Yingluck questions Constitutional Court for accepting case against her

[philw]

To bring it back on topic,

New York Times on the impending judicial coup in Thailand

By Bangkok Pundit Apr 09, 2014

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Some interesting points which go against the majority Yingluck haters on here.

The article actually is stating what is obvious to any body interested, let's hope the eventual outcome is not too bloody.

“It no longer makes sense to attempt to explain the current political situation in Thailand by relying on legal principles,” Verapat Pariyawong, a lawyer and commentator, said in a Facebook posting. “The current situation is more or less a phenomenon of raw politics whereby the rule of law is conveniently stretched and stripped to fit a political goal.”

I particularly like

“We all know elections are evil,” Mr. Wicha said at the time, arguing that power must be transferred into the hands of judges rather than elected representatives, who he said had caused the country to “collapse.”

“People, especially academics who want to see the Constitution lead to genuine democracy, are naïve,”

And that's from a CC Judge who will be hearing the case.

These illuminating words were uttered in 2007.

Impartiality, anyone ??

Edited April 9, 2014 by philw

[djjamie]

A lot of people post a lot of things on FB. That is their opinion. My opinion on the lunar landing may be different than the next persons which may be different than the next persons. They are opinions. They are not law.

Well done on yingluck stating her opinion. Now we all know her opinion lets move forward and see what the Constitutional Courts ruling is on her transfer of Thawil.

My opinion is she will be removed from office, but then….that's only my opinion.

ya and no one cares about YOUR opinion because it's based upon bias, ignorance and prejudice

I have no doubt the yellow judicial coup will proceed UNTIL the Thai nation rises - and rise it will against the Amaart control infrastructure

No one? Who is no one? You?

I stated that it was yinglucks opinion. Nothing more and nothing less. It was yinglucks opinion. That cannot be denied.

Based on bias, ignorance and prejudice? That is your opinion. I respect that opinion. That is part of democracy. Respecting others opinion yet offering a different view point to rebut that. Democracy is NOT demonizing the opposition by stating they are ignorant, biased and prejudiced. Well done for highlighting how a democracy DOESNT work.

Judicial coup? So if yingluck is guilty beyond reasonable doubt is it still a judicial coup or a correct result? Maybe a judicial coup is a cop out for unaccountability.

As stated before, if you reply, don't demonize me, don't be condescending, don't quote me out of context and don't change the subject and don't cherry pick when replying. Or as I have seen in the last 2 hours, maybe that is simply too hard for some UDD supporters...

Edited April 9, 2014 by djjamie

[bigbamboo]

A lot of people post a lot of things on FB. That is their opinion. My opinion on the lunar landing may be different than the next persons which may be different than the next persons. They are opinions. They are not law.

Well done on yingluck stating her opinion. Now we all know her opinion lets move forward and see what the Constitutional Courts ruling is on her transfer of Thawil.

My opinion is she will be removed from office, but then….that's only my opinion.

ya and no one cares about YOUR opinion because it's based upon bias, ignorance and prejudice

I have no doubt the yellow judicial coup will proceed UNTIL the Thai nation rises - and rise it will against the Amaart control infrastructure

Dream on.

The Thai nation has enough trouble rising after lunch.

[djjamie]

To bring it back on topic,

New York Times on the impending judicial coup in Thailand

By Bangkok Pundit Apr 09, 2014

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Some interesting points which go against the majority Yingluck haters on here.

The article actually is stating what is obvious to any body interested, let's hope the eventual outcome is not too bloody.

“It no longer makes sense to attempt to explain the current political situation in Thailand by relying on legal principles,” Verapat Pariyawong, a lawyer and commentator, said in a Facebook posting. “The current situation is more or less a phenomenon of raw politics whereby the rule of law is conveniently stretched and stripped to fit a political goal.”

I particularly like

“We all know elections are evil,” Mr. Wicha said at the time, arguing that power must be transferred into the hands of judges rather than elected representatives, who he said had caused the country to “collapse.”

“People, especially academics who want to see the Constitution lead to genuine democracy, are naïve,”

And that's from a CC Judge who will be hearing the case.

