NLA to discuss and vote on impeachment case on Friday

[webfact]

IMPEACHMENT
NLA to discuss and vote on impeachment case on Friday
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- National Legislative Assembly whips resolved yesterday that the assembly should discuss and vote on whether it has the authority to impeach two prominent politicians from the previous government on constitutional charges, NLA whip spokesman Dr Jetn Sirathranont said yesterday.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission had earlier recommended that the Senate launch impeachment proceedings against former Parliament president Somsak Kiatsuranont and former Senate deputy speaker Nikom Wairatpanich.

The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate. The agency made the recommendation before the Senate was dissolved after the May 22 coup.

Jetn said the impeachment issue would be debated on Friday.

NLA members would be given time to discuss if the agency has the authority to impeach the politicians before calling a vote on the matter.

He said the NLA decision on this matter would not set a norm for other impeachment cases because the alleged offences were different.

Academics and lawmakers are split on whether the NLA has the authority to impeach the politicians. Those who support the move argue that the NLA acts as the Senate, which had the capacity to impeach previously, and although the 2007 charter is now defunct, the NLA provisions 58 and 64 of the National Anti-Corruption Act 1999 are still in effect.

The provisions clearly stipulate that political office-holders who were believed to be unusually rich, corrupt, had abused their authority or violated the charter or any other laws must face impeachment by the Senate.

Nikom has threatened to take the NLA to court if it seeks to impeach him, saying the alleged offence was filed under the previous charter, which is now defunct.

Jetn said the whips decided that the NLA should discuss and vote on whether it has authority to impeach based on Article 5 of the interim charter. The provision stipulates that should there be legal disputes over any issues, the NLA can make such decisions. "This means we do not need to seek a Constitutional Court ruling,'' Jetn said.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NLA-to-discuss-and-vote-on-impeachment-case-on-Fri-30245500.html


-- The Nation 2014-10-15

[Robby nz]

Seems there is little doubt or argument that that they broke the law they are just quibbling over who has the right to impeach them.

Nikom has fallen back on the old threat tactic in the hope that it will intimidate (scare) some of them enough to find in his favor.

All he has I suppose, burning coffins is no longer acceptable.

[rickirs]

Why all the consternation? The NCPO has both the legislative and judicial authority to impeach them directly. Let's get this farce done and move on.

[heybruce]

Seems there is little doubt or argument that that they broke the law they are just quibbling over who has the right to impeach them.

Nikom has fallen back on the old threat tactic in the hope that it will intimidate (scare) some of them enough to find in his favor.

All he has I suppose, burning coffins is no longer acceptable.

"The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate."

Is it illegal to amend the constitution?

[Eric Loh]

Seems there is little doubt or argument that that they broke the law they are just quibbling over who has the right to impeach them.

Nikom has fallen back on the old threat tactic in the hope that it will intimidate (scare) some of them enough to find in his favor.

All he has I suppose, burning coffins is no longer acceptable.

"The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate."

Is it illegal to amend the constitution?

Bruce, Constitution Chapter XV Section 291 said you are right; not illegal for house to amend.

[billd766]

Seems there is little doubt or argument that that they broke the law they are just quibbling over who has the right to impeach them.

Nikom has fallen back on the old threat tactic in the hope that it will intimidate (scare) some of them enough to find in his favor.

All he has I suppose, burning coffins is no longer acceptable.

"The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate."

Is it illegal to amend the constitution?

Bruce, Constitution Chapter XV Section 291 said you are right; not illegal for house to amend.

Only if it is done according to the rules

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Thailand_%282007%29/Chapter_15

Section 291. An amendment of the Constitution may be made under the rules and procedures as follows:

(1) a motion for amendment must be proposed by the Council of Ministers, members of the House of Representatives of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members of the House of Representatives or members of both Houses of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members thereof or persons having the right to vote of not less than fifty thousand in number under the law on lodging a petition for introducing the law;

A motion for amendment which has the effect of changing the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State or changing the form of the State shall be prohibited;

(2) a motion for amendment must be proposed in the form of a draft Constitution Amendment and the National Assembly shall consider it in three readings;

(3) the voting in the first reading for acceptance in principle shall be by roll call and open voting, and the amendment must be approved by votes of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(4) the consideration in the second reading section by section shall also be subject to a public hearing participated by persons having the right to vote, who have proposed the draft Constitution Amendment;

The voting in the second reading for consideration section by section shall be decided by a simple majority of votes;

(5) at the conclusion of the second reading, there shall be an interval of fifteen days after which the National Assembly shall proceed with its third reading;

(6) the voting in the third and final reading shall be by roll call and open voting, and its promulgation as the Constitution must be approved by votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(7) after the resolution has been passed in accordance with the rules and procedures hitherto specified, the draft Constitution Amendment shall be presented to the King, and the provisions of section 150 and section 151 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

[ramrod711]

Impeachment is hardly enough for these two, but as they are rich privileged elite, they will never see jail.

[Emster23]

Isn't this like beating a dead horse? What are they going to do, throw them out of office already been thrown out of?

[Eric Loh]

Seems there is little doubt or argument that that they broke the law they are just quibbling over who has the right to impeach them.

Nikom has fallen back on the old threat tactic in the hope that it will intimidate (scare) some of them enough to find in his favor.

All he has I suppose, burning coffins is no longer acceptable.

"The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate."

Is it illegal to amend the constitution?

Bruce, Constitution Chapter XV Section 291 said you are right; not illegal for house to amend.

