Suthep displays ideas of supreme sovereignty

[michaelscottfan]

The Nation turning against Suthep and calling out his ambitions as being ridiculous seems like a watershed moment as it implies that the establishment (Namely the military brass and the courts) figures in the government who's interests they represent no longer see him as viable.

Edited April 9, 2014 by michaelscottfan

[dwcrist]

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

That is a good joke. Everything you said is the opposite of reality.

[kurtgruen]

I guess it all depends who Suthep is demonstrating for, doesn't it? Obviously, it is not himself, otherwise, he would have been removed a long time ago.

For somebody, who has been surprised many times, by "Thai ways" of doing things, this whole thing has been fairly predictable from the beginning. Most of us on here, all know who the big players are and I am not talking about Yingluck and Suthep.

[fab4]

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

If he has millions of supporters then surely he can win an election, no?

Well they got 11.5 votes while they were at their weakest in 2011 during an election where they were not allowed to campaign for 80% of the votes due to campaign intimidation from the red shirts hired by Thaksin. Also the vast amount of voters intimidated by red thugs and village chiefs forcing them to vote PTP against threat of violence and harm...

In the past 3 years, they would have picked up even more due to the ineptitude of the PTP government and the shambles they have made of ALL their populist policies.

So yes..... The Dems can get many votes.

In fact, in a FREE and FAIR election, they would almost certainly take PTP to the cleaners.

But getting FREE and FAIR elections is impossible while Thaksin wields influence in Thailand and holds the north in his tyrannical grip through fear.

"during an election where they were not allowed to campaign for 80% of the votes due to campaign intimidation from the red shirts hired by Thaksin. Also the vast amount of voters intimidated by red thugs and village chiefs forcing them to vote PTP against threat of violence and harm..."

You do know that is against forum rules to post "any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate", and yet here you are pushing the same old bilge.

In case you didn't get the memo, here is an excerpt from abhisits appearance on the BBC's World Debate 19th June 2011,a couple of weeks before the election

Respect for the Election Result:

All the political parties and the generals said that everybody has to respect the (people’s)decision on the 3rd of July. There is no reason to believe that the decision (of the election) will not be respected. It’s clear that all the political parties have the freedom to campaign now. They also have the freedom to choose the next government once the election results are known.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/สมเกียรติ-อ่อนวิมล-somkiat-onwimon/pm-abhisit-on-bbc-world-debate/181987625193301?comment_id=2152228

You need to "get with the program" if your proselytizing is going to have any impact.

[Old Man River]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

A coup is a coup. For those who believe in democracy, it is never correct. For others, best evaluated a few years hence.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Tatsujin]

And still Mr yellow farang is in denial, Mr frog,scamper, TV Gerry and the other mob what say thee now?

I think many have gone into shock, try turning this one into a debate about rubbish if you can.

For all you drama queen's, I posted this in another thread:

The operative words in his statement were "IF" and "THEN" which were clearly missed out by Khaosod and all the pro-Govt supporters.

"IF" the PM and caretaker Govt are convicted, and "IF" the caretaker Govt refuses to relinquish power (as they have already stated they will do by ignoring any rulings by any of the Courts or NACC), "THEN" Suthep will petition the King to appoint an interim PM.

It can't be a coup if the caretaker Govt refuses to step down as they will no longer have the right to govern and someone else needs to be appointed to take over.

Nowhere does it state that Suthep will "take over" running the country under his sole control, someone else will be appointed to do so and authorized/approved by HM.

[Tatsujin]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

A coup is a coup. For those who believe in democracy, it is never correct. For others, best evaluated a few years hence.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

So on that basis, the 2010 red shirt protests were an attempted coup also? The demands were the same, that the current sitting Govt step down.

[Eric Loh]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

A coup is a coup. For those who believe in democracy, it is never correct. For others, best evaluated a few years hence.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

So on that basis, the 2010 red shirt protests were an attempted coup also? The demands were the same, that the current sitting Govt step down.

Wrong. the UDD 2010 protest was to ask the government who was formed by means of judiciary coups to hold an election. Suterp is just the opposite. No election but his personal appointment of the PM. See the difference??

[webfact]

Suthep makes clear of his declaration of sovereign



BANGKOK: -- People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) secretary general Suthep Thaugsuban said the people will “drag and pull” caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra down from the prime minister seat if she again rejects ruling by either the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and continues to stay in office citing her own “democratic system”.

Suthep’s remark came amid growing criticism of his self proclaimed “sovereign” to seize power from the caretaker government and the ruling Pheu Thai party is filing complaints with the police and Department of Special Investigation with call to impose “treason” charge on him.

But Suthep played down treason charge saying he cared nothing as he already faced treason charge already.

However he pledged to turn himself in to the police to face the charge once he has accomplished the important task to bring down the Thaksin regime and the country is back to real constitutional democracy.

He then explained why he has to declare sovereign.

