New Thai PM expected in week of Aug 18

[AleG]

What is a fair election? Can an election ever be fair? How much money has to be spent campaigning to win an election in the Western World?

Is it necessary for voters to have a basic understanding about politics, governance and economy to be qualified to vote?

Should an elected government be allowed to change the constitution? Who controls the government? What is the role of the constitutional court?

To begin with one were the electorate is not blatantly swindled as with, for example, PTPs promise of a flat 20 Baht fare for the MRT and BTS networks in Bangkok, it's not just that they apparrently completely forgot about that promise after the election, they must have known that they would not have the legal power to change the rates to begin with.

It was a lie, a con, probably bagged lots of votes with that one though.

Same with the Rice Scheme, anyone with minimum understanding of how international markets work knew it would end in disaster, didn't stop PTP from foisting that on the country with no other aim than securing a large voting block.

[sjaak327]

They might have been lousy, they were indeed elected, there is however no evidence to suggest they were undemocratic.

There is however undisputable evidence that the current government is indeed undemocratic. It seems your wish of stability and good governance has not been granted.

When free and fair elections do return to Thailand, I sincerely hope the next government would make sure the military could never again stick their nose were it doesn't belong..

The people voted for PTP and Yingluck, they got Thaksin, a fugitive on the run, directing the government. That would be an unelected criminal for those that are not up to speed, in charge of a government. If you don´t see that as undemocratic it has something to do with subverting the democratic process, removing transparency and accountability for governnment decision and just a plain insult to the country by putting up a charade of Yingluck as a useless puppet for window dressing; not to mention the sheer illegality of it all.

You may come back with the tired old argument that the people knew that they were actually voting for Thaksin (therefore participating in electoral fraud BTW), but if you are going to just assume what people want, without caring with what people actually voted for, why bother with this "election" thing at all?

Then of course there's all the parliamentary shenanigans of PTP, like changing a bill on the eleventh hour so it would have absolved Thaksin of all his crimes (after swearing up and down for months that was not what they wanted to do), then passing the "Amnesty Bill at 4AM in the abscence of any opposition.

Last but not least, there's all those murders of people that dared to protests against PTP, not very democratic that.

It isn't a tired old argument of course, PT actually made no secret of Thaksin's involvement behind the scenes. It is not like something new for Thailand, considering they did the same thing with Samak.

Abhisit's government was only possible thanks to Newin who at the time was banned for five years.

I have no knowledge of the previous government of Thailand murdering protestors. In fact Yingluck has shown remarkable restraint In dealing with them. Even when they stopped being protestors when they resorted to obstructing the elections. What a contrast with the government that preceded it, which has lead to over 90 deaths at the hands of the army.

[fab4]

"about 4 hours wasn't it, before he declared his coup"

I was overseas on family business that week fab4, but IIRC the BBC & Al-Jazeera reported it as two days of meetings , before he announced that martial-law would become a full coup ? Were they wrong ?

My point was that I view it as a small measure of progress, the military's having meetings to allow the politicians one last chance to come to a peaceful agreement, compared to the old days.

And that small steps, in the right direction, are better than nothing.

Yes there were meetings on two days - that is not the same as two days of meetings, as this report from the time shows

Wed 21st

After more than two hours of talks at the Army Club, the meeting brokered by Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha ended with at least one positive sign.

"All conflicting parties want to see a solution soon. They want to see happiness return as soon as possible,'' army spokeswoman Col Sirichan Ngathong said.

Thurs 22nd

As the meeting began at 2pm, Army chief Prayuth Chan-ocha told participants in stern tones that he could not afford to let the political crisis plaguing the country drag on without a solution.

"I am ready to take responsibility, no matter whether it is right or wrong," Gen Prayuth said, adding that he hoped all stakeholders will help the army improve the political situation.

After about 45 minutes of meeting in the private room, the participants were led back to the main meeting room, said the source.

After that Gen Prayuth invited UDD chairman Jatuporn Prompan and Suthep Thaugsuban, secretary-general of PDRC, to another private meeting for about one minute.

After that Gen Prayuth returned to ask Mr Chaikasem who represented the caretaker government one last time whether the caretaker cabinet would resign and Mr Chaikasem's answer was "no".