These illuminating words were uttered in 2007.

Impartiality, anyone ??

Say hi to Fryslan boppe for me. He lives in 2007 as well.

If you want to use quotes from the past to represent current events then can I have a go?

Lets time travel back to 1992. Thaksin quoted that "I have today because you gave it to me" referring to the general that instigated the 1992 coup that brought unfound wealth to thaksin.

And that quote was from from thaksin who is stating the last coup was undemocratic...

Impartiality anyone?

[northernjohn]

She is supposed to be preparing a defense instead of posting on Facebook.

 
BANGKOK: -- April 9, 2014 3:29 pmCaretaker Prime Minister Yingluck 
Shinawatra Wednesday questioned the decision of the Constitutional Court to 
proceed with a petition against her related to the transfer of the National 
Security Council Chief.Yingluck posted a message on her 
Facebook wall that it was unprecedented for the Constitutional Court to take up 
a case related to personnel administration for deliberation.She said the 
Constitutional Court took up the case for deliberation although the Supreme 
Administrative Court had already made a ruling in the issue and although the 
government had already reinstated Thawil Pliensri as the NSC secretary 
general.

Some how I don't think that is going to do it. But it will give the red shirts encouragement. they think her s--t doesn't stink.

[philw]

To bring it back on topic,

New York Times on the impending judicial coup in Thailand

By Bangkok Pundit Apr 09, 2014

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Some interesting points which go against the majority Yingluck haters on here.

The article actually is stating what is obvious to any body interested, let's hope the eventual outcome is not too bloody.

“It no longer makes sense to attempt to explain the current political situation in Thailand by relying on legal principles,” Verapat Pariyawong, a lawyer and commentator, said in a Facebook posting. “The current situation is more or less a phenomenon of raw politics whereby the rule of law is conveniently stretched and stripped to fit a political goal.”

I particularly like

“We all know elections are evil,” Mr. Wicha said at the time, arguing that power must be transferred into the hands of judges rather than elected representatives, who he said had caused the country to “collapse.”

“People, especially academics who want to see the Constitution lead to genuine democracy, are naïve,”

And that's from a CC Judge who will be hearing the case.

These illuminating words were uttered in 2007.

Impartiality, anyone ??

Say hi to Fryslan boppe for me. He lives in 2007 as well.

If you want to use quotes from the past to represent current events then can I have a go?

Lets time travel back to 1992. Thaksin quoted that "I have today because you gave it to me" referring to the general that instigated the 1992 coup that brought unfound wealth to thaksin.

And that quote was from from thaksin who is stating the last coup was undemocratic...

Impartiality anyone?

That you get 4 instant likes for an incomprehensible post says a lot about this forum.

Does the double "from" come about from froth on the keyboard ??

Just out of curiosity, did you look at the link i provided ??

[northernjohn]

To bring it back on topic,

New York Times on the impending judicial coup in Thailand

By Bangkok Pundit Apr 09, 2014

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Some interesting points which go against the majority Yingluck haters on here.

The article actually is stating what is obvious to any body interested, let's hope the eventual outcome is not too bloody.

“It no longer makes sense to attempt to explain the current political situation in Thailand by relying on legal principles,” Verapat Pariyawong, a lawyer and commentator, said in a Facebook posting. “The current situation is more or less a phenomenon of raw politics whereby the rule of law is conveniently stretched and stripped to fit a political goal.”

I particularly like

“We all know elections are evil,” Mr. Wicha said at the time, arguing that power must be transferred into the hands of judges rather than elected representatives, who he said had caused the country to “collapse.”

“People, especially academics who want to see the Constitution lead to genuine democracy, are naïve,”

And that's from a CC Judge who will be hearing the case.

These illuminating words were uttered in 2007.

Impartiality, anyone ??

Say hi to Fryslan boppe for me. He lives in 2007 as well.

If you want to use quotes from the past to represent current events then can I have a go?

Lets time travel back to 1992. Thaksin quoted that "I have today because you gave it to me" referring to the general that instigated the 1992 coup that brought unfound wealth to thaksin.