He said there is clear indication that Ms Yingluck and her Pheu Thai party would not accept the ruling of the court and the NACC, citing the current attempt of her party to discredit both the court of justices and the graft buster.

He said Yingluck’s legal advisor has petitioned the NACC seeking the replacement of the chairman of the NACC’s inquiry subcommittee Vicha Mahakhun reasoning that he was biased and unfair with her.

They also discredited the Constitutional Court by asking why the court has to accept the petition of the senator to rule Yingluck’s premiership status over the transfer of former national security council chief Thawil Pliensri despite the fact that the Supreme Administrative Court has a ruling and the former chief has been reinstated on court’s order.

Suthep said Yingluck and her followers even questioned the Constitutional Court and asked that she should not be treated in a double-standard manner.

The PDRC said all these attempts by Yingluck and her followers indicated they would not accept the rulings by both independent organizations under the Constitution if the ruling is a disadvantage to her.

In anticipation of her stubbornness, disobedience and defiance of the justice system, Suthep stressed there is no choice but to get the people ready on the day when either ruling is handed down.

“Once the court rules her premiership status has terminated, and she rejects, the people will unset her with push and pull.”

He said he declared sovereign just to demand sovereignty back to the hands of the people.

When she loses the right to stay in power, and right to hold sovereign power, then the right for sovereign power must be returned to the people as the Constitution states clearly that sovereignty belonged to the people.

He said what he declared was made within the scope of the Constitution while Yingluck and her followers are real defiant of the Constitution.

He said when Ms Yingluck is removed, reform could then start and no politician be allowed to involve in the reform as they still have conflict of interest and therefore should be kept off until reform is accomplished.

He added that Ms Yingluck has repeatedly stressed to keep the law, respect the law and ready to comply with the law, but what she said and did was different when she rejects the rulings of the Constitutional Court and the NACC.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/suthep-makes-clear-declaration-sovereign/


-- Thai PBS 2014-04-09

[Tatsujin]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

A coup is a coup. For those who believe in democracy, it is never correct. For others, best evaluated a few years hence.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

So on that basis, the 2010 red shirt protests were an attempted coup also? The demands were the same, that the current sitting Govt step down.

Wrong. the UDD 2010 protest was to ask the government who was formed by means of judiciary coups to hold an election. Suterp is just the opposite. No election but his personal appointment of the PM. See the difference??

So, what was actually "illegal" about how the Dems got to run Parliament back in 2008-2010? What laws did they break to gain power?

[Dogmatix]

I don't know exactly what Suthep meant by his apparently ill-considered remarks and I don't suppose many other people do either. But the caretaker government's response seems to be an overreaction. Article 113 of the Penal Code that they are asking their DSI poodles to investigate only deals with violence or threats of violence used to overthrow the government or constitution. Suthep didn't actually mention anything about violence in his ramblings. That has so far been the sole prerogative of government ministers and their red shirts who are threatening to form an armed volunteer force.

The government failed to react to separatist threats by their paid red shirt lackeys and announcements by government ministers of the formation of an armed terrorist group. Now they are up in arms about some incomprehensible nonsense spouted by Suthep on the stage. Yingluck is even trying to involve the Army Chief, while her moronic cousin, 'Dr' Suraphong, is trying to get the US ambassadress to take her break from her adoring devotion to Thai people and culture to dial in an air strike on the monitor lizards of Lumpini Park. Double standards?

Edited April 9, 2014 by Dogmatix

[AleG]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

The difference is that the government are in a huge position of trust by the people to serve the people. The army are in a position to serve the people also.

The people have the ultimate power and sovereignty in the nation.

So the people have the right to topple a government if it fails to deliver on its promises and this government has failed on every single front.

The issue here is that besides elections this: "So the people have the right to topple a government" is usually sorted out by massive protests and then the government usually has the good sense of stepping down in contrition . The problem is when the crooks cling to power no matter what, as Yingluck is doing on behalf of her brother. I think the reason is that Thaksin doesn't really have anything to lose by seeing the country spiral down into anarchy, he is already warm and cozy abroad, unlike Yingluck who if it would be up to her would had quit a long time ago, he doesn't have to worry what would happen to him.

[lostinsurin]

And still Mr yellow farang is in denial, Mr frog,scamper, TV Gerry and the other mob what say thee now?

I think many have gone into shock, try turning this one into a debate about rubbish if you can.

For all you drama queen's, I posted this in another thread:

The operative words in his statement were "IF" and "THEN" which were clearly missed out by Khaosod and all the pro-Govt supporters.

"IF" the PM and caretaker Govt are convicted, and "IF" the caretaker Govt refuses to relinquish power (as they have already stated they will do by ignoring any rulings by any of the Courts or NACC), "THEN" Suthep will petition the King to appoint an interim PM.

It can't be a coup if the caretaker Govt refuses to step down as they will no longer have the right to govern and someone else needs to be appointed to take over.

Nowhere does it state that Suthep will "take over" running the country under his sole control, someone else will be appointed to do so and authorized/approved by HM.

