ANALYSIS
Yingluck heads for judicial showdown

BANGKOK: -- Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra faces acourt hearing this week that could bar her from office, a move that would be in line with the aims of recent anti-government protests, but that would plunge the country into uncharted waters.

Officials have hinted that even a ruling against her and her cabinet could leave enough of it intact to limp on to fresh elections, or might even not be implemented, while opposition activists have hinted at the possibility of wider civil conflict.

On Friday, Yingluck is due before the Constitutional Court to defend herself against charges that she abused her premiership in 2011 when she transferred the chief of the National Security Council, allegedly to assure the advancement of one of her relatives.

A ruling is expected before the end of the month, with Yingluck’s chances of success rated as low. Last month, the case was before the Administrative Court, which said Yingluck’s removal of the council’s chief Thawil Pliensri three years ago was unlawful.

If the Constitutional Court finds her guilty of transferring a civil servant for personal benefit, in breach of the constitution, she and her cabinet, whose members also approved the transfer, could face dismissal.

Other parts of government are already out of action. The parliament is not sitting after elections this year failed to elect enough members, and the new senate is pending validation. If the court dismisses the premier and cabinet, it could create the political vacuum the People’s Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC),which has led months of protests, has been striving for since November.

The PDRC wants an appointed prime minister to rule with an interim cabinet for about a year while reforms are passed before an election is held.

But the current cabinet is not expected to leave quietly. "If the court steps across the boundary too much, do you think their decision will be respected?" said Deputy Prime Minister Pongthep Thepkanjana, a former judge and justice minister.

He also said dismissal is not technically possible since "(T)he prime minister and all cabinet members have been out of our positions since Parliament was dissolved on December 9."

"We cannot be ousted a second time," he said. Others argue that 16 of the current caretaker ministers were not in office when Thawil was transferred, and so should not be implicated.With that much of the cabinet still in office, the caretaker administration could hang on until a general election.

Should the Constitutional Court sack the entire cabinet, it risks apolitical backlash.The court has a track record of judgement against the Yingluck government and her Pheu Thai Party, whose de facto leader is her brother, fugitive former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, living abroad since 2008 to avoid a two-year sentence for corruption.

Thaksin-led political parties have won every election in Thailand since 2001, with a focus on populist policies aimed at the less affluent.Pheu Thai and their street demonstration support movement the Red Shirts have said they will oppose any attempt to appoint an unelected premier.

"The Red Shirts and others will fight," predicted caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisaeng, a senior Pheu Thai member.

"It will be a big conflict, but probably not civil war. Thai people are not brave enough for that."Some question whether Pheu Thai is even brave enough to ignore the court."Going against the court would risk the whole system collapsing into anarchy or civil war, and I am not sure the Pheu Thai is up to that,"said Panitan Wattanayagorn, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University.

Barring the outbreak of civil war or unlikely prompt elections,anti-government forces are hoping to bring into play the constitution’s Article 7.

The article states, "Whenever no provision of this constitution is applicable to any case, it should be decided in accordance with the constitutional practice in the democratic regime of government with the King as head of state.

"The PDRC interprets the clause as meaning that in a political vacuum a prime minister can be appointed by "the people" with the endorsement of the king.

Who represents the people in such a case isan open question.The Constitutional Court has also been asked to rule on the correct process of finding a new premier in the event of Yingluck’s dismissal."There is no article in the constitution that really describes what is about to happen," said PDRC spokesman Akanat Promphan. "It has never happened before."


-- The Nation 2014-04-16

So far, things are developing as expected

" If the court steps across the boundary too much, do you think their decision will be respected? "

​This is a troubling leitmotiv, but it keeps cropping up again and again. Pheu Thai and the UDD in particular have adopted this as a common refrain. And it's truly dangerous. Never should any doubt in the judicial process be encouraged. And yet, every day we see evidence of it. It is to Pheu Thai and the UDD's advantage that people don't respect the verdict if they deem it " unfair " in some form or another. For Pheu Thai and the UDD, the law has always been malleable.

The only way forward constitutionally is to respect the ruling of the Constitutional Court.

"The Red Shirts and others will fight," predicted caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisaeng, a senior Pheu Thai member.

All things considered, I wouldn't count on it. Some monk beaters will, but the turnout at the pre Songkran rally was very low, not 5% of Jatuporns expectations. I think many of the rank and file are fed up with this governments lies.

