The Yingluck lesson is a must-learn

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
The Yingluck lesson is a must-learn
The Nation

Reform has to tackle differences among Thais over democratic principles

BANGKOK: -- People view Wednesday's developments triggered by the Constitutional Court's ousting of caretaker prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra according to their own political leanings. Supporters of the Pheu Thai Party decried another "judicial coup", while the other side insists that justice was finally served. Such bitter division was the root of the national strife in the first place, so anyone who thinks the end is near is probably being optimistic.

The court dealt Pheu Thai a heavy blow, but it's also notable that the judges did leave room for the caretaker Cabinet to carry on. For how much longer is another matter, of course. The ruling that swept away Yingluck and several of her key ministers has left Pheu Thai with a coterie of "second-best" politicians in charge of an already-shaky caretaker administration. Were the judges being fair in not dismissing the entire Cabinet? Again, the response rests with your ideological viewpoint.

It's not a "coup" if Pheu Thai, which won the 2011 election, could still pick Yingluck's successor, one camp says. The other claims the judges only "pretended to be fair" because they knew the judicial noose would choke off the last-remaining Pheu Thai power-holder sooner or later anyway. The latter camp does not believe a post-Yingluck Pheu Thai caretaker government can last long.

The week's developments only confirmed the depth and breadth of the ideological chasm dividing the nation. Regardless of the motives behind the transfer of Thawil Pliensri from the National Security Council and the promotion of Priewphan Damapong to the top police post, the Thai public remains polarised over the extent of the government's democratic mandate and the need for checks and balances. Reaction to the Constitutional Court's ruling has told us that much.

"One man's judicial coup is another man's checks and balances," says a tweet from the anti-government camp. While the origin of the tweet left no doubt as to its meaning, we should examine it from both sides. There has been much talk regarding the need for reform, but any reforms must bridge the gap of ideological differences. If future reforms deliver measures to prevent "abuse of power" but at the same time Thais continue to disagree over what constitutes abuse of power, the reforms will be useless.

Was Thawil's transfer a matter of power abused? Was the Constitutional Court's dismissal of Yingluck an abuse of power? Thais are utterly divided on these questions. There are, of course, politically motivated attempts to demonise the government or the judiciary, but there are also "honest" opinions in their favour or against them. Reform must seek to address the differences, no matter how difficult the task.

Thailand's problems revolve around the differences. Some say Thaksin Shinawatra abused his power in helping his ex-wife buy state-owned land, while others say penalising that act was unfair judicial intervention. When his Thai Rak Thai Party was dissolved, it was either because of election fraud or because the "checks and balances" were conspiring against him. Was Thawil's transfer wrong? Should the rice price-pledging scheme, launched by a "government by the people and for the people", be subject to scrutiny by the non-elected few? Shouldn't an elected government be able to initiate an unorthodox Bt2-trillion borrowing plan? The list goes on.

People think differently and that makes reform tricky. On one hand any reform must reconcile our differences. On the other, it must maintain the ultimate democratic value of freedom of thought. That's how thin the line is between Thailand making progress or returning to Square 1.


-- The Nation 2014-05-09

[Gsxrnz]

Leapords (of all political camps) cannot change their spots.

[PatOngo]

The Yingluck lesson is a must-learn

Unfortunately, they are a land of slow learners.

[RogueExpat]

Why do they always bleat on and scream "judicial coup"?

She did something wrong, and the court penalised her for it. I don't see the issue.

[NongKhaiKid]

The Yingluck lesson is a must-learn

Unfortunately, they are a land of slow learners.

However they can always be sure of that infamous ' no fail ' dictum.

[Torkmada]

Thailand lacks an independent judiciary, this much is indisputable.

How can anyone expect the referees decisions to be respected when the referees are in the pocket of one of the sides in dispute?

The 2007 constitution rewrite produced an incestuous judicial appointment system that allowed the unpopular anti-democrats to exert undue influence over the courts by giving them total control over the legal system despite their lack of electoral mandate to do so.

Thailand needs a new constitution that returns to a fully elected Senate, only then can Thailand's courts begin to regain their lost and tarnished reputation.

[stickyrice2000]

The Prime Minister has the right to shuffle the staffs and replaces with the people who she can trust to carry on the responsibility. The Constitution Court does not have enough ground to remove her for this reason. They should be interpreting the laws, not executing punishments.

