Ex-Pheu Thai MP sceptical about charter drafters

[tbthailand]

The problem with this new charter (and the previous one) is that people will reject it regardless of it's content.

Basically, it's shoot the messenger.

I disagree completely.

It wasn't shoot the messenger last time in the referendum. And people looked at the content of the charter - a lot.

They'll do that with this constitution too.

[tbthailand]

A former Pheu Thai Party lawmaker yesterday expressed concern that the new charter may not be democratic and fails to bring about reconciliation, judging by the people named on the Constitution Drafting Committee.

no kidding.

If only he could say what he must really think.

People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) spokesman Akanat Promphan supported the newly elected charter drafters recruited under the quota of the National Legislative Assembly and the National Reform Council.

at the risk of repeating myself...

no kidding.

His only wish is that he could be in the trough, he and his pals blew it big time. He had 3 years to say the correct things, but never objected to anything as he was a trough member. Funny how MPs react when they are out the picture, he had no balls before just a Shin yes man.

maybe

maybe not

but he seems to understand the make up of the CDC as well as the most likely result coming from it.

As I said pity he didn't open his big mouth when in power, did we ever hear from him ??? now he wants the publicity---nice try--you blew it before so now go home and work.

you know, I have seen this comment and maybe one other from him since the 'intervention'... that doesn't look like a publicity hound.

As for pre-intervention, what is it that he should have been saying in your mind? What are these 'correct things' that you wanted to hear about?

[khunken]

Try not to bait, nuff said.......................you know so why try to get a poster banned, by goading a reply.

I'm not baiting, I'm asking a serious question; who gave this PM full approval? If you can't answer it then your post is nonsense.

so far according to national polls the current PM gets up to 80% of the Thai peoples approval

maybe you have another source ? if you do then post it otherwise it's just another nonsense post from you

So you accept polls conducted under a dictatorship and censorship by organizations such as the Thai Researchers in Community Happiness Association, but you don't accept election results. Who's posting nonsense?

You and some others have been spreading misleading lies about the poll in the other thread. I tend to be sceptical of local polls except, sometimes the NIDA polls have some veracity.

The poll you are referring to was conducted by Master Poll - read the Op properly. A leader of Thai Researchers in Community Happiness (awful title, I'd agree) commented. They did not conduct the poll.

At least try and make accurate criticism.

[Baerboxer]

It doesn't matter who is in govt and how different their attitude and politics are from the previous lot there's one constant and that's in who is appointed and how.

There will always be patronage, looking after friends and family and appointing people who can be relied on to agree with everything the boss says.

In too many cases intelligence and ability isn't a prerequisite.

As an example consider Chalerm and others in the last govt and the current Minister of Tourism.

If it wasn't for connections they would they ever have been appointed ?

There probably always will be patronage in government appointments, but in a democratic system the voters can change to people who do the appointing.

What democratic system here in Thailand ??? They have no idea and the politicians haven't, Thai style yes.

Currently there is no democracy in Thailand. Before there was a monitored election and a legitimate elected government.

A legitimate elected government that once installed lied, got caught lying and lied again, ignored parliamentary procedures, broke the law, refused to accept court decisions they didn't like, openly threatened and intimated judges before they made rulings, refused to act transparently, produce figures, or be accountable, intimidated, threatened, and removed people who spoke against them, openly cavorted with a criminal fugitive, openly admitted said criminal skyped into cabinet meetings, allowed said criminal to choose cabinet members - a cabinet that was shuffled 6 times in less than 3 years, had a nominal PM/DM who very rarely attended parliament or committees or did any work, and allowed attacks and killings of those who protested against them to go unchecked and unpunished.

A very interesting form of democracy.

[Mudcrab]

so far according to national polls the current PM gets up to 80% of the Thai peoples approval

maybe you have another source ? if you do then post it otherwise it's just another nonsense post from you

Ah ! That makes it allright. The party of the previous PM received 265 out of 500 seats and led to a government with 300 seats, yet she had to go.

