People must solve political strife as 'courts can't always do it'

[Lite Beer]

People must solve political strife as 'courts can't always do it'
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Constitutional Court cannot solve a political crisis and can only defer the timing of a military coup when there are political conflicts, according to a King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) study released yesterday and presented at a Bangkok seminar.

Jaratpong Klangkorn, a lecturer at Northwestern University who was involved in the research paper entitled "The Role of the Constitutional Court in Solving Political Conflicts", concluded that only by returning power to the people so they exercise their electoral rights could a political dispute be truly settled.

Jaratpong said that politicians use all means available to them to secure Cabinet posts while the Constitutional Court was often perceived as being linked to politics, leading to allegations of double standards in its rulings.

He cited the court's removal of prime minister Samak Sundaravej due to his appearance on a television cooking show as an example.

Jaratpong said it was beyond the ability of the Constitutional Court to solve political conflicts.

Thawilwadee Bureekul, director of the Research and Development Office at KPI, said at the seminar that now that Thailand was entering another reform period, political institutions should be thoroughly studied.

She said political institutions should be composed of not just the executive branch but the legislative and judicial branches and local administrative organisations. She said political institutions had failed in the past because they were not effective, thus political reform was needed.

Thawilwadee said that KPI would invite academics to conduct a joint study and come up with reform proposals, adding that there could be no peace in society as long as democracy was weak.

Kla Samudavanija, an employee at the Office of the Constitutional Court, also stressed that ultimate power lies with the public and not the Constitutional Court. He suggested that politics should be removed from the judiciary.

Ekachai Chainuvati, deputy dean of law at Siam University, said that people should not confuse the Constitutional Court with the constitution and suggested that the Constitutional Court avoid making political rulings.

Ekachai said the main responsibility of the Constitutional Court was to scrutinise laws to ensure that they did not contradict the charter.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/People-must-solve-political-strife-as-courts-cant--30244255.html

-- The Nation 2014-09-27

[chainarong]

The law is an ass certainly applies to Thailand , there seems to be any amount of thin skinned politicians , as you are in the public eye you will get the social media dead beats, as for what is said on the floor of parliament, that stays in parliament, as for sacking a PM for appearing on a cooking show, that is just so bad that Thailand must be the laughing stock of the world of politics , that's a bad example of Democracy , a man is doing something in his own time , provided any payment made is payed to a good institution, politely who could give a toss, probably better programing than those soaps, at least they got something to eat, probably cake.

[jaltsc]

"Jaratpong Klangkorn, a lecturer at Northwestern University who was involved in the research paper entitled "The Role of the Constitutional Court in Solving Political Conflicts", concluded that only by returning power to the people so they exercise their electoral rights could a political dispute be truly settled."

However, for this to succeed, the populace needs to be "educated" in such a way that they have the ability to exercise their electoral rights responsibly. Voting for a candidate because he paid you 300 baht does not meet the definition of "responsible".

It is not quite as easy as Dr. Jaratpong suggests.

[ramrod711]

In Thailand you can be sued for libel, even if what you say is true. What "average joe" is going to point the finger at a rich powerful government minister, a policeman, a member of the UDD or any other person or group with power or influence. The people are accustomed to seeing the rich given ridiculously lenient sentences, bail, and opportunity to flee. What can people do when the courts and law enforcement are prejudiced, will they speak out and risk being sued or worse, I don't think so.

[rickirs]

"Ekachai Chainuvati ... said that people should not confuse the Constitutional Court with the constitution ..."

This certainly true in Thailand. Where else in the world can a Constitutional Court continue to exist when the constitution itself was suspended, aborgated, and rewritten? So I agree with Chainuvati. In Thailand there is no connection between the Constitution and the Constitutional Court.

[tbthailand]

King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) study released yesterday and presented at a Bangkok seminar.

I recall the junta stopping several seminars recently because they were 'political'

wonder how this one slipped through the cracks.

[tbthailand]

"Jaratpong Klangkorn, a lecturer at Northwestern University who was involved in the research paper entitled "The Role of the Constitutional Court in Solving Political Conflicts", concluded that only by returning power to the people so they exercise their electoral rights could a political dispute be truly settled."

However, for this to succeed, the populace needs to be "educated" in such a way that they have the ability to exercise their electoral rights responsibly. Voting for a candidate because he paid you 300 baht does not meet the definition of "responsible".

It is not quite as easy as Dr. Jaratpong suggests.

how condescending.

[seajae]

when the people vote for who ever gives them the most money or threatens their lives more it is impossible to put the result in their hands for something involving the laws. Unfortunately there is corruption everywhere in Thailand that effects everyday life constantly, there is no clear way to decide a lot of things due entirely to this. At least the courts have people that are able to understand the laws and act on them no matter what others may say, their rulings are fine if they are based solely on the laws and not their own bias, this is the catch. The courts have to act on the law alone without changing it to suit themselves or whoever happens to pay more, they need to treat all people that come before the courts as equals, not one rule for the rich/ hi-so's and another for the poor as we currently see. Until this happens we will never see justice in this country for anyone let alone see political people taken/charged for what they deserve to be.

[Robby nz]

The law is an ass certainly applies to Thailand , there seems to be any amount of thin skinned politicians , as you are in the public eye you will get the social media dead beats, as for what is said on the floor of parliament, that stays in parliament, as for sacking a PM for appearing on a cooking show, that is just so bad that Thailand must be the laughing stock of the world of politics , that's a bad example of Democracy , a man is doing something in his own time , provided any payment made is payed to a good institution, politely who could give a toss, probably better programing than those soaps, at least they got something to eat, probably cake.

He wasn't kicked out for appearing on a cooking show he was kicked out for lying about it.

[rubl]

"Ekachai Chainuvati ... said that people should not confuse the Constitutional Court with the constitution ..."

This certainly true in Thailand. Where else in the world can a Constitutional Court continue to exist when the constitution itself was suspended, aborgated, and rewritten? So I agree with Chainuvati. In Thailand there is no connection between the Constitution and the Constitutional Court.

The Martial Law acted as 'supreme law'.

You may want to read it. Here a link to the (unofficial) English translation

http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0SO8x.nayZUbWUAXBVXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE0YTNmNXZtBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMTAEY29sbwNncTEEdnRpZANTTUU2OThfMQ--/RV=2/RE=1411832871/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.thailawforum.com%2flaws%2fMartial%2520Law.pdf/RK=0/RS=8r8G80CdaI06zAZXwarqnVvJJe0-

[rubl]

King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) study released yesterday and presented at a Bangkok seminar.

I recall the junta stopping several seminars recently because they were 'political'

wonder how this one slipped through the cracks.

This seminar wasn't political even if you're against it.

[tbthailand]

King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) study released yesterday and presented at a Bangkok seminar.

I recall the junta stopping several seminars recently because they were 'political'

wonder how this one slipped through the cracks.

This seminar wasn't political even if you're against it.

you are on a t'roll today.

you do not know if I am against it.

have you read the OP? Seems a common issue with your posts.

you will notice that the topic of the paper and the seminar were both, exclusively about politics.

pffft

[rubl]

King Prajadhipok's Institute (KPI) study released yesterday and presented at a Bangkok seminar.

I recall the junta stopping several seminars recently because they were 'political'

wonder how this one slipped through the cracks.

This seminar wasn't political even if you're against it.

you are on a t'roll today.

you do not know if I am against it.

have you read the OP? Seems a common issue with your posts.

you will notice that the topic of the paper and the seminar were both, exclusively about politics.

pffft

Much more on political institutions, processes and so than on 'politics'. There is a difference.