Thai cabinet appoints new PM: minister

[Bocking]

...it will finally dawn on the Suthepistas that it is business as usual...

Thank you Mr. wind up for this post, no way will this be business as usual, for now every politician will be SH####ing bricks ---look before you tread guys---most who are not convicted will be wearing brown underpants,

For you --you would have been happy for no action ????----sorry your disappointed with democracy.

No, it's fundamentally undemocratic and that's my problem with it. An elected PM dismissed by a stacked court, for the most trivial of reasons ( in any other country it would have been a censure at most), initaited by an APPOINTED Senator. Anyway, the govt continues in office and that's the main game.

Really?

Imagine David Cameron coming to power and with the first month dismissing the perfectly capable Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, installing his brother-in -law and then holding the inauguration ceremony at Jonathan Aitkins house? ... Censure???? .. He'd be sent to the bloody tower

[Torkmada]

3 duly elected Prime Ministers sacked by an incestuous unelected elite appointed judiciary.

The final time of reckoning is upon Thailand.

Who owns the country?

The masses or the elites?

The choices are stark.

One road leads to a free and open society with a flourishing economy and equality for all.

And the other?

Aparthied, dictatorship, oppression, censorship, injustice, international pariah status, economic doom and national misery.

It's clear to see why this only ends one way and the victors can only be the Reds.

[MaxLee]

3 duly elected Prime Ministers sacked by an incestuous unelected elite appointed judiciary.

The final time of reckoning is upon Thailand.

Who owns the country?

The masses or the elites?

The choices are stark.

One road leads to a free and open society with a flourishing economy and equality for all.

And the other?

Aparthied, dictatorship, oppression, censorship, injustice, international pariah status, economic doom and national misery.

It's clear to see why this only ends one way and the victors can only be the Reds.

Yup, the legacy Shinawatra will never go down...

[AleG]

3 duly elected Prime Ministers sacked by an incestuous unelected elite appointed judiciary.

The final time of reckoning is upon Thailand.

Who owns the country?

The masses or the elites?

The choices are stark.

One road leads to a free and open society with a flourishing economy and equality for all.

And the other?

Aparthied, dictatorship, oppression, censorship, injustice, international pariah status, economic doom and national misery.

It's clear to see why this only ends one way and the victors can only be the Reds.

Riiight. The Reds want a free and open society with equality for all... that's why they want the Shinawatras, the epithome of the exact opposite of all that.

-Thaksin Thinks, Phuea Thai does, master/servant relationship as their election slogan.

-Absolute lack of transparency in government, as in the Rice Scheme, as in the issue of a passport to Thaksin that still, 3 years later remains unexplained, as in the Amnesty Bill with the smoke screen of "it's not about Thaksin" until the 11th hour that it was changed to be all about Thaksin, etc, etc... Scratch the "Open" out.

-Equality for all, except for the PTP and UDD, of course, they should be exempted from being equal before the law because they won an election.

The less told about a "flourishing economy" the better, the incompetent PTP put the country on a nose dive well before the anti-government protests started.

This "Aparthied, dictatorship, oppression, censorship, injustice, international pariah status, economic doom and national misery." is very rich coming from someone that choosed as a new user name the name of a man infamous for prosecuting, torturing and murdering by the thousands people that refused, or even seemed to, not to accept the One True Faith. Your only interest is in being part of a winning team that would let you enjoy your inner viciousness directly or vicariously.

Really Pipkins, come visit reality some times.

[ingvar]

Let me see, this guy have close ties with Shinawatra, becomes the CEO of iTV and soon after that iTV is bought by Shinawatra? and then he becomes a monk for three years, as if he had to cleans himself of something dirty....

[ezzra]

I don't envy this fella, he was chosen to preside over a hornet nest... and if he's

got any common sense in his had, run away now, and run very fast...

[ginjag]

3 duly elected Prime Ministers sacked by an incestuous unelected elite appointed judiciary.

The final time of reckoning is upon Thailand.

Who owns the country?

The masses or the elites?

The choices are stark.

One road leads to a free and open society with a flourishing economy and equality for all.

And the other?

Aparthied, dictatorship, oppression, censorship, injustice, international pariah status, economic doom and national misery.

It's clear to see why this only ends one way and the victors can only be the Reds.

Problem Thaksin thought HE owned the country and tried with all the power he could muster but was defeated--then he and his money tried again to control from afar and that has come unstuck again denied.

Thaksin is a complete control freak and has schooled the red army in the same fashion. good for others to try and succeed to rid this manipulating NUT.