And that quote was from from thaksin who is stating the last coup was undemocratic...

Impartiality anyone?

Well there is no question about it. I am not a Thaksin fan. Why any one would back a man who has caused so much harm to the country is beyond me. It is no secret that he is the real Prime Minister for Thailand backed up by the red shirt militia and people he has been in one way or another paying off.

How ever if the political situation has sunk so low for the PTP that their Prime Minister has to resort to Facebook for her defense it should give people a clue as to what kind of a leader they have. I doubt Thaksin told her to do that. She is just a plain out and out Dumb Dora coward.

But she does OK on Photo Ops.

Edit

The article actually is stating what is obvious to any body interested, let's hope the eventual outcome is not too bloody.

First off the New York times is not any better for a source of information than the Nation is. They have gone down hill.

Secondly it will only be as Bloody as Yingluck and her Red Shirt backers make it.

Edited April 9, 2014 by northernjohn

[philw]

She is supposed to be preparing a defense instead of posting on Facebook.

 
BANGKOK: -- April 9, 2014 3:29 pmCaretaker Prime Minister Yingluck 
Shinawatra Wednesday questioned the decision of the Constitutional Court to 
proceed with a petition against her related to the transfer of the National 
Security Council Chief.Yingluck posted a message on her 
Facebook wall that it was unprecedented for the Constitutional Court to take up 
a case related to personnel administration for deliberation.She said the 
Constitutional Court took up the case for deliberation although the Supreme 
Administrative Court had already made a ruling in the issue and although the 
government had already reinstated Thawil Pliensri as the NSC secretary 
general.

Some how I don't think that is going to do it. But it will give the red shirts encouragement. they think her s--t doesn't stink.

It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm.

That is some serious scratching that you're doing.

Have a cup of tea............

[djjamie]

She is supposed to be preparing a defense instead of posting on Facebook.

 
BANGKOK: -- April 9, 2014 3:29 pmCaretaker Prime Minister Yingluck 
Shinawatra Wednesday questioned the decision of the Constitutional Court to 
proceed with a petition against her related to the transfer of the National 
Security Council Chief.Yingluck posted a message on her 
Facebook wall that it was unprecedented for the Constitutional Court to take up 
a case related to personnel administration for deliberation.She said the 
Constitutional Court took up the case for deliberation although the Supreme 
Administrative Court had already made a ruling in the issue and although the 
government had already reinstated Thawil Pliensri as the NSC secretary 
general.

Some how I don't think that is going to do it. But it will give the red shirts encouragement. they think her s--t doesn't stink.

It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm.

That is some serious scratching that you're doing.

Have a cup of tea............

I know porn sites that are read at 10:02pm…BY ME!!!

So according to you, is a worthy read.

The comparisons are fanciful if misguided, but are truly appreciated and enjoyed by the majority.

[northernjohn]

What would you do if you were the CEO of a company and you knew that one of your senior employees was out campaigning against your company, calling you and your family crooks?

Doesn't everybody have a right to support which ever polictal party they chose even if they are employed by the government?

In a Democracy yes but not in a dictatorship.

[philw]

She is supposed to be preparing a defense instead of posting on Facebook.

 
BANGKOK: -- April 9, 2014 3:29 pmCaretaker Prime Minister Yingluck 
Shinawatra Wednesday questioned the decision of the Constitutional Court to 
proceed with a petition against her related to the transfer of the National 
Security Council Chief.Yingluck posted a message on her 
Facebook wall that it was unprecedented for the Constitutional Court to take up 
a case related to personnel administration for deliberation.She said the 
Constitutional Court took up the case for deliberation although the Supreme 
Administrative Court had already made a ruling in the issue and although the 
government had already reinstated Thawil Pliensri as the NSC secretary 
general.

Some how I don't think that is going to do it. But it will give the red shirts encouragement. they think her s--t doesn't stink.

It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm.

That is some serious scratching that you're doing.

Have a cup of tea............

I know porn sites that are read at 10:02pm…BY ME!!!