"As such, from now on I decide to seize power," Gen Prayuth was quoted as saying.

As I said before, the coup was obviously a spur of the moment decision based entirely on the participants failure to agree after, ooh, around 4 hours of talks. It's obvious that it was perfectly reasonable to expect results in that timeframe bearing in mind the previous 6 months of dispute not providing a result. No way should anyone be thinking that the coup would have been in the planning stage since 2010 despite sutheps admission that it was

Before martial law was declared, Gen Prayuth told me ‘Khun Suthep and your masses of PDRC supporters are too exhausted. It’s now the duty of the army to take over the task’, ” Mr Suthep said.

He had consulted Gen Prayuth since the 2010 political unrest on how to root out the so-called Thaksin regime and join hands to reform the country, fight corruption and dissolve colour-coded politics that divided Thais.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/124077/suthep-prayuth-and-i-have-been-planning-a-coup-since-2010/

The much touted PM to be, General Prayuth, denies all, quite rightly. Well to be exact, he informed his NCPO deputy spokesman to "clarify inconsistencies" in the report. Which the spokesman did, pointing out that how could the General possibly plot with suthep whilst he was busy complying with the law and state policy.

"Yingluck Shinawatra, the government at the time, instructed the army to warn all groups to avoid breaking the law and protect the people," he said. "As chief of a security force whose duty is to comply with the law and state policy, Gen Prayuth could not have done so” [talked to Mr Suthep confidentially].

Hope that's cleared up any possible misunderstanding.....................................

[AleG]

They might have been lousy, they were indeed elected, there is however no evidence to suggest they were undemocratic.

There is however undisputable evidence that the current government is indeed undemocratic. It seems your wish of stability and good governance has not been granted.

When free and fair elections do return to Thailand, I sincerely hope the next government would make sure the military could never again stick their nose were it doesn't belong..

The people voted for PTP and Yingluck, they got Thaksin, a fugitive on the run, directing the government. That would be an unelected criminal for those that are not up to speed, in charge of a government. If you don´t see that as undemocratic it has something to do with subverting the democratic process, removing transparency and accountability for governnment decision and just a plain insult to the country by putting up a charade of Yingluck as a useless puppet for window dressing; not to mention the sheer illegality of it all.

You may come back with the tired old argument that the people knew that they were actually voting for Thaksin (therefore participating in electoral fraud BTW), but if you are going to just assume what people want, without caring with what people actually voted for, why bother with this "election" thing at all?

Then of course there's all the parliamentary shenanigans of PTP, like changing a bill on the eleventh hour so it would have absolved Thaksin of all his crimes (after swearing up and down for months that was not what they wanted to do), then passing the "Amnesty Bill at 4AM in the abscence of any opposition.

Last but not least, there's all those murders of people that dared to protests against PTP, not very democratic that.

It isn't a tired old argument of course, PT actually made no secret of Thaksin's involvement behind the scenes. It is not like something new for Thailand, considering they did the same thing with Samak.

Abhisit's government was only possible thanks to Newin who at the time was banned for five years.

I have no knowledge of the previous government of Thailand murdering protestors. In fact Yingluck has shown remarkable restraint In dealing with them. Even when they stopped being protestors when they resorted to obstructing the elections. What a contrast with the government that preceded it, which has lead to over 90 deaths at the hands of the army.

So you see nothing undemocratic with either electoral fraud or a fugitive criminal running a government?

[Thanet]

And that refers to Yingluck ? I Always thought Yingluck was voted in by 300 MP's in parliament.Which in turn where voted in by the electorate, either direct or in-direct via Party list. Speaking of Party list, Yingluck was number one on that list and her party received 48% of the votes.

One would think, anyone who would be voted in as PM could only hope to have such a mandate...

Well, since we don't have a PM currently, I assumed bender was complaining about the last one we had, the 'clone of Thaksin'. She is not a muppet and the real Ms. Piggy would surely be offended, at having a fellow female called names by mere males that is.

BTW the 'respect your vote' till it's counted and no longer needed Pheu Thai party had 43% of votes cast and 33% of the total electorate. Being Dutch you might also appreciate that even other parties had votes cast for them, like the Democrat party with 32% and 24% respectively.

