Step down for sake of the country, senators urge govt

[fab4]

I don't believe Thaksin fears returning to Thailand because of his conviction. Thaksin fears returning to Thailand because of the half-dozen or so arrest warrants yet to be served.

The charge against Abhisit and Suthep was a quite obvious gambit to coerce them into backing the amnesty bill. Imagine the look on Thaksin's face when they refused to play his game.

All convicted should go to prison; there is no need for amnesty. Especially for the leaders of the disgraceful actions.

Just my opinion, but I would say it is not the allegations (what arrest warrants are there apart from an outstanding one for his countersigning of his ex-wifes purchase of Land at Rachadaphisek - the reality doesn't sound quite the same as "convicted criminal on the run", does it?) that he is avoiding, more likely the judges who will preside over those alleged charges.

[SheungWan]

Why does the PDRC?Suthep STEP BACK. Why the Govt need to step back? As far as I am aware they have been trying to follow procedure and have an election? Why are the senators calling for them to step down, rather than calling Suthep to step back?

Because they are the cause of the problems, had they not try to get Taksin home the good people of Thailand would not have risen against this government. They were told not too, but did so it is all on them and their bandit leader.

If you really think this whole thing is because of the amnesty then you are a complete moron.

Why was it okay for the people who carried out the coup to grant themselves amnesty?

I am not saying that it is or was correct, and it was a ridiculous thing to try and do, but to pretend this whole thing is about that is completely naive. If you gave Suthep the choice of granting the amnesty and the Dems being in power, he would take you bloody hand off for it. They would then set up Committee's to look at reform and 10 years later we would be in the same position, just more violent as people's elected Governments continue to be thrown out for spurious reasons.

As opposed to those who don't really think at all other then to work out which position benefits Thaksin and throw up appropriate quantities of fairy dust to push the discussion away from the main objective. The forum engine room knows what it has to do.

[tezzainoz]

Surely the best way to get a prime minister & cabinet with full authority would be to have an election or am I missing something?

Surely "full authority" must include the mandate of the people?

Yes we all agree

But you forgot to add a FREE ELECTION

Not a Red shirt only election in the north so no one can challenge them

when this happens, ????????????????????????????????

Thats what the people want

[SheungWan]

I don't believe Thaksin fears returning to Thailand because of his conviction. Thaksin fears returning to Thailand because of the half-dozen or so arrest warrants yet to be served.

The charge against Abhisit and Suthep was a quite obvious gambit to coerce them into backing the amnesty bill. Imagine the look on Thaksin's face when they refused to play his game.

All convicted should go to prison; there is no need for amnesty. Especially for the leaders of the disgraceful actions.

Just my opinion, but I would say it is not the allegations (what arrest warrants are there apart from an outstanding one for his countersigning of his ex-wifes purchase of Land at Rachadaphisek - the reality doesn't sound quite the same as "convicted criminal on the run", does it?) that he is avoiding, more likely the judges who will preside over those alleged charges.

So, back to the red TV canard that it is all alleged charges and Thaksin not convicted of anything really. If anything else 10/10 for barefaced black is white. Tread in it and tell us it is the smell of roses.

[fab4]

Really out of this world how the reds rant on about appointed senators as if its some sort of a crime.

The senate is made up according to law so get used to it.

The present acting president of the senate was voted into the job in a democratic election of all senators and if memory serves me correctly with a majority of over 80%, that he has as yet not received royal endorsement is a detail, it will happen for his majesty will not turn down the choice of the senate.

The senate could by now have been fully elected for there was a bill before the house to change section 190 of the constitution to allow just that and all parties agreed to the proposal.

However at the last minute extra clauses were added to allow friends and family of sitting MP's to stand for senate positions and to abolish the 6 year term.

This would have allowed the party in power to stack the senate with their own people who could have stayed in the senate for life virtually abolishing the checks and balances role of the senate.

These clauses and the fact that the altered bill was sneaked through in an unlawful manner meant it was taken to the CC who found to be unconstitutional.

So you can blame PT for the fact that there are still appointed senators for if they had not tried to subvert the law the bill in its agreed form would have been law by now.

What is holding up any progress to a democratic solution within the law are 26 caretaker cabinet ministers who refuse to step aside for the good of the country.

Tell me, how many of those 26 are in fact elected ?

