Pheu Thai moves to prevent Senate from nominating PM

[h90]

So one side is trying to find a way out of the deadlock, meeting with academics, getting different views, checking what the people want. And the other side (PTP) is trying to frustrate every effort to find a solution and common ground.

This desperate clinging to "power" is becoming quite ridiculous and they don't seem to realize that it is against the good of the country.

What has the good of the country to do with it?

As longer they hang on the power as more money they can get into their pocket. That isn't ridiculous, for me that seems very logic.

[h90]

Elections will come *after* the reform.

what "reform"? show me the proposals... where is the outline...? what is the timeline? you mean lese majeste? defamation? the judiciary? I'd like to see ALL those reformed

are they in the list? where is the list???

Close your eyes if you want to, but it seems to be happening. We might learn more when Acting Senate Speaker Surachai speaks later today.

Considering what Yingluck has said about lese majeste in the past, it doesn't seem likely that PTP would fight to have that included in the list of reforms; however, it's a moot point as PTP refuses to join the discussions.

there is no list... IF there were it would be in everyone's interest to PUBLISH it then people "may" understand what it's all about

top three: Judiciary, lese majeste and defamation I don't know even ONE person Thai or Farang who would not agree to this list

there is a huge list and discussed to dead....

Tops are:

harsh laws against vote buying and fraud at the elections so free and democratic elections can take place as that is the most important

harsh laws against corruption and abuse of power

Than:

Police reforms

Judiciary reforms

Defamation

of course the lese majeste laws must be changed, just no one really wants to discuss that

[ShannonT]

the Ammart will find every and any way to retain power and the don't care about elections they were 'born to rule' after all

Elections will come *after* the reform.

Where is the referendum that allows the Thai people to choose if they even want this reform?

I see absolutely no talk about that.

[Mark Thaiford]

They may have been elected time and time again by the people.......but their governance has shown time and time and again to be shockingly poor in both vision and substance. Hence they continue to have problems.

Rule 101 of parenting - Give a child what they needs not what they want.

What Thai people need is good governance, not what they want - An elected PTP government; as sadly (for democracy) history has shown that these two are mutually exclusive and incompatible.

Bravo - for not being one of the typical hypocritical farangs continually posting the WRONG reasons why they want the current government gone. You have clearly stated that what you want is pure fascism and all democracy gone from Thailand. That is what all the other haters of the current government who keep posting on this thread want as well - but they never just say so. Instead they wrap this basic motivation in various ways to try to justify the on-going coup against a democratically elected government.

Those farangs who keep urging on the abolition of Thai democracy belong to the old "colonialist" way of thinking: Keep the natives in their place. It is all based on the notion that farangs think the Thai population are inferior to themselves and by all means should be kept in that position. That is why some farangs hate Thai democracy.

[Bakseeda]

That's right they were elected time after time by the people.

The only way the yellow dems can get power is by taking it by any means other than election because the people have proven time and time again they don't want them!

Where's abhisit this last week?

Some go forward he is!

Not a peep out of him!

Stuttering Parrot...... go look in a mirror and see what is looking back at you.... obviously English is NOT your first language. Perhaps you did not go to skool......

[Piichai]

Where's abhisit this last week?

Just saw on Thai news that Abhisit is at the hospital visiting the injured from the latest Red attack.

Shouldn't the PM be doing that?

[Jonmarleesco]

'... the party's legal team issued a statement ...' that '... went on to say that any attempt to nominate a PM after the House of Representatives is dissolved violates Article 68 of the Constitution.'

So where does that leave Niwattumrong Boonsongpaisan?

[wandasloan]

Does that constitute a ruling by the CC? I don't think so.. will the CC rule on the issue, it sounds like a ludocrous suggestion that the yet to be rolyally endorsed senate speaker, can by himself select and install a PM, when the Senate itself is out of session,so he doesn't even have a senate vote on this,AND the king said you cannot use section 7 to appoint a PM!

It's really noteworthy how many ways this can be distorted and misrepresented, accidentally or maybe not.

The King said HE could not use Section 7 to appoint a PM, and he refused publicly to name a PM, saying that if HE used Section 7 it would be unconstitutional.

Every other spin on this including yours Khun Peaker, is wrong for a very obvious reason. Your wrong report on what happened says that the king directly involved himself in a political and legal decision, saying what Section 7 is and what it can do. He has NEVER done this, ever, including in this case. The king did not comment on what Section 7 could or could not do - not as you claim, not as other wrong reports claim, not in any way at all. His Majesty refused to name a PM, period, nothing else happened.