Go back and read the post again it states

"Ridiculously, veteran politician Suthep announced last Saturday that once the Constitutional Court toppled Yingluck Shinawatra's government, he could pick up anybody he deemed proper to seek royal

endorsement as the new premier to replace her." and more and more......

I think he is getting a little ahead of himself.

This is the first article in the nation that is critical of suthep, Maybe the worm has turned,

that's part of the beauty of Thailand it's full of surprises, just when you think it's going one way it goes another.

[Dogmatix]

A coup is a coup. For those who believe in democracy, it is never correct. For others, best evaluated a few years hence.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

So on that basis, the 2010 red shirt protests were an attempted coup also? The demands were the same, that the current sitting Govt step down.

Wrong. the UDD 2010 protest was to ask the government who was formed by means of judiciary coups to hold an election. Suterp is just the opposite. No election but his personal appointment of the PM. See the difference??

So, what was actually "illegal" about how the Dems got to run Parliament back in 2008-2010? What laws did they break to gain power?

Nothing. The removal of Somchai as PM due to electoral fraud committed by his party was constitutional. After that the House was obliged to elect a new PM within 30 days. They did so and Abhisit was elected PM.

The truth is that Somchai's wife and Thaksin's sister had alienated factions in the Thaksin Party by cutting them off from the gravy in favour of her own faction. That facilitated the defection of the Newin faction that tipped the balance in Parliament and led to Abhisit's election as PM. Their fatal flaw is always their greed and impetuousness, viz. the Shin Corp sale without agreed to make a voluntary donation equivalent to tax, the Amnesty Bill. Perhaps helping brother-in-law into a job where he could make a lot of money will go down as another blunder. Surely Thaksin could have just given him a nice cheque for his birthday instead.

[siampolee]

Suthep displays ideas of supreme sovereignty

Has not that odious legal eagle so beloved by Thaksin, Robert Amsterdam also gone down the same road in support of his client Thaksin ?

[Scamper]

This is a good article. Well written, and the argument is sound. From any standpoint, Suthep went over the top. Virtually everyone recognizes this - probably even him. His words - already over the top and fanciful, and really too silly to be taken seriously - were also subject to the wildest extemporization and treatment on the part of a particularly ludicrous publication that is notoriously known for that. But that notwithstanding, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of Thaksin, taken the focus off the Yingluck administration, taken the focus off of the UDD's intimation of the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and even managed to take off the focus off of all the controversial statements of Ko Tee, Jatuporn, Nattawut and Charapong concerning their campaign against the checks and balances and endorsement of a UDD platform that included secession. Incredibly, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of all of that. And so these very same people who have rallied against the judicial system of checks and balances now have the effrontery and hypocrisy of pretending to the outside world that they are the protectors of democracy, even though the judicial process is the foundation stone of a any democracy. Suthep has managed to undo the whole narrative and has subsequently and foolishly played into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Both Thaksin and Pheu Thai are simply elated at Suthep's remarks, because he has managed in one foolish moment to deflect all the attention from what Pheu Thai has done in the last two and a half years - that entailed activities positively steeped in criminal activity. Even Nattawut is relieved, as no one is asking him about that UDD rally he attended in February that so inconveniently and so embarrassingly haunts his recent " Tuesday stance ".

Suthep needed to do one of three things. He needed either to clarify his remarks, or to distance himself from them, or to step down from the movement. Or all three. CAPO, Surapong, Pheu Thai, Thaksin, both his Thai and foreign lawyers, the UDD - they are all going to town on this. Not only that, but they are now using it as a weapon against all the PDRC leaders - none of whom echoed these remarks, while one in fact - Thaworn - publicly distanced himself from them. They are now even trying to tie this with the Democratic party, and are even taking the opportunity to go after one who has stayed laudably out of the limelight - Abhisit.

For the PDRC to remain on message, Suthep needs to take a back seat. The PDRC needs to get back on message - which is the protection and respect for the judicial process of the constitution. When the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission deliver their verdicts, the PDRC needs to rally support for the courts. Because - to be sure - Pheu Thai, Thaksin, and the UDD will not. And if that happens, the true colours of Pheu Thai will be laid bare.

[Seastallion]

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

If he has millions of supporters then surely he can win an election, no?

Well they got 11.5 votes while they were at their weakest in 2011 during an election where they were not allowed to campaign for 80% of the votes due to campaign intimidation from the red shirts hired by Thaksin. Also the vast amount of voters intimidated by red thugs and village chiefs forcing them to vote PTP against threat of violence and harm...

In the past 3 years, they would have picked up even more due to the ineptitude of the PTP government and the shambles they have made of ALL their populist policies.

So yes..... The Dems can get many votes.

In fact, in a FREE and FAIR election, they would almost certainly take PTP to the cleaners.

But getting FREE and FAIR elections is impossible while Thaksin wields influence in Thailand and holds the north in his tyrannical grip through fear.

