Pheu Thai Party: PM's resignation against Constitution

BANGKOK, 5 May 2014 (NNT) - Executives of the Government-led Pheu Thai Party say Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra cannot resign since her resignation will breach the Constitution and point out that the Democrat Party Leader’s political reform road map is against the charter.

Phue Thai Spokesman Phromphong Nopparit on Monday said the party’s executives would hold an official meeting on the reform road map of Democrat Leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and would later issue a statement on the matter.

The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said.

The party’s executives had initially agreed that Mr Abhisit’s proposal that the prime minister and the Cabinet should step down to pave the way for a nonpartisan provisional government was unconstitutional and against democracy, said Mr Phromphong.

The Pheu Thai spokesman called on the prime minister to adhere to laws by remaining in office, saying she might face legal actions if she resigned according to Section 181 of the Constitution.


-- NNT 2014-05-05

I'm no constitution expert but it seems to me, these people use the constituition as an excuse when it benefits them and ignore it completely when it doesn't,

The Pheu Thai spokesman called on the prime minister to adhere to laws by remaining in office, saying she might face legal actions if she resigned according to Section 181 of the Constitution.

Adhere to the laws?? a tad selective about the law, aren't we boys? ............... .and who would bring legal action against her?/ Ah, yes...a threat from PTP.

dont want to burst your bubble PTP ..but your the caretaker government ...no longer classed as elected your time expired 1 April...so Yingy can just quit when she wants

" The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said. "

Good luck, because they don't even understand it themselves. Nothing Pheu Thai says and does is in sync with each other. On the one hand, they say they'll study Abhisit's proposal, and on the other hand they already dismiss it as unconstitutional. It's not unconstitutional. Everything in the Abhisit plan is constitutional because the mechanism that Abhisit is referring to regarding the removal of a prime minister is found already in the constitution - for these very specific set of circumstances - i.e. the lack of a parliamentary quorum. Through the constitution there is a pathway - if there is a quorum-less parliament - of nominating a prime minister through the Senate. Abhisit is absolutely right, because it's already in the constitution ! Pheu Thai are now arguing against the very document they feign to understand. What they ought to have dismissed out of hand was not Abhisit's proposal - which remains the singular best means to avoid a crisis - and to instead to dismiss out of hand the proposal Prompong officially accepted for Pheu Thai's consideration today by a faction of the UDD - that not only called upon the Yingluck administration to reject the Constitutional Court ruling, but to remove all nine judges of the Constitutional Court, and replace them with new judges. That is the proposal that Prompong and Pheu Thai think is worthy of consideration and study. And that most definitely is the path to chaos.

"The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said."

Well... what does that project? Is that the only place (CM to be frank) where support still exists?

"Executives of the Government-led Pheu Thai Party say Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra cannot resign since her resignation will breach the Constitution and point out that the Democrat Party Leader’s political reform road map is against the charter."

They also said that in early January, and now we are in May... do they not understand their own?

It gets curiouser and curiouser...

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

" The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said. "

Good luck, because they don't even understand it themselves. Nothing Pheu Thai says and does is in sync with each other. On the one hand, they say they'll study Abhisit's proposal, and on the other hand they already dismiss it as unconstitutional. It's not unconstitutional. Everything in the Abhisit plan is constitutional because the mechanism that Abhisit is referring to regarding the removal of a prime minister is found already in the constitution - for these very specific set of circumstances - i.e. the lack of a parliamentary quorum. Through the constitution there is a pathway - if there is a quorum-less parliament - of nominating a prime minister through the Senate. Abhisit is absolutely right, because it's already in the constitution ! Pheu Thai are now arguing against the very document they feign to understand. What they ought to have dismissed out of hand was not Abhisit's proposal - which remains the singular best means to avoid a crisis - and to instead to dismiss out of hand the proposal Prompong officially accepted for Pheu Thai's consideration today by a faction of the UDD - that not only called upon the Yingluck administration to reject the Constitutional Court ruling, but to remove all nine judges of the Constitutional Court, and replace them with new judges. That is the proposal that Prompong and Pheu Thai think is worthy of consideration and study. And that most definitely is the path to chaos.