'... the party's legal team issued a statement ...' that '... went on to say that any attempt to nominate a PM after the House of Representatives is dissolved violates Article 68 of the Constitution.'

So where does that leave Niwattumrong Boonsongpaisan?

??? It leaves him as acting caretaker prime minister. There has been no prime minister since December, when the House was dissolved. Herself at that point became caretaker PM. With her departure as *caretaker* PM, the next in line stepped in to *act* as *caretaker* PM instead.

This part is specifically legal and stipulated in the supreme law. Some parties now want to go outside of that stipulated part. They claim, controversially, that they can legally go outside and take a different route to get an *actual* prime minister because they will call him/her "interim" as opposed to "caretaker". They may be legally right, or they may have the guns to do it, or they may have second thoughts and stop, or they may fail - four possibilities at least.

But that's what the score is and up to now everyone has followed the law. If an interim PM is named, that's going to push the law pretty much and many people will say it is illegal. The problem is that there is no authority that is trusted to decide, so in the end it will come down to guns, as it always does. Then more guns. Then an election. Repeat. After several or many cycles, some side will win.

Than:

Police reforms

Judiciary reforms

Defamation

of course the lese majeste laws must be changed, just no one really wants to discuss that

Wow. Be very careful h90. It is almost certain that between now and completed reform, some people will be killed for saying what you just wrote. Your "of course" is viewed in some circles, specifically those coming into power, as a confirmation of the ... wrong views involved and the necessity to teach a lesson.

Of course you don't have to believe that. By all means, if the amaart come into power, let them know your view on "of course".

.

Edited May 16, 2014 by wandasloan

[Scamper]

" The party may later file a petition with the Constitutional Court against Surachai on the same matter. "

There is a very good reason why Prompong is not doing this now. He - and Pheu Thai - are fearful of what the Constitutional Court will rule on this matter. That is why he's going through a circuitous route. But to be sure, the Constitutional Court is where it will end up. And it would be remarkable indeed for the Constitutional Court to say that the Senate cannot function and can remain permanently out of operation due to the whims of the Pheu Thai party, keeping the country in a perpetual stalemate for months on end. And that's why Prompong is taking the present route. He and Pheu Thai know this is a losing battle, but there is still time to delay and intimidate - the only two things Pheu Thai have ever learned to do with real excellence. Prompong's statement that Surachai is on course to Article 7 is false - plain and simple. In fact Surachai emphatically released a statement yesterday saying that he is not siding with any position, but is acting as a mediator trying to forge a consensus- a consensus made all the more difficult by Pheu Thau's refusal to take part, as well as their decision to pool their remaining energies towards the usurping of the Senate's constitutional obligations to air this in a reasonable and mature way.

[pkspeaker]

Are you joking? The King cannot appoint a PM but an appointed senator from a military coup could? and why? because the looser of the election sabotaged 1 election and now are saying that one of their people can be a dictator..ridiculous

http://asiancorrespondent.com/119312/

“I am greatly troubled. Whatever happens there will be request for a royally appointed prime minister. [This] is not democratic. If you cite Section 7 of the Constitution, it is a wrong citation. [You] cannot reference this. Section 7 has only has two lines; that is, whatever is not stated in the Constitution then it should be in accordance with tradition or what has occurred before…. Asking for a royally appointed prime minister is not in accordance administration by democracy. "

Notice he specifically mentions section 7 and says, "YOU cannot do this" and talks about administration by democracy..

it would be insane for someone not the king to seize full power by section 7, what he was saying is that NOT EVEN THE KING can violate democracy, but then some senator could because 1 election was nulified?

Edited May 16, 2014 by pkspeaker

[wandasloan]

Are you joking? The King cannot appoint a PM but an appointed senator from a military coup could? and why? because the looser of the election sabotaged 1 election and now are saying that one of their people can be a dictator..ridiculous

Stop imputing political motives to the King and mixing His Majesty into the political mix. It is very disrespectful, not to mention you can't even write a one-sentence summary about it correctly. So just stop. Really.

Yes, it is POSSIBLE that an appointed senator may succeed in nominating and appointing an interim prime minister. Yes.

Comparing him in any manner, and comparing his actions in any manner to the monarch is ... well some people who really care a lot would say "actionable". But you should stop. Completely. Don't do it. You *will* not prevail.

.

[Wombat6]

the Ammart will find every and any way to retain power and the don't care about elections they were 'born to rule' after all

You are getting really tiresome with the same rhetoric. I am not sure if you are really blind to reality, brainwashed or getting paid to write these posts. My opinion is that you have your own agenda or a bet with your mates at your local bar to see how many replies you can get.

