Tanasak tells UN why Thai Army took control of the country

[Alwyn]

Fantastic. A representative of a dictator talking to the UK about democracy

[winstonc]

"we know that we cannot go against the tide of democracy." Well said General Tanasak.

But we can try. Buying time for national attitude adjustment and a redefining of the concept that even Eric Arthur Blair could scarcely have imagined.

you mean george orwell...

[winstonc]

Fantastic. A representative of a dictator talking to the UK about democracy

well if the army had not stepped in the farmers would be on there 35th promise of payment by now...or maybe been paid by the 2.2 trillion loan with no accountability..strictly for the rail project of course yes....

[lvr181]

"And it must be about good governance, transparency, accountability and equal access to justice. This was not the case in my country before May 22," the foreign minister said."

He's right, you know.

Yes, BUT already some Government members are unwilling to declare assets. They do not want transparency! I hope the PM and NCPO "persuade" those reluctant members to toe the line - or move on. Get it right the first time PM Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, your people and now the world expects this promise to be fulfilled.

Just as important, is for government members NOT to vote on matters in which they have a financial interest!

[martinhp]

But he failed to explain that the army failed to support the elected government making it powerless.

He just lies and think we all are stupid the army have nothing to do in office and do not know better than elected they normally represent the most pebble which is not the case of the army

I see the crime rate going up it did actually get more un safe after 22 in the turist destinations

And mister ding dong seams like he likes to makes friends with some and others not

And if so as before the 22 big problem why is Suthep not in prison where he belongs and his friends in for justice as vel

And why does many turist choose other countries than thailand if they do so vel

He better get it straight he and the junta is the problem and need justice more than Suthep but they are next in line

And maybe the country can move forward again

[heyexile]

"we know that we cannot go against the tide of democracy." Well said General Tanasak.

But we can try. Buying time for national attitude adjustment and a redefining of the concept that even Eric Arthur Blair could scarcely have imagined.

you mean george orwell...

Yep. Birth name rather than pen name, just for a change.

[KhnomKhnom]

But he failed to explain that the army failed to support the elected government making it powerless.

The subtle key phrase was about possible bloodshed. "Someone" was funding a private army to destabilize Thailand and seize power again, and this time with guns and .... upon "someone's" return, this time, no more Mr. Nice Guy.

Polluted "elections" are not democracy, the local elections were polluted, so it is impossible that the Army displaced a real "elected government."

[Krataiboy]

Reading this eulogy of the architects of "Thai-style" democracy, the words "butter" and "parsnips" spring to mind.

[Baerboxer]

Powerful institutions did nothing to support a govt under siege but the military deemed it necessary to act to "protect democracy" and "return happiness to the people". The happiest people would be those few powerful and mega rich business families whose interests were challenged by the policies of the former government.

The rest of the world knows exactly what happened and will not be easily conned by this "rationale"

"As in many countries, Thailand has learned the lesson that democracy is more than having elections.

"Democracy must be based on respect for the rule of law.

"And it must be about good governance, transparency, accountability and equal access to justice. This was not the case in my country before May 22," the foreign minister said.

I don't disagree with all you say. But, the above statements are also correct. Shiniwatra governments lacked transparency, accountability, good governance, did not respect the rule of law and were certainly not ensuring access to justice for all.

I'm not sure the "rest of the world" are particularly interested. Those that bothered to read the often slanted news reports, such as AFP or BBC would have formed a view, although most probably sensible enough not to believe all they read in the news. Foreign government's would have known more of course, as do we who live here. They would have seen the cheating in parliament, the lying, the attempts to clear Thaksin of any wrongdoing and many others. They would have seen the incompetence and arrogance.

The various Thaksin governments were no more interested in democracy, justice and the true rule of law than any of their predecessors. All in it for themselves, and regard themselves as above the law. They are part of the exclusive tiny % that controls nearly all the countries wealth, and none of them want to see that changed.

Lot's of good words from NCPO, as indeed there was from Thaksin and then Yingluck. We await to see what the current leadership can achieve as the only thing that really changed during the PTP government was the Shiniwatra family wealth, as reported in Forbes. They are one of the powerful mega rich families - but don't seem to get on with the rest.

