside of that he needs to shut the f..up about sovereignty and let the courts do what they should in a democracy.

"However good the laws, they can still be twisted and abused if politicians maintain the status quo of self-serving power plays. "

And this is now easy to see when they call them selves a democratic Government

But in 2014 the Thai People are no longer sheep of a corrupt Government set up by undemocratic means, and they are aware of alleged corruption and abuses of authority by the current PTP Party. and the negative effects on the country associated with the influence of former prime minister Thakin Shinawatra.

Can I prove this Yes

In Jan 2014 the Election Commission (EC) had repeatedly stated it could not guarantee a fair election, but the Caretaker Government insisted on going ahead with it in a bid to whitewash its wrongdoings.

Was this a Democratic Election .............. No

Unless an election is fair, it can not be democratic.

Government supporters continued to threaten independent organisations, the people and political parties which opposed it. and the police fail to perform their duties.

Ms Yingluck had never called for the pro-government and red-shirt demonstrators to behave, suggesting that she supported the actions of these same redshirt demonstrators.

Thai People have witnessed red-shirt demonstrators threaten other party members without facing arrest.

The Democrat Party has also been threatened, many times if they want to campaign in Issan

More Proof

During the 2005 general election, a political canvasser belonging to his party in Phichit province had been told to stop his campaigning.

When the threat was ignored, the canvasser was shot dead in front of his house three days before the election. Police have still not arrested any suspects

In 2014 things are even worse. Anti-government demonstrators were being ambushed on a main Hyway and no suspects had been arrested.

Under these circumstances, No other party but the PTP is safe to campaign for votes in the North East of Thailand

“The [Democrat] party conducted a survey of potential candidates nationwide and found that 80% had no safe place to campaign for votes, except those in the South, Bangkok and parts of the Central Plains.

So, was this a democratic Election, is it fair? if only one political party can campaign for votes but others cannot

So many TVF members tell us that western countries are behind the PTP Government

But they not say, not one western governement would allow elections in their countries under the rules that the PTP use

Conclusion

Are the Thai people really trying to get rid of a democratically elected government

Or have the Thai people in 2014 woken up to the fact that the PTP where never elected democratically, and they are therefore not a democratically Elected Government.

Most of this is actually twisted facts by their little red journo.

Basically it is trying to tell us that reforms are not necessary and won't work.

Don't# even bother giving it a try.

Keep the status quo... nothing will work.

still waiting for proof that he actually said this... many have seen the speech on youtube and said it wasn't mentioned.

'twisted judicial rulings'...????

How about rule of law as well, while you are spouting from a constitution.

'If toppling elected governments unconstitutionally really did lead to positive change, we would not be in this mess. Suthep would have had no need to take the battle to the streets if the 2006 coup had led to reforms and the purging of corrupt politicians.'

Crock... again... why even mention this?.... The 2006 coup did not lead to reforms because reforms was not on the cards like it this time around. Again a desperate attempt to discredit reforms before having them.

Why are some people so dead set against reforms.... Thailand needs them badly.

However good the laws, they can still be twisted and abused if politicians maintain the status quo of self-serving power plays.

Boll--x.... Reforms will lead to some very stiff and harsh punishments that should be enough to deter further corruption. The only way you will f-up Thailand is by embracing the status quo and shunning reforms, which will be the thing that actually keeps us in the ongoing circuit of power grabs... They are all based on the people's dissatisfaction with government corruption and cronyism.

Thai editorial just answered their own question , same old power play, you don't think the establishment are going to part with the power they have held for so long, the ins and outs of the revolving corruption door , we cannot have an upstart bus driver becoming a prime Minister, heavens forbid, they just might find out who are all the corrupt one's . Reform , a mythical word in Thailand , similar to Thai Democracy.

"Veteran intellectuals" in Thailand?

"...If democratic reform really is the ultimate goal of the anti-government protesters, as they claim, one has to wonder why their leader, Suthep Thaugsuban, last Saturday proposed the equivalent of a coup d'etat"

What a surprise...I'm dumb-struck....A coup d'etat?....Whoever thought?.....He really said that?....Who knew?

And here all the while some were thinking these anti-Govt. protesters were 'anti-Government'...and not pro-coup only.

Who can you believe these days.......Sigh!

Same fly, same Sh*t

As per democratic norms, the installation of a new prime minister, Cabinet and national assembly comes via the people exercising their sovereign power in elections.

The Constitution does not permit sovereignty to be used in any other way to install a government. A protest movement, no matter how large and no matter how appealing its leader, does not have the constitutional power to install a prime minister.

Using unconstitutional force in any form - military, civilian or twisted judicial rulings —to topple a government and install a new one is equivalent to a coup d'etat.

This is the major point.