Anyway, did you already look at the currently applicable interim constitution to check that the prime candidate for appointment is eligible according to that constitution?

Talking of clones, family preferences and the like, there is a high-up general in the NLA by the name of Preecha Chan-ocha. Do you have any idea who is his brother?

There is also a powerful lady in the USA who will probably be its next president. How did she get so high up to run for president? By sleeping with a guy called Bill. And no, I'm not talking about Monica Lewinsky.

Power runs in families. It gives people a leg up that they otherwise wouldn't have got. Get over it, or if you don't agree with this age old tradition, then at least use the same standard on both sides.

And the interim constitution is just fluff. You keep quoting it as if you actually believe in it, ignoring its self-destruct feature that gives absolute power to the military dictatorship. It's total lack of substance reminds me a bit of the 'rights' that Germany gave to sympathisers in the Warsaw Ghetto - totally meaningless, and cynically intended as a ploy to delude people into thinking that they had any rights at all.

Edited August 18, 2014 by Thanet

[sjaak327]

They might have been lousy, they were indeed elected, there is however no evidence to suggest they were undemocratic.

There is however undisputable evidence that the current government is indeed undemocratic. It seems your wish of stability and good governance has not been granted.

When free and fair elections do return to Thailand, I sincerely hope the next government would make sure the military could never again stick their nose were it doesn't belong..

The people voted for PTP and Yingluck, they got Thaksin, a fugitive on the run, directing the government. That would be an unelected criminal for those that are not up to speed, in charge of a government. If you don´t see that as undemocratic it has something to do with subverting the democratic process, removing transparency and accountability for governnment decision and just a plain insult to the country by putting up a charade of Yingluck as a useless puppet for window dressing; not to mention the sheer illegality of it all.

You may come back with the tired old argument that the people knew that they were actually voting for Thaksin (therefore participating in electoral fraud BTW), but if you are going to just assume what people want, without caring with what people actually voted for, why bother with this "election" thing at all?

Then of course there's all the parliamentary shenanigans of PTP, like changing a bill on the eleventh hour so it would have absolved Thaksin of all his crimes (after swearing up and down for months that was not what they wanted to do), then passing the "Amnesty Bill at 4AM in the abscence of any opposition.

Last but not least, there's all those murders of people that dared to protests against PTP, not very democratic that.

It isn't a tired old argument of course, PT actually made no secret of Thaksin's involvement behind the scenes. It is not like something new for Thailand, considering they did the same thing with Samak.

Abhisit's government was only possible thanks to Newin who at the time was banned for five years.

I have no knowledge of the previous government of Thailand murdering protestors. In fact Yingluck has shown remarkable restraint In dealing with them. Even when they stopped being protestors when they resorted to obstructing the elections. What a contrast with the government that preceded it, which has lead to over 90 deaths at the hands of the army.

So you see nothing undemocratic with either electoral fraud or a fugitive criminal running a government?

What electoral fraud ? As far as I am aware, people voted for Yingluck and that's what they got. It was Yingluck who was elected PM by parliament, and who subsequently ran the government.

Thaksin did not run the government, which would be utterly impossible since he isn't in Thailand. There is no doubt he advised and influenced the government, but this is neither undemocratic nor illegal.

Undemocratic is what this thread is all about, a general seizing power by military force and no way for anyone outside of his circle to do anything about it. Undemocratic is the NLA appointing the PM instead of the lower house.

[tbthailand]

Yes there were meetings on two days - that is not the same as two days of meetings, as this report from the time shows

As I said before, the coup was obviously a spur of the moment decision based entirely on the participants failure to agree after, ooh, around 4 hours of talks. It's obvious that it was perfectly reasonable to expect results in that timeframe bearing in mind the previous 6 months of dispute not providing a result. No way should anyone be thinking that the coup would have been in the planning stage since 2010 despite sutheps admission that it was

Before martial law was declared, Gen Prayuth told me ‘Khun Suthep and your masses of PDRC supporters are too exhausted. It’s now the duty of the army to take over the task’, ” Mr Suthep said.

