Pheu Thai Party: PM's resignation against Constitution

[TimCM]

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?

That was my point

Like all civilized people, I arrive in Thailand by plane under the influence of fine vodka

[moonao]

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.

I support the democratic process and the rule of law and the people right to excersise their voting rights.

I'm afraid it's you, lemon boy, who along with suthep and the rest has the obsession with thaksin, not me.

[scorecard]

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

That really means:

- We will explain it the way we want you to believe it, regardless of the actual law.

- Ensure there's plenty of time on the agenda for hate speeches, and to stir up the locals to stop local freedom of speech etc.

[Tatsujin]

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

What he meant was:

The Pheu Thai executives would also travel up-country to start their election campaigning early and to explain to the locals what democracy and the consitution mean in the world according to Thaksin because they are too stupid to figure things out for themselves.

[djjamie]

she might face legal actions if she resigned according to Section 181 of the Constitution.

She might face legal action?

​So she was not given this advice when she transferred Thawil? She was not given this advice when the rice scheme crumbled? She was not given this advice when the PTP, not once, but twice committed voter fraud in parliament with the 2.2 trillion borrowing bill and the senate make up vote. No advice regarding legal action when it was deemed unconstitutional when they wanted to bypass democratic processes to get this loan.

​I would sack my legal team and get competent lawyers. Unless of course this is all agenda driven responses.

Don't tell the gullible. Gotto keep the charade up that the PTP are following the rule of law and always have otherwise the "judicial coup" excuse for all their failings and utter disrespect for the law would be harder to swallow. Telling them otherwise would splash some proverbial egg on their faces and be highly embarrassing for the weak minded 1992 coup lovers.

I respect the constitution until it does not allow me to do what I want.

That is PTP logic right there.

Edited May 5, 2014 by djjamie

[dcutman]

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.

Another very important section in the constitution IMO. It does not differentiate about what political party or region most of your support comes from. Or any self interests, or those of your brother.

I added text in red.

Section 175. Before taking office, a Minister must make a solemn declaration before the King in the following words: “I, (name of the declarer), do solemnly declare that I will be loyal to the King and will faithfully perform my duties in the interests of the (entire) country and (all) of the people ( not just in the northern region). I will also uphold and observe the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand in every respect.” (even if I or my supporters dont agree)

[ginjag]

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.

I support the democratic process and the rule of law and the people right to excersise their voting rights.

I'm afraid it's you, lemon boy, who along with suthep and the rest has the obsession with thaksin, not me.

I am sorry to spoil your day but you said " I support the rule of law" if so why do you condone the PTP ??? why if you are honest haven't you posted on the violations of law during your Yinglucks admin ??? This has been undemocratic from Day 1, and you support democracy. That makes your post a porky pie.???

[dominique355]

Art 181 of the Thai Consitution deals with the interim government but says absolutely nothing about the "caretaker" PM not being able to resign.

However, Art. 182 together with Art. 180 specifically say:

Section 180. Ministers vacate office en masse upon:

(1) the termination of ministership of the Prime Minister under section 182;

[...]

Section 182. The ministership of an individual Minister terminates upon:

(1) death;

(2) resignation;

[...]

So the Thai consitution specifically mentions the resignation of the PM through resignation. Perhaps PT should read the Constitution before talking. That supposes of course that they can read...

[Crushdepth]

The constitution contains provisions *allowing* the PM to resign (and also to be removed). There are NO provisions forbidding the PM to resign. It's bullshit.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Morch]

" 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.

Abhisit became prime minister near the end of 2008.

There were two TRT clone governments after the 2006 coup, which preceded Abhisit.

[lungmi]

Where is the Thai Constitution?

In Dubai?

[Enid]

I just moved to Phuket with my husband of 40 years. Retired here from Australia and I wanted to join a forum that allowed me to connect with the happenings of Thailand. Seems that I may have made a wrong decision after absorbing the political content and seeing what goes on here.

Seems that both sides of politics are terrible examples of democracy.

I came from a state in Australia where Barry O'Farrell resigned as the premier because of a bottle of wine that would be perceived as a bribe. A state where Mike Gallacher has resigned as police and justice minister because of an investigation of his alleged role involving corruption. Everyone agreed they did the right thing.

