Thaworn threatens to take impeachment cases to charter court

[Lite Beer]

Thaworn threatens to take impeachment cases to charter court
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- Thaworn Senneam, a co-leader of the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC), yesterday threatened to forward the impeachment cases of two former senior politicians to the Constitutional Court if the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) chooses not to take action on the issue.

"The National Anti-Corruption Commission [NACC] forwarded the case to the NLA, which empowers the assembly to impeach the wrongdoers as per the 2007 Constitution. If the NLA does not take any action, then it will certainly have to face the PDRC," Thaworn said without elaborating.

Empowered by interim charter

He went on to say that if the NLA decides not to take any action, he will take the case to the Constitutional Court himself under the interim charter's Section 6.

Section 6 states that the NLA shall act as the House of Representatives, the Senate and the National Assembly.

"I would also like to urge the National Council for Peace and Order [NCPO] to remind the NLA that they need to represent the people, and if they do not impeach corrupt politicians, then there will be no justification for the [May 22] coup," Thaworn said.

The NACC found former Parliament president Somsak Kiatsuranon and his deputy Nikom Wairatpanich guilty of violating the 2007 Constitution by pushing for charter changes in relation to the composition of the Senate.

Thaworn explained that the assembly was divided in its opinion regarding the impeachment of Somsak, Nikom and former premier Yingluck Shinawatra.

He said the NLA was wavering between two options: Not accepting the case because the 2007 Constitution that it was filed under is now defunct; or accepting the case in its capacity as House of Representatives and Senate.

Thaworn pointed out that if the NLA chooses the first option, then it proves that its purview of scrutiny is far too narrow.

"However, I want to express my gratitude to those NLA members who support the case, while those who disagree should reconsider," he said.

He reminded the NLA members that their job is to represent the people and that they had been appointed by the NCPO. He also wondered if the members might be afraid of certain political groups.

"If the NLA wants to prove that their scrutiny of the case is transparent and sincere, then they should not hold the discussion behind closed doors this Thursday, but instead broadcast it to the public," he said.

He said that he was glad that the NCPO has taken charge of the country and is considering many of the PDRC's suggestions, including its six reform proposals.

Thaworn added that the PDRC would monitor the public hearings held by the Internal Security Operations Command and also offer suggestions.

"I will cooperate and attend every hearing," he said.

Thaworn said that though some NLA members don't believe the case against Yingluck will succeed, he pointed out that she could be impeached on charges of dereliction of duty because she failed to terminate the rice-pledging scheme despite it being plagued with corruption and massive losses.

'It is not criminal to scrutinise'

When asked if some NLA members did not want to accept the case because they are afraid of being sued later, he said that scrutinising cases was not a criminal offence and that the NLA would be working as a representative of the people.

However, he said, the NLA may be found guilty in the political arena and charged with not having the authority.

"However, I will pursue the impeachment case according to the interim charter's Section 5, which hands authority to the people who can also impeach the appointed NLA," the PDRC co-leader explained.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Thaworn-threatens-to-take-impeachment-cases-to-cha-30246744.html

-- The Nation 2014-11-01

[RustBucket]

Section 6 states that the NLA shall act as the House of Representatives, the Senate and the National Assembly.

That's it lads. Keep the pressure up. Don't let these worms wriggle through loopholes that are not there.

Before someone tries to 'remind' me that there is no constitution anymore so there can't ba a crime against it. At the time of the crime, there WAS a constitution that they committed crimes against. That is enough.

If I murder someone, and the body is cremated, it is 'no more' so my crime vanishes? Or I burgle a building and go to prison, later the building is demolished... I am set free?

I have heard some lame excuses in this forum, but the 'no charter so no crime' excuse is by far the lamest.

So don't bother.

[The stuttering parrot]

Yep keep it up boys just don't forget Sutep and abhisit .

Oh that's right yo have already.

Well maybe not Sutep but he chooses to ignore the courts while hiding behind a monks robe!

[dru2]

Yep keep it up boys just don't forget Sutep and abhisit .

Oh that's right yo have already.

Well maybe not Sutep but he chooses to ignore the courts while hiding behind a monks robe!

Jesus....

[ianf]

Yep keep it up boys just don't forget Sutep and abhisit .

Oh that's right yo have already.

Well maybe not Sutep but he chooses to ignore the courts while hiding behind a monks robe!

Are you serious?

[sjaak327]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

[dru2]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

What a silly question!