Perhaps I'm ill-informed, but the Dems are not Suthep's PDRC. Sure, it may be a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", but it is not an alliance.

[WoopyDoo]

Suthep makes clear of his declaration of sovereign

BANGKOK: -- People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) secretary general Suthep Thaugsuban said the people will “drag and pull” caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra down from the prime minister seat if she again rejects ruling by either the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and continues to stay in office citing her own “democratic system”.

Suthep’s remark came amid growing criticism of his self proclaimed “sovereign” to seize power from the caretaker government and the ruling Pheu Thai party is filing complaints with the police and Department of Special Investigation with call to impose “treason” charge on him.

But Suthep played down treason charge saying he cared nothing as he already faced treason charge already.

However he pledged to turn himself in to the police to face the charge once he has accomplished the important task to bring down the Thaksin regime and the country is back to real constitutional democracy.

He then explained why he has to declare sovereign.

He said there is clear indication that Ms Yingluck and her Pheu Thai party would not accept the ruling of the court and the NACC, citing the current attempt of her party to discredit both the court of justices and the graft buster.

He said Yingluck’s legal advisor has petitioned the NACC seeking the replacement of the chairman of the NACC’s inquiry subcommittee Vicha Mahakhun reasoning that he was biased and unfair with her.

They also discredited the Constitutional Court by asking why the court has to accept the petition of the senator to rule Yingluck’s premiership status over the transfer of former national security council chief Thawil Pliensri despite the fact that the Supreme Administrative Court has a ruling and the former chief has been reinstated on court’s order.

Suthep said Yingluck and her followers even questioned the Constitutional Court and asked that she should not be treated in a double-standard manner.

The PDRC said all these attempts by Yingluck and her followers indicated they would not accept the rulings by both independent organizations under the Constitution if the ruling is a disadvantage to her.

In anticipation of her stubbornness, disobedience and defiance of the justice system, Suthep stressed there is no choice but to get the people ready on the day when either ruling is handed down.

“Once the court rules her premiership status has terminated, and she rejects, the people will unset her with push and pull.”

He said he declared sovereign just to demand sovereignty back to the hands of the people.

When she loses the right to stay in power, and right to hold sovereign power, then the right for sovereign power must be returned to the people as the Constitution states clearly that sovereignty belonged to the people.

He said what he declared was made within the scope of the Constitution while Yingluck and her followers are real defiant of the Constitution.

He said when Ms Yingluck is removed, reform could then start and no politician be allowed to involve in the reform as they still have conflict of interest and therefore should be kept off until reform is accomplished.

He added that Ms Yingluck has repeatedly stressed to keep the law, respect the law and ready to comply with the law, but what she said and did was different when she rejects the rulings of the Constitutional Court and the NACC.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/suthep-makes-clear-declaration-sovereign/

-- Thai PBS 2014-04-09

And there you have it.

Exactly almost word for word how my wife translated his speech from Saturday night from the youtube video.

So that just confirms it now that Khaosod in fact did add things like 'I have the right to execute, but will just seize assets'... 'I will appoint myself sovereign'... etc etc etc, blah blah blah.

This Khaosod translation and all its embellishments are exactly what the CAPO, DSI PTP and their legal flunkies including Amsterdam are citing as their case for sedition, treason blah blah blah.

They don't have a leg to stand on.

With Suthep's clarity of his words, it actually makes 100% sense, and it is not treason or theft of sovereignty... The fact that if the PTP intend to refuse and refuse to move.... That is exactly what will and should happen being that the only alternative would be for the police to remove them by force which we know won't happen, or a full blown military coup which equally won't happen.

I say march to wherever they are and remove them by force and pup them all in prison if they so much as hint at staying on in defiance.

[WoopyDoo]

And still Mr yellow farang is in denial, Mr frog,scamper, TV Gerry and the other mob what say thee now?

I think many have gone into shock, try turning this one into a debate about rubbish if you can.

For all you drama queen's, I posted this in another thread:

The operative words in his statement were "IF" and "THEN" which were clearly missed out by Khaosod and all the pro-Govt supporters.

"IF" the PM and caretaker Govt are convicted, and "IF" the caretaker Govt refuses to relinquish power (as they have already stated they will do by ignoring any rulings by any of the Courts or NACC), "THEN" Suthep will petition the King to appoint an interim PM.

It can't be a coup if the caretaker Govt refuses to step down as they will no longer have the right to govern and someone else needs to be appointed to take over.

Nowhere does it state that Suthep will "take over" running the country under his sole control, someone else will be appointed to do so and authorized/approved by HM.

Go back and read the post again it states

"Ridiculously, veteran politician Suthep announced last Saturday that once the Constitutional Court toppled Yingluck Shinawatra's government, he could pick up anybody he deemed proper to seek royal

endorsement as the new premier to replace her." and more and more......

I think he is getting a little ahead of himself.

