'Chaikasem playing with Thai govt rivals': Thai analysis

[webfact]

NATION ANALYSIS
'Chaikasem playing with govt rivals'
PIYANUCH THAMNUKASETCHAI
THE NATION

JUSTICE MINISTER'S IDEA TO ASK |FOR A ROYAL JUDGEMENT SEEN AS A SHOT AT PDRC

BANGKOK: -- JUSTICE MINISTER Chaikasem Nitisiri has made a subtle riposte to retaliate against the People's Democratic Reform Committee by floating the idea of seeking a royal judgement in case of a political vacuum.

As a legal guru of the Pheu Thai Party, the proposal was by no means a slip of the tongue. It was deliberately raised to respond to the PDRC's repeated call for a non-partisan prime minister to be appointed by His Majesty the King under Article 7 of the Constitution.

It drew heavy criticism from both his party and the PDRC, but after all, since the PDRC plans to invoke Article 7 to seek a prime minister from His Majesty, why can't the ruling coalition cite the same article to ask His Majesty whether the caretaker government could remain in office?

Chaikasem had expressed fear that the Constitutional Court would rule against Yingluck for transferring Thawil Pliensri from the position of secretary-general of the National Security Council, causing her to step down.

In that scenario, the entire Cabinet would be ousted along with her, creating a political vacuum.

Article 7 states that: "Whenever no provision under this Constitution is applicable to any case, it shall be decided in accordance with the constitutional practice in the democratic regime of the government with the King as Head of State".

"I believe the Constitutional Court will rule that the prime minister and the Cabinet must be terminated. This will be unprecedented. To prevent a political vacuum, Article 7 must be invoked.

"The Cabinet is appointed by the King but the Constitutional Court will rule that it must be removed from office, so the King should be asked what he thinks should be the right process," Chaikasem said.

His Majesty should be asked whether the Cabinet appointed by him should go on working since he has not issued a royal command to disband it.

His proposal was condemned for improperly dragging the Monarch into politics.

It was seen as being well planned because Ruangkrai Leekijwattana, a member of the Pheu Thai legal team, also came up with a similar prediction for the court's ruling.

An aide of Chaikasem confirmed to The Nation that the minister did not make a mistake and was not testing the political waters. However, he was returning the PDRC's sword against the anti-government movement.


-- The Nation 2014-04-14

[WoopyDoo]

It drew heavy criticism from both his party and the PDRC, but after all, since the PDRC plans to invoke Article 7 to seek a prime minister from His Majesty, why can't the ruling coalition cite the same article to ask His Majesty whether the caretaker government could remain in office?

Is this guy for real????

What ruling coalition?

Parliament was dissolved months ago, that 'ruling' coalition is no longer in place. In fact the PTP are no longer ruling...... IT'S A CARETAKER CABINET!!

Seriously, are these actually the best politicians that Thailand can come up with?..... No wonder the country is a mess and an international laughing stock!!!!!

Edited April 13, 2014 by WoopyDoo

[thesetat2013]

It drew heavy criticism from both his party and the PDRC, but after all, since the PDRC plans to invoke Article 7 to seek a prime minister from His Majesty, why can't the ruling coalition cite the same article to ask His Majesty whether the caretaker government could remain in office?

Is this guy for real????

What ruling coalition?

Parliament was dissolved months ago, that 'ruling' coalition is no longer in place. In fact the PTP are no longer ruling...... IT'S A CARETAKER CABINET!!

Seriously, are these actually the best politicians that Thailand can come up with?..... No wonder the country is a mess and an international laughing stock!!!!!

Agreed! But since the PTP don't accept court rulings or laws or even follow the constitution they still believe that they are in power.

What gets me is their audacity to involve the King into ther parties bid to keep their party in control and keep YL as pm even if the courts rule against them. Basically they want the Kings approval for them to ignore a Senate ruling. They know already they are history soon as the courts have already provided enough evidence to make a case against YL and she has no defence except ignorance in this.

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[NongKhaiKid]

He may be playing with the govt's rivals but I would suggest he's also playing with fire if he tries to involve the monarchy in politics.

[Tatsujin]

Meanwhile back in Thaksin-land, the last (incomplete) election showed a massive majority supporting Thaksin/PT still, the dissolution of Parliament means nothing according to their legal experts, and as sitting Parliament they still believe they cannot be removed.

[Tatsujin]

So:

1. When does anyone think PT will ask HM to allow PT to remain in power?

2. And the million dollar question, what will the response be?

Personally, I think #1 will come next week, after Songkran, but before any rulings, and #2 will be them rolling around in laughter on the floor before finally saying "no" and passing the responsibility back to the Courts.

[Fryslan boppe]

"It was deliberately raised to respond to the PDRC's repeated call for a non-partisan prime minister..."