So far, I wouldn't hold your breadth for change.

[MediaWatcher]

Thai at Heart, on 29 Sept 2014 - 12:49, said:

Said the man who's undemocratic organisation has intervened in the democratic process god knows how many times.

What have they been.doing all these years?

Well, since 1932 at least 19 times, and at least one time it was because the government was trying to remove some power from the military.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silent_Coup_(Thailand)

[Baerboxer]

"Demo-cracy must be based on respect for the rule of law."

Here are selections of the Rule of Law prior to the May 2014 military coup from the 2007 Constitution:

Article 32. Arrest and detention of person shall not be made except by order or warrant issued by the Courts or there is a ground as provided by the law.

Article 36. A person shall enjoy the liberty of communication by lawful means.

Article 45. A person shall enjoy the liberty to express his opinion, make speech, write, print, publicise, and make expression by other means.

The prevention of a newspaper or other mass media from printing news or expressing their opinions, wholly or partly, or interference in any manner whatsoever in deprivation of the liberty under this section shall not be made except by the provisions of the law enacted in accordance with the provisions of paragraph two.

Article 63. A person shall enjoy the liberty to assemble peacefully and without arms.

Article 65. A person shall enjoy the liberty to unite and form a political party for the purpose of making political will of the people and carrying out political activities in fulfillment of such will through the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State as provided in this Constitution.

Article 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

Maybe Tanasak can explain how the Rule of Law was respected when the Junta’s first act after overthrowing the government was to suspend the 2007 Constitution.

And you know very well that PTP ignored and broke laws and rules they didn't like. Any court ruling against them was "biased or politically motivated", they could do no wrong, got everything right and never needed to be accountable. You would trust them?

Reality, the whole country only seems to obey laws and rules when they want to. Until that changes, and rich / connected / elites/ gangsters cannot put themselves above the law you might as well through the rule book in the bin.

Perhaps you can explain why a party with the majority of seats in parliament resorts to illegal and unsavory acts and practices to try and sneak legislation through? Or refuses to be held accountable to parliament and issue meaningful answers to questions?

[Robby nz]

If a government is acting in a manner contrary to the needs of the nation, following their own narrow self serving agenda, and against the democratic procedures of that country, then an army should not support it.

And who have the right to judge the governments acts: The army and its political wing the Democrats?

Not a fan of the Shins, but it is a dangerous path!

As for the "returning happiness to the people" BS, This was never about the people, but about keeping the existing feudal system in place!

The people have a right to judge the acts of the government and the opposition have a duty to judge the acts of the Government.

The people judged the acts of the PT Govt as unfair and aimed at increasing their hold on power and absolving a convicted criminal and all politicians of wrongdoing for the previous 4 years.

They saw this as unjust and came out in protest as was their right under the constitution.

As for the rest of your post, just the usual red crap from someone who has proved to be a fan of the shins by repeated posts.

Absolutely correct, the people do have a right to judge the acts of Government and that is achieved through the process of elections.

Sadly "the people" who opposed the government obstructed the election process which would have allowed "the people" to have a representative voice.

The government was never judged by the people it was overthrown by a military coup.

Now the people have no rights to judge "The Government" .....

What a massive failure.

The people have a right to judge the Govt at any time, they need not wait for an election accepting every crocked move a govt makes, for instance the amnesty bill which would have absolved all the politicians from their wrongdoing.

To wait for an election can be too late for by then a law may well be passed to make elections redundant.

The military took over because the people had come out on the streets to protest against the Govt and they were being killed on a daily basis by supporters of the Govt (now being proved) and because the sad remnant of what once was a Govt refused to talk.

Tell us what elected Govt was overthrown by the military ?

The elected PT Govt was dissolved well before the military took over leaving a cabinet made up of ministers who were all appointed, go through the list and look at how many had faced the country at the ballot box, as in elected.

When the military took over there were 26 of those appointed ministers left every one appointed by a convicted criminal on the run.

Check out how long some of them had been in the job and their qualifications for the job, remember 6 cabinet reshuffles in two and a half years, check out which of them flew to various parts of the world to beg the boss for the job.

Look at the editorials and comments in the English language press and everyday you will see criticism of the military, they are being judged.