If the reds use violence as is wanted by Thaksin then again the army will have to put them to order. Imagine if the army were the same as the police force --Anarchy for sure mega style under red control.

[smileydude]

As expected, the strategic political jousting continues.....

....whoever thought Thailand's problems would go away is optimistically naive.

As for whoever is being appointed being good, bad, qualitfied, unqualified, intelligent, stupid, it doesn't matter because at the end of the day they are not the one calling the shots. YL never truly called the shots and neither will Niwattumrong.

Nothing has changed except you might never hear "thank you three times" again, or will we?

Edited May 8, 2014 by smileydude

[Prbkk]

...it will finally dawn on the Suthepistas that it is business as usual...

Thank you Mr. wind up for this post, no way will this be business as usual, for now every politician will be SH####ing bricks ---look before you tread guys---most who are not convicted will be wearing brown underpants,

For you --you would have been happy for no action ????----sorry your disappointed with democracy.

No, it's fundamentally undemocratic and that's my problem with it. An elected PM dismissed by a stacked court, for the most trivial of reasons ( in any other country it would have been a censure at most), initaited by an APPOINTED Senator. Anyway, the govt continues in office and that's the main game.

Really?

Imagine David Cameron coming to power and with the first month dismissing the perfectly capable Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, installing his brother-in -law and then holding the inauguration ceremony at Jonathan Aitkins house? ... Censure???? .. He'd be sent to the bloody tower

A public servant trying to overthrow an elected govt? These public servants need to understand that they are there to serve the people by working through the govt. If they can't do that they should RESIGN.As I understand it, this particular individual is now on a list of those to be charged with insurrection.

The transfer was trivial and is the right of the elected govt . It happens in every country, every day.

[h90]

Who is not defense minister?

There were the talks that she is still defense minister, but I don't think so.....Anyone knows?

[fab4]

At the time of Thawil's transfer it was pointed out in the media that this had strong potential to get YL and the entire cabinet removed, if they remained office long enough for the case to come to fruition. That took 2 and half years but got there in the end. If they didn't realise this, it was because they ignored the warnings and/or had very poor legal advice. Anyway all other considerations took a back seat to Potjaman's desire to reward her phi.

While I'm sure that the media is a sound arbiter of legal advice I can't imagine the legal team of the PTP taking much notice of them.

Perhaps they were naive enough to believe that if the Administration Court ruled that the transfer was illegal and ordered a reinstatement they would do so and that would be that - as shown by abhisits transfer of the Police Chief - he never reinstated the Police Chief but still faced no further action.

And perhaps they were naive enough to believe that even if an anti Thaksin Senator were to file a complaint after the Cabinet had agreed to reinstate Thawil that the CC would not go out of their way to act upon it let alone dismiss the PM and Cabinet.

Well that's political justice for you.

PT's legal team doesn't seem to be all that sharp but, if they dared raise a concern at the time, they would have been shouted down, given that the de facto leadership of the party plus ex-wife wanted the chain reaction of transfers to take place and aren't people who like to take no for an answer. They probably also assumed that the case would take so long going through at least 3 courts that the govt would be gone and, if not, that they would be gone, so it wouldn't matter. Abhisit avoided this because he dinged the police chief late in his tenure and was long gone before the case got through the admin courts. It was ruled a wrongful dismissal too but the police chief had already passed retirement age and Abhisit had already lost the election, so there was no point in the CC hearing the case, as they couldn't have removed him from office which is all they can do.

So abhisit, doesn't get hounded through the Constitution Court with the expected Senate ruling of a 5 year ban from politics, because he had lost an election and the civil servant involved had retired ?

Well, that's political Justice for you................................if your surname isn't Shinawatra.

[ebean001]

Just a thought from me - democracy has it's own way of working but, of course, is very slow and who gets elected not necessarily the right person for all the people. This swift action by 'appointing' a PM is unique but hummmm. Maybe that is how you get a quality person in government who is not full of politics. Just saying -

[fab4]

So, your point is?

Gee Flab

seems you are a bit butt hurt today, spouting your usual BS seems more aggressive(stupid) than normal. Just think how your hero's(criminals) that just got sacked feel?

It's Fab4. A bit butt hurt? No I'm just getting peed off having to spend an inordinate amount of time answering ill thought posts. Oh and crude drivel, like your post.

[ginjag]

So, your point is?

Gee Flab

seems you are a bit butt hurt today, spouting your usual BS seems more aggressive(stupid) than normal. Just think how your hero's(criminals) that just got sacked feel?