Suthep and his supporters on one hand accuse the government of not respecting the law and the courts but at the same time they see fit to twist the very same laws to suit their own agendas.

This is of course the very same power play that has been taking place in Thailand since 1932.

Most of this is actually twisted facts by their little red journo.

Basically it is trying to tell us that reforms are not necessary and won't work.

Don't# even bother giving it a try.

Keep the status quo... nothing will work.

still waiting for proof that he actually said this... many have seen the speech on youtube and said it wasn't mentioned.

'twisted judicial rulings'...????

How about rule of law as well, while you are spouting from a constitution.

'If toppling elected governments unconstitutionally really did lead to positive change, we would not be in this mess. Suthep would have had no need to take the battle to the streets if the 2006 coup had led to reforms and the purging of corrupt politicians.'

Crock... again... why even mention this?.... The 2006 coup did not lead to reforms because reforms was not on the cards like it this time around. Again a desperate attempt to discredit reforms before having them.

Why are some people so dead set against reforms.... Thailand needs them badly.

However good the laws, they can still be twisted and abused if politicians maintain the status quo of self-serving power plays.

Boll--x.... Reforms will lead to some very stiff and harsh punishments that should be enough to deter further corruption. The only way you will f-up Thailand is by embracing the status quo and shunning reforms, which will be the thing that actually keeps us in the ongoing circuit of power grabs... They are all based on the people's dissatisfaction with government corruption and cronyism.

So that's Khaosod, the Bangkok Post and now even The Nation, as English Language sources, that have reported what suthep said with regard to him (suthep) appointing a PM.

But that's not proof enough for you.

These "many" that "have seen the speech on youtube" and are denying that suthep said any such thing - you wouldn't have found that "fact" reported on a PDRC facebook page by any chance would you?

It could account for your stunning lack of political awareness - you really cannot be politically aware if you seriously think that these mysterious reforms will get rid of the status quo. Who do you think is paying for all this and why - donations from the ordinary people?

Both parties are equally corrupt and only want to end the corruption of the other party not there own. Of course if

either side were serious a good start would be strict term limits at all levels of government .

It is the belief that a pooyai is a Khon Dee and as such is allowed to take a hypocritical position, because of course he wouldn't abuse it, because he is of course, a good guy.

I love to see the Nation trying to squirm its way out of this, because now the Empower has no clothes. Suthep has been exposed.

A woe is me, what to do now? Think fast people, because time is a ticking. The reform master is a con, ptp is stuck in court, the election didn't happen.

The county is now officially stuck. Can't go back, Suthep is a nutter, can't go forward , the EC doesn't want elections.

As per democratic norms, the installation of a new prime minister, Cabinet and national assembly comes via the people exercising their sovereign power in elections.

The Constitution does not permit sovereignty to be used in any other way to install a government. A protest movement, no matter how large and no matter how appealing its leader, does not have the constitutional power to install a prime minister.

Using unconstitutional force in any form - military, civilian or twisted judicial rulings to topple a government and install a new one is equivalent to a coup d'etat.

This is the major point.

Suthep and his supporters on one hand accuse the government of not respecting the law and the courts but at the same time they see fit to twist the very same laws to suit their own agendas.

This is of course the very same power play that has been taking place in Thailand since 1932.

But their essential goodness means they are to be trusted with the responsibility of changing the country. And isn't that the biggest load of horse excrement ever thought up.

There are many salient points made in this editorial, save for one key sentence :

" Using unconstitutional force in any form - military, civilian or twisted judicial rulings —to topple a government and install a new one is equivalent to a coup d'etat. "

What in the world is the phrase " twisted judicial rulings " doing there ? What is the definition of a " twisted judicial ruling " ? Does the writer of the article have a definition ? I'd be fascinated to see what it is, so I can spot it on sight. I can tell you that Jatuporn has a ready to go variety of definitions that he could recite in his sleep. The problem with the phrase " twisted judicial rulings " is that it plays right into the hands of the UDD. Their whole argument is based on the premise of the " twisted judicial ruling "- real or imagined. It's almost as popular as " elite " - which also unsurprisingly eludes definition, other than we're fairly certain it apparently excludes despot billionaires.

Within the next few weeks, the country is going to be plunged into the world as Pheu Thai and the UDD see it over their use of the phrase " twisted judicial rulings ". If the rulings are not what they would like - safe bet - they will call them " twisted judicial rulings ".

​The writer is right to criticize Suthep. He ought to shut up at this point. Thaworn - another PDRC leader - was quick to point out that the PDRC is anticipating the situation that Pheu Thai and the UDD will not accept these judicial rulings. Thaworn is anticipating that Pheu Thai ( the administration ) will call out " twisted judicial rulings ". If they do, that will be a constitutional crisis. Suthep's remedy is laughable and will never materialize - with or without the Bram Stoker flourishes of Khaosod - and should be justly criticized and admonished. But so too the narrative of Pheu Thai - which has consistently strove to de-legitimize the judicial process. The writer of this article would do well to focus on that.

The Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission are constitutionally empowered institutions and are to be respected and adhered to as such. The writer of this article should simply state this formally - as I'm sure he would - and to reiterate that the whole public will accept the rulings of the courts, as I am hoping he will.

Most of this is actually twisted facts by their little red journo.

Basically it is trying to tell us that reforms are not necessary and won't work.

Don't# even bother giving it a try.

Keep the status quo... nothing will work.

still waiting for proof that he actually said this... many have seen the speech on youtube and said it wasn't mentioned.

'twisted judicial rulings'...????

How about rule of law as well, while you are spouting from a constitution.

'If toppling elected governments unconstitutionally really did lead to positive change, we would not be in this mess. Suthep would have had no need to take the battle to the streets if the 2006 coup had led to reforms and the purging of corrupt politicians.'

Crock... again... why even mention this?.... The 2006 coup did not lead to reforms because reforms was not on the cards like it this time around. Again a desperate attempt to discredit reforms before having them.

Why are some people so dead set against reforms.... Thailand needs them badly.

However good the laws, they can still be twisted and abused if politicians maintain the status quo of self-serving power plays.

Boll--x.... Reforms will lead to some very stiff and harsh punishments that should be enough to deter further corruption. The only way you will f-up Thailand is by embracing the status quo and shunning reforms, which will be the thing that actually keeps us in the ongoing circuit of power grabs... They are all based on the people's dissatisfaction with government corruption and cronyism.

So that's Khaosod, the Bangkok Post and now even The Nation, as English Language sources, that have reported what suthep said with regard to him (suthep) appointing a PM.

But that's not proof enough for you.

These "many" that "have seen the speech on youtube" and are denying that suthep said any such thing - you wouldn't have found that "fact" reported on a PDRC facebook page by any chance would you?

It could account for your stunning lack of political awareness - you really cannot be politically aware if you seriously think that these mysterious reforms will get rid of the status quo. Who do you think is paying for all this and why - donations from the ordinary people?

Yet it seems OK with you and the other Red Shirt supporters that a convicted criminal fugitive from justice can pick and choose Prime Ministers.

After all there was Samak chosen in 2007, Somchai in 2009, Yingluck in 2011 ALL chosen by the very same convicted criminal fugitive from justice.

How is that democratic and constitutional?

There are many salient points made in this editorial, save for one key sentence :

" Using unconstitutional force in any form - military, civilian or twisted judicial rulings to topple a government and install a new one is equivalent to a coup d'etat. "

What in the world is the phrase " twisted judicial rulings " doing there ? What is the definition of a " twisted judicial ruling " ? Does the writer of the article have a definition ? I'd be fascinated to see what it is, so I can spot it on sight. I can tell you that Jatuporn has a ready to go variety of definitions that he could recite in his sleep. The problem with the phrase " twisted judicial rulings " is that it plays right into the hands of the UDD. Their whole argument is based on the premise of the " twisted judicial ruling "- real or imagined. It's almost as popular as " elite " - which also unsurprisingly eludes definition, other than we're fairly certain it apparently excludes despot billionaires.

Within the next few weeks, the country is going to be plunged into the world as Pheu Thai and the UDD see it over their use of the phrase " twisted judicial rulings ". If the rulings are not what they would like - safe bet - they will call them " twisted judicial rulings ".

​The writer is right to criticize Suthep. He ought to shut up at this point. Thaworn - another PDRC leader - was quick to point out that the PDRC is anticipating the situation that Pheu Thai and the UDD will not accept these judicial rulings. Thaworn is anticipating that Pheu Thai ( the administration ) will call out " twisted judicial rulings ". If they do, that will be a constitutional crisis. Suthep's remedy is laughable and will never materialize - with or without the Bram Stoker flourishes of Khaosod - and should be justly criticized and admonished. But so too the narrative of Pheu Thai - which has consistently strove to de-legitimize the judicial process. The writer of this article would do well to focus on that.

The Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission are constitutionally empowered institutions and are to be respected and adhered to as such. The writer of this article should simply state this formally - as I'm sure he would - and to reiterate that the whole public will accept the rulings of the courts, as I am hoping he will.

What? You dont like it when an editor piece from normally an anti-thaksin mouthpiece admits that some of the legal judgements might be jigged?

Please don't tell me that you believed that all the judgements are free and fair and not in any way motivated to stymie either TRT/PTP or Thaksin himself.

First I thought you were just naive, but now... Well.