Experts Decry 'Judicial Coup' Against Yingluck

[virtualtraveller]

Conveniently, these 'experts' overlook the simple fact that for two years Yingluck has been a clear proxy for a fugitive criminal, and that should not have been tolerated by the courts. She's lucky to have made it this far, if the courts were draconian, and the result of the verdict means yet another 'judicial coup' against an elected govt, it's only because the elected govt is time and again nothing more than a family proxy. Certainly not in the spirit of democracy.

[dukeandduke]

Wow the TVF yellow cheerleading squad have progressed from being small-minded keyboard warriors to being able to denounce legal opinions from professors of law.

Indeed, while they conclude, with intellectual, legal analysis, that blocking polling places and storming Ministry buildings are lawful acts.

[fab4]

[Yingluck] has the unique ability to filter her brother's hot headed thinking, but if she is gone, the situation can change very quickly for the worse, Mr. Verapat warned.

More threats from the Reds.

All the more reason to finally get rid of Thaksin once and for all.

Well you'd be telling the truth if anyone from the UDD were responsible for that quote. As they didn't and the quote is attributed to Independent Legal advisor Verapat Pariyawong, your statement is false, a lie, if you like.

[JAG]

Reading through this topic so far has left me with the impression that political intolerance and academic snobbery seem to make good bedfellows!

I am assuming of course that those heaping scorn on these professor's academic credentials are at least as well educated, and employed in positions that reflect that.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Now or Never]

Professor Chambers, who teaches at Payap University in northern Thailand and is otherwise unemployable outside of Northern Thailand.

Chambers is a nobody Red stooge.

Spot on - can you imagine him getting a job outside Thailand? Yeah, in some red-neck US state somewhere, maybe ...

This might explain things further - note who funds it ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payap_University

Yes, Maybe Kentucky State or Texas...lol...lol.

[binjalin]

spot on article - it's soooooooooooooooooooooo obvious only a moron could not see it

[fab4]

Khaosod has really started to make the rounds with a series of " articles " that frame a firmly established UDD narrative - a narrative that Pheu Thai is zealously pursuing. Predictably, every one of their " experts " are firmly on the UDD side of the universe. Khaosod would have us believe that there are no legal experts who feel that the Constitutional Court has acquitted themselves well. But there are. Only you won't find them in Khaosod's fictional and delusional pages. One could spend more quality time reading the comics. A disgrace to journalism.

I don't suppose there's any chance of you letting the forum know just where these legal experts have voiced their opinion and "feel that the Constitutional Court has acquitted themselves well" ?

Well?

[rreddin]

So where is the technical analysis of the ruling? I see a lot of editorials and commentary but no scholarly analysis. Where are the constitutional scholars? Does a straightforward reading of the constitution plainly forbid certain actions of which the PM is known to have done?

Why doesn't political science Professor Paul Chambers explain precisely why the justices are wrong in their ruling?

Please provide us with your expert technical and scholarly analysis. Be prepared for it to be peer group reviewed.

[Now or Never]

So where is the technical analysis of the ruling? I see a lot of editorials and commentary but no scholarly analysis. Where are the constitutional scholars? Does a straightforward reading of the constitution plainly forbid certain actions of which the PM is known to have done?

Why doesn't political science Professor Paul Chambers explain precisely why the justices are wrong in their ruling?

Throughout Thaksin's controversial political career he has manipulated everything from fellow politicians, senators and academics to lawyers, journalists and so on. If you research Thaksin on the internet you'll learn the extent of his manipulation of others, such as paying Senators 100,000 baht a month and the equivalent in personal payments to MPs, not necessarily of his own party. He has twisted and deceived and lied at every opportunity. That's his history. Read what many fellow politicians have said about him. There are 1000s of references throughout the net. With that in mind, let me suggest that Thaksin has also paid off Professor Paul Chambers. Its a huge possibility (but not necessarily fact) and it would fit in very firmly with what we know about how Thaksin does business. For example, if we're talking about business, this is a man who has 'huge interests in gold mnes in Uganda', except there is no gold deposits (or very little) in Uganda. So the gold he is selling comes from the West Congo, which is illegally smuggled into Uganda and sold as Ugandan gold. There are massive legal and humane issues associated with this business. But this is a Thaksin business and it is how he works. Everything and everyone can be bought. Unfortunately for him he has failed to buy the judiciary - although he has tried very hard. If he had of managed to buy the judiciary then by now Thaksin would be in complete dictatorial control of Thailand. So thank goodness for the independence and intelligence of the judiciary.

Yes, Definitely.

You can see Thaksins manipulative tentacles all over these experts.

Chambers can be seen on Singapore's Chanel News Asia's biased coverage of Thailand.

The Singaporean mafia bought the phone network from Thaksin and their love of Thaksin and his power is endless.

Hence the promotion of Chambers and his pro Thaksin views.