It's Fab4. A bit butt hurt? No I'm just getting peed off having to spend an inordinate amount of time answering ill thought posts. Oh and crude drivel, like your post.

You mean you have got tired of typing hundreds of denial posts-more than likely .

[Rorri]

marko kok prong, on 07 May 2014 - 15:39, said:

So looks like the final battle is still on for the 14th then.

I believe now it is the 9th May.

[fab4]

Fab 4 lives in the past Problem is he is busy rewriting it and has no time for 2014.

If you don't understand the past why do you think you can write knowledgeably about the present, let alone the future? Not that that bothers you, obviously.

[pkspeaker]

OMG! They just can't deal with reality-the pad/pdrc supporters- trying to turn this disaster into a victory..

OK GUYZ, take a deep breath.. this thing with the 'appointed' peoples council is not gonna happen..

The pad/pdrc/dems ONLY HOPE was for the court to remove the entire cabnet, then this 'vacuum' was supposed to lead to the Senate-which was going to install this non-MP PM in what would have been an absurd legal manuver.. the CC (as biased against the PT as it is) clearly stated that they can not do this, they stated that the remaining cabnet can continue on.. even if this second caretaker PT PM is sacked, then another PTPM will take over, there are still 24 of them! Sabotaging the july 20 election will simply continue the caretaker cabnet..

What's more significant is that CAPO on several occasions , the most recent being 2 days ago, warned the courts/senate that they cannot 'create a political vacuum' -in other words they will not tolerate a non-elected 'ruler' seizing power from the caretaker govt.

So even if the courts did follow up with more sackings while the pdrc sabotaged the july 20 election, to the point that no one was left in the caretaker cabnet; the government, backed by CAPO will simply say 'no!' and continue governing until the next election finally happens.

back by 100,000 cops and with the military quietly nodding it's head in approval, CAPO will trump any creative ruling by the nacc or whatever... the PDRC's agenda of installing a dictator is DEAD, deal with reality time

The Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Thailand must be a member of the House of Representatives.^[2] Therefore the qualifications for the office is the same as the qualifications for the House.

To be appointed the nominee for the office must have the support of one-fifth of the members of the House of Representatives. Then after a simple-majority vote in the House, a resolution will be passed and submitted to the King, who will then make a formal appointment by giving his royal assent to the resolution. This must be done within thirty days of the beginning of the first session of the House of Representatives after an election. If no candidate can be found within this time then it is the duty of the President of the National Assembly of Thailand to submit the name considered most worthy for the King to formalize.

The nominee and eventual Prime Minister is always the leader of the largest political party in the lower house or the leader of the majority coalition formed after an election.

its all interesting but surely you are not the only one here with this info - meaning, why isn't there anything in the English Media about the legitimacy of this appointment?

This is public knowledge that the PM has to be an MP... You can't have a PM who did not get chosen by the electorate to at least represent their constituency... let alone the entire country.

Dunno why it hasn't been picked up by the media yet.... maybe they are still all clamouring for comments from the EX ministers and Yingluck.

But it has been tweeted in a few places... Eventually it will be picked up and expanded on from there one legal challenges are made.

One tweet was from a prominent PDRC leader... So is only a matter of time.

They may have picked him as he is also hanging by a thread from the NACC case, and want to show a second PM being removed by the courts.... For the sake of riling up their supporters.

It would not surprise me in the slightest.

But the main fact is.... the PTP have no right to install a PM that couldn't even get elected as an MP.

The country is in caretaker mode and with only half a cabinet, the rest of PTP becoming obsolete back in December.... They are no longer anything to do with the government.... how come they have been able to supply one of its members as the new PM???

There is NOTHING in the constitution to say the cabinet (albeit half) have the authority to choose a replacement PM.... The Senate is the organic route under these circumstances.

This in my opinion is flawed and unconstitutional on two points and don't be surprised to see this reversed....

I seriously can't see an illegally appointed replacement being sent to the king for endorsement.

[Tatsujin]

Correct me if I am wrong, but when Parliament was dissolved, the MP's all resigned, therefore they are not "MP's" any longer.

If that is the case, how can they appoint a new PM? The PM MUST be an MP according to the Constitution. The only people who can appoint a new PM in this case then is the Senate . . .

[fab4]

It's Fab4. A bit butt hurt? No I'm just getting peed off having to spend an inordinate amount of time answering ill thought posts. Oh and crude drivel, like your post.

You mean you have got tired of typing hundreds of denial posts-more than likely .

No, as I said I'm fed up with "having to spend an inordinate amount of time answering ill thought posts".