[ramrod711]

Saying the things that the UN want to hear is nothing new, the problem is some of those things he is saying are quite simply not true

"the opposing political parties were given the chance to save democracy but failed because they were unwilling to compromise"

Truth. The opposing party protesting calling government to step down, so government followed correct procedure and the law, dissolved government and called for elections, which the EC tried to illegally (delay) stop, protesters illegally blocked entry to government buildings cut water and power and intimidated threatened staff to get out. destroyed public property, claiming with the judicial support that they are peaceful, NOT SO, blocked polling stations, beat any and all man woman young and old (FACT backed by video evidence), that wished to exercise their legal right to vote, Still claiming peaceful protesters, throwing grenades at police blowing apart one officers leg, and injuring others still claiming with judicial support that they are peaceful and police can not touch them, the list goes on.

opposition to protesters shooting and throwing grenades killing men woman and children (fact backed by video evidence)

"We all wish that things did not have to turn out that way" <deleted>, It was planed and put into action, and the mob let loose to do as they pleased, without police interference. so as to give cause for yet another planed coup.

Now some he will call this propaganda, it's not it's fact backed by video evidence, some will call it bias, so before they get their shot I'll sat this, I do NOT support violence by either side of the political divide and any guilty of it should be thrown in gaol.

As for human rights and human trafficking well we know just how that works here, it's ok until you get caught then after the brown paper bag it's back at it again

as the money being made by those that are responsible to stop it is just to irresistible, and the consequences of the threatened inactive post is not a deterrent.

"without police interference" A very polite way of saying that the police did nothing to prevent or catch the perpetrators of over 100 attacks on the protestors. What a twisted version of the "truth" you are peddling.

ramrod711, Didn't take long,

Are you really saying that? WOW, "the police did nothing to prevent or catch the perpetrators of over 100 attacks on the protestors"

Think you may need to have a little look at your " twisted version of the truth" think you might find that in fact there have been arrests, and sure I think not enough.

Everything I have said in my post is fact, and I'll say it again is backed by video evidence, it's just not to your liking, which I find rather twisted, but ok each to their own. So can you say the same? do you have video evidence of police sitting by watching a pick up full of gun toting killers and throwing bombs and shooting people and they just sat there and did nothing, REALLY...

Really, the arrests took place after the coup, after Adul was removed before he could make another trip abroad for Thaksin approved strategies.

[Bluespunk]

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

But he failed to explain that the army failed to support the elected government making it powerless.

If a government is acting in a manner contrary to the needs of the nation, following their own narrow self serving agenda, and against the democratic procedures of that country, then an army should not support it.

No. It is the PEOPLE THAT SHOULD NOT SUPPORT IT. That is how democracy works. The army should be nonpolitical and should not insert itself into governance of the people through its own unaccountable and nontransparent strucure.

I never said the army should insert itself into governance. I said they are not obliged to support a government that acts against the best interests of the people, through corruption, abuse of government, abuse of the legal system, attempting to pardon criminals bankrolling their party and ruling for a narrow clique [all the time proclaiming itself to be for the people].

Now that in itself does not justify a coup, one would hope that the legal and democratic process would prevent these things happening.

They weren't.

The PDRC were no better and a stand off that had no happy outcome in sight was in place.

Maybe a coup wasn't the way to go but no one was coming up with any sane, rational plan for reconciliation and a return to proper governance. I don't support the idea of military rule, but in this case I don't see what other realistic options existed.

[rubl]

I wonder how it was received ?

"Many of the great and their representatives from around the world were in attendance at the U.N. Summit. They say this was arguably the most high-profile, significant meeting that will in no way change anything whatsoever."

[Bluespunk]

"And it must be about good governance, transparency, accountability and equal access to justice. This was not the case in my country before May 22," the foreign minister said."

He's right, you know.

Yes, BUT already some Government members are unwilling to declare assets. They do not want transparency! I hope the PM and NCPO "persuade" those reluctant members to toe the line - or move on. Get it right the first time PM Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, your people and now the world expects this promise to be fulfilled.

Just as important, is for government members NOT to vote on matters in which they have a financial interest!

I don't disagree with your call for everyone to be transparent or not have government members voting when they have a vested interest.