I may be an old duck, but that comes with old fashioned values. No one in NSW defended the actions of these people for valiantly resigning. In fact the Australia PM commended them for resigning even though Barry was of the same political party as him.

I have only been retired in Thailand for 9 weeks and I already miss Australia as does my husband. We knew nothing of this corruption and the blind defense of it before we came to Phuket.

And with due respect some forum members should be ashamed of themselves for defending the corrupt happenings of either side and respect the law.

My grandson in Australia doesn't respect the law and he says the courts are biased after he went to jail for insider trading. I told him he needs to be accountable and respect the rules lest he find himself in mischief again. He has learnt after 14 months and I hope the people in Thai politics learn too.

Thanks for listening.

[ChrisY1]

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.

One of the most prolific trolls on TV....

[GeorgeO]

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.

This from a man who is still walking free as opposed to serving his jail sentence...! How about that for adherence to the law of the land...?!

[GeorgeO]

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.

One of the most prolific trolls on TV....

Actually, I believe that "cold pork" (moo nao) is the undisputed king of the trolls...!! I have never ever seen a constructive contribution from him on any subject.

[winstonc]

<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.

lets have some proof tina turner...please stop lying you look stupid...and we wouldnt want that now ...would we..

[dcutman]

I just moved to Phuket with my husband of 40 years. Retired here from Australia and I wanted to join a forum that allowed me to connect with the happenings of Thailand. Seems that I may have made a wrong decision after absorbing the political content and seeing what goes on here.

Seems that both sides of politics are terrible examples of democracy.

I came from a state in Australia where Barry O'Farrell resigned as the premier because of a bottle of wine that would be perceived as a bribe. A state where Mike Gallacher has resigned as police and justice minister because of an investigation of his alleged role involving corruption. Everyone agreed they did the right thing.

I may be an old duck, but that comes with old fashioned values. No one in NSW defended the actions of these people for valiantly resigning. In fact the Australia PM commended them for resigning even though Barry was of the same political party as him.

I have only been retired in Thailand for 9 weeks and I already miss Australia as does my husband. We knew nothing of this corruption and the blind defense of it before we came to Phuket.

And with due respect some forum members should be ashamed of themselves for defending the corrupt happenings of either side and respect the law.

My grandson in Australia doesn't respect the law and he says the courts are biased after he went to jail for insider trading. I told him he needs to be accountable and respect the rules lest he find himself in mischief again. He has learnt after 14 months and I hope the people in Thai politics learn too.

Thanks for listening.

Well good luck Enid.

Surly you you knew a bit about Thailand/Phuket before you came here? Its not top secret both are in the running for the most corrupt places on this Earth.

[tingtongteesood]

PM resigning is against the constitution ? But PM denying the authority of the constitutional Court ( as PT have tried to do more than once recently and she will probably do if they rule against her ) is also unconstitutional...Boot out the stupid PT hypocrites now please, enough already !

[GeorgeO]

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.

I support the democratic process and the rule of law and the people right to excersise their voting rights.

I'm afraid it's you, lemon boy, who along with suthep and the rest has the obsession with thaksin, not me.

I think the "lemon boy" thing only works one way .. he was referring to manao, moonao...!!

It's you who keeps bringing up this comment on "obsession with Thaksin", so it would appear that you are the one obsessed. You also clearly demonstrate that with your constant references to Abhisit and Suthep, even in posts where their mention is of no relevance whatsoever.

It's time you took a good long look at your stance. You consistently tell us that you support the rule of law, but turn a blind eye to any breaches by your beloved leader and his followers. I note that in another thread, you are in support of the red shirt call to disobey the ruling of the constitutional court. Is that your idea of being in support of the rule of law?

[tingtongteesood]

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.

I support the democratic process and the rule of law and the people right to excersise their voting rights.

I'm afraid it's you, lemon boy, who along with suthep and the rest has the obsession with thaksin, not me.

I am sorry to spoil your day but you said " I support the rule of law" if so why do you condone the PTP ??? why if you are honest haven't you posted on the violations of law during your Yinglucks admin ??? This has been undemocratic from Day 1, and you support democracy. That makes your post a porky pie.???

Mwuhahahahaha, Ginjag has backed you into an intellectual corner Mooney, Let's see you try and spin your way out of that one !