I wouldn't have said that if I really meant I "have got tired of typing hundreds of denial posts", would I?

Oh, and answering pointless sniping posts like yours.

[ginjag]

Fab 4 lives in the past Problem is he is busy rewriting it and has no time for 2014.

If you don't understand the past why do you think you can write knowledgeably about the present, let alone the future? Not that that bothers you, obviously.

No work permits needed in the red army. they need all they can muster now, and also we have Thursday to see what happens re--rice job.

Didn't she do well overseeing this, also ???

[fab4]

Fab 4 lives in the past Problem is he is busy rewriting it and has no time for 2014.

If you don't understand the past why do you think you can write knowledgeably about the present, let alone the future? Not that that bothers you, obviously.

No work permits needed in the red army. they need all they can muster now, and also we have Thursday to see what happens re--rice job.

Didn't she do well overseeing this, also ???

What are you on about now? Did it all make sense when it was in your brain and then it all went terribly wrong when you typed it out?

[pkspeaker]

OK Tat, your wrong, it's over and this new guy is now the PT PM, if he gets sacked there is another 24 people in line, the notion that the senate can apoint a PM is non-sense, senators are not MPs, cabnet ministers are MPs ok take a deep breathe now and deal with reality

Correct me if I am wrong, but when Parliament was dissolved, the MP's all resigned, therefore they are not "MP's" any longer.

If that is the case, how can they appoint a new PM? The PM MUST be an MP according to the Constitution. The only people who can appoint a new PM in this case then is the Senate . . .

[ginjag]

It's Fab4. A bit butt hurt? No I'm just getting peed off having to spend an inordinate amount of time answering ill thought posts. Oh and crude drivel, like your post.

You mean you have got tired of typing hundreds of denial posts-more than likely .

No, as I said I'm fed up with "having to spend an inordinate amount of time answering ill thought posts".

I wouldn't have said that if I really meant I "have got tired of typing hundreds of denial posts", would I?

Oh, and answering pointless sniping posts like yours.

You do not have to spend your precious time doing that, put your point about what side you prefer. End of story. But do not spend your time denying the abuse of power by the government, I comment on this because it is fact, NOT repeat NOT because I do not like Yingluck. and I am not for the opposition.

Just oppose control freaks, and reply to your denial posts otherwise I would not bother.

We all knows what is going on here--this mega power struggle---fine -UK labour-conservative. But you do not have to resort to corrupt government, you govern good you never have problems---SURE

[ginjag]

Fab 4 lives in the past Problem is he is busy rewriting it and has no time for 2014.

If you don't understand the past why do you think you can write knowledgeably about the present, let alone the future? Not that that bothers you, obviously.

No work permits needed in the red army. they need all they can muster now, and also we have Thursday to see what happens re--rice job.

Didn't she do well overseeing this, also ???

What are you on about now? Did it all make sense when it was in your brain and then it all went terribly wrong when you typed it out?

I am on about, what is reality NOW, The other poster was correct about you living the past, you are not facing today's reality, so my nasty little quip was for your info, as you are blindly red colour only. Topic re cabinet--corruption and appointment. come on today reality.

[dinooz]

OK Tat, your wrong, it's over and this new guy is now the PT PM, if he gets sacked there is another 24 people in line, the notion that the senate can apoint a PM is non-sense, senators are not MPs, cabnet ministers are MPs ok take a deep breathe now and deal with reality

Correct me if I am wrong, but when Parliament was dissolved, the MP's all resigned, therefore they are not "MP's" any longer.

If that is the case, how can they appoint a new PM? The PM MUST be an MP according to the Constitution. The only people who can appoint a new PM in this case then is the Senate . . .

I think you will find he is caretaker deputy prime minister,at the moment Thailand does not have new Prime Minister and wont have until either elections happen or an interim Prime Minister is appointed.

[Morch]

3 duly elected Prime Ministers sacked by an incestuous unelected elite appointed judiciary.

The final time of reckoning is upon Thailand.

Who owns the country?

The masses or the elites?

The choices are stark.

One road leads to a free and open society with a flourishing economy and equality for all.

And the other?

Aparthied, dictatorship, oppression, censorship, injustice, international pariah status, economic doom and national misery.

It's clear to see why this only ends one way and the victors can only be the Reds.

Disregarding the usual hyperbole, there is indeed an issue here.

Wouldn't say it is exactly about who "owns" the country, as we basically just got business interest groups vying for control, with some Democracy and Reform rhetoric fluff for general consumption.