Seems logical to me.

Of course I would expect all those past and present to do the same and any found to have been corrupt and abused power for personal gain to go to gaol.

No amnesty, no exceptions.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Bluespunk

[rubl]

Powerful institutions did nothing to support a govt under siege but the military deemed it necessary to act to "protect democracy" and "return happiness to the people". The happiest people would be those few powerful and mega rich business families whose interests were challenged by the policies of the former government.

The rest of the world knows exactly what happened and will not be easily conned by this "rationale"

True, true.

The world obviously would have liked to see the Army go in as if to 'eliminate' terrorists. All would have praised Ms. Yingluck if the army had shot a few anti-government protesters for her.

[rubl]

Powerful institutions did nothing to support a govt under siege but the military deemed it necessary to act to "protect democracy" and "return happiness to the people". The happiest people would be those few powerful and mega rich business families whose interests were challenged by the policies of the former government.

The rest of the world knows exactly what happened and will not be easily conned by this "rationale"

True, oh so true.

The world would obviously have really liked for the army to have gone in as if to 'eliminate terrorists'.

All would have applauded Ms. Yingluck if the army had killed a few anti-government protesters on her bidding.

[rubl]

I wonder how it was received ?

"Many of the world's great and their assistants were in attendance at the U.N. General Assembly. They say this was arguably the most high-profile, significant meeting that will in no way change anything whatsoever."

[wave]

The people have a right to judge the acts of the government and the opposition have a duty to judge the acts of the Government.

The people judged the acts of the PT Govt as unfair and aimed at increasing their hold on power and absolving a convicted criminal and all politicians of wrongdoing for the previous 4 years.

They saw this as unjust and came out in protest as was their right under the constitution.

As for the rest of your post, just the usual red crap from someone who has proved to be a fan of the shins by repeated posts.

Absolutely correct, the people do have a right to judge the acts of Government and that is achieved through the process of elections.

Sadly "the people" who opposed the government obstructed the election process which would have allowed "the people" to have a representative voice.

The government was never judged by the people it was overthrown by a military coup.

Now the people have no rights to judge "The Government" .....

What a massive failure.

The people have a right to judge the Govt at any time, they need not wait for an election accepting every crocked move a govt makes, for instance the amnesty bill which would have absolved all the politicians from their wrongdoing.

To wait for an election can be too late for by then a law may well be passed to make elections redundant.

The military took over because the people had come out on the streets to protest against the Govt and they were being killed on a daily basis by supporters of the Govt (now being proved) and because the sad remnant of what once was a Govt refused to talk.

Tell us what elected Govt was overthrown by the military ?

The elected PT Govt was dissolved well before the military took over leaving a cabinet made up of ministers who were all appointed, go through the list and look at how many had faced the country at the ballot box, as in elected.

When the military took over there were 26 of those appointed ministers left every one appointed by a convicted criminal on the run.

Check out how long some of them had been in the job and their qualifications for the job, remember 6 cabinet reshuffles in two and a half years, check out which of them flew to various parts of the world to beg the boss for the job.

Look at the editorials and comments in the English language press and everyday you will see criticism of the military, they are being judged.

Just the vacuous platitudes of a coup apologist....

Elections are the proscribed method of appointing democratic government...Democracy can not exist with out elections.

There is now amnesty for all the Coup makers.......

But....the people now have no rights to judge this current Government, yet you support the peoples rights to judge the previous government.

You allude to supporting democracy but you are happy to do away with the very cornerstone that supports it.

[clued]

But he failed to explain that the army failed to support the elected government making it powerless.

The Shins had the support of the police, like Ali Baba had the support of the forty thieves. Thank goodness they are gone and the power of the police is in decline.

Amen.

[clued]

One would think that not all was told by Tanasak to the UN, to do so would place him in a difficult position, called L.M.

unsupported BS

[clued]

Not a fan of the Shins, but

yeah, right...

[clued]

I wonder how it was received ?

They went for coffee probably. 2 coups in 8 years, what would you do ?

I wonder what time the speech was scheduled, and as yellowboat alluded to, how many people were actually in the chamber to listen. These sort of presentations are often done in the quiet time with very few in the chamber at the time, but having been presented the speech is on record as having been presented.