This is the first article in the nation that is critical of suthep, Maybe the worm has turned,

that's part of the beauty of Thailand it's full of surprises, just when you think it's going one way it goes another.

If you intend to use words from somewhere to support your post, I suggest you find the words from a credible source, and all those words have already been twisted around from a sole source (namely Khaosod).

Otherwise your post has absolutely zero credibility.

[WoopyDoo]

This is a good article. Well written, and the argument is sound. From any standpoint, Suthep went over the top. Virtually everyone recognizes this - probably even him. His words - already over the top and fanciful, and really too silly to be taken seriously - were also subject to the wildest extemporization and treatment on the part of a particularly ludicrous publication that is notoriously known for that. But that notwithstanding, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of Thaksin, taken the focus off the Yingluck administration, taken the focus off of the UDD's intimation of the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and even managed to take off the focus off of all the controversial statements of Ko Tee, Jatuporn, Nattawut and Charapong concerning their campaign against the checks and balances and endorsement of a UDD platform that included secession. Incredibly, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of all of that. And so these very same people who have rallied against the judicial system of checks and balances now have the effrontery and hypocrisy of pretending to the outside world that they are the protectors of democracy, even though the judicial process is the foundation stone of a any democracy. Suthep has managed to undo the whole narrative and has subsequently and foolishly played into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Both Thaksin and Pheu Thai are simply elated at Suthep's remarks, because he has managed in one foolish moment to deflect all the attention from what Pheu Thai has done in the last two and a half years - that entailed activities positively steeped in criminal activity. Even Nattawut is relieved, as no one is asking him about that UDD rally he attended in February that so inconveniently and so embarrassingly haunts his recent " Tuesday stance ".

Suthep needed to do one of three things. He needed either to clarify his remarks, or to distance himself from them, or to step down from the movement. Or all three. CAPO, Surapong, Pheu Thai, Thaksin, both his Thai and foreign lawyers, the UDD - they are all going to town on this. Not only that, but they are now using it as a weapon against all the PDRC leaders - none of whom echoed these remarks, while one in fact - Thaworn - publicly distanced himself from them. They are now even trying to tie this with the Democratic party, and are even taking the opportunity to go after one who has stayed laudably out of the limelight - Abhisit.

For the PDRC to remain on message, Suthep needs to take a back seat. The PDRC needs to get back on message - which is the protection and respect for the judicial process of the constitution. When the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission deliver their verdicts, the PDRC needs to rally support for the courts. Because - to be sure - Pheu Thai, Thaksin, and the UDD will not. And if that happens, the true colours of Pheu Thai will be laid bare.

He has not gone over the top....

He has only gone over the top if you believe the twisted version of his words and I am quite frankly surprised to see that you give them value.

[Seastallion]

I'm certainly against the Shin conspiracy, and if the PDRC can chuck them out, then good. But if (big IF) Suthep really said those things, in the context that has been reported, then he is a megalomaniac that should not be allowed to continue.

I suspect that AV knows this, and is biding his time. I suspect AV is watching and learning, and hopefully will reform the entire system and stamp out corruption.

[WoopyDoo]

I'm certainly against the Shin conspiracy, and if the PDRC can chuck them out, then good. But if (big IF) Suthep really said those things, in the context that has been reported, then he is a megalomaniac that should not be allowed to continue.

I suspect that AV knows this, and is biding his time. I suspect AV is watching and learning, and hopefully will reform the entire system and stamp out corruption.

Am I the only one who has read the update from Suthep's own lips then????

Suthep makes clear of his declaration of sovereign

BANGKOK: -- People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) secretary general Suthep Thaugsuban said the people will “drag and pull” caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra down from the prime minister seat if she again rejects ruling by either the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and continues to stay in office citing her own “democratic system”.

Suthep’s remark came amid growing criticism of his self proclaimed “sovereign” to seize power from the caretaker government and the ruling Pheu Thai party is filing complaints with the police and Department of Special Investigation with call to impose “treason” charge on him.

But Suthep played down treason charge saying he cared nothing as he already faced treason charge already.

However he pledged to turn himself in to the police to face the charge once he has accomplished the important task to bring down the Thaksin regime and the country is back to real constitutional democracy.

He then explained why he has to declare sovereign.

He said there is clear indication that Ms Yingluck and her Pheu Thai party would not accept the ruling of the court and the NACC, citing the current attempt of her party to discredit both the court of justices and the graft buster.

He said Yingluck’s legal advisor has petitioned the NACC seeking the replacement of the chairman of the NACC’s inquiry subcommittee Vicha Mahakhun reasoning that he was biased and unfair with her.

They also discredited the Constitutional Court by asking why the court has to accept the petition of the senator to rule Yingluck’s premiership status over the transfer of former national security council chief Thawil Pliensri despite the fact that the Supreme Administrative Court has a ruling and the former chief has been reinstated on court’s order.

Suthep said Yingluck and her followers even questioned the Constitutional Court and asked that she should not be treated in a double-standard manner.