[Piichai]

the Ammart will find every and any way to retain power and the don't care about elections they were 'born to rule' after all

You are getting really tiresome with the same rhetoric. I am not sure if you are really blind to reality, brainwashed or getting paid to write these posts. My opinion is that you have your own agenda or a bet with your mates at your local bar to see how many replies you can get.

Now that Suthep is siding with the Senate, the Reds will fallback to "the Ammart."

[Wombat6]

That's right they were elected time after time by the people.

The only way the yellow dems can get power is by taking it by any means other than election because the people have proven time and time again they don't want them!

Where's abhisit this last week?

Some go forward he is!

Not a peep out of him!

Another idiot raises his head. You definitely don't know anything about voting in Thailand. It doesn't matter which election is held, the person with the most money always wins. The people don't really give a stuff who wins as long as someone pays for their vote...

[pkspeaker]

What I find dis-respectful is that this Senator is going to send this blatently illegal power grab to the King for his endorsement when he knows most Thai People are against him,This Senator is clearly aligned with the democrats who lost the election and was appointed my a military coup.. this puts the King in a difficult position....

ALL previous royal endorsements (not directly related to the coup) have been of a routine in nature, when an election is called the King endorses the election decree(or exactly the process I'm not certain) when a new this or that is selected, the king signs off on it,

Now suddenly this Senator forwards him something so politically explosive, it could damage the monarchy; sounds like this Senator and the people who support him love their own LUST for POWER more than they do anything else.

Are you joking? The King cannot appoint a PM but an appointed senator from a military coup could? and why? because the looser of the election sabotaged 1 election and now are saying that one of their people can be a dictator..ridiculous

Stop imputing political motives to the King and mixing His Majesty into the political mix. It is very disrespectful, not to mention you can't even write a one-sentence summary about it correctly. So just stop. Really.

Yes, it is POSSIBLE that an appointed senator may succeed in nominating and appointing an interim prime minister. Yes.

Comparing him in any manner, and comparing his actions in any manner to the monarch is ... well some people who really care a lot would say "actionable". But you should stop. Completely. Don't do it. You *will* not prevail.

.

Edited May 16, 2014 by pkspeaker

[Piichai]

I would agree that it's not routine, but we don't know that it's not legal.

Acting Senate Speaker Surachai has already met with the Constitutional Court. Hard to believe this wasn't discussed.

And also as Wanda has mentioned, do be careful when mentioning the king.

What I find dis-respectful is that this Senator is going to send this blatently illegal power grab to the King for his endorsement when he knows most Thai People are against him,This Senator is clearly aligned with the democrats who lost the election and was appointed my a military coup.. this puts the King in a difficult position....

ALL previous royal endorsements (not directly related to the coup) have been of a routine in nature, when an election is called the King endorses the election decree(or exactly the process I'm not certain) when a new this or that is selected, the king signs off on it,

Are you joking? The King cannot appoint a PM but an appointed senator from a military coup could? and why? because the looser of the election sabotaged 1 election and now are saying that one of their people can be a dictator..ridiculous

Stop imputing political motives to the King and mixing His Majesty into the political mix. It is very disrespectful, not to mention you can't even write a one-sentence summary about it correctly. So just stop. Really.

Yes, it is POSSIBLE that an appointed senator may succeed in nominating and appointing an interim prime minister. Yes.

Comparing him in any manner, and comparing his actions in any manner to the monarch is ... well some people who really care a lot would say "actionable". But you should stop. Completely. Don't do it. You *will* not prevail.

.

[pkspeaker]

it may become a prolonged legal battle, the PT asking the Attorney General to intervene, it probably would have to get through the courts before it could go to royal endorsement.

The court will then be called out for another judicial coup, finishing what they refused to do in the first one, odd.

Edited May 16, 2014 by pkspeaker

[Gweiloman]

That's right they were elected time after time by the people.

The only way the yellow dems can get power is by taking it by any means other than election because the people have proven time and time again they don't want them!

Where's abhisit this last week?

Some go forward he is!

Not a peep out of him!

Stuttering Parrot...... go look in a mirror and see what is looking back at you.... obviously English is NOT your first language. Perhaps you did not go to skool......

So what if English is not his first language. It's not mine either, maybe that's why I don't know what a "skool" is.....

[h90]

Where's abhisit this last week?

Just saw on Thai news that Abhisit is at the hospital visiting the injured from the latest Red attack.