If you or yellowboat had bothered to check it out rather than aimlessly speculate, the U.N. video of the speech seems to show the U.N. General Assembly otherwise.

[Eric Loh]

"Demo-cracy must be based on respect for the rule of law."

Here are selections of the Rule of Law prior to the May 2014 military coup from the 2007 Constitution:

Article 32. Arrest and detention of person shall not be made except by order or warrant issued by the Courts or there is a ground as provided by the law.

Article 36. A person shall enjoy the liberty of communication by lawful means.

Article 45. A person shall enjoy the liberty to express his opinion, make speech, write, print, publicise, and make expression by other means.

The prevention of a newspaper or other mass media from printing news or expressing their opinions, wholly or partly, or interference in any manner whatsoever in deprivation of the liberty under this section shall not be made except by the provisions of the law enacted in accordance with the provisions of paragraph two.

Article 63. A person shall enjoy the liberty to assemble peacefully and without arms.

Article 65. A person shall enjoy the liberty to unite and form a political party for the purpose of making political will of the people and carrying out political activities in fulfillment of such will through the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State as provided in this Constitution.

Article 68. No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

Maybe Tanasak can explain how the Rule of Law was respected when the Juntas first act after overthrowing the government was to suspend the 2007 Constitution.

And you know very well that PTP ignored and broke laws and rules they didn't like. Any court ruling against them was "biased or politically motivated", they could do no wrong, got everything right and never needed to be accountable. You would trust them?

Reality, the whole country only seems to obey laws and rules when they want to. Until that changes, and rich / connected / elites/ gangsters cannot put themselves above the law you might as well through the rule book in the bin.

Perhaps you can explain why a party with the majority of seats in parliament resorts to illegal and unsavory acts and practices to try and sneak legislation through? Or refuses to be held accountable to parliament and issue meaningful answers to questions?

Can the PTP afford to break any laws when you have an establishment friendly judiciary? In this environment, it's the minority with the help of the courts that seem to be above the law.

[fab4]

"And it must be about good governance, transparency, accountability and equal access to justice. This was not the case in my country before May 22," the foreign minister said."

He's right, you know.

Yes, BUT already some Government members are unwilling to declare assets. They do not want transparency! I hope the PM and NCPO "persuade" those reluctant members to toe the line - or move on. Get it right the first time PM Gen Prayuth Chan-ocha, your people and now the world expects this promise to be fulfilled.

Just as important, is for government members NOT to vote on matters in which they have a financial interest!

Just one point. Apparently the junta leader has declared that he is now to be known as PM Gen. Prayut Chan-o-cha.

I'm not quite sure what the rationale is for this, perhaps some Thai genealogical scholar can help me? Personally I believe he's just having a The Artist formerly known as Prince moment.

Perhaps he will become known by less than reverent posters (that excludes several TVF members, you know who you are) as PM Gen. Squiggle?

Edited September 29, 2014 by fab4

[See the bears]

But he failed to explain that the army failed to support the elected government making it powerless.

Who would support an "elected" government who was, it seemed, forgetting the reason that they were elected for. When a Government seems more concerned about how much they can rip off the Country to enlarge their personal wealth, mismanage populist vote buying schemes at the expense of the country. This "elected" government tried to use parliament to try and admonish criminals with an Amnesty bill ( and the main criminal was pulling the strings)......then naturally there is a backlash from the people who didn't want the farce to continue., You all know that the last Government was a joke !!

Just one of many similar posts that are wrong.

In fact, the PTP government were fulfilling their election promises, which included the rice pledging and to bring back TS. As well as these, they carried through with the tablet scheme, high-speed rail, minimum-wage increase,.... They were elected on these platforms & they were in the process of delivering them. The fact that some of the policies were economically misguided is something for the voters to decide, not the army. There has also been no cases of the government 'ripping of the country' as you say. Please show the evidence of a PTP MP financially benefiting from a government policy.

The only real support the PRDC ever got was for the amnesty bill. After that issue died down their numbers dwindled quickly until they were down to a few thousand.