The PDRC said all these attempts by Yingluck and her followers indicated they would not accept the rulings by both independent organizations under the Constitution if the ruling is a disadvantage to her.

In anticipation of her stubbornness, disobedience and defiance of the justice system, Suthep stressed there is no choice but to get the people ready on the day when either ruling is handed down.

“Once the court rules her premiership status has terminated, and she rejects, the people will unset her with push and pull.”

He said he declared sovereign just to demand sovereignty back to the hands of the people.

When she loses the right to stay in power, and right to hold sovereign power, then the right for sovereign power must be returned to the people as the Constitution states clearly that sovereignty belonged to the people.

He said what he declared was made within the scope of the Constitution while Yingluck and her followers are real defiant of the Constitution.

He said when Ms Yingluck is removed, reform could then start and no politician be allowed to involve in the reform as they still have conflict of interest and therefore should be kept off until reform is accomplished.

He added that Ms Yingluck has repeatedly stressed to keep the law, respect the law and ready to comply with the law, but what she said and did was different when she rejects the rulings of the Constitutional Court and the NACC.

[Dogmatix]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

A military coup is illegal under Article 113 of the Penal Code because it uses violence or the threat of violence to overthrow the government and the constitution. Historically the military has always taken care to immediately abrogate the constitution and put a temporary one in its place that includes an amnesty for their illegal actions which is countersigned into law by HMK.

We don't know what defines Suthep's concept of a people's coup because so far it is just hot air blowing around at rally sites. But he seems to be advocating something that doesn't use the military or advocate violence and leaves the constitution in place. He seems to be hoping that a judicial ousting of the government would lead to a vacuum forcing the constitutional court to use Article 7 to adapt a stop gap solution. In the event that this difficult feat can be accomplished it would of course be called a 'judicial coup' by the Thaksinista media influenced by paid lobbyists such as Robert Amsterdam, including Jonathan Head, The Economist etc. However, the 'judicial coup' nomenclature relies on a flimsy circular argument that by disrespecting the judgement of the highest court in the land the Thaksinites are respecting democracy and law and order.

This is what they fear above all else. If they have to go, they would much prefer a military coup which in 2014 is a clear cut taboo in the eyes of the US, even though it was tacitly accepted in Egypt because it got rid the 'bad guys' and used to be the standard first line treatment prescribed by the US for third world countries (including Thailand) not so long ago.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Dogmatix

[bobmac10]

Suthep have millions of supporters who want him to be PM. Isn't that mandate enough to rule the country? Many people will come out to donate and protect him if Yingluck try to arrest him. Also, Thai court have no right what so ever to summon him at all, because he protest peacefully and without weapon.

even you could be right

Sutheop has made it clean he does not want this

so the Red shirt government fans need to tell lies and make him look bad

and they call this a democratic government

Terry Terry Terry, how many times must you be told?

Suthep needs to win an election.

He can't because he's a nutter.

Everybody knows this.

Why don't you?

[Thai at Heart]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

Not really.

In reality there can only be the legal assumption of an political mandate. All the rest is illegal.

What he said was really quite scary and says a lot about what his real agenda is. I can't believe after all these years of seeing that the Shins had an agenda, that anyone believes that Suthep doesn't have one.

The default position about any politician (more so in thailand), should be that he is a lying, deceitful, self serving piece of s**t. Why anyone really believes he is doing this to save the country is frankly delusional

[Thai at Heart]

I'm certainly against the Shin conspiracy, and if the PDRC can chuck them out, then good. But if (big IF) Suthep really said those things, in the context that has been reported, then he is a megalomaniac that should not be allowed to continue.

I suspect that AV knows this, and is biding his time. I suspect AV is watching and learning, and hopefully will reform the entire system and stamp out corruption.

Ever the optimist .

[Old Man River]

This is a good article. Well written, and the argument is sound. From any standpoint, Suthep went over the top. Virtually everyone recognizes this - probably even him. His words - already over the top and fanciful, and really too silly to be taken seriously - were also subject to the wildest extemporization and treatment on the part of a particularly ludicrous publication that is notoriously known for that. But that notwithstanding, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of Thaksin, taken the focus off the Yingluck administration, taken the focus off of the UDD's intimation of the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and even managed to take off the focus off of all the controversial statements of Ko Tee, Jatuporn, Nattawut and Charapong concerning their campaign against the checks and balances and endorsement of a UDD platform that included secession. Incredibly, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of all of that. And so these very same people who have rallied against the judicial system of checks and balances now have the effrontery and hypocrisy of pretending to the outside world that they are the protectors of democracy, even though the judicial process is the foundation stone of a any democracy. Suthep has managed to undo the whole narrative and has subsequently and foolishly played into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Both Thaksin and Pheu Thai are simply elated at Suthep's remarks, because he has managed in one foolish moment to deflect all the attention from what Pheu Thai has done in the last two and a half years - that entailed activities positively steeped in criminal activity. Even Nattawut is relieved, as no one is asking him about that UDD rally he attended in February that so inconveniently and so embarrassingly haunts his recent " Tuesday stance ".