So according to you, is a worthy read.

The comparisons are fanciful if misguided, but are truly appreciated and enjoyed by the majority.

A predictably stupid response.

Good night and I'm off for a cup of tea..

[Skywalker69]

A lot of people post a lot of things on FB. That is their opinion. My opinion on the lunar landing may be different than the next persons which may be different than the next persons. They are opinions. They are not law.

Well done on yingluck stating her opinion. Now we all know her opinion lets move forward and see what the Constitutional Courts ruling is on her transfer of Thawil.

My opinion is she will be removed from office, but then….that's only my opinion.

ya and no one cares about YOUR opinion because it's based upon bias, ignorance and prejudice

I have no doubt the yellow judicial coup will proceed UNTIL the Thai nation rises - and rise it will against the Amaart control infrastructure

ya and no one cares about YOUR opinion because it's based upon bias, ignorance and prejudice

Likewise, sir. Likewise.

[djjamie]

To bring it back on topic,

New York Times on the impending judicial coup in Thailand

By Bangkok Pundit Apr 09, 2014

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Some interesting points which go against the majority Yingluck haters on here.

The article actually is stating what is obvious to any body interested, let's hope the eventual outcome is not too bloody.

“It no longer makes sense to attempt to explain the current political situation in Thailand by relying on legal principles,” Verapat Pariyawong, a lawyer and commentator, said in a Facebook posting. “The current situation is more or less a phenomenon of raw politics whereby the rule of law is conveniently stretched and stripped to fit a political goal.”

I particularly like

“We all know elections are evil,” Mr. Wicha said at the time, arguing that power must be transferred into the hands of judges rather than elected representatives, who he said had caused the country to “collapse.”

“People, especially academics who want to see the Constitution lead to genuine democracy, are naïve,”

And that's from a CC Judge who will be hearing the case.

These illuminating words were uttered in 2007.

Impartiality, anyone ??

Say hi to Fryslan boppe for me. He lives in 2007 as well.

If you want to use quotes from the past to represent current events then can I have a go?

Lets time travel back to 1992. Thaksin quoted that "I have today because you gave it to me" referring to the general that instigated the 1992 coup that brought unfound wealth to thaksin.

And that quote was from from thaksin who is stating the last coup was undemocratic...

Impartiality anyone?

That you get 4 instant likes for an incomprehensible post says a lot about this forum.

Does the double "from" come about from froth on the keyboard ??

Just out of curiosity, did you look at the link i provided ??

So first sentence was off topic and a demonizing tactic.

Second sentence was something else that had nothing to add to the forum and strongly condescending.

Well done. You fit the PTP mould perfectly.

Third sentence was a question.

Lets look at the third sentence then!

When the link starts with asian correspondent I answer it as much as your ilk answers quotes that start with land destroyer. That is never. Which is why I never quote land destroyer. It makes me look silly and unable to defend an argument without referring to a one sided biased website.

Nice try and as my new default dictates due to your peers responses if you reply, don't demonize me, don't be condescending, don't quote me out of context and don't change the subject and don't cherry pick when replying otherwise you won't get a response. It will save me a lot of time.

AND it is an absolute shame that I have to state this when making comments. Some should know better.

Edited April 9, 2014 by djjamie

[djjamie]

She is supposed to be preparing a defense instead of posting on Facebook.

 
BANGKOK: -- April 9, 2014 3:29 pmCaretaker Prime Minister Yingluck 
Shinawatra Wednesday questioned the decision of the Constitutional Court to 
proceed with a petition against her related to the transfer of the National 
Security Council Chief.Yingluck posted a message on her 
Facebook wall that it was unprecedented for the Constitutional Court to take up 
a case related to personnel administration for deliberation.She said the 
Constitutional Court took up the case for deliberation although the Supreme 
Administrative Court had already made a ruling in the issue and although the 
government had already reinstated Thawil Pliensri as the NSC secretary 
general.

Some how I don't think that is going to do it. But it will give the red shirts encouragement. they think her s--t doesn't stink.

It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm.