[sjaak327]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

What a silly question!

There are no silly questions, just silly answers. Your post being a prime example.

[konying]

Yep keep it up boys just don't forget Sutep and abhisit .

Oh that's right yo have already.

Well maybe not Sutep but he chooses to ignore the courts while hiding behind a monks robe!

Ever been a monk or lived in a temple ? Ain't exactly a joyride

[rubl]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

Come on Sjaakie, be serious.

Whether or not the Thai electorate is stupid or even the World has nothing to do with the legal status of the NLA.

Back to the OP I think it's good to let the Constitutional Court look into the matter at hand. To clear things up, to elaborate and to allow all to either accept or reject any possible ruling depending on what they themselves think the ruling should be

[lomatopo]

When all else fails he can bring charges in that beacon of the Thai judicial system, the Kangaroo Court.

Edited November 1, 2014 by lomatopo

[Baerboxer]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

Come on Sjaakie, be serious.

Whether or not the Thai electorate is stupid or even the World has nothing to do with the legal status of the NLA.

Back to the OP I think it's good to let the Constitutional Court look into the matter at hand. To clear things up, to elaborate and to allow all to either accept or reject any possible ruling depending on what they themselves think the ruling should be

That's a good idea. PTP have stated many times they won't accept rulings and judgments from the CC so they won't be bothered about it anyway.

[fab4]

Ah, Thaworn Senneam, you can take the man out of the democrat party but you can't take the democrat party out of the man.

Not getting your way? First stop, the Constitutional Court...........................

[Eric Loh]

Someone ought to take the NLA to the court for accepting a charge with half the evidence. Then again maybe not as the courts answer to the same master.

[rubl]

Someone ought to take the NLA to the court for accepting a charge with half the evidence. Then again maybe not as the courts answer to the same master.

The NLA accepted a case, not a charge. They also seem to want to drop the case. Now if you think they would be wrong to do so because they only have 'half of the evidence', I suggest you provided the other half before the NLA makes the wrong decision.

[Eric Loh]

Someone ought to take the NLA to the court for accepting a charge with half the evidence. Then again maybe not as the courts answer to the same master.

The NLA accepted a case, not a charge. They also seem to want to drop the case. Now if you think they would be wrong to do so because they only have 'half of the evidence', I suggest you provided the other half before the NLA makes the wrong decision.

I know it is Saturday night evening and time to settle in for a Chang and watch EPL. If not a charge by NACC, then no reason for NLA to accept. As for the other half of evidence, ask the good general or read the article.

[Cuchulainn]

Yep keep it up boys just don't forget Sutep and abhisit .

Oh that's right yo have already.

Well maybe not Sutep but he chooses to ignore the courts while hiding behind a monks robe!

At least They're man enough to stay in the country?

[ginjag]

Someone ought to take the NLA to the court for accepting a charge with half the evidence. Then again maybe not as the courts answer to the same master.

The NLA accepted a case, not a charge. They also seem to want to drop the case. Now if you think they would be wrong to do so because they only have 'half of the evidence', I suggest you provided the other half before the NLA makes the wrong decision.

I know it is Saturday night evening and time to settle in for a Chang and watch EPL. If not a charge by NACC, then no reason for NLA to accept. As for the other half of evidence, ask the good general or read the article.

People here in Thailand obsessed with drink, what has Saturday got to do with beer?? Suppose you think it's normal to open bottles of booze.

I would think the PM is aware.

[Robespiere]

Section 6 states that the NLA shall act as the House of Representatives, the Senate and the National Assembly.

That's it lads. Keep the pressure up. Don't let these worms wriggle through loopholes that are not there.

Before someone tries to 'remind' me that there is no constitution anymore so there can't ba a crime against it. At the time of the crime, there WAS a constitution that they committed crimes against. That is enough.

If I murder someone, and the body is cremated, it is 'no more' so my crime vanishes? Or I burgle a building and go to prison, later the building is demolished... I am set free?

I have heard some lame excuses in this forum, but the 'no charter so no crime' excuse is by far the lamest.

So don't bother.

Your analogies are ridiculously inapt.

Report yourself.

[Eric Loh]

Someone ought to take the NLA to the court for accepting a charge with half the evidence. Then again maybe not as the courts answer to the same master.

The NLA accepted a case, not a charge. They also seem to want to drop the case. Now if you think they would be wrong to do so because they only have 'half of the evidence', I suggest you provided the other half before the NLA makes the wrong decision.