Suthep needed to do one of three things. He needed either to clarify his remarks, or to distance himself from them, or to step down from the movement. Or all three. CAPO, Surapong, Pheu Thai, Thaksin, both his Thai and foreign lawyers, the UDD - they are all going to town on this. Not only that, but they are now using it as a weapon against all the PDRC leaders - none of whom echoed these remarks, while one in fact - Thaworn - publicly distanced himself from them. They are now even trying to tie this with the Democratic party, and are even taking the opportunity to go after one who has stayed laudably out of the limelight - Abhisit.

For the PDRC to remain on message, Suthep needs to take a back seat. The PDRC needs to get back on message - which is the protection and respect for the judicial process of the constitution. When the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission deliver their verdicts, the PDRC needs to rally support for the courts. Because - to be sure - Pheu Thai, Thaksin, and the UDD will not. And if that happens, the true colours of Pheu Thai will be laid bare.

It is probably too late. Suthep has, in one series of outbursts , on done everything that he, and those who have given their lives, gained. As far as I can ascertain, he cannot find a legal right to do what he is promising. If this is so, he then will be showing the same disdain for the legal system that we think the PTP has shown.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Dogmatix]

Suthep makes clear of his declaration of sovereign

BANGKOK: -- People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) secretary general Suthep Thaugsuban said the people will “drag and pull” caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra down from the prime minister seat if she again rejects ruling by either the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) and continues to stay in office citing her own “democratic system”.

Suthep’s remark came amid growing criticism of his self proclaimed “sovereign” to seize power from the caretaker government and the ruling Pheu Thai party is filing complaints with the police and Department of Special Investigation with call to impose “treason” charge on him.

But Suthep played down treason charge saying he cared nothing as he already faced treason charge already.

However he pledged to turn himself in to the police to face the charge once he has accomplished the important task to bring down the Thaksin regime and the country is back to real constitutional democracy.

He then explained why he has to declare sovereign.

He said there is clear indication that Ms Yingluck and her Pheu Thai party would not accept the ruling of the court and the NACC, citing the current attempt of her party to discredit both the court of justices and the graft buster.

He said Yingluck’s legal advisor has petitioned the NACC seeking the replacement of the chairman of the NACC’s inquiry subcommittee Vicha Mahakhun reasoning that he was biased and unfair with her.

They also discredited the Constitutional Court by asking why the court has to accept the petition of the senator to rule Yingluck’s premiership status over the transfer of former national security council chief Thawil Pliensri despite the fact that the Supreme Administrative Court has a ruling and the former chief has been reinstated on court’s order.

Suthep said Yingluck and her followers even questioned the Constitutional Court and asked that she should not be treated in a double-standard manner.

The PDRC said all these attempts by Yingluck and her followers indicated they would not accept the rulings by both independent organizations under the Constitution if the ruling is a disadvantage to her.

In anticipation of her stubbornness, disobedience and defiance of the justice system, Suthep stressed there is no choice but to get the people ready on the day when either ruling is handed down.

“Once the court rules her premiership status has terminated, and she rejects, the people will unset her with push and pull.”

He said he declared sovereign just to demand sovereignty back to the hands of the people.

When she loses the right to stay in power, and right to hold sovereign power, then the right for sovereign power must be returned to the people as the Constitution states clearly that sovereignty belonged to the people.

He said what he declared was made within the scope of the Constitution while Yingluck and her followers are real defiant of the Constitution.

He said when Ms Yingluck is removed, reform could then start and no politician be allowed to involve in the reform as they still have conflict of interest and therefore should be kept off until reform is accomplished.

He added that Ms Yingluck has repeatedly stressed to keep the law, respect the law and ready to comply with the law, but what she said and did was different when she rejects the rulings of the Constitutional Court and the NACC.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/suthep-makes-clear-declaration-sovereign/

-- Thai PBS 2014-04-09

He raises the interesting point about what would happen if the entire cabinet has to leave office as a result of the Thawil case but refuse to go. The court could rule either way on the Thawil case for Yingluck and, even if she is removed from office, it is not a slam dunk that the court would rule that the rest of the cabinet had to go with her. There is a credible argument that the cabinet has already vacated office under 180.2 following the dissolution of Parliament. Therefore how could they be removed from office again under 180.1 as a result of the PM being removed and anyway would a second removal from office still leave them as a caretaker cabinet under 181? This is the argument put forward by Chalerm and it is not without merit.

However, I think the same argument could equally apply to the removal from office of the PM, since she has already vacated office and is only a caretaker PM obliged to remain in office along with the rest of her government until they can hand over the reins to the next government. The fact that the court has unanimously agreed to accept the case suggests that it feels that a caretaker PM can be removed and it might follow that a caretaker cabinet can also be removed. Perhaps a holistic solutions which would be needed to provide a new interim government for the removed caretaker cabinet to hand over to but the Constitutional Court is noted for a piecemeal approach.