That is, were actual MP"s in the previous PT administration who have faced the people at the ballot box ?

And how many were appointed during the many cabinet reshuffles ?

If you want to go on about the legitimacy of elected versus appointed the answer to that would have a big bearing on your argument .

The senate is in fact at present the only fully functional part of Government this country has.

The status of the 26 as an arm of Government is in doubt and will probably have to be taken to the CC, this has been highlighted by the EC in respect of the signing of a royal decree to hold an election.

The senate has every right to make decisions and is going about things in a democratic manner by consulting with everyone who will meet with them.

OK, Now here's the reality:

You appear to forget that MPs are aligned to a particular political party. The senate are supposed to be fully non partisan. Surachai is aligned with the anti-Thaksin Gang of 40. He was also appointed by the military Junta to draft the flawed 2007 constitution. So let's forget that independent tag shall we.

The "election" for senate speaker was added to the agenda of the royally endorsed special session of the senate by surachai himself, illegally. The special session was called for the Senate to endorse the appointment of a new NACC member and Administrative Court specialists, only.

He is now "holding court" with half a senate, 70 senators, not even a majority, and presumes to speak for the whole Senate.

I never said anything about anyone in the senate being independent so your post really does not answer anything I have written just goes of on a tangent to try to deamonise the senate speaker.

However I will answer you because you seem a little confused.

If the senate is supposed to be fully non aligned how do you explain the wife of a red leader (red radio station owner) who is now a senator, do you really believe she is non aligned ?

Do you believe that all the elected senators from red controlled provinces like Udon Thani and Chai yaphum where the governors have recently dismissed village heads for supporting the opposition are non aligned ?

So this is the reality.

There is a balance which keeps things in prospective and the present senate speaker is doing his best to give everyone a say and is using input from as many parties as possible before any decision is made.

I see nowhere that any senators have been excluded from discussions by the speaker or anyone else, if they choose not to have their say that is their business.

That some (or one, UDD) parties refuse to take part is their loss.

I would expect any decision to be put to the democratic vote in the senate just as the senate voted for its speaker.

Your second paragraph assumes that the 26 caretaker cabinet ministers have the authority to order the senate around by limiting what it can do by issuing a restrictive royal decree.

If what I read is correct the senate being the only fully functional part of the Govt at present has the authority to call emergency sessions, this it seem is what they have done in an an attempt to get the country out of what is becoming a desperate situation and to prevent farther loss of life and injury.

A far cry from some organisations and some posters on here who can only come up with negativity and criticism.

Do you have an answer as to how many of the 26 caretaker cabinet ministers were elected to their position ?

Er that was my point. The supposed non partisan senators are anything but. The appointed deputy speaker surachai and his gang of 40 plus the the other 20 odd senators all of whom are aligned with the PDRC (http://asiancorrespondent.com/121241/the-reason-why-the-thai-establishment-likes-appointed-senators/) are attempting to answer for all of the Senate. The reason that the other Senators (not aligned to the dems or PDRC and therefore the balance of which you allude to) are not getting involved with these deals behind closed doors is that if they did they would give credence to an unofficial Senate session which is attempting to carry out unconstitutional actions - the ridiculous Section 7 attempt for one.

The senate session was a special session royally decreed to do two things only. Appoint the new member of the NACC and specialists for the Administrative Court. It had no remit for the election of senate speaker and it was not on the agenda - until Surachai put it there. It amazes me the hypocrisy people like you show, having lambasted the Government for not following the rules and here you are glossing over the abuse of a Royal Decree!

Your last question is of no relevance to your "argument". Cabinet Ministers are appointed by the PM and subject to royal assent. So what? They are a legitimate Caretaker cabinet who will remain in place until elections take place and a new government (and subsequently a cabinet) is formed in accordance with Section 181 of the Constitution, however long it takes - there is no time limit.

Edited May 18, 2014 by fab4

[chotthee]

Surely the best way to get a prime minister & cabinet with full authority would be to have an election or am I missing something?

Surely "full authority" must include the mandate of the people?

Yes we all agree

But you forgot to add a FREE ELECTION

Not a Red shirt only election in the north so no one can challenge them

when this happens, ????????????????????????????????

Thats what the people want

Thailand don't need another of of those FREE ELECTION

Thailand needs to be ELECTION FREE.

Election only bring corruption(vote buying).