He had consulted Gen Prayuth since the 2010 political unrest on how to root out the so-called Thaksin regime and join hands to reform the country, fight corruption and dissolve colour-coded politics that divided Thais.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/124077/suthep-prayuth-and-i-have-been-planning-a-coup-since-2010/

The much touted PM to be, General Prayuth, denies all, quite rightly. Well to be exact, he informed his NCPO deputy spokesman to "clarify inconsistencies" in the report. Which the spokesman did, pointing out that how could the General possibly plot with suthep whilst he was busy complying with the law and state policy.

"Yingluck Shinawatra, the government at the time, instructed the army to warn all groups to avoid breaking the law and protect the people," he said. "As chief of a security force whose duty is to comply with the law and state policy, Gen Prayuth could not have done so” [talked to Mr Suthep confidentially].

Hope that's cleared up any possible misunderstanding.....................................

clear as a bell.

[Ricardo]

"about 4 hours wasn't it, before he declared his coup"

I was overseas on family business that week fab4, but IIRC the BBC & Al-Jazeera reported it as two days of meetings , before he announced that martial-law would become a full coup ? Were they wrong ?

My point was that I view it as a small measure of progress, the military's having meetings to allow the politicians one last chance to come to a peaceful agreement, compared to the old days.

And that small steps, in the right direction, are better than nothing.

Yes there were meetings on two days - that is not the same as two days of meetings, as this report from the time shows

Wed 21st

After more than two hours of talks at the Army Club, the meeting brokered by Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha ended with at least one positive sign.

"All conflicting parties want to see a solution soon. They want to see happiness return as soon as possible,'' army spokeswoman Col Sirichan Ngathong said.

Thurs 22nd

As the meeting began at 2pm, Army chief Prayuth Chan-ocha told participants in stern tones that he could not afford to let the political crisis plaguing the country drag on without a solution.

"I am ready to take responsibility, no matter whether it is right or wrong," Gen Prayuth said, adding that he hoped all stakeholders will help the army improve the political situation.

After about 45 minutes of meeting in the private room, the participants were led back to the main meeting room, said the source.

After that Gen Prayuth invited UDD chairman Jatuporn Prompan and Suthep Thaugsuban, secretary-general of PDRC, to another private meeting for about one minute.

After that Gen Prayuth returned to ask Mr Chaikasem who represented the caretaker government one last time whether the caretaker cabinet would resign and Mr Chaikasem's answer was "no".

"As such, from now on I decide to seize power," Gen Prayuth was quoted as saying.

As I said before, the coup was obviously a spur of the moment decision based entirely on the participants failure to agree after, ooh, around 4 hours of talks. It's obvious that it was perfectly reasonable to expect results in that timeframe bearing in mind the previous 6 months of dispute not providing a result. No way should anyone be thinking that the coup would have been in the planning stage since 2010 despite sutheps admission that it was

Thank you !

[AleG]

So you see nothing undemocratic with either electoral fraud or a fugitive criminal running a government?

What electoral fraud ? As far as I am aware, people voted for Yingluck and that's what they got. It was Yingluck who was elected PM by parliament, and who subsequently ran the government.

Thaksin did not run the government, which would be utterly impossible since he isn't in Thailand. There is no doubt he advised and influenced the government, but this is neither undemocratic nor illegal.

Undemocratic is what this thread is all about, a general seizing power by military force and no way for anyone outside of his circle to do anything about it. Undemocratic is the NLA appointing the PM instead of the lower house.

It was Yingluck who was elected PM by parliament, and who subsequently ran the government.

Riiiiiight....

You actually believe that or you just play dumb for convenience?

Either way it's worthless to discuss anything with anyone acting like that.

[SinCityGr8One]

I firmly believe that General Prayuth Chan-ocha did the right thing at the right time on 22 May 2557. He pulled the Kingdom back from the edge of the abyss. The following is an out take from DW: Unlike most Armies around the World, the Thai Military's most important duty is not to defend the Nation's territory, but to protect the Monarchy. The Thai King is nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. The events that unfolded in 2012 are a good example of Prayuth's loyalty to the Monarchy. As intellectuals pushed for a revision of the country's lesè majesté laws - which deal with offenses against the Sovereign - Prayuth warned them of harsh consequences and urged them to leave the Country. Thank You General, for removing the possibility of a Civil War in the Kingdom. You are the right man for the job and I hope you stay on the job for a long time to come! "Long live the King!"