That is some serious scratching that you're doing.

Have a cup of tea............

I know porn sites that are read at 10:02pm…BY ME!!!

So according to you, is a worthy read.

The comparisons are fanciful if misguided, but are truly appreciated and enjoyed by the majority.

A predictably stupid response.

Good night and I'm off for a cup of tea..

You stated that "It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm."

You said that. Not me. You did. You set a precedent that that if something is worth reading after 10pm it is worthy reading. I quote you where "It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm."

​Do you now renege that since it does not suit your agenda? Do you renounce your comments because it does not suit an agenda? Or will you simply state that you didn't say what you said, not unlike the UDD leader Nattawut did in regards to not supporting succession even though the evidence of which is widely available on youtube.

So what is it? A worthy read if someone reads it after 10pm or not a worth read? Comes down to agenda right?

I rest my case.

[northernjohn]

ya and no one cares about YOUR opinion because it's based upon bias, ignorance and prejudice

I have no doubt the yellow judicial coup will proceed UNTIL the Thai nation rises - and rise it will against the Amaart control infrastructure

ya and no one cares about YOUR opinion because it's based upon bias, ignorance and prejudice

Likewise, sir. Likewise.

binjalin what are you talking about. Who is the "Amaart" Do you think there is a chance that it is really the illuminati?

Also what are you talking about when you say "yellow judicial coup"

Any one who has been even glancing at the goings on knows the Yellow shirts are of no importance any more they shot their wad when they tried unsuccessfully to get Abhist to declare war on Cambodia.

[northernjohn]

It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm.

That is some serious scratching that you're doing.

Have a cup of tea............

I know porn sites that are read at 10:02pm…BY ME!!!

So according to you, is a worthy read.

The comparisons are fanciful if misguided, but are truly appreciated and enjoyed by the majority.

A predictably stupid response.

Good night and I'm off for a cup of tea..

You stated that "It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm."

You said that. Not me. You did. You set a precedent that that if something is worth reading after 10pm it is worthy reading. I quote you where "It shows her face book gets attention and is a worthy read, if such an ardent hater as yourself is reading it at 10pm."

​Do you now renege that since it does not suit your agenda? Do you renounce your comments because it does not suit an agenda? Or will you simply state that you didn't say what you said, not unlike the UDD leader Nattawut did in regards to not supporting succession even though the evidence of which is widely available on youtube.

So what is it? A worthy read if someone reads it after 10pm or not a worth read? Comes down to agenda right?

I rest my case.

Still with the love them or hate them no room for any thing like common sense.

[Throatwobbler]

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

What would you do if you were the CEO of a company and you knew that one of your senior employees was out campaigning against your company, calling you and your family crooks?

Doesn't everybody have a right to support which ever polictal party they chose even if they are employed by the government?

In a Democracy yes but not in a dictatorship.

Word of advice about richteacher.

[oneday]

If she had done nothing wrong why she worried?

I thought she would welcome the opportunity to prove she had done nothing wrong.

Right and no one in this country is ever unjustly accused and convicted because of purely political reasons.

[djjamie]

What would you do if you were the CEO of a company and you knew that one of your senior employees was out campaigning against your company, calling you and your family crooks?

I would charge them with defamation. Of course, if they didn't say that then the defamation suit would not hold. Was the CEO's defamation suit successful against the employees?

Which company are we talking about BTW.

This article is about yingluck questioning the CC in her perception that they overstepped their mark.

Seems you are unfamiliar with the background of Tawil's case. Please do some research.

Very familiar. As I stated this is about yingluck questioning the CC in her perception that they overstepped their mark.

So, was the "CEO" defamation suit successful? Did the employees actually slander the "CEO"?

So did she file a defamation suit against Thawil.

Here are a couple of examples of defamation suits she has filed before.

http://www.thailandnews.co/2014/03/three-former-democrat-mps-indicted-for-defaming-yingluck-shinawatra/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Yingluck-sues-Thai-Rath-cartoonist-for-defamation-30205358.html

If he slandered her she would file a suit. So where is it? Where is the link showing him slandering her?