Edited May 5, 2014 by tingtongteesood

[AleG]

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.

So it has finally come to be so FUBAR that Yingluck's "own" party has to threaten her to carry on with the charade.

[JesseFrank]

The constitution contains provisions *allowing* the PM to resign (and also to be removed). There are NO provisions forbidding the PM to resign. It's bullshit.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My understanding is that a caretaker PM has to stay on until the lections are finished and can not resign during that period, unless with royal agreement.

When the cabinet is dissolved new elections will be held not earlier than 60 days and not later than 90 days, and a new government should be formed within 30 days after the election.

If that fails the role of the caretaker government is over.

Which means since 1 April the role of the caretaker PM is over.

[Enid]

I just moved to Phuket with my husband of 40 years. Retired here from Australia and I wanted to join a forum that allowed me to connect with the happenings of Thailand. Seems that I may have made a wrong decision after absorbing the political content and seeing what goes on here.

Seems that both sides of politics are terrible examples of democracy.

I came from a state in Australia where Barry O'Farrell resigned as the premier because of a bottle of wine that would be perceived as a bribe. A state where Mike Gallacher has resigned as police and justice minister because of an investigation of his alleged role involving corruption. Everyone agreed they did the right thing.

I may be an old duck, but that comes with old fashioned values. No one in NSW defended the actions of these people for valiantly resigning. In fact the Australia PM commended them for resigning even though Barry was of the same political party as him.

I have only been retired in Thailand for 9 weeks and I already miss Australia as does my husband. We knew nothing of this corruption and the blind defense of it before we came to Phuket.

And with due respect some forum members should be ashamed of themselves for defending the corrupt happenings of either side and respect the law.

My grandson in Australia doesn't respect the law and he says the courts are biased after he went to jail for insider trading. I told him he needs to be accountable and respect the rules lest he find himself in mischief again. He has learnt after 14 months and I hope the people in Thai politics learn too.

Thanks for listening.

Well good luck Enid.

Surly you you knew a bit about Thailand/Phuket before you came here? Its not top secret both are in the running for the most corrupt places on this Earth.

Hi dear. Thanks for the luck. I am sure we will enjoy our time here. The beaches are wonderful.

My husband researched Thailand and being an eternal optimist he read up on corruption. He stated this site http://www.transparency.org/country#THA_PublicOpinion

It is old dear, but the people said corruption was going down until 2010. They also said Thailand is far from the most corrupt. Seems you are knowledgeable and my apologies if I may have looked in the wrong place for evidence. I assumed transparency international was a reputable society. I will look else where for evidence if they are wrong.

Not sure of any changes since 2010, but corruption seems to have increased since then?

Not sure, but thank you dear for the reply.

Take care and enjoy your stay in Thailand.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Enid

[klauskunkel]

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.

So it has finally come to be so FUBAR that Yingluck's "own" party has to threaten her to carry on with the charade

It certainly sounds like it, however, there was no mention of a grenade yet, which is the usual threat delivery system...

[fab4]

The constitution contains provisions *allowing* the PM to resign (and also to be removed). There are NO provisions forbidding the PM to resign. It's bullshit.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My understanding is that a caretaker PM has to stay on until the lections are finished and can not resign during that period, unless with royal agreement.

When the cabinet is dissolved new elections will be held not earlier than 60 days and not later than 90 days, and a new government should be formed within 30 days after the election.

If that fails the role of the caretaker government is over.

Which means since 1 April the role of the caretaker PM is over.

Well someone better tell them then. Or you could be mistaken..............

This interpretation is contested by legal analyst Verapat. First, the Yingluck Cabinet is a caretaker Cabinet. It is compelled to continue its role under Section 181 until a new Cabinet takes office. Second, there is 180 days under Section 93, paragraph 6 to get to 95% minimum threshold of MPs for the House of Representatives to convene so there is no 60 day deadline.

BP: Normally, within 60 days of the election the caretaker Cabinet will be replaced by a new Cabinet, but Section 181 does not put a maximum timeframe on how long the caretaker Cabinet can continue. It simply states the caretaker Cabinet continues until a new Cabinet takes office. In BP’s view this is clear. There is no expiry date.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/120115/will-the-yingluck-government-cease-caretaker/

[bigbamboo]

I just moved to Phuket with my husband of 40 years. Retired here from Australia and I wanted to join a forum that allowed me to connect with the happenings of Thailand. Seems that I may have made a wrong decision after absorbing the political content and seeing what goes on here.