[rubl]

And that refers to Yingluck ? I Always thought Yingluck was voted in by 300 MP's in parliament.Which in turn where voted in by the electorate, either direct or in-direct via Party list. Speaking of Party list, Yingluck was number one on that list and her party received 48% of the votes.

One would think, anyone who would be voted in as PM could only hope to have such a mandate...

Well, since we don't have a PM currently, I assumed bender was complaining about the last one we had, the 'clone of Thaksin'. She is not a muppet and the real Ms. Piggy would surely be offended, at having a fellow female called names by mere males that is.

BTW the 'respect your vote' till it's counted and no longer needed Pheu Thai party had 43% of votes cast and 33% of the total electorate. Being Dutch you might also appreciate that even other parties had votes cast for them, like the Democrat party with 32% and 24% respectively.

Anyway, did you already look at the currently applicable interim constitution to check that the prime candidate for appointment is eligible according to that constitution?

Talking of clones, family preferences and the like, there is a high-up general in the NLA by the name of Preecha Chan-ocha. Do you have any idea who is his brother?

There is also a powerful lady in the USA who will probably be its next president. How did she get so high up to run for president? By sleeping with a guy called Bill. And no, I'm not talking about Monica Lewinsky.

Power runs in families. It gives people a leg up that they otherwise wouldn't have got. Get over it, or if you don't agree with this age old tradition, then at least use the same standard on both sides.

And the interim constitution is just fluff. You keep quoting it as if you actually believe in it, ignoring its self-destruct feature that gives absolute power to the military dictatorship. It's total lack of substance reminds me a bit of the 'rights' that Germany gave to sympathisers in the Warsaw Ghetto - totally meaningless, and cynically intended as a ploy to delude people into thinking that they had any rights at all.

Talking about clones, Sister Yingluck has only that aspect which helped her become PM. The others you mention got where they got on their own merit.

Power runs indeed in families, very democratically so it would seem some think. It should only help rather be the only reason someone gets where he (or she) gets. You seem to advocate 'no change' here, interesting.

As for the interim constitution, it's just that. The CDC will need all help it can get to either modify the 2007 version or write a new one. To call the interim constitution 'fluff' ignores it's 'interim' and seems to be used to suggest it's more than just interim.

BTW nice quote about Nazi Germany. May I stay in the recent past with lots of posters here telling how good the 1997 constitution? Probably because it deluded people into thinking that they had any rights at all.

[heybruce]

I firmly believe that General Prayuth Chan-ocha did the right thing at the right time on 22 May 2557. He pulled the Kingdom back from the edge of the abyss. The following is an out take from DW: Unlike most Armies around the World, the Thai Military's most important duty is not to defend the Nation's territory, but to protect the Monarchy. The Thai King is nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. The events that unfolded in 2012 are a good example of Prayuth's loyalty to the Monarchy. As intellectuals pushed for a revision of the country's lesè majesté laws - which deal with offenses against the Sovereign - Prayuth warned them of harsh consequences and urged them to leave the Country. Thank You General, for removing the possibility of a Civil War in the Kingdom. You are the right man for the job and I hope you stay on the job for a long time to come! "Long live the King!"

Someone who goes by SinCityGr8One is a fan of Prayuth. I'm sure the general is thrilled.

[ginjag]

The people voted for PTP and Yingluck, they got Thaksin, a fugitive on the run, directing the government. That would be an unelected criminal for those that are not up to speed, in charge of a government. If you don´t see that as undemocratic it has something to do with subverting the democratic process, removing transparency and accountability for governnment decision and just a plain insult to the country by putting up a charade of Yingluck as a useless puppet for window dressing; not to mention the sheer illegality of it all.

You may come back with the tired old argument that the people knew that they were actually voting for Thaksin (therefore participating in electoral fraud BTW), but if you are going to just assume what people want, without caring with what people actually voted for, why bother with this "election" thing at all?