The question is why can't a Prime minister resign , the PTP are a load of self serving bigots that do not want reforms. Abhisit has good people around him ,they all know the constitution.

well, Abhisit, Suthep, and their yellow shirt supporters will have none of that.

democracy, the constitution, the law, elections, justice... are 2nd class citizens who they will have no qualms subjugating in their all consuming priority, their irrational and childish pursuit of Thaksin.

Can you summarily equate your response with Thaksin's childish pursuit of all of Thailand?

well, Abhisit, Suthep, and their yellow shirt supporters will have none of that.

democracy, the constitution, the law, elections, justice... are 2nd class citizens who they will have no qualms subjugating in their all consuming priority, their irrational and childish pursuit of Thaksin.

Sick and boring- repetitive reply last ditch propping up of PTP.

Seems to me anyone in pursuit of reds is wrong, and Thaksin is a 1st class citizen ????

You will soon qualify for the PTP Xmas party, free ticket---keep these posts going you have tremendous TVF support.

No need for her to quit, she will be removed in a few days.

Isn't Auntie Poo facing challenges in the courts that could see her impeached?

Surely no need to resign, she may soon be carried out kicking and screaming, that's much more dignified.

well, Abhisit, Suthep, and their yellow shirt supporters will have none of that.

democracy, the constitution, the law, elections, justice... are 2nd class citizens who they will have no qualms subjugating in their all consuming priority, their irrational and childish pursuit of Thaksin.

Sick and boring- repetitive reply last ditch propping up of PTP.

Seems to me anyone in pursuit of reds is wrong, and Thaksin is a 1st class citizen ????

You will soon qualify for the PTP Xmas party, free ticket---keep these posts going you have tremendous TVF support.

Well gin, he could come to my soi now and have his dog or his girlfriend vaccinated against rabies. It's his preference depending on which one bites the most. The PTP are really in a gift giving mood at the moment. He should take advantage of it while it lasts.

well, Abhisit, Suthep, and their yellow shirt supporters will have none of that.

democracy, the constitution, the law, elections, justice... are 2nd class citizens who they will have no qualms subjugating in their all consuming priority, their irrational and childish pursuit of Thaksin.

Sick and boring- repetitive reply last ditch propping up of PTP.

Seems to me anyone in pursuit of reds is wrong, and Thaksin is a 1st class citizen ????

You will soon qualify for the PTP Xmas party, free ticket---keep these posts going you have tremendous TVF support.

If he keeps brown nosing, they may even give him a non-immigrant visa and he will not need to visa run every two weeks

Prompong why aren't you in jail ?

well, Abhisit, Suthep, and their yellow shirt supporters will have none of that.

democracy, the constitution, the law, elections, justice... are 2nd class citizens who they will have no qualms subjugating in their all consuming priority, their irrational and childish pursuit of Thaksin.

Sick and boring- repetitive reply last ditch propping up of PTP.

Seems to me anyone in pursuit of reds is wrong, and Thaksin is a 1st class citizen ????

You will soon qualify for the PTP Xmas party, free ticket---keep these posts going you have tremendous TVF support.

If he keeps brown nosing, they may even give him a non-immigrant visa and he will not need to visa run every two weeks

Typo? You meant non-ignorant visa for sure, mai na?

How can one interpret it in any way it would be unconstitutional for the PM to step down?