As Suthep stated after the coup, he had been in regular contact with Prayuth since PT's election victory. They had laid their plans & were simply waiting for an opportunity to rock the boat enough for the army to use it as an excuse. Their was absolutely no possibility of a civil war as has been bandied around. The explicit support of the PRDC by the army was evident before & after the coup. Their agendas are identical and people aren't falling for the junta's weak attempts at justifying their actions.

[lvr181]

But he failed to explain that the army failed to support the elected government making it powerless.

Who would support an "elected" government who was, it seemed, forgetting the reason that they were elected for. When a Government seems more concerned about how much they can rip off the Country to enlarge their personal wealth, mismanage populist vote buying schemes at the expense of the country. This "elected" government tried to use parliament to try and admonish criminals with an Amnesty bill ( and the main criminal was pulling the strings)......then naturally there is a backlash from the people who didn't want the farce to continue., You all know that the last Government was a joke !!

Just one of many similar posts that are wrong.

In fact, the PTP government were fulfilling their election promises, which included the rice pledging and to bring back TS. As well as these, they carried through with the tablet scheme, high-speed rail, minimum-wage increase,.... They were elected on these platforms & they were in the process of delivering them. The fact that some of the policies were economically misguided is something for the voters to decide, not the army. There has also been no cases of the government 'ripping of the country' as you say. Please show the evidence of a PTP MP financially benefiting from a government policy.

The only real support the PRDC ever got was for the amnesty bill. After that issue died down their numbers dwindled quickly until they were down to a few thousand.

As Suthep stated after the coup, he had been in regular contact with Prayuth since PT's election victory. They had laid their plans & were simply waiting for an opportunity to rock the boat enough for the army to use it as an excuse. Their was absolutely no possibility of a civil war as has been bandied around. The explicit support of the PRDC by the army was evident before & after the coup. Their agendas are identical and people aren't falling for the junta's weak attempts at justifying their actions.

Equally so, show me the PTP MPs who did not benefit from Government policy?

Not easy is it, when MPs do not declare their assets or refrain from voting on policies which may enhance their "wealth"?

[belg]

"Demo-cracy must be based on respect for the rule of law."

STEP 1 : fire everybody of RTP

[rubl]

Just one of many similar posts that are wrong.

In fact, the PTP government were fulfilling their election promises, which included the rice pledging and to bring back TS. As well as these, they carried through with the tablet scheme, high-speed rail, minimum-wage increase,.... They were elected on these platforms & they were in the process of delivering them. The fact that some of the policies were economically misguided is something for the voters to decide, not the army. There has also been no cases of the government 'ripping of the country' as you say. Please show the evidence of a PTP MP financially benefiting from a government policy.

The only real support the PRDC ever got was for the amnesty bill. After that issue died down their numbers dwindled quickly until they were down to a few thousand.

As Suthep stated after the coup, he had been in regular contact with Prayuth since PT's election victory. They had laid their plans & were simply waiting for an opportunity to rock the boat enough for the army to use it as an excuse. Their was absolutely no possibility of a civil war as has been bandied around. The explicit support of the PRDC by the army was evident before & after the coup. Their agendas are identical and people aren't falling for the junta's weak attempts at justifying their actions.

Just one of many similar posts that are wrong.

BTW bringing back Thaksin wasn't an election promise, neither mentioned in PM Yingluck speech in parliament in August 2011. Actually apart from that admirably frank Dept. PM Pol. Chalerm who said he would bring back Thaksin, no one really mentioned in clear terms.

They were delivering indeed, like that passport from flooded office when everybody else was somewhat distracted by floodwaters. Delivering a 33% reduction in Corporate tax as first action, losing 700++ as next important item. Outside the NationalBudget, a non-revolving funds, guaranteed by the Yingluck Government and to be repaid by thankful taxpayers over the next seven years, first instalment in 2014/2015 National Budget. That 700++ could have paid for the two double track 160km/h train links now planned in a seven year project with again first instalment in the National Budget.

As Suthep stated after the coup, while soldiers accompanied him to acknowledge charges at the Criminal Court, the military listened to him and did his bidding.

Anyway, strange that the NCPO suppresses all parties including those who allegedly control them. Maybe I should spent a day in Dusit Zoo and see the bears ?