Then of course there's all the parliamentary shenanigans of PTP, like changing a bill on the eleventh hour so it would have absolved Thaksin of all his crimes (after swearing up and down for months that was not what they wanted to do), then passing the "Amnesty Bill at 4AM in the abscence of any opposition.

Last but not least, there's all those murders of people that dared to protests against PTP, not very democratic that.

It isn't a tired old argument of course, PT actually made no secret of Thaksin's involvement behind the scenes. It is not like something new for Thailand, considering they did the same thing with Samak.

Abhisit's government was only possible thanks to Newin who at the time was banned for five years.

I have no knowledge of the previous government of Thailand murdering protestors. In fact Yingluck has shown remarkable restraint In dealing with them. Even when they stopped being protestors when they resorted to obstructing the elections. What a contrast with the government that preceded it, which has lead to over 90 deaths at the hands of the army.

So you see nothing undemocratic with either electoral fraud or a fugitive criminal running a government?

What electoral fraud ? As far as I am aware, people voted for Yingluck and that's what they got. It was Yingluck who was elected PM by parliament, and who subsequently ran the government.

Thaksin did not run the government, which would be utterly impossible since he isn't in Thailand. There is no doubt he advised and influenced the government, but this is neither undemocratic nor illegal.

Undemocratic is what this thread is all about, a general seizing power by military force and no way for anyone outside of his circle to do anything about it. Undemocratic is the NLA appointing the PM instead of the lower house.

Not to you really just to use this space.

Thaksin controlled PTP/Yingluck.

Undemocratic or democratic is not about elections it is the initial part of the process, what you splinter group does not admit to is when elected it does not give anyone the right to govern against the vow when sworn in. It then becomes undemocratic. Amnesty amongst other things that made them that. Right fully when the army asked both parties to agree on some middle ground to stop the anarchy/ national violence--no one moved on it,---wham bang thankyou maam. they stepped in to save bloodshed. Especially reds army--now proved-reds villages -fact-unhealthy.

[sjaak327]

So you see nothing undemocratic with either electoral fraud or a fugitive criminal running a government?

What electoral fraud ? As far as I am aware, people voted for Yingluck and that's what they got. It was Yingluck who was elected PM by parliament, and who subsequently ran the government.

Thaksin did not run the government, which would be utterly impossible since he isn't in Thailand. There is no doubt he advised and influenced the government, but this is neither undemocratic nor illegal.

Undemocratic is what this thread is all about, a general seizing power by military force and no way for anyone outside of his circle to do anything about it. Undemocratic is the NLA appointing the PM instead of the lower house.

Not to you really just to use this space.

Thaksin controlled PTP/Yingluck.

Undemocratic or democratic is not about elections it is the initial part of the process, what you splinter group does not admit to is when elected it does not give anyone the right to govern against the vow when sworn in. It then becomes undemocratic. Amnesty amongst other things that made them that. Right fully when the army asked both parties to agree on some middle ground to stop the anarchy/ national violence--no one moved on it,---wham bang thankyou maam. they stepped in to save bloodshed. Especially reds army--now proved-reds villages -fact-unhealthy.

Just for the purpose of decency, could you refrain from uttering something about a non existing splinter group, let alone "my" splinter group ?

The army stepping in to prevent bloodshed ? They know a thing or two about bloodshed themselves (and not only in 2010 I might add !).

What undemocratic thing has the Yingluck government done that "went against the vow" ?

And didn't Yingluck's government already throw the towel by dissolving the house in februrary ? Effectively giving the power back to the electorate. Because that is what they did. Yet due to Suthep and his friends, there still wasn't a new government because elections for the lower house were sabotaged.

The bottom line of course is, any reforms in a democratic society are not performed by appointed commitees such as the NLA, but by politicians that have a clear mandate. Yet, if groups in that society make elections and campaigning for elections impossible, how could reform ever being put on the agenda, and how could the electorate ever support these reforms.

[rubl]

Just for the purpose of decency, could you refrain from uttering something about a non existing splinter group, let alone "my" splinter group ?

The army stepping in to prevent bloodshed ? They know a thing or two about bloodshed themselves (and not only in 2010 I might add !).