Section 181. The outgoing Council of Ministers shall remain in office for performing duties until the newly appointed Council of Ministers takes office; but, in the case of the vacation of office under section 180 (2), the Council of Ministers and Ministers may perform duties only to the extent of necessity

Section 180. Ministers vacate office en masse upon: (1) the termination of ministership of the Prime Minister under section 182; (2) the expiration of the term or the dissolution of the House of Representatives; (3) the resignation of the Council of Ministers. In the case where the ministership of the Prime Minister terminates under section 182

Section 182. The ministership of an individual Minister terminates upon: (1) death; (2) resignation; (3) having been sentenced by a judgment to a term of imprisonment irrespective of the finality of the case or a suspension of the punishment, except for a non-final case or a suspension of the punishment in an offence committed through negligence or a petty offence or an offence of defamation; (4) the passing of a vote of no-confidence by the House of Representatives under section 158 or section 159; (5) being disqualified or being under any of the prohibitions under section 174; (6) the issuance of a Royal Command removing ministership under section 183; (7) having done an act prohibited by section 267, section 268 or section 269; (8) being removed from office by a resolution of the Senate under section 274. Apart from the circumstances resulting in the termination of the ministership in an individual capacity under paragraph one, the ministership of the Prime Minister also terminates upon the expiration of the time under section 171 paragraph four. The provisions of section 91 and section 92 shall apply to the termination of the ministership under (2), (3), (5) or (7) or paragraph two and, for this purpose, the Election Commission may refer the matter to the Constitutional Court for decision thereon.

I'm no constitution expert but it seems to me, these people use the constituition as an excuse when it benefits them and ignore it completely when it doesn't,

Remember the endless ranting that this is a coup, military constitution and therefor evil.....now they start to love it....

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

" The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said. "

Good luck, because they don't even understand it themselves. Nothing Pheu Thai says and does is in sync with each other. On the one hand, they say they'll study Abhisit's proposal, and on the other hand they already dismiss it as unconstitutional. It's not unconstitutional. Everything in the Abhisit plan is constitutional because the mechanism that Abhisit is referring to regarding the removal of a prime minister is found already in the constitution - for these very specific set of circumstances - i.e. the lack of a parliamentary quorum. Through the constitution there is a pathway - if there is a quorum-less parliament - of nominating a prime minister through the Senate. Abhisit is absolutely right, because it's already in the constitution ! Pheu Thai are now arguing against the very document they feign to understand. What they ought to have dismissed out of hand was not Abhisit's proposal - which remains the singular best means to avoid a crisis - and to instead to dismiss out of hand the proposal Prompong officially accepted for Pheu Thai's consideration today by a faction of the UDD - that not only called upon the Yingluck administration to reject the Constitutional Court ruling, but to remove all nine judges of the Constitutional Court, and replace them with new judges. That is the proposal that Prompong and Pheu Thai think is worthy of consideration and study. And that most definitely is the path to chaos.

The question is why can't a Prime minister resign , the PTP are a load of self serving bigots that do not want reforms. Abhisit has good people around him ,they all know the constitution.

If she has doubts, she could still resign for health reasons, as all that pressure is too much for her. No one could blame her for getting sick....

Don't see what the problem is "Redshirts call ruling party to disobey charter court"

If they are going to disobey the court then it is a perfect time for Yimgluck to resign.

Seem to remember way back when Yingluck wanted out that it was reported that Thaksin told her she could go to jail if she resigned.

Now it would seem as she has not resigned she could go to jail.

I'm no constitution expert but it seems to me, these people use the constituition as an excuse when it benefits them and ignore it completely when it doesn't,

Exactly, that is what Suthep is doing 6 months now !

How can one interpret it in any way it would be unconstitutional for the PM to step down?