I know it is Saturday night evening and time to settle in for a Chang and watch EPL. If not a charge by NACC, then no reason for NLA to accept. As for the other half of evidence, ask the good general or read the article.

People here in Thailand obsessed with drink, what has Saturday got to do with beer?? Suppose you think it's normal to open bottles of booze.

I would think the PM is aware.

Relax Gin. You are putting too much stress on yourself whole week. Times you must realize that this not your fight and really no one is listening. Kick back, open up a bottle on the weekend and enjoy the tranquility wherever you are. Nothing Ike a cold beer watching a good match. Not too much or you end up with the match watching you. Cheers my friend.

[Dogmatix]

It's starting to look like a re-run of the Sarayud government when no one wanted to do anything to uproot the Thaksin regime because they were terrified about them coming back. In the end the 2006 was worse than a waste of time as it achieved nothing.

Some blame lies with the interim constitution drafters who are the same people who have served Thaksin and the 2006 junta, even though their work has never yielded encouraging results and as if there is no one else around. They deliberately left the NLA with no specific powers of impeachment and provided no way to impeach for breaches of the 2007 constitution even though it was in force when the offences occurred.

Edited November 1, 2014 by Dogmatix

[rubl]

Someone ought to take the NLA to the court for accepting a charge with half the evidence. Then again maybe not as the courts answer to the same master.

The NLA accepted a case, not a charge. They also seem to want to drop the case. Now if you think they would be wrong to do so because they only have 'half of the evidence', I suggest you provided the other half before the NLA makes the wrong decision.

I know it is Saturday night evening and time to settle in for a Chang and watch EPL. If not a charge by NACC, then no reason for NLA to accept. As for the other half of evidence, ask the good general or read the article.

Now please pay attention, I'll try to describe this in simple words.

The NACC gave the NLA documentation on a case (that is something that happened but possibly should not have) which may make it necessary to charge some people.

Now having reread the OP (that is the original starting post to this topic) and the theNation article it points to, I have found no reference to "half the evidence". Rather than bothering the PM with "Eric Loh said to ask about half the evidence" I think I should ask you to explain first.

[sjaak327]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

Come on Sjaakie, be serious.

Whether or not the Thai electorate is stupid or even the World has nothing to do with the legal status of the NLA.

Back to the OP I think it's good to let the Constitutional Court look into the matter at hand. To clear things up, to elaborate and to allow all to either accept or reject any possible ruling depending on what they themselves think the ruling should be

Of course the legal status of the NLA and how they were installed is a huge issue. Of course everyone but a few would raise questions when these people are impeached by people that actually did violate the 2007 constitution by abolishing it and writing their own. This is a public relations nightmare and the accused could simply state this is politically motivated and everyone but a few will agree.

You are defending a lost cause rubl, maybe some time back in the Netherlands would do you good, see first hand how real laws are created and how these laws apply to everyone equally.

No self written constitutions that grant amnesty and absolute power in the Netherlands.

[ginjag]

People here in Thailand obsessed with drink, what has Saturday got to do with beer?? Suppose you think it's normal to open bottles of booze.

I would think the PM is aware.

Relax Gin. You are putting too much stress on yourself whole week. Times you must realize that this not your fight and really no one is listening. Kick back, open up a bottle on the weekend and enjoy the tranquility wherever you are. Nothing Ike a cold beer watching a good match. Not too much or you end up with the match watching you. Cheers my friend.

I am more relaxed than your stressed out apologists who have their knickers in a twist over the PM.

If I am on your ignore list, you wouldn't reply to me about your thoughts on the PM. Keep your smelly dog breath beer smell, I can relax with a nice brandy coffee. Who wants to self inflict a beer gut.

As a class 1 ref I enjoy the prem matches on TV, Not as stressed as your making out. I actually get DE.STRESSED looking at apologists posts.

[rubl]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

Come on Sjaakie, be serious.

Whether or not the Thai electorate is stupid or even the World has nothing to do with the legal status of the NLA.

Back to the OP I think it's good to let the Constitutional Court look into the matter at hand. To clear things up, to elaborate and to allow all to either accept or reject any possible ruling depending on what they themselves think the ruling should be

Of course the legal status of the NLA and how they were installed is a huge issue. Of course everyone but a few would raise questions when these people are impeached by people that actually did violate the 2007 constitution by abolishing it and writing their own. This is a public relations nightmare and the accused could simply state this is politically motivated and everyone but a few will agree.