What undemocratic thing has the Yingluck government done that "went against the vow" ?

And didn't Yingluck's government already throw the towel by dissolving the house in februrary ? Effectively giving the power back to the electorate. Because that is what they did. Yet due to Suthep and his friends, there still wasn't a new government because elections for the lower house were sabotaged.

The bottom line of course is, any reforms in a democratic society are not performed by appointed commitees such as the NLA, but by politicians that have a clear mandate. Yet, if groups in that society make elections and campaigning for elections impossible, how could reform ever being put on the agenda, and how could the electorate ever support these reforms.

For your information Sjakie, Ms. Yingluck dissolved the House on the 9th of December, 2013, staying on as caretaker PM for the time being. When the EC appealled that a Feb2 election was near impossible because of anti-government protests and with even an Emergency Degree declared, Ms. Yingluck insisted not to be able to step down because of the law. A ruling by the CC that an election postponement was possible, and for government and EC to sort it out was received with "we'll respect", denounced by Pheu Thai and finding the right people to tell her Ms. Yingluck stated she was advised to go on with the elections, she had no choice.

Bottom line of course is that with their political apparatus and help of UDD Pheu Thai thought they could sway enough voters to get another seat majority and go on with their blanket amnesty bill and borrowing 2 trillion Baht and so, ignoring voters, just concentrating on business as usual and Thaksin first.

Now that a type of democracy some really like to return to, allegedly that is.

[sjaak327]

Just for the purpose of decency, could you refrain from uttering something about a non existing splinter group, let alone "my" splinter group ?

The army stepping in to prevent bloodshed ? They know a thing or two about bloodshed themselves (and not only in 2010 I might add !).

What undemocratic thing has the Yingluck government done that "went against the vow" ?

And didn't Yingluck's government already throw the towel by dissolving the house in februrary ? Effectively giving the power back to the electorate. Because that is what they did. Yet due to Suthep and his friends, there still wasn't a new government because elections for the lower house were sabotaged.

The bottom line of course is, any reforms in a democratic society are not performed by appointed commitees such as the NLA, but by politicians that have a clear mandate. Yet, if groups in that society make elections and campaigning for elections impossible, how could reform ever being put on the agenda, and how could the electorate ever support these reforms.

For your information Sjakie, Ms. Yingluck dissolved the House on the 9th of December, 2013, staying on as caretaker PM for the time being. When the EC appealled that a Feb2 election was near impossible because of anti-government protests and with even an Emergency Degree declared, Ms. Yingluck insisted not to be able to step down because of the law. A ruling by the CC that an election postponement was possible, and for government and EC to sort it out was received with "we'll respect", denounced by Pheu Thai and finding the right people to tell her Ms. Yingluck stated she was advised to go on with the elections, she had no choice.

Bottom line of course is that with their political apparatus and help of UDD Pheu Thai thought they could sway enough voters to get another seat majority and go on with their blanket amnesty bill and borrowing 2 trillion Baht and so, ignoring voters, just concentrating on business as usual and Thaksin first.

Now that a type of democracy some really like to return to, allegedly that is.

I am aware of it, I just got the month wrong, thanks for reminding me, I am sure you knew exactly what I meant, but felt the need to do a little nitpicking.

A postponement of the February elections would have yielded the same result, and everyone knew it. Suthep would not allow it, end of story.

It doesn't change the fact that Yingluck dissolved the house, and therefore effectively gave up power. As you rightfully pointed out, she remained in a caretaker role only, as mandated by the constitution, by the way, the elections were also mandated by that same constitution and just because I know you like it, was endorsed by the head of state.

Indeed that is how democracy should work, you mess up, or face grave opposition, you therefore dissolve the house and let the Thai electorate have a say in who exactly should run their country.

Now I would love Prayuth to do the same, not in 2015 or 2016 but now.

By the way, the current junta knows a thing or two about "amnesty laws" blowing away money and they are second to none in ignoring voters. In fact they are legitimized in ignoring pretty much anyone (including the judiciary) as long as it in the matter of 'national interest'.

Quite clearly a step up..

Edited August 18, 2014 by sjaak327