Or were you just "pretending" when you said "calling you and your family crooks?" Was that only said to suit an agenda?

[SICHONSTEVE]

She should have fired him instead. If she fired 50% of all govt employees no one would miss them. They are worthless. In every country. They should start at the top...excluding the PM and see how much work gets done then...

Excluding the 'biggest waster' of them all!!!!

This is like throwing all of the good apples out of the barrel whilst leaving the bad 'rotting' one inside!!!

[Dogmatix]

If she had done nothing wrong why she worried?

I thought she would welcome the opportunity to prove she had done nothing wrong.

The problem is that the Supreme Administrative Court has already established that she did do something wrong. So it is logical to find out whether it was also unconstitutional or whether wrong doing is encouraged by the constitution.

I think it is indeed unprecedented but it is clearly provided for in the Constitution and some one needs to set all precedents. Owing to the admin court ruling this is the perfect case to set the precedent one way or the other. Yingluck should be delighted to make legal history and stand out from the crowd.

[kerrysum]

If she had done nothing wrong why she worried?

I thought she would welcome the opportunity to prove she had done nothing wrong.

My thought exactly........

[kerrysum]

Here is my point,

Why do leaders of nations post on, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media? I thought the ideal was to lead a nation????? Maybe just a selfie moment? A little bit crazy in my view.... No appearance or formal press ops? This really makes me wonder...... If their lives consist of such things, then why are they in leadership rolls, and offer no press conference??????

[SICHONSTEVE]

Here is my point,

Why do leaders of nations post on, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media? I thought the ideal was to lead a nation????? Maybe just a selfie moment? A little bit crazy in my view.... No appearance or formal press ops? This really makes me wonder...... If their lives consist of such things, then why are they in leadership rolls, and offer no press conference??????

Press conference!!!! ...........Heaven forbid, they might ask her a question, in front of all of those people.

[rubl]

wow, Ms. Yingluck really spelled it out, didn't she.

The SAC interfered with the government's appointment of staff, not the C.C. The re-instatement of Thawill doesn't change the fact that the SAC ruled his transfer to an inactive Advisor of the PM post illegal.

The rest is equally distorting laws and issues. Just the type of stuff we're seeing more and more on facebook, allegations without real background, without real value.

Curious that you understand all the ramifications of this case but had so much trouble understanding the political sacking of the Police Chief by abhisit - and he didn't even reinstate the Police Chief when told to by the Police Federation that he was the chairman of!

Yes, I can see why Yingluck feels that this is just part of the general double standards applied to anyone who isn't "the right people".

"allegations without real background, without real value" - the sad thing is you actually can't (or more likely, refuse to) see anything wrong with this situation.

You deserve suthep, believe me.

.

Pity really that your memory is so selective and so distracting from this topic on how Ms. Yingluck complains to be treated unfairly.

Mind you, I wouldn't wish Thaksin on you, I have compassion even with fools, idiots, the misguided and fellow posters of course.

Edited April 10, 2014 by rubl

[rubl]

Breathtaking naivety.

The fact that 40 candidates aligned with PTP won seats in the recent election put an end to any hope of impeaching Yingluck (they can't achieve the 3/5 votes required). It is why the focus has now swung completely over to the Thawil transfer case (rice scheme corruption case is all but forgotten). With the Thawil case the courts can (corruptly) get rid of Yingluck without any need of assistance from the senate.

Its as anti-democratic as you can get.

The Peoples Constitution of 1997 is the high-water mark for freedom and democracy in Thailand and is the best place to return to to set the country back on the right path to justice and modernity.

Oh boy, again someone who not only can't count, but diverts to death a nice topic.

Now a last time (hopefully), Ms. Yingluck complains that she already re-instated that Thawill person and therefor the case should be closed. Well that's as wishful thinking as her older brother used to display with his tearful 'honest mistake' statements.

Nope, I don't get the death reference.