That will be their first act when they 'pull the coup trigger"

Change the constitution to enable what is described in above quote.....A motive perfectly consistent with unelectables.

By non-partisan, they actually mean someone from their own ranks....They floated the name of the Anti-democrat Annand...the elitist of all elitists, the author of the ant-democracy "All Politicians are corrupt" line.

So what makes them think the electoral majority would ever accept such a thing?........Didn't they wake up to that problem, after trying that idiocy of elevating a non-nationally elected AV........Didn't they see what happens to someone like that, when he was strutting about the international political stage in Pattaya as if he had electoral legitimacy? Don't they see what happens everytime the Elitist AV wanders outside his PAD-Dem circles.

Once exposed to it, pretty hard to put the genie back into the bottle......The majority electorate accustomed to electing a Prime Minister as the leader of the Party they select to govern, aren't going to put up with this unelectable dreaming and folderol.

But I think they know......The coup advocates are treading very carefully, delaying and delaying. Avoiding that coup-trigger for fear of the repercussions....Actually, they are in a bit of a quandary....not sure what to do, now that they have brought it this far....they are afraid to go back, and afraid to go forward.....It is why they yearn for the good old days before 2006. They would have had their coup long ago, if things were like they were back then..

[gabruce]

Meanwhile back in Thaksin-land, the last (incomplete) election showed a massive majority supporting Thaksin/PT still, the dissolution of Parliament means nothing according to their legal experts, and as sitting Parliament they still believe they cannot be removed.

One party elections do tend to return majorities.

[Costas2008]

He is not playing with his rivals.

He is trying to cover his stupid mistake, before he is kicked out from his bosses.

[Local Drunk]

"It was deliberately raised to respond to the PDRC's repeated call for a non-partisan prime minister..."

That will be their first act when they 'pull the coup trigger"

Change the constitution to enable what is described in above quote.....A motive perfectly consistent with unelectables.

By non-partisan, they actually mean someone from their own ranks....They floated the name of the Anti-democrat Annand...the elitist of all elitists, the author of the ant-democracy "All Politicians are corrupt" line.

So what makes them think the electoral majority would ever accept such a thing?........Didn't they wake up to that problem, after trying that idiocy of elevating a non-nationally elected AV........Didn't they see what happens to someone like that, when he was strutting about the international political stage in Pattaya as if he had electoral legitimacy? Don't they see what happens everytime the Elitist AV wanders outside his PAD-Dem circles.

Once exposed to it, pretty hard to put the genie back into the bottle......The majority electorate accustomed to electing a Prime Minister as the leader of the Party they select to govern, aren't going to put up with this unelectable dreaming and folderol.

But I think they know......The coup advocates are treading very carefully, delaying and delaying. Avoiding that coup-trigger for fear of the repercussions....Actually, they are in a bit of a quandary....not sure what to do, now that they have brought it this far....they are afraid to go back, and afraid to go forward.....It is why they yearn for the good old days before 2006. They would have had their coup long ago, if things were like they were back then..

Another overly and copiously wordy post that says absolutely nothing. Thank you for sharing.

[Tatsujin]

Meanwhile back in Thaksin-land, the last (incomplete) election showed a massive majority supporting Thaksin/PT still, the dissolution of Parliament means nothing according to their legal experts, and as sitting Parliament they still believe they cannot be removed.

One party elections do tend to return majorities.

Based on the numbers we know from the last failed election, what "majority" are you talking about? The "majority" chose NOT to vote for PT.

[ChrisY1]

He may be playing with the govt's rivals but I would suggest he's also playing with fire if he tries to involve the monarchy in politics.

I think he's an old goat and just playing with himself.....like the rest of them..pretty much useless!

[rickirs]

improperly dragging the Monarch into politics.

Thailand is a constitutional monarchy, under which form of government the King serves the People of Thailand as "HEAD OF STATE", under the terms of the 1997 Constitution of Thailand. The Constitution reads in part (selected clauses):

"Bills passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate become law upon approval of the bill by the King. The King has the power to approve or disapprove bills adopted by the Parliament; bills do not become effective as laws without the approval of the King, unless later re-approved by the Parliament. If the King disapproves a bill as a proposed law, the bill is returned to the Parliament to consider the King's objections. If the parliament nonetheless approves the law again, by at least a 2/3 vote of both houses of the parliament, the bill is returned to the King for reconsideration. If the King still declines to sign the bill into law, the Prime Minister is authorized to promulgate the bill as a law by publishing it in the Government Gazette, the official newspaper of the Government, as if the King had signed it."

"Upon recommendation of the Prime Minister, the King appoints all Ministers and Deputy Ministers."