[Samui Coconut]

Yeap!

Edited May 9, 2014 by Samui Coconut

[Scamper]

" One man's judicial coup is another man's checks and balances "

Quote of the week. Indeed, Pheu Thai and Thaksin cling to the narrative of the former, because in so doing they can essentially do anything they please without repercussions, and avoid the later. It's the Pheu Thai/UDD Utopian dream - a world without checks and balances. Thankfully, there are still enough of those who disagree.

[noitom]

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

Thailand lacks an independent judiciary, this much is indisputable.

How can anyone expect the referees decisions to be respected when the referees are in the pocket of one of the sides in dispute?

The 2007 constitution rewrite produced an incestuous judicial appointment system that allowed the unpopular anti-democrats to exert undue influence over the courts by giving them total control over the legal system despite their lack of electoral mandate to do so.

Thailand needs a new constitution that returns to a fully elected Senate, only then can Thailand's courts begin to regain their lost and tarnished reputation.

Regain? Could you have been thinking of "develop?"

[chainarong]

The sad part of this saga is that this happened in 2011 and there has not been one move to change the system, so that tells me that change/ reforms will not come about quickly, there should be by now an independent panel that appoints senior government and military personal, the PM and the Ministers should by now have no input into appointments and if their is a relation appointed ,it is on ability, not who you know.

[Manbing]

It is interesting to note that similar legal challenges were open to the PTP, against the democrats after they regained power. To effect a politicing ban on senior democrat powers after leaving office.

However it appears there was nothing to charge them with.

In many governments around the world it seems certain rulers feel they can ignore to law as much as they like forpersonal gain and to maintain their dictatorship.

[Manbing]

What happened to the murder charges against Suthep and Abhasit. Surely such serious allegations couldn't just vanish, umless of course they were entirely without foundation.

[tx22cb]

I don't understand why a PM, any PM, should not be able to transfer a civil servant (he was not fired).

Even if it happens to be against Thailand's laws, the punishment (dismissal of PM + several key Cabinet members) surely does not fit the "crime".

[Lupatria]

…differences among Thais over democratic principles

Thais live in the year 2557- of course they are 543 years ahead- compared to the rest of the world. In all these years the majority may have accepted that nobody can be half pregnant. However, they still refuse to accept that a system of a half or conveniently modified democracy implemented by some privileged beneficiaries, can’t work for the entire population.

[A1Str8]

Indeed. Must learn the lesson that people have no right to complain about crooked leaders. They are elected by the same people who talk sh.t about them. What's that a new joke?

If the system is messed up that's the fault of an entire nation. Sh.t in, sh.t out.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Eric Loh]

Most international media and myself left puzzled as to how a transfer of a civil servant can result in an eviction of a prime minister. Total inappropriate sentencing which don't fit the offence.

[kurnell]

Learn? These people go into politics to become rich. It's not like they have an interest in helping the country or leaving a legacy.

[ginjag]

Thailand lacks an independent judiciary, this much is indisputable.

How can anyone expect the referees decisions to be respected when the referees are in the pocket of one of the sides in dispute?

The 2007 constitution rewrite produced an incestuous judicial appointment system that allowed the unpopular anti-democrats to exert undue influence over the courts by giving them total control over the legal system despite their lack of electoral mandate to do so.

Thailand needs a new constitution that returns to a fully elected Senate, only then can Thailand's courts begin to regain their lost and tarnished reputation.

Are you actually saying it needs all these in place REFORMS BEFORE ELECTIONS. good I'm with you on that one. Mega changes to the law of the land and severe penalties for corrupt practices.

Jail all the known baddies set up an independent reform council, apply new rules to govern cleanly. ELECTIONS fair---is that ok OR is it too fair for you as your wants are merely for PTP.

[Just1Voice]

Without taking sides, the establishment of a "neutral" PM and "neutral" governing body, no matter how good it may be, will never be accepted by the Red Shirts and UDD, and will, more than likely, result in more violence and bloodshed.

[Acharn]

Why do they always bleat on and scream "judicial coup"?

She did something wrong, and the court penalised her for it. I don't see the issue.