Section 181. The outgoing Council of Ministers shall remain in office for performing duties until the newly appointed Council of Ministers takes office; but, in the case of the vacation of office under section 180 (2), the Council of Ministers and Ministers may perform duties only to the extent of necessity

Section 180. Ministers vacate office en masse upon: (1) the termination of ministership of the Prime Minister under section 182; (2) the expiration of the term or the dissolution of the House of Representatives; (3) the resignation of the Council of Ministers. In the case where the ministership of the Prime Minister terminates under section 182

Section 182. The ministership of an individual Minister terminates upon: (1) death; (2) resignation; (3) having been sentenced by a judgment to a term of imprisonment irrespective of the finality of the case or a suspension of the punishment, except for a non-final case or a suspension of the punishment in an offence committed through negligence or a petty offence or an offence of defamation; (4) the passing of a vote of no-confidence by the House of Representatives under section 158 or section 159; (5) being disqualified or being under any of the prohibitions under section 174; (6) the issuance of a Royal Command removing ministership under section 183; (7) having done an act prohibited by section 267, section 268 or section 269; (8) being removed from office by a resolution of the Senate under section 274. Apart from the circumstances resulting in the termination of the ministership in an individual capacity under paragraph one, the ministership of the Prime Minister also terminates upon the expiration of the time under section 171 paragraph four. The provisions of section 91 and section 92 shall apply to the termination of the ministership under (2), (3), (5) or (7) or paragraph two and, for this purpose, the Election Commission may refer the matter to the Constitutional Court for decision thereon.

"How can one interpret it in any way it would be unconstitutional for the PM to step down?"

They can't; however, they are proposing the argument to delay any ruling against them. What I'm saying is that the PTP is challenging and saying to the courts and to the public "prove it's unconstitutional." It's simply a delay tactic to hang on to power until they can think of another. The courts will win in the end.

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

" The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said. "

Good luck, because they don't even understand it themselves. Nothing Pheu Thai says and does is in sync with each other. On the one hand, they say they'll study Abhisit's proposal, and on the other hand they already dismiss it as unconstitutional. It's not unconstitutional. Everything in the Abhisit plan is constitutional because the mechanism that Abhisit is referring to regarding the removal of a prime minister is found already in the constitution - for these very specific set of circumstances - i.e. the lack of a parliamentary quorum. Through the constitution there is a pathway - if there is a quorum-less parliament - of nominating a prime minister through the Senate. Abhisit is absolutely right, because it's already in the constitution ! Pheu Thai are now arguing against the very document they feign to understand. What they ought to have dismissed out of hand was not Abhisit's proposal - which remains the singular best means to avoid a crisis - and to instead to dismiss out of hand the proposal Prompong officially accepted for Pheu Thai's consideration today by a faction of the UDD - that not only called upon the Yingluck administration to reject the Constitutional Court ruling, but to remove all nine judges of the Constitutional Court, and replace them with new judges. That is the proposal that Prompong and Pheu Thai think is worthy of consideration and study. And that most definitely is the path to chaos.

The question is why can't a Prime minister resign , the PTP are a load of self serving bigots that do not want reforms. Abhisit has good people around him ,they all know the constitution.

Abhisit should have done his reforms when he was PM, but he did nothing than chasing Taksin.

Second, who are the good people around him ? You might mean the army who stated the coup so they could later put Abhisit on the Pm chair.... I hope they put this bloke (Abhisit) in jail for the killings in 2010 as he was an not-elected (by the people) PM who , together with that good people around him , killed innocent people just because they where against him.

" The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said. "

Good luck, because they don't even understand it themselves. Nothing Pheu Thai says and does is in sync with each other. On the one hand, they say they'll study Abhisit's proposal, and on the other hand they already dismiss it as unconstitutional. It's not unconstitutional. Everything in the Abhisit plan is constitutional because the mechanism that Abhisit is referring to regarding the removal of a prime minister is found already in the constitution - for these very specific set of circumstances - i.e. the lack of a parliamentary quorum. Through the constitution there is a pathway - if there is a quorum-less parliament - of nominating a prime minister through the Senate. Abhisit is absolutely right, because it's already in the constitution ! Pheu Thai are now arguing against the very document they feign to understand. What they ought to have dismissed out of hand was not Abhisit's proposal - which remains the singular best means to avoid a crisis - and to instead to dismiss out of hand the proposal Prompong officially accepted for Pheu Thai's consideration today by a faction of the UDD - that not only called upon the Yingluck administration to reject the Constitutional Court ruling, but to remove all nine judges of the Constitutional Court, and replace them with new judges. That is the proposal that Prompong and Pheu Thai think is worthy of consideration and study. And that most definitely is the path to chaos.