Your naivety is breathtaking indeed, but I suspect it's just wilful ignorance. Yingluck is not complaining that Thawil has been reinstated and therefore the case should be closed she is making the very valid point that the case shouldn't have been opened in the first place. There is a difference, rubl, though it would be pointless trying to point it out to you.

I suspect that when you face difficult decisions in life, you probably ask yourself, "What would Diana have done?"

your insolence and continuous suggesting others are 'naive' starts to get a bit annoying, my dear fabs. Also it becomes less and less believable with all the nonsense you use to 'back up' your suggestion.

Ms. Yingluck seems to say she re-instated this Thawill fellow and that should be it. She seems unaware that the Senate can petition the C.C. on this case and the C.C has the right to accept the case. Now of course if both you and she feel the CC shouldn't have then I aexpect some solid reasoning, not just a "situation corrected, next'.

PS no idea what Diana would have done, neither really understand who this Diana would be, nor why what she might have done would be relevant to this topic. Unless you refer to the late 'Diana' and want to suggest a link with Ms. Yingluck ? Weird, really.

Edited April 10, 2014 by rubl

[diehard60]

Several off topic and slanderous posts and quotes of them have been removed.

Why? They could be fun to read.

[rubl]

The Supreme Administrative Court ruled on March 7 that while the prime minister could exercise her judgement in transferring personnel, there must be plausible reasons to justify her decisions. Transfers should be free from bias or political preferences.

​Lol. How about judicial decisions & rulings? The hypocrisy would be humorous if it wasn't so destructive.

So why can't she follow the rules like the dems?

Because she's a Shinawatra and therefore above the law?

They will need to buy the Palm Jumeira at this rate

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"The Central Administrative Court ruled yesterday that former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva's order in 2009 to dismiss then-national police chief Patcharawat Wongsuwan should be revoked"

"The surprise decision by the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) not to pursue the charge against TPI Polene of siphoning off funds is a big boon for the ruling Democrat Party in its legal battle in which the party's dissolution is at stake."

Oh boy, another comparison between unrelated issues. Ms. Yingluck and her followers must be getting real worried.

Even the alleged TPI Polene donation of 279 million Baht which never got past 'he said' state is being used. Pity really that the court ruled on the procedure to come to the case only. It would have been worthwhile to see how desperate the prosecution would get in being able to present any 'real' evidence rather than only the alleged.

So, Ms. Yingluck not happy. Well, that's a pity. Mind you the just application of the law doesn't always make all people happy. She'll get used to it with the other cases still in progress.

[Halion]

In my opinion politicians who utilize Facebook see themselves as more of a celebrity than anything else allowing them to fully exercise their megalomania and narcissism to its full potential.

[rickirs]

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

What would you do if you were the CEO of a company and you knew that one of your senior employees was out campaigning against your company, calling you and your family crooks?

I understand your point, but in Government not all people are always on your side, as you INHERIT bureaucrats and have to accept not everyone believes the same as you do. That is LIFE and Government. BUT if that person is in a position whereas making a POLITICAL move can be a violation of a law then you should be careful.

It would appear in this case that this was something that should not have occurred and ths the Constituional Court making its decision.

I am no expert in ANY law as one Judge will rule this way and another Judge will overturn the previous decision. But there MUST be grounds or this would not have such an impact upon the Yingluck administration.

So I guess it is a case of Naughty Yinny

Many governments employ too types of employees: civil servants and leadership.

Civil servants or civil serviec employees are nonpolitical and protected usually by job descriptions and grievance procedures. Their employment follows prescribed competitive hiring practices and removal must be made for cause only as prescribed by their terms of performance. Civil Service employees are typical required to be nonpolitical in the work place.

The leadership or "breaucrats" are those executive positions typically several levels above the frontline manager. First tier executives who report directly to the top leader of the government like the PM or President are appointed positions. Their appointments are typically politically motivated to assure the leader's political agenda is carried out through to the operation of the civil servants. Thus, when there is a political change in the top leadership, it is not uncommon and quite practical for previous administration political appointees to be dismissed from the new government administration. Yingluck had the right to replace the appointee due to political conflict with her administration but apparently valued his employment enough to merely transfer him.