Well, it's a bit like Pochamon's land purchase, which the court ruled was corruption by Thaksin. Before making the purchase, Pochamon (and, I'm sure, Thaksin) checked with lawyers who studied previous Supreme Court rulings. They decided the case law was clear that Pochamon's purchase (at an auction, by the way) was not a violation of the law. Eventually, after the coup-makers promoted some judges, the court decided otherwise. Now the Yellows point to the blatant corruption on thaksin's part, but it didn't seem to be wrong at the time (although it was terrible public relations). Same thing here. Why would anybody think the Prime Minister could not assign people to important positions? I don't know how the court reasoned that it was unconstitutional, but I'm sure that at the time she thought the action was legitimate, although maybe pushing the edge a little. From the Reds' point of view, the court has handed down verdicts to promote a particular agenda, and to do so they twist the meaning of the law and the words which describe the case. The Yellows, as the article said, see it as justice finally triumphing. There are many people on each side, and they feel passionately about it.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Acharn

[Acharn]

Are you actually saying it needs all these in place REFORMS BEFORE ELECTIONS. good I'm with you on that one. Mega changes to the law of the land and severe penalties for corrupt practices.

Well, that much is meaningless bombast, merely serving to identify the writer as a member of a particular tribe.

Jail all the known baddies set up an independent reform council, apply new rules to govern cleanly. ELECTIONS fair---is that ok OR is it too fair for you as your wants are merely for PTP.

Now we get to the meat of it:

[ginjag]

Why do they always bleat on and scream "judicial coup"?

She did something wrong, and the court penalised her for it. I don't see the issue.

Well, it's a bit like Pochamon's land purchase, which the court ruled was corruption by Thaksin. Before making the purchase, Pochamon (and, I'm sure, Thaksin) checked with lawyers who studied previous Supreme Court rulings. They decided the case law was clear that Pochamon's purchase (at an auction, by the way) was not a violation of the law. Eventually, after the coup-makers promoted some judges, the court decided otherwise. Now the Yellows point to the blatant corruption on thaksin's part, but it didn't seem to be wrong at the time (although it was terrible public relations). Same thing here. Why would anybody think the Prime Minister could not assign people to important positions? I don't know how the court reasoned that it was unconstitutional, but I'm sure that at the time she thought the action was legitimate, although maybe pushing the edge a little. From the Reds' point of view, the court has handed down verdicts to promote a particular agenda, and to do so they twist the meaning of the law and the words which describe the case. The Yellows, as the article said, see it as justice finally triumphing. There are many people on each side, and they feel passionately about it.

Assigning persons OK but to out one and implant--yes implant a near family member of the clan to make top 5 persons in government Shins related,

In reasonable demo run countries ---NOT ON more than suspicious-edging dictatorial. There lays the reason.

As far as who is on who's side, your colours show as you deny/denial/defend for the sake of it.

I am a farrang by stander who can easily see and smell a rat in the nest of, an object to it. THATS ME this clan-pro gov posters class me as a Suthep lover because I criticize PTP and reds actions of intimidations for years.

[Acharn]

Are you actually saying it needs all these in place REFORMS BEFORE ELECTIONS. good I'm with you on that one. Mega changes to the law of the land and severe penalties for corrupt practices.

Well, that much is meaningless bombast, merely serving to identify the writer as a member of a particular tribe.

Jail all the known baddies set up an independent reform council, apply new rules to govern cleanly. ELECTIONS fair---is that ok OR is it too fair for you as your wants are merely for PTP.

Now we get to the meat of it:

-"Jail all the known baddies" Known to whom? To you? Do you have a little list? Are you sure everybody would agree? If not, how would you decide? You'll be the final arbiter, amirite?

-"Set up an independent reform council" Hmm. Set up how? By whom? How are you going to make sure the members are independent? What, exactly, does "independent" mean? What if they decide on reforms other than what you want; are they still independent? Who exactly is going to appoint them, ad by what authority? Will Suthep pick people, by his sovereign authority? How would that make them independent?

-"Apply new rules to govern cleanly" Frankly, I thought the 1997 Constitution did a pretty good job of that, although it required too many provisions to be embodied in statutes which had to be passed by the parliament. Are you dissatisfied with the 2007 Constitution? What mechanism do you have in mind for formulating and enforcing these new rules you want? Do you have some rules in mind already? What will be the legal basis for them? Your sovereignty?

-"ELECTIONS Fair" What constitutes fair elections in your opinion, and how do you get there? I thought the Election Commission was supposed to be made up of "good people" who are appointed. Are they not capable of holding fair elections? Is an election not fair because you know your choices will be rejected by an overwhelming majority of the voters, as the Democrats know?