Seems that both sides of politics are terrible examples of democracy.

I came from a state in Australia where Barry O'Farrell resigned as the premier because of a bottle of wine that would be perceived as a bribe. A state where Mike Gallacher has resigned as police and justice minister because of an investigation of his alleged role involving corruption. Everyone agreed they did the right thing.

I may be an old duck, but that comes with old fashioned values. No one in NSW defended the actions of these people for valiantly resigning. In fact the Australia PM commended them for resigning even though Barry was of the same political party as him.

I have only been retired in Thailand for 9 weeks and I already miss Australia as does my husband. We knew nothing of this corruption and the blind defense of it before we came to Phuket.

And with due respect some forum members should be ashamed of themselves for defending the corrupt happenings of either side and respect the law.

My grandson in Australia doesn't respect the law and he says the courts are biased after he went to jail for insider trading. I told him he needs to be accountable and respect the rules lest he find himself in mischief again. He has learnt after 14 months and I hope the people in Thai politics learn too.

Thanks for listening.

You should stick with it. Just be fair minded and treat the politicians, the police and the forum trolls with equal contempt.

And Thai politics is almost as hilarious as Hoges' Academy Awards speech!

[jcb2001]

she might face legal actions if she resigned according to Section 181 of the Constitution.

She might face legal action?

​So she was not given this advice when she transferred Thawil? She was not given this advice when the rice scheme crumbled? She was not given this advice when the PTP, not once, but twice committed voter fraud in parliament with the 2.2 trillion borrowing bill and the senate make up vote. No advice regarding legal action when it was deemed unconstitutional when they wanted to bypass democratic processes to get this loan.

​I would sack my legal team and get competent lawyers. Unless of course this is all agenda driven responses.

Don't tell the gullible. Gotto keep the charade up that the PTP are following the rule of law and always have otherwise the "judicial coup" excuse for all their failings and utter disrespect for the law would be harder to swallow. Telling them otherwise would splash some proverbial egg on their faces and be highly embarrassing for the weak minded 1992 coup lovers.

I respect the constitution until it does not allow me to do what I want.

That is PTP logic right there.

Great analogy, nice to see you back on TVF.

[dcutman]

The constitution contains provisions *allowing* the PM to resign (and also to be removed). There are NO provisions forbidding the PM to resign. It's bullshit.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My understanding is that a caretaker PM has to stay on until the lections are finished and can not resign during that period, unless with royal agreement.

When the cabinet is dissolved new elections will be held not earlier than 60 days and not later than 90 days, and a new government should be formed within 30 days after the election.

If that fails the role of the caretaker government is over.

Which means since 1 April the role of the caretaker PM is over.

Well someone better tell them then. Or you could be mistaken..............

This interpretation is contested by legal analyst Verapat. First, the Yingluck Cabinet is a caretaker Cabinet. It is compelled to continue its role under Section 181 until a new Cabinet takes office. Second, there is 180 days under Section 93, paragraph 6 to get to 95% minimum threshold of MPs for the House of Representatives to convene so there is no 60 day deadline.

BP: Normally, within 60 days of the election the caretaker Cabinet will be replaced by a new Cabinet, but Section 181 does not put a maximum timeframe on how long the caretaker Cabinet can continue. It simply states the caretaker Cabinet continues until a new Cabinet takes office. In BP’s view this is clear. There is no expiry date.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/120115/will-the-yingluck-government-cease-caretaker/

never mind

Edited May 5, 2014 by dcutman

[BillyBobThai]

Maybe she should just die. Would that be against the constitution??

[Baerboxer]

" 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.

Of course - replace the judges with 9 who see everything your way; or keep changing them until they do. Like the several cabinet shuffles. Keep moving the boys around and around.

Totally unconstitutional and undemocratic - hallmarks of PTP and its strategic thinker.

The red faction on TV will, as usual claim this as democracy - after all PTP were democratically elected.

Announcing they will not recognize court judgement in advance would be enough to force resignation or face impeachment in any real democracy.