Only if it is done according to the rules

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Thailand_%282007%29/Chapter_15

Section 291. An amendment of the Constitution may be made under the rules and procedures as follows:

(1) a motion for amendment must be proposed by the Council of Ministers, members of the House of Representatives of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members of the House of Representatives or members of both Houses of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members thereof or persons having the right to vote of not less than fifty thousand in number under the law on lodging a petition for introducing the law;

A motion for amendment which has the effect of changing the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State or changing the form of the State shall be prohibited;

(2) a motion for amendment must be proposed in the form of a draft Constitution Amendment and the National Assembly shall consider it in three readings;

(3) the voting in the first reading for acceptance in principle shall be by roll call and open voting, and the amendment must be approved by votes of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(4) the consideration in the second reading section by section shall also be subject to a public hearing participated by persons having the right to vote, who have proposed the draft Constitution Amendment;

The voting in the second reading for consideration section by section shall be decided by a simple majority of votes;

(5) at the conclusion of the second reading, there shall be an interval of fifteen days after which the National Assembly shall proceed with its third reading;

(6) the voting in the third and final reading shall be by roll call and open voting, and its promulgation as the Constitution must be approved by votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(7) after the resolution has been passed in accordance with the rules and procedures hitherto specified, the draft Constitution Amendment shall be presented to the King, and the provisions of section 150 and section 151 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

No rules were broken. Just that the Constitution Court interpreted that the changes to elected senators "will destroy check and balance". If rules we broken, the court would have dissolved the party. They found nothing on that front and have to fall back on their own interpretation just like they interpreted the the PDRC shutdown was legal.

[heybruce]

"The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate."

Is it illegal to amend the constitution?

Bruce, Constitution Chapter XV Section 291 said you are right; not illegal for house to amend.

Only if it is done according to the rules

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Thailand_%282007%29/Chapter_15

Section 291. An amendment of the Constitution may be made under the rules and procedures as follows:

(1) a motion for amendment must be proposed by the Council of Ministers, members of the House of Representatives of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members of the House of Representatives or members of both Houses of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members thereof or persons having the right to vote of not less than fifty thousand in number under the law on lodging a petition for introducing the law;

A motion for amendment which has the effect of changing the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State or changing the form of the State shall be prohibited;

(2) a motion for amendment must be proposed in the form of a draft Constitution Amendment and the National Assembly shall consider it in three readings;

(3) the voting in the first reading for acceptance in principle shall be by roll call and open voting, and the amendment must be approved by votes of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(4) the consideration in the second reading section by section shall also be subject to a public hearing participated by persons having the right to vote, who have proposed the draft Constitution Amendment;

The voting in the second reading for consideration section by section shall be decided by a simple majority of votes;

(5) at the conclusion of the second reading, there shall be an interval of fifteen days after which the National Assembly shall proceed with its third reading;

(6) the voting in the third and final reading shall be by roll call and open voting, and its promulgation as the Constitution must be approved by votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(7) after the resolution has been passed in accordance with the rules and procedures hitherto specified, the draft Constitution Amendment shall be presented to the King, and the provisions of section 150 and section 151 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

No rules were broken. Just that the Constitution Court interpreted that the changes to elected senators "will destroy check and balance". If rules we broken, the court would have dissolved the party. They found nothing on that front and have to fall back on their own interpretation just like they interpreted the the PDRC shutdown was legal.

If I'm interpreting this correctly, and your summary is correct, then the amendment was attempted constitutionally, but the constitutional court decided that the amendment was too big. It seems the constitutional court is not limited to legal interpretations of the constitution, but can also decide when "the vibe" isn't right.

Who appoints the members of the constitutional court, and what checks and balances are in place for them?

[jesimps]

Seems there is little doubt or argument that that they broke the law they are just quibbling over who has the right to impeach them.

Nikom has fallen back on the old threat tactic in the hope that it will intimidate (scare) some of them enough to find in his favor.

All he has I suppose, burning coffins is no longer acceptable.

"The NACC found the pair guilty of allegedly violating the Constitution by pushing for amendments in regard to composition of the Senate."

Is it illegal to amend the constitution?

Bruce, Constitution Chapter XV Section 291 said you are right; not illegal for house to amend.

Only if it is done according to the rules

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Thailand_%282007%29/Chapter_15

Section 291. An amendment of the Constitution may be made under the rules and procedures as follows:

(1) a motion for amendment must be proposed by the Council of Ministers, members of the House of Representatives of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members of the House of Representatives or members of both Houses of not less than one-fifth of the total number of the existing members thereof or persons having the right to vote of not less than fifty thousand in number under the law on lodging a petition for introducing the law;

A motion for amendment which has the effect of changing the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State or changing the form of the State shall be prohibited;

(2) a motion for amendment must be proposed in the form of a draft Constitution Amendment and the National Assembly shall consider it in three readings;

(3) the voting in the first reading for acceptance in principle shall be by roll call and open voting, and the amendment must be approved by votes of not less than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(4) the consideration in the second reading section by section shall also be subject to a public hearing participated by persons having the right to vote, who have proposed the draft Constitution Amendment;

The voting in the second reading for consideration section by section shall be decided by a simple majority of votes;

(5) at the conclusion of the second reading, there shall be an interval of fifteen days after which the National Assembly shall proceed with its third reading;

(6) the voting in the third and final reading shall be by roll call and open voting, and its promulgation as the Constitution must be approved by votes of more than one-half of the total number of the existing members of both Houses;

(7) after the resolution has been passed in accordance with the rules and procedures hitherto specified, the draft Constitution Amendment shall be presented to the King, and the provisions of section 150 and section 151 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Is it an offence to unilaterally delete the constitution and make out a new one in your favour?