You really heed to explain yourself a little more clearly, Think. But I understand, you're just venting your anger that there are so many idiots who don't agree with you.

[Acharn]

<snip>

I am a farrang by stander who can easily see and smell a rat in the nest of, an object to it. THATS ME this clan-pro gov posters class me as a Suthep lover because I criticize PTP and reds actions of intimidations for years.

Well, OK, nice to know, but not really necessary. English is clearly not your first language, so I understand it's hard to express yourself clearly. I'm a farang bystander, too. I happen to think that Thaksin was a very good thing for Thailand because I've lived in some poor places in Isaan and I know how much better their lives are today because of things Thaksin did. He did a lot of bad stuff, too, like condoning the extrajudicial killing of 2,500 people suspected of having some connection to drugs. I don't notice the Yellows bringing that up, I think because they agreed with it.

I hate to admit it, but I have to, that my viewpoint is based on emotion, too. Do you know what happened October 6, 1976? I believe the same people are behind the 2006 coup, the PAD, and the PDRC and Suthep. I think that if Suthep succeeds we'll see another period like the government of Thanin Kraivichien. I hope not to see that.

[ginjag]

Are you actually saying it needs all these in place REFORMS BEFORE ELECTIONS. good I'm with you on that one. Mega changes to the law of the land and severe penalties for corrupt practices.

Well, that much is meaningless bombast, merely serving to identify the writer as a member of a particular tribe.

Jail all the known baddies set up an independent reform council, apply new rules to govern cleanly. ELECTIONS fair---is that ok OR is it too fair for you as your wants are merely for PTP.

Now we get to the meat of it:

-"Jail all the known baddies" Known to whom? To you? Do you have a little list? Are you sure everybody would agree? If not, how would you decide? You'll be the final arbiter, amirite?

-"Set up an independent reform council" Hmm. Set up how? By whom? How are you going to make sure the members are independent? What, exactly, does "independent" mean? What if they decide on reforms other than what you want; are they still independent? Who exactly is going to appoint them, ad by what authority? Will Suthep pick people, by his sovereign authority? How would that make them independent?

-"Apply new rules to govern cleanly" Frankly, I thought the 1997 Constitution did a pretty good job of that, although it required too many provisions to be embodied in statutes which had to be passed by the parliament. Are you dissatisfied with the 2007 Constitution? What mechanism do you have in mind for formulating and enforcing these new rules you want? Do you have some rules in mind already? What will be the legal basis for them? Your sovereignty?

-"ELECTIONS Fair" What constitutes fair elections in your opinion, and how do you get there? I thought the Election Commission was supposed to be made up of "good people" who are appointed. Are they not capable of holding fair elections? Is an election not fair because you know your choices will be rejected by an overwhelming majority of the voters, as the Democrats know?

You really heed to explain yourself a little more clearly, Think. But I understand, you're just venting your anger that there are so many idiots who don't agree with you.

I have no anger--that's in YOUR mind just because I mentioned a few points that could sort out the problems.

Anyone who HAS flouted the law big time lock them up. YOU object to this then are you afraid some of your people may be caught in the web ???

Reform council is a must because of the situation, reasonable remedy for many problems. YOU object to that. Look up independent in the Oxford dictionary.

Fair elections suits all parties YOU question that, why does that go against the grain ?? stops the infringements afraid of that.

Give me ideas what your thoughts are. BUT before you do , do not tell me we need elections first if so do not reply.

I want good government here as normal Thais do. We have just witnessed bad government, surely your not going to argue about that ??

New rules, refresh. as the PTP flouted this. You object to this

[Mrgk]

" One man's judicial coup is another man's checks and balances "

Quote of the week. Indeed, Pheu Thai and Thaksin cling to the narrative of the former, because in so doing they can essentially do anything they please without repercussions, and avoid the later. It's the Pheu Thai/UDD Utopian dream - a world without checks and balances. Thankfully, there are still enough of those who disagree.

Well, you should add the world press to those sticking to the 'judicial coup' narrative. Funny, no?

[Mrgk]

Are you actually saying it needs all these in place REFORMS BEFORE ELECTIONS. good I'm with you on that one. Mega changes to the law of the land and severe penalties for corrupt practices.

Well, that much is meaningless bombast, merely serving to identify the writer as a member of a particular tribe.