In this context, the choices are unarguably stark, and come down to personal preferences, in essence both sides not being all that different. No one's really on the masses (or people) side, can be even argued the people aren't on the people side, or they'd tell the lot to either manage the country or go get a proper job.

There's no winning as such under this system, not for the "people", at least. Best they can hope for are limited improvements in areas which coincide with leadership's business interests.

The Democrat Party seems to have inherent issues with relating to large segments of the electorate, coupled with entrenched believe that this can be overcome by manipulating the system so that these issues become less relevant. So far, didn't work all that well. One may say that they're bent on external reform, while neglecting to reform their own backyard.

On the other hand, the PTP, as long as its a de facto Shin Corp branch, is hardly the answer. Basically having the same outlook as the Democrat Party, by bringing forward its greater electoral support, while underplaying its own failings.

Unless the Democrat Party reinvents itself, or the PTP comes to its own, there's indeed little for the people to choose between.

[lineofentry]

The election winning political party is free to choose it's leader and that leader is the first choice to be 'invited' to be prime minister and form a government, the reporting is slightly misleading for those of you only familiar with presidential style systems.

[Tatsujin]

OK Tat, your wrong, it's over and this new guy is now the PT PM, if he gets sacked there is another 24 people in line, the notion that the senate can apoint a PM is non-sense, senators are not MPs, cabnet ministers are MPs ok take a deep breathe now and deal with reality

Correct me if I am wrong, but when Parliament was dissolved, the MP's all resigned, therefore they are not "MP's" any longer.

If that is the case, how can they appoint a new PM? The PM MUST be an MP according to the Constitution. The only people who can appoint a new PM in this case then is the Senate . . .

Have you actually read any of the current Constitution that details HOW things should be done legally as opposed to the way Thaksin and the incredible PT legal team think or want things to be done?

Answer me this . . .

Are Yingluck and any of the 9 members of the cabinet who were removed from office currently MP's?

Are ANY of the current caretaker Govt currently MP's?

[pkspeaker]

They will not allow and 'outsider' into the cabinet, no court can do this and the senate session is only dealing with other issues for a fixed amount of time. If anyone tries this utter non-sense-it will not be respected give it up already..

[Morch]

At the time of Thawil's transfer it was pointed out in the media that this had strong potential to get YL and the entire cabinet removed, if they remained office long enough for the case to come to fruition. That took 2 and half years but got there in the end. If they didn't realise this, it was because they ignored the warnings and/or had very poor legal advice. Anyway all other considerations took a back seat to Potjaman's desire to reward her phi.

While I'm sure that the media is a sound arbiter of legal advice I can't imagine the legal team of the PTP taking much notice of them.

Perhaps they were naive enough to believe that if the Administration Court ruled that the transfer was illegal and ordered a reinstatement they would do so and that would be that - as shown by abhisits transfer of the Police Chief - he never reinstated the Police Chief but still faced no further action.

And perhaps they were naive enough to believe that even if an anti Thaksin Senator were to file a complaint after the Cabinet had agreed to reinstate Thawil that the CC would not go out of their way to act upon it let alone dismiss the PM and Cabinet.

Well that's political justice for you.

PT's legal team doesn't seem to be all that sharp but, if they dared raise a concern at the time, they would have been shouted down, given that the de facto leadership of the party plus ex-wife wanted the chain reaction of transfers to take place and aren't people who like to take no for an answer. They probably also assumed that the case would take so long going through at least 3 courts that the govt would be gone and, if not, that they would be gone, so it wouldn't matter. Abhisit avoided this because he dinged the police chief late in his tenure and was long gone before the case got through the admin courts. It was ruled a wrongful dismissal too but the police chief had already passed retirement age and Abhisit had already lost the election, so there was no point in the CC hearing the case, as they couldn't have removed him from office which is all they can do.

So abhisit, doesn't get hounded through the Constitution Court with the expected Senate ruling of a 5 year ban from politics, because he had lost an election and the civil servant involved had retired ?

Well, that's political Justice for you................................if your surname isn't Shinawatra.

Asked you in another topic, apologies if answered already (a bit hard to keep track of all these similar threads) - Yes, Abhisit had a rather similar case, but was the removal of the official/civil servant at that instance coupled with any allegations that amounted to abuse of power (as in for personal gain/corruption), as they were in Yingluck's case?

Not a baiting question, just perhaps not aware of all details in Abhisit's case. Not arguing that the courts aren't, in general, more lenient with him and the Democrat Party (might also have to do with the Dems being better at playing legal games).