"Going against the court would risk the whole system collapsing into anarchy or civil war"

And just like the abuse of elections through intimidation, vote buying or other examples of electoral fraud the PTP displayed last year in parliament, the abuse of the rule of law has consequences too. The rule of law does not bode well with the 1992 coup monger and his minority followers just as not garnering a majority in the 2014 failed elections that overwhelmingly pointed to a "reform before elections" narrative by the majority.

I hope for peace in Thailand and that the example set by one accused mass murderer, accuses terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive does not bring war or major disruption to the good people in Thailand. His example and his views are minority driven. People want the rule of law. People yearn the rule of law. Criminals that discredit the judiciary is to be expected. Criminals hate the rule of law. When governments do it then that shows the composition of the party as criminals.

Edited April 16, 201412 yr by djjamie

I Love it.

PTP and it's followers are shit scared of the outcome.

The criminal fugitive is sending us laughable, loving messages.

They know their time has come and they are trying to hang on any thing they can to stay alive.

Well done Khun Sutherp.

Sometimes I doubted you but it proves you had the right strategy.

"We cannot be ousted a second time," he said

You will be ousted every time you ( PT & Thaksin ) do something illegal.

So you should have been ousted many times before.

I can't believe it has taken this long to soon get rid of this bunch of thieving criminalsi

He also said dismissal is not technically possible since "(T)he prime minister and all cabinet members have been out of our positions since Parliament was dissolved on December 9."

Then what are they doing.

Hardly a day goes by that we don't hear about the minister of this or that.

If they are not ministers what is a proven liar doing representing Thailand at the WBO?

Civil war? the Thai people cant get out of bed so civil war is just another newspaper beat up. Ask your friends and which ones of them will actually join this supposed CIVIL WAR

Yeah and she already has her brother's dogs barking and threatening to come into Bangkok. So which building are they going to burn down this time when things don't go their way?

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

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

"Going against the court would risk the whole system collapsing into anarchy or civil war"

And just like the abuse of elections through intimidation, vote buying or other examples of electoral fraud the PTP displayed last year in parliament, the abuse of the rule of law has consequences too. The rule of law does not bode well with the 1992 coup monger and his minority followers just as not garnering a majority in the 2014 failed elections that overwhelmingly pointed to a "reform before elections" narrative by the majority.

I hope for peace in Thailand and that the example set by one accused mass murderer, accuses terrorist, convicted criminal fugitive does not bring war or major disruption to the good people in Thailand. His example and his views are minority driven. People want the rule of law. People yearn the rule of law. Criminals that discredit the judiciary is to be expected. Criminals hate the rule of law. When governments do it then that shows the composition of the party as criminals.

What do you mean 1992 coup monger???

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

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Scroll back to 1992 and you might change that attitude.

She won't be able to make the hearing on Friday and her lawyers will ask tomorrow for a new date and time.

If the cabinet is still getting a salary then they can be sacked.

One hopes they will be asked to refund any damages to the country too - especially the rice scam

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My biggest problem with all of this is that comment that Ministers are not there , I know that, however if you do not consider yourself a Minister of a caretaker cabinet ,one would hope you are not taking a wage and all the perks of office.

"The court has a track record of judgement against the Yingluck government and her Pheu Thai Party"

Can't say that I noticed.................................

There will definitely not be a civil war. Talk to anybody. Most Thai people are sick and tired of both sides by now. Suthep still has a lot of followers and has the momentum (never really lost the momentum), because he advocates a peaceful solution. Jatuporn, on the other side, has lost most of his followers, because nobody wants to get their butts blown off for Thaksin and his henchmen. Thai People don't want civil war and are getting tired of the Red rhetoric. Look at the small turnout, Jattuporn had for his "Mass Rally", which he later called "just a warmup", when hardly anybody showed up.

If, or rather when, the courts find Yingluck and her crew guilty and they are removed, a lot of Reds will cry foul. There may be some more isolated red terrorist attacks, but nobody will let themselves get drawn into a civil war.

It's sad, that so many people have died in this conflict already. A conflict, that is really only about who will be at the money trough

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

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Scroll back to 1992 and you might change that attitude.

You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners.

With 10,000000 known guns in a so called Buddhist country. Anything is possible.

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Most Thai people work a lot longer hours than people in the West, every week, so I think your comment stinks.