Jail all the known baddies set up an independent reform council, apply new rules to govern cleanly. ELECTIONS fair---is that ok OR is it too fair for you as your wants are merely for PTP.

Now we get to the meat of it:

-"Jail all the known baddies" Known to whom? To you? Do you have a little list? Are you sure everybody would agree? If not, how would you decide? You'll be the final arbiter, amirite?

-"Set up an independent reform council" Hmm. Set up how? By whom? How are you going to make sure the members are independent? What, exactly, does "independent" mean? What if they decide on reforms other than what you want; are they still independent? Who exactly is going to appoint them, ad by what authority? Will Suthep pick people, by his sovereign authority? How would that make them independent?

-"Apply new rules to govern cleanly" Frankly, I thought the 1997 Constitution did a pretty good job of that, although it required too many provisions to be embodied in statutes which had to be passed by the parliament. Are you dissatisfied with the 2007 Constitution? What mechanism do you have in mind for formulating and enforcing these new rules you want? Do you have some rules in mind already? What will be the legal basis for them? Your sovereignty?

-"ELECTIONS Fair" What constitutes fair elections in your opinion, and how do you get there? I thought the Election Commission was supposed to be made up of "good people" who are appointed. Are they not capable of holding fair elections? Is an election not fair because you know your choices will be rejected by an overwhelming majority of the voters, as the Democrats know?

You really heed to explain yourself a little more clearly, Think. But I understand, you're just venting your anger that there are so many idiots who don't agree with you.

I have no anger--that's in YOUR mind just because I mentioned a few points that could sort out the problems.

Anyone who HAS flouted the law big time lock them up. YOU object to this then are you afraid some of your people may be caught in the web ???

Reform council is a must because of the situation, reasonable remedy for many problems. YOU object to that. Look up independent in the Oxford dictionary.

Fair elections suits all parties YOU question that, why does that go against the grain ?? stops the infringements afraid of that.

Give me ideas what your thoughts are. BUT before you do , do not tell me we need elections first if so do not reply.

I want good government here as normal Thais do. We have just witnessed bad government, surely your not going to argue about that ??

New rules, refresh. as the PTP flouted this. You object to this

Two words come to mind:

Barely coherent.

[robblok]

Its always funny all those new posters here, and always starting just at US/EU times.. and always political. One has to wonder about this actually a lot has said about those new posters. All the old hands here agree about it.

There are a few true expats who support the reds but a lot of hired hands too on this forum.

Its quite simple in no government in the world will you see all family at the top .. that is nepotism and that is wrong. That is what is happening here, not ability but family loyalties are the decisive factor for getting a post. Everyone with half a brain would agree that is wrong.

The current constitution is good but should be even stronger to combat corruption, most people would agree combating corruption is a good thing.. not the PTP slashed the budged of the anti corruption agency in half. Started a rice program that is corrupt.

Then someone brought up the land deal.. don't remember change of the law before the sale of his company .. or the loans to foreign countries so they could buy from his private company. Face it the guy in Dubai was corrupt and only a few of his cases have been concluded because like the coward he was he fled the country. But his and always will be a convicted criminal and should not be allowed to interfere with this government something he still does.

[ginjag]

I have no anger--that's in YOUR mind just because I mentioned a few points that could sort out the problems.

Anyone who HAS flouted the law big time lock them up. YOU object to this then are you afraid some of your people may be caught in the web ???

Reform council is a must because of the situation, reasonable remedy for many problems. YOU object to that. Look up independent in the Oxford dictionary.

Fair elections suits all parties YOU question that, why does that go against the grain ?? stops the infringements afraid of that.

Give me ideas what your thoughts are. BUT before you do , do not tell me we need elections first if so do not reply.

I want good government here as normal Thais do. We have just witnessed bad government, surely your not going to argue about that ??

New rules, refresh. as the PTP flouted this. You object to this

Two words come to mind:

Barely coherent.

That is because you didn't follow the gist of the conversation from starters.

Your 2 words so clever of you, have you any thought on the topic ??? or are you just backing up a pro gov apologist.

Try to locate the first post, I only listed some suggested reform items, didn't go into detail they were more like feelers for talking.

But attacked straight away by your mate ? who didn;t follow up with anything constructive himself, typical of those in denial of bad governing.

At times we do not type a saga, and at times I admit I over cut content to keep my post short. sorry my broken sentences disturb you.