"The Council of Ministries has the power to submit urgent legislation to the King for immediate implementation by Royal Decree..."

The King is most certainly an integral part of Thailand politics. Without the King there is no "Thailand." And knowing that the King is a vital part of Thailand politics is why Suthep seeks reassurances from the King that (in a hypothetical scenario) when Yingluck is forced out as PM and her government disbanded that the King will appoint the People's Committee as the interim government. If that isn't politics, Thailand doesn't grow rice.

[Scamper]

As everyone strives to have their opinion heard, the Constitutional Court is actually slated to make a ruling, and that ruling will need to be respected and adhered to by all. There is no need to second guess. The Constitutional Court ruling will be clear. The only problems that could emanate from that would be if that ruling were not accepted or adhered to. It's as simple as that. Pheu Thai likes to maintain a narrative that there are options if you don't actually want to accept a Constitutional Court ruling. But that narrative only holds if you believe - as Pheu Thai and their supporters apparently do - that there are judicial rulings that are to be respected and adhered to and judicial rulings that are not. As long as you entertain that kind of narrative, you make your respect of the law conditional, and thereby forfeit credibility in the argument.

[Bluespunk]

"In that scenario, the entire Cabinet would be ousted along with her, creating a political vacuum."

Creating? So what we have now is stability and political leadership? Wake up son.

[tomhell]

Are you real ? Are you Australian ? Are you over 60 Years ?

Questions Questions Questions.

Thailand was a mess before. Some people always have the same boring answer.

King, Nation, Military, Suthep, Obey and listen to authority.

Boring Boring Boring

Tom

It drew heavy criticism from both his party and the PDRC, but after all, since the PDRC plans to invoke Article 7 to seek a prime minister from His Majesty, why can't the ruling coalition cite the same article to ask His Majesty whether the caretaker government could remain in office?

Is this guy for real????

What ruling coalition?

Parliament was dissolved months ago, that 'ruling' coalition is no longer in place. In fact the PTP are no longer ruling...... IT'S A CARETAKER CABINET!!

Seriously, are these actually the best politicians that Thailand can come up with?..... No wonder the country is a mess and an international laughing stock!!!!!

[Morch]

Meanwhile back in Thaksin-land, the last (incomplete) election showed a massive majority supporting Thaksin/PT still, the dissolution of Parliament means nothing according to their legal experts, and as sitting Parliament they still believe they cannot be removed.

One party elections do tend to return majorities.

Based on the numbers we know from the last failed election, what "majority" are you talking about? The "majority" chose NOT to vote for PT.

Both sides trying to claim the to have majority.

A bit absurd when there were no election results, and the elections annulled.

The majority didn't vote. That's all you know.

They also didn't vote for the Democrat party.

[Tatsujin]

Meanwhile back in Thaksin-land, the last (incomplete) election showed a massive majority supporting Thaksin/PT still, the dissolution of Parliament means nothing according to their legal experts, and as sitting Parliament they still believe they cannot be removed.

One party elections do tend to return majorities.

Based on the numbers we know from the last failed election, what "majority" are you talking about? The "majority" chose NOT to vote for PT.

Both sides trying to claim the to have majority.

A bit absurd when there were no election results, and the elections annulled.

The majority didn't vote. That's all you know.

They also didn't vote for the Democrat party.

Most if not all the results have been released.

The Dems didn't contest so of course they got no votes, but it was VERY clear to see that people were not voting for PT n the same way as before.

[Morch]

One party elections do tend to return majorities.

Based on the numbers we know from the last failed election, what "majority" are you talking about? The "majority" chose NOT to vote for PT.

Both sides trying to claim the to have majority.

A bit absurd when there were no election results, and the elections annulled.

The majority didn't vote. That's all you know.

They also didn't vote for the Democrat party.

Most if not all the results have been released.

The Dems didn't contest so of course they got no votes, but it was VERY clear to see that people were not voting for PT n the same way as before.

Guess I wasn't aware of that. Would appreciate a link if you got one.

Quite probable that PTP lost some support, but considering the lead they had on the Democrat party last time, not sure how much it actually matters.

[MaxLee]

I see some posts being deleted soon,....

.... just saying...

Neither side will just give in and drag the innocent bystanders to their doom. The real losers are the innocent hardworking people in this country, just because of one thing: the greed for absolute rule and POWER...

[Anon999]

Meanwhile back in Thaksin-land, the last (incomplete) election showed a massive majority supporting Thaksin/PT still, the dissolution of Parliament means nothing according to their legal experts, and as sitting Parliament they still believe they cannot be removed.

One party elections do tend to return majorities.

Based on the numbers we know from the last failed election, what "majority" are you talking about? The "majority" chose NOT to vote for PT.

Maybe there was some confusion in the translation into Dutch?