"The court has a track record of judgement against the Yingluck government and her Pheu Thai Party"

Can't say that I noticed.................................

Can't say that they were wrong either......

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

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Scroll back to 1992 and you might change that attitude.

You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners.

You are right, there were foreign fighters under the red shirts at that time

" If the court steps across the boundary too much, do you think their decision will be respected? "

​This is a troubling leitmotiv, but it keeps cropping up again and again. Pheu Thai and the UDD in particular have adopted this as a common refrain. And it's truly dangerous. Never should any doubt in the judicial process be encouraged. And yet, every day we see evidence of it. It is to Pheu Thai and the UDD's advantage that people don't respect the verdict if they deem it " unfair " in some form or another. For Pheu Thai and the UDD, the law has always been malleable.

The only way forward constitutionally is to respect the ruling of the Constitutional Court.

The troubling leitmotif, throughout your posts is ignoring the will of the electorate in favour of a nondemocratic "solution". You may be a ( self proclaimed) expert on the Thai Constitution but you are no supporter of the democratic process prescribed by that constitution.Yet again, the constitutional way forward is to hold an election, and abide by the result. And all said in one paragraph!

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Scroll back to 1992 and you might change that attitude.

You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners.

I don't know about populated by foreigners, but they were drawn from the units that could be "relied upon", and are therefore based in or near Bangkok.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

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

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Scroll back to 1992 and you might change that attitude.

You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners.

You are right, there were foreign fighters under the red shirts at that time

Do you have a problem with the English language? You understand the basics, yes? Right, then please tell me why, when I write this,

"You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners"

Why on earth would you think that I was referring to the red shirts?

and then you take it further alleging that foreign fighters were involved with the red shirts in 2010! Do you believe everything you read? If so, I can recommend cartalucci or yon or better still a comprehensive "true" story of what happened in 2010. it's English title is The Simple Truth, read it. you'll love it.

(though if he's heard of Oscar Wilde you may wonder why he chose that title)

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Scroll back to 1992 and you might change that attitude.

You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners.

I don't know about populated by foreigners, but they were drawn from the units that could be "relied upon", and are therefore based in or near Bangkok.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Therein lies the rub, to slightly misquote the bard.

The talk of civil war is laughable really....Thais don't want to kill each other, and they won't...save for a few dumb ass reds..!

And as mentioned in a previous post...it's hard enough to get 'em out of bed....let alone going out to shoot people!!

Most Thai people work a lot longer hours than people in the West, every week, so I think your comment stinks.

I agree with you, kurtgruen. Furthermore, many Thais are also admirable for working very hard under extreme weather conditions. From street vendors to farmers, or construction workers, they earn their bahts with great strength. Please, do not undervalue them.

" If the court steps across the boundary too much, do you think their decision will be respected? "

​This is a troubling leitmotiv, but it keeps cropping up again and again. Pheu Thai and the UDD in particular have adopted this as a common refrain. And it's truly dangerous. Never should any doubt in the judicial process be encouraged. And yet, every day we see evidence of it. It is to Pheu Thai and the UDD's advantage that people don't respect the verdict if they deem it " unfair " in some form or another. For Pheu Thai and the UDD, the law has always been malleable.

The only way forward constitutionally is to respect the ruling of the Constitutional Court.

I would not use the word "respect" in regard to court rulings. Until it becomes legal to publicly question the merits of rulings of courts and the reasoning of judges, all there can be is acceptance.

The rule of law is necessary, but the right to discuss the work of the judicial branch and offer criticism thereof is also necessary if this country is to develop a court system which is seen to be fair by one and all.

You are right, there were foreign fighters under the red shirts at that time

Do you have a problem with the English language? You understand the basics, yes? Right, then please tell me why, when I write this,

"You don't have to go back that far, unless I'm mistaken and the RTA regiments involved in abhisits "crackdown" were populated by foreigners"

Why on earth would you think that I was referring to the red shirts?

and then you take it further alleging that foreign fighters were involved with the red shirts in 2010! Do you believe everything you read? If so, I can recommend cartalucci or yon or better still a comprehensive "true" story of what happened in 2010. it's English title is The Simple Truth, read it. you'll love it.

(though if he's heard of Oscar Wilde you may wonder why he chose that title)

I you were here well before and during the 2010 you will not have to read anything or be in command of perfect English.

Maybe you could have been reading what you wanted to believe. Sort of self inflicted brainwash.