You are defending a lost cause rubl, maybe some time back in the Netherlands would do you good, see first hand how real laws are created and how these laws apply to everyone equally.

No self written constitutions that grant amnesty and absolute power in the Netherlands.

Early 20th Century a great-grandfather worked in a 'brick making factory'. Weekly salary paid out in the pub owned by the factory owner. Those were the days when the Netherlands was a democracy and women couldn't vote.

In some ways Thailand is still stuck in those days, although women can vote here.

BTW any constitution is self-written even if by a handful of men, some even hand written. The American one even starts with "We, the people" and is signed by a few.

[sjaak327]

The NLA does not represent the people. People being impeached for alledged violation of the constitution by people put in place by people that have violated that same constitution.

Do these people really think the electorate of Thailand and the rest of the world is stupid ?

Come on Sjaakie, be serious.

Whether or not the Thai electorate is stupid or even the World has nothing to do with the legal status of the NLA.

Back to the OP I think it's good to let the Constitutional Court look into the matter at hand. To clear things up, to elaborate and to allow all to either accept or reject any possible ruling depending on what they themselves think the ruling should be

Of course the legal status of the NLA and how they were installed is a huge issue. Of course everyone but a few would raise questions when these people are impeached by people that actually did violate the 2007 constitution by abolishing it and writing their own. This is a public relations nightmare and the accused could simply state this is politically motivated and everyone but a few will agree.

You are defending a lost cause rubl, maybe some time back in the Netherlands would do you good, see first hand how real laws are created and how these laws apply to everyone equally.

No self written constitutions that grant amnesty and absolute power in the Netherlands.

Early 20th Century a great-grandfather worked in a 'brick making factory'. Weekly salary paid out in the pub owned by the factory owner. Those were the days when the Netherlands was a democracy and women couldn't vote.

In some ways Thailand is still stuck in those days, although women can vote here.

BTW any constitution is self-written even if by a handful of men, some even hand written. The American one even starts with "We, the people" and is signed by a few.

But dear Rubl, they are usually written by people that have an electoral mandate, as for instance the 1997 constitution of Thailand.

Subsequently they are amended by people that also have an electoral mandate. I understand some people (possibly including you) seem to believe that abolishing a constution at gun point and replace it with their own to be acceptable but neither in the US or in the Netherlands is this the case.

Ideally this shouldn't be the case in Thailand either, but the people with the guns seem to believe that the Thai electorate shouldn't be involved at all.

As a true democrat I take exception to this, as would any democrat. There are no valid excuses to allow such practice.

Edited November 3, 2014 by sjaak327

[rubl]

Come on Sjaakie, be serious.

Whether or not the Thai electorate is stupid or even the World has nothing to do with the legal status of the NLA.

Back to the OP I think it's good to let the Constitutional Court look into the matter at hand. To clear things up, to elaborate and to allow all to either accept or reject any possible ruling depending on what they themselves think the ruling should be

Of course the legal status of the NLA and how they were installed is a huge issue. Of course everyone but a few would raise questions when these people are impeached by people that actually did violate the 2007 constitution by abolishing it and writing their own. This is a public relations nightmare and the accused could simply state this is politically motivated and everyone but a few will agree.

You are defending a lost cause rubl, maybe some time back in the Netherlands would do you good, see first hand how real laws are created and how these laws apply to everyone equally.

No self written constitutions that grant amnesty and absolute power in the Netherlands.

Early 20th Century a great-grandfather worked in a 'brick making factory'. Weekly salary paid out in the pub owned by the factory owner. Those were the days when the Netherlands was a democracy and women couldn't vote.

In some ways Thailand is still stuck in those days, although women can vote here.

BTW any constitution is self-written even if by a handful of men, some even hand written. The American one even starts with "We, the people" and is signed by a few.

But dear Rubl, they are usually written by people that have an electoral mandate, as for instance the 1997 constitution of Thailand.

Subsequently they are amended by people that also have an electoral mandate. I understand some people (possibly including you) seem to believe that abolishing a constution at gun point and replace it with their own to be acceptable but neither in the US or in the Netherlands is this the case.

Ideally this shouldn't be the case in Thailand either, but the people with the guns seem to believe that the Thai electorate shouldn't be involved at all.

As a true democrat I take exception to this, as would any democrat. There are no valid excuses to allow such practice.

As a 'true' democrat you probably also take offence when people talk about a democratic Thailand before the coup ?