Anyway who should enforce the court's judgement, if the cabinet refuses to go is an interesting question.

Edited April 9, 2014 by Dogmatix

[Dogmatix]

This is a good article. Well written, and the argument is sound. From any standpoint, Suthep went over the top. Virtually everyone recognizes this - probably even him. His words - already over the top and fanciful, and really too silly to be taken seriously - were also subject to the wildest extemporization and treatment on the part of a particularly ludicrous publication that is notoriously known for that. But that notwithstanding, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of Thaksin, taken the focus off the Yingluck administration, taken the focus off of the UDD's intimation of the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and even managed to take off the focus off of all the controversial statements of Ko Tee, Jatuporn, Nattawut and Charapong concerning their campaign against the checks and balances and endorsement of a UDD platform that included secession. Incredibly, Suthep has managed to take the focus off of all of that. And so these very same people who have rallied against the judicial system of checks and balances now have the effrontery and hypocrisy of pretending to the outside world that they are the protectors of democracy, even though the judicial process is the foundation stone of a any democracy. Suthep has managed to undo the whole narrative and has subsequently and foolishly played into Thaksin and Pheu Thai's hands. Both Thaksin and Pheu Thai are simply elated at Suthep's remarks, because he has managed in one foolish moment to deflect all the attention from what Pheu Thai has done in the last two and a half years - that entailed activities positively steeped in criminal activity. Even Nattawut is relieved, as no one is asking him about that UDD rally he attended in February that so inconveniently and so embarrassingly haunts his recent " Tuesday stance ".

Suthep needed to do one of three things. He needed either to clarify his remarks, or to distance himself from them, or to step down from the movement. Or all three. CAPO, Surapong, Pheu Thai, Thaksin, both his Thai and foreign lawyers, the UDD - they are all going to town on this. Not only that, but they are now using it as a weapon against all the PDRC leaders - none of whom echoed these remarks, while one in fact - Thaworn - publicly distanced himself from them. They are now even trying to tie this with the Democratic party, and are even taking the opportunity to go after one who has stayed laudably out of the limelight - Abhisit.

For the PDRC to remain on message, Suthep needs to take a back seat. The PDRC needs to get back on message - which is the protection and respect for the judicial process of the constitution. When the Constitutional Court and the National Anti-Corruption Commission deliver their verdicts, the PDRC needs to rally support for the courts. Because - to be sure - Pheu Thai, Thaksin, and the UDD will not. And if that happens, the true colours of Pheu Thai will be laid bare.

It is probably too late. Suthep has, in one series of outbursts , on done everything that he, and those who have given their lives, gained. As far as I can ascertain, he cannot find a legal right to do what he is promising. If this is so, he then will be showing the same disdain for the legal system that we think the PTP has shown.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

It doesn't seem to matter what each side says or does. The society is deeply polarized by Thaksin. People who hate him are not going to stop supporting Suthep just because of some slightly incoherent ramblings which were anyway intended as an attack against disrespect shown by PT and the red shirts for the courts and independent agencies. The call to arms and separatism by the red shirts and the interior minister and the deputy commerce minister didn't make much difference either but drew attention to them which is what Suthep is doing. Even flagrant use of weapons by either side and atrocities like the red shirt attacks on children at Trat and Big C don't diminish the two sides' support.

So what will be the effect of a few ill chosen and distorted words be. Do Suthep's supporters just abandon him and surrender the country to Shinawatra kleptocracy for ever?

The only thing that will end this situation permanently will be the removal of the root cause in the form of the demise of Thaksin.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

This is no comment one way or the other on Suthep's verbal ramblings... But just a question.

Is there any real difference between a military coup, of which Thailand has had made, vs. a, for lack of a better term, a "people's coup"?

AFAIK, the military have no legal right under any Thai law to overthrow a sitting, elected Thai government -- no matter how bad it may be. Yet they've done so many times.

So how would a people's coup be any different -- other than that the military has the weapons and force to better execute such a thing, compared to the average citizens on the street. Although, these days, based on the numbers of shootings and grenade attacks occurring, the citizens on the street seem to be pretty well armed.

Not really.

In reality there can only be the legal assumption of an political mandate. All the rest is illegal.

What he said was really quite scary and says a lot about what his real agenda is. I can't believe after all these years of seeing that the Shins had an agenda, that anyone believes that Suthep doesn't have one.

The default position about any politician (more so in thailand), should be that he is a lying, deceitful, self serving piece of s**t. Why anyone really believes he is doing this to save the country is frankly delusional

I'm not sure what you're saying "not really" to...

The general proposition I was raising, was that a people's coup would be not much different in Thai legal terms than a military coup. And there certainly have been plenty of military coups. In other words, they're both equally illegal under the law. But as history has proven here, that hasn't served as much of an impediment.