Thaksin.... Policeman turned billionaire turned politician....lol..lol..lol.

[Torkmada]

Interestingly enough, none fundament their "expert" opinion citing any facts or arguments.

The idiocy of the situation is self evident

[AleG]

So where is the technical analysis of the ruling? I see a lot of editorials and commentary but no scholarly analysis. Where are the constitutional scholars? Does a straightforward reading of the constitution plainly forbid certain actions of which the PM is known to have done?

Why doesn't political science Professor Paul Chambers explain precisely why the justices are wrong in their ruling?

Please provide us with your expert technical and scholarly analysis. Be prepared for it to be peer group reviewed.

The Constitutional Court alread explained and fundamented their case at length, now it's up to those who disagree to put a bit more effort in opposing the veredict than just blurting out "judicial coup!"

You feel up to it?

[AleG]

Interestingly enough, none fundament their "expert" opinion citing any facts or arguments.

The idiocy of the situation is self evident

Well, Pipkins, if it is so self evident you can you can easily debunk the decision of the court with solid arguments, can you?

[phutoie2]

Wow the TVF yellow cheerleading squad have progressed from being small-minded keyboard warriors to being able to denounce legal opinions from professors of law.

Ditto, most of the TVY 's have bar stool diploma's plus I was threatened by a yellow loon on a previous topic

Signed up for a Chuck Norris refresher just in case.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ 2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited May 7, 2014 by phutoie2

[patjem]

Such an old scratched record..... please!

[rreddin]

Professor Chambers, who teaches at Payap University in northern Thailand and is otherwise unemployable outside of Northern Thailand.

Chambers is a nobody Red stooge.

Spot on - can you imagine him getting a job outside Thailand? Yeah, in some red-neck US state somewhere, maybe ...

This might explain things further - note who funds it ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payap_University

Yes, Maybe Kentucky State or Texas...lol...lol.

Oh deary me! Kentucky is a Commonwealth, not a state. I do hope you are not American.

[gangrel]

Wow the TVF yellow cheerleading squad have progressed from being small-minded keyboard warriors to being able to denounce legal opinions from professors of law.

Paul Chambers is NOT a professor of law.

[gangrel]

Professor Chambers, who teaches at Payap University in northern Thailand and is otherwise unemployable outside of Northern Thailand.

Chambers is a nobody Red stooge.

Spot on - can you imagine him getting a job outside Thailand? Yeah, in some red-neck US state somewhere, maybe ...

This might explain things further - note who funds it ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payap_University

Yes, Maybe Kentucky State or Texas...lol...lol.

Oh deary me! Kentucky is a Commonwealth, not a state. I do hope you are not American.

I believe he's referencing Kentucky State University, Yingluck's supposed alma mater.

[rebelplatoon]

Nonsense story. 3 people from THE NORTH, where the Sae Khu clan base is, say its illegal. Lots and lots of other people from all over Thailand, lawyers and academics alike and in fact the government a few weeks ago by saying they would abide by the ruling, have said it is up to them. There is no real legal new aspect involved in this article. YL and her 8 ministers are convicted of wrong doing in order to let themselves and their croonies profit. Simple close and shut case.

This story to me just proves that the speed of light is indeed faster than the speed of sound. Some people seem bright until they speak.

[dru2]

Reading through this topic so far has left me with the impression that political intolerance and academic snobbery seem to make good bedfellows!

I am assuming of course that those heaping scorn on these professor's academic credentials are at least as well educated, and employed in positions that reflect that.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Actually better educated, with much higher academic credentials and longer experience.

[Dogmatix]

“Thailand has a form of democracy, but there is no real balance or checks," said Professor Chambers, who teaches at Payap University in northern Thailand.”

There are real checks and balances, including the Constitutional Court, the NACC, the EC, the Auditor-General's office etc. Get it?

[wolf5370]

Wow the TVF yellow cheerleading squad have progressed from being small-minded keyboard warriors to being able to denounce legal opinions from professors of law.

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect Thailand1399478080.621959.jpg

Paul Chambers is NOT a professor of law.

True-but he seems pretty well qualified on political matters - especially here in Thailand: http://ic.payap.ac.th/other-programs/ia/paul.php

Just saying.

It would have been nice if he had explained the "whys" instead of just poo-pooing though.

PS: To "See the Bears" /"Jag"- not everyone here is unqualified - there is even a forum just for teachers which includes university professors - just saying that too.

//Edit: Typo.

Edited May 7, 2014 by wolf5370

[daveAustin]

Chiang Mai University law lecturer Somchai Preechasilpakul also criticised the court's verdict today...

“The verdict appears to indicate that all Prime Ministers who do not come from the Democrat Party will be eventually removed by the so-called independent agencies,” Mr. Somchai said,

It doesn't to me. To me the verdict indicates that all prime ministers that do wrong and/or who serve the Please Thaksin Party will eventually be removed.