The path to chaos was made in 2006, and the moment the army gave power to a non-elected Abhisit to make more chaos.

If it is illegal for the caretaker PM to resign then how is it that Thaksin did so and his resignation was accepted?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

If it is illegal for the caretaker PM to resign then how is it that Thaksin did so and his resignation was accepted?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The same way it is possible for a democratic government to be headed by a fugitive from another country.

This Thailand, baby! They don't call it 'amazing' for nothing.

well, Abhisit, Suthep, and their yellow shirt supporters will have none of that.

democracy, the constitution, the law, elections, justice... are 2nd class citizens who they will have no qualms subjugating in their all consuming priority, their irrational and childish pursuit of Thaksin.

Stick with Mr T and the PTP, lemon boy, you totally deserve them.

" The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to explain the statement to the locals themselves, he said. "

Good luck, because they don't even understand it themselves. Nothing Pheu Thai says and does is in sync with each other. On the one hand, they say they'll study Abhisit's proposal, and on the other hand they already dismiss it as unconstitutional. It's not unconstitutional. Everything in the Abhisit plan is constitutional because the mechanism that Abhisit is referring to regarding the removal of a prime minister is found already in the constitution - for these very specific set of circumstances - i.e. the lack of a parliamentary quorum. Through the constitution there is a pathway - if there is a quorum-less parliament - of nominating a prime minister through the Senate. Abhisit is absolutely right, because it's already in the constitution ! Pheu Thai are now arguing against the very document they feign to understand. What they ought to have dismissed out of hand was not Abhisit's proposal - which remains the singular best means to avoid a crisis - and to instead to dismiss out of hand the proposal Prompong officially accepted for Pheu Thai's consideration today by a faction of the UDD - that not only called upon the Yingluck administration to reject the Constitutional Court ruling, but to remove all nine judges of the Constitutional Court, and replace them with new judges. That is the proposal that Prompong and Pheu Thai think is worthy of consideration and study. And that most definitely is the path to chaos.

The path to chaos was made in 2006, and the moment the army gave power to a non-elected Abhisit to make more chaos.

The path to chaos was well underway by 1997. However, a certain man was more corrupt than the rest put together, and he managed to persuade matters until exactly 2006. Thank for your attempt at re-writing history though.

Prompong why aren't you in jail ?

Why aren't most of PT, the DP, PDRC and UDD all in jail?

Incompetent or corrupt law enforcement and court system would be my bet.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I recall that in the past scores of prime ministers who were still IN OFFICE (i.e. not in a caretaker position) have resigned whenever they thought it was called for, justifiable, or otherwise warranted (e.g. because they came under intense political pressure for corruption, etc.).

Among these is Yingluck's very own brother - the much-cited fugitive convicted felon Thaksin - who resigned in early 2006 just prior to announcing another round of snap elections.

Either something fundamentally has changed in the 1997 constitution (the current one) or PTP is - as usual - twisting words and interpreting the constitution as it fits their obscure agenda. I can hardly believe there is any article in the constitution that explicitly prohibits the resignation of any prime minister sitting or acting.

What exactly in the minds of PTPs so-called "legal experts" makes Yingluck the first (caretaker) prime minister in Thailand's history who CANNOT resign? What exactly are the dubious provisions in article 181 that would prevent that?

Methinks there is just someone really really desperately clinging on to power, because she has been ordered to so so by another really really desperate person far far away.

Prompong why aren't you in jail ?

Why aren't most of PT, the DP, PDRC and UDD all in jail?

Incompetent or corrupt law enforcement and court system would be my bet.

They are the corrupt, incompetent law enforcement and court system.. or did you just arrive off a boat?