Shouldn't the PM be doing that?

the PM is visiting the attackers meanwhile

[h90]

Does that constitute a ruling by the CC? I don't think so.. will the CC rule on the issue, it sounds like a ludocrous suggestion that the yet to be rolyally endorsed senate speaker, can by himself select and install a PM, when the Senate itself is out of session,so he doesn't even have a senate vote on this,AND the king said you cannot use section 7 to appoint a PM!

It's really noteworthy how many ways this can be distorted and misrepresented, accidentally or maybe not.

The King said HE could not use Section 7 to appoint a PM, and he refused publicly to name a PM, saying that if HE used Section 7 it would be unconstitutional.

Every other spin on this including yours Khun Peaker, is wrong for a very obvious reason. Your wrong report on what happened says that the king directly involved himself in a political and legal decision, saying what Section 7 is and what it can do. He has NEVER done this, ever, including in this case. The king did not comment on what Section 7 could or could not do - not as you claim, not as other wrong reports claim, not in any way at all. His Majesty refused to name a PM, period, nothing else happened.

'... the party's legal team issued a statement ...' that '... went on to say that any attempt to nominate a PM after the House of Representatives is dissolved violates Article 68 of the Constitution.'

So where does that leave Niwattumrong Boonsongpaisan?

??? It leaves him as acting caretaker prime minister. There has been no prime minister since December, when the House was dissolved. Herself at that point became caretaker PM. With her departure as *caretaker* PM, the next in line stepped in to *act* as *caretaker* PM instead.

This part is specifically legal and stipulated in the supreme law. Some parties now want to go outside of that stipulated part. They claim, controversially, that they can legally go outside and take a different route to get an *actual* prime minister because they will call him/her "interim" as opposed to "caretaker". They may be legally right, or they may have the guns to do it, or they may have second thoughts and stop, or they may fail - four possibilities at least.

But that's what the score is and up to now everyone has followed the law. If an interim PM is named, that's going to push the law pretty much and many people will say it is illegal. The problem is that there is no authority that is trusted to decide, so in the end it will come down to guns, as it always does. Then more guns. Then an election. Repeat. After several or many cycles, some side will win.

Than:

Police reforms

Judiciary reforms

Defamation

of course the lese majeste laws must be changed, just no one really wants to discuss that

Wow. Be very careful h90. It is almost certain that between now and completed reform, some people will be killed for saying what you just wrote. Your "of course" is viewed in some circles, specifically those coming into power, as a confirmation of the ... wrong views involved and the necessity to teach a lesson.

Of course you don't have to believe that. By all means, if the amaart come into power, let them know your view on "of course".

.

Don't be ridiculous:

See his Kings birthday speech: "The King can do wrong" and think about it.

there is a lot discussion from very conservative people that the lese majeste laws are used against its purposes. As you can't publish things, you also can't proof that something that was told is a lie.

Everyone is using the lese majeste laws to sue some opponents to get rid of him, not to protect the monarchy.

So it isn't only the commies who want to have these laws changed.

[tezzainoz]

That's right they were elected time after time by the people.

The only way the yellow dems can get power is by taking it by any means other than election because the people have proven time and time again they don't want them!

Where's abhisit this last week?

Some go forward he is!

Not a peep out of him!

That's right they were elected time after time by using the people.

The only way the yellow dems can get power is by making elections FAIR, where all parties have the freedom to educate those who only understand what is best for themselves and not the country, and convicted criminal can not be involved in Politics

[Civil War]

PTP are quoting articles that totally invalid in the absence of a full sitting lower house, that is why the constitution has an article 7.... To come into force when other articles become void.

PTP have no rights to attempt to enforce void articles.

They are trying to manipulate the constitution once again. By petitioning the the constitutional court, all they are actually doing is pushing for a ruling, which we know would have to be article 7 as it is the only real valid article left to address the situation Thailand is in.

So Thailand will definitely get its interim PM and government, and the reforms will go on.

Basically Suthep has won this 100% from start to finish.... Which is why he never gave up and went home, even though many anti-government thaivisa members where saying he should ..... hanging on till the end got him his 'final victory'.

The red shirts won't rise up either, they were supposed to have risen up half a dozen times already, Jattuport is just spouting empty threats. There also won't be a civil war... I used to think there was almost certainly going to be one, but now it has dawned on me, the reds need to be paid to attend rallies, no money = no red shirts.

[Robby nz]

the Ammart will find every and any way to retain power and the don't care about elections they were 'born to rule' after all

Elections will come *after* the reform.

Where is the referendum that allows the Thai people to choose if they even want this reform?

I see absolutely no talk about that.

You don't really take notice do you.

Suthep has been saying all along that there must be a referendum on the reforms put together by the reform drafting group he proposes before an election.