[rebelplatoon]

Education: Bachelor's Degree in Letters (University of Oklahoma); Bachelor's Degree in Spanish (University of Oklahoma); Master of Arts in International Affairs (Ohio University); Master of Arts in Political Science (Ohio University); Ph.D. in Political Science (Northern Illinois University)

Paul has been gathering quite a few degrees. Most of which do not even touch on the field discussed. Political science is not Law. Political science does touch on the field, though. It would have been correct to see a point by point reasoning. I have been here quite a bit longer and follow politics from day one. Besides that I have a degree in law. If I wasn t so busy I d make a point by point reasoning why this decision is correct. For all people of the Sae Khu clan fan club required reading should be roo tan thaksin (one step ahead of Thaksin) vol. I and II. Lest we forget: payap is in Chiang Mai, the place where the Sae Khu clan settled down after moving here from China. Maybe Paul likes his job.

[casualbiker]

Education: Bachelor's Degree in Letters (University of Oklahoma); Bachelor's Degree in Spanish (University of Oklahoma); Master of Arts in International Affairs (Ohio University); Master of Arts in Political Science (Ohio University); Ph.D. in Political Science (Northern Illinois University)

Paul has been gathering quite a few degrees. Most of which do not even touch on the field discussed. Political science is not Law. Political science does touch on the field, though. It would have been correct to see a point by point reasoning. I have been here quite a bit longer and follow politics from day one. Besides that I have a degree in law. If I wasn t so busy I d make a point by point reasoning why this decision is correct. For all people of the Sae Khu clan fan club required reading should be roo tan thaksin (one step ahead of Thaksin) vol. I and II. Lest we forget: payap is in Chiang Mai, the place where the Sae Khu clan settled down after moving here from China. Maybe Paul likes his job.

I think from Paul's papers and books that he doesn't like military involvement in politics. Fair enough. It could also be said that maybe his statement was cherry picked. The Thai Harvard lawyer is obviously pro government anti Democrats ... maybe hahaha

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[casualbiker]

Education: Bachelor's Degree in Letters (University of Oklahoma); Bachelor's Degree in Spanish (University of Oklahoma); Master of Arts in International Affairs (Ohio University); Master of Arts in Political Science (Ohio University); Ph.D. in Political Science (Northern Illinois University)

Paul has been gathering quite a few degrees. Most of which do not even touch on the field discussed. Political science is not Law. Political science does touch on the field, though. It would have been correct to see a point by point reasoning. I have been here quite a bit longer and follow politics from day one. Besides that I have a degree in law. If I wasn t so busy I d make a point by point reasoning why this decision is correct. For all people of the Sae Khu clan fan club required reading should be roo tan thaksin (one step ahead of Thaksin) vol. I and II. Lest we forget: payap is in Chiang Mai, the place where the Sae Khu clan settled down after moving here from China. Maybe Paul likes his job.

I think from Paul's papers and books that he doesn't like military involvement in politics. Fair enough. It could also be said that maybe his statement was cherry picked. The Thai Harvard lawyer is obviously pro government anti Democrats ... because of his half truths. Example : Samak was not sanctioned for his working on a cooking show .. he was sanctioned for being paid for working on a cooking show and then lying about the payment.

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Mister Fixit]

“Thailand has a form of democracy, but there is no real balance or checks," said Professor Chambers, who teaches at Payap University in northern Thailand.”

There are real checks and balances, including the Constitutional Court, the NACC, the EC, the Auditor-General's office etc. Get it?

Nope, the 'Professor' doesn't - not at all ...

I mean, come on, Payap 'University' ... Pffft.

Someone has just trotted out their tame white boy.

Edited May 7, 2014 by Mister Fixit

[shawndoc]

I notice most of those attacking the ruling aren't pointing out where the ruling was wrong, instead they resort to name calling, inflammatory language, or ad hominem attacks on the judges or those not actually involved in the case.

I wonder why that is?

[AleG]

I notice most of those attacking the ruling aren't pointing out where the ruling was wrong, instead they resort to name calling, inflammatory language, or ad hominem attacks on the judges or those not actually involved in the case.

I wonder why that is?

I guess because they just know the court and the veredict to be biased.

Even Alanis Morissett would recongnize the irony there.

[Thaddeus]

so whats new with this scheming bunch of s***tbags that will stoop to any new low to remove a democratically elected PM

Democratically elected, by all terms, that is a given.

Once elected, morally corrupt with a large dollop of inept.

Care for the well-being of the country doesn't stop at the voting booth, does it.

[casualbiker]

I notice most of those attacking the ruling aren't pointing out where the ruling was wrong, instead they resort to name calling, inflammatory language, or ad hominem attacks on the judges or those not actually involved in the case.

I wonder why that is?

I guess because they just know the court and the veredict to be biased.

Even Alanis Morissett would recongnize the irony there.

So it's ok for people to dislike Thaksin then because they "just know " that he is corrupt to the core...

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app