Now "opinion poles" are used to provide justification.

Can't have the total elligble Thai electorate have a say, as that approval rate would prove to be bolloney.

The whole bleeding lot had to go-not just her. diabolical lousy governing---that's why. Protests and army have had their say.

Had the Shins used their brains they would still had been there-----nothing to do with elections. Doris Day--song ' What-ever will be will be.'

You mean protesters gave the army an excuse. Either way democracy is gone and Thailand currently has a dictatorship, which seems to please some people.

Mr T must be really upset - that is what he wanted, but didn't get. Remember the "Democracy is not my goal" quote??

[Mudcrab]

On another thread there is an article about the NRC wanting to gather ideas from the public.

Stuttering Parrot, Fab4 et al - here's your chance to be heard.

Put your balls where your mouth is and send them an email.

[EnglishJohn]

If he is one of those who voted in the 310:0 amnesty disgrace, I don't care what he thinks.

He showed himself to be grossly unfit for any involvement in Thailands law making right there and then. He should be in jail for abuse of power.

[tbthailand]

so far according to national polls the current PM gets up to 80% of the Thai peoples approval

maybe you have another source ? if you do then post it otherwise it's just another nonsense post from you

So you accept polls conducted under a dictatorship and censorship by organizations such as the Thai Researchers in Community Happiness Association, but you don't accept election results. Who's posting nonsense?

You and some others have been spreading misleading lies about the poll in the other thread. I tend to be sceptical of local polls except, sometimes the NIDA polls have some veracity.

The poll you are referring to was conducted by Master Poll - read the Op properly. A leader of Thai Researchers in Community Happiness (awful title, I'd agree) commented. They did not conduct the poll.

At least try and make accurate criticism.

Maybe I misunderstand what you just wrote, but the Master Poll and TRICHA are the same thing.

http://masterpoll.net/menu1.html

[metisdead]

Nonsense baiting posts and replies have been removed.

[khunken]

so far according to national polls the current PM gets up to 80% of the Thai peoples approval

maybe you have another source ? if you do then post it otherwise it's just another nonsense post from you

So you accept polls conducted under a dictatorship and censorship by organizations such as the Thai Researchers in Community Happiness Association, but you don't accept election results. Who's posting nonsense?

You and some others have been spreading misleading lies about the poll in the other thread. I tend to be sceptical of local polls except, sometimes the NIDA polls have some veracity.

The poll you are referring to was conducted by Master Poll - read the Op properly. A leader of Thai Researchers in Community Happiness (awful title, I'd agree) commented. They did not conduct the poll.

At least try and make accurate criticism.

Maybe I misunderstand what you just wrote, but the Master Poll and TRICHA are the same thing.

http://masterpoll.net/menu1.html

Thanks for the correction. Yes, I got it wrong - mea culpa.

Apology to Heybruce too.

[MediaWatcher]

worgeordie, on 02 Nov 2014 - 09:07, said:

Writing a new charter should be easy ,just take the best bits

from the umpteen charters they have had in the past.

regards Worgeordie

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

[Thanatta]

The problem with this new charter (and the previous one) is that people will reject it regardless of it's content.

Basically, it's shoot the messenger.

Have they reject the 2007 Charter? That's really new for the world! Start to t.... before you quote!

[whybother]

The problem with this new charter (and the previous one) is that people will reject it regardless of it's content.

Basically, it's shoot the messenger.

Have they reject the 2007 Charter? That's really new for the world! Start to t.... before you quote!

It was passed by referendum. People were given no choice to pass it, if you believe some people. Red shirt supporters have rejected it because it was written by the junta, even though it's pretty much the same as the 1997 constitution.

My point is, a lot of people reject the whole thing, but don't really know what's in it or what is different to the previous one.

[rubl]

"However, People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) spokesman Akanat Promphan supported the newly elected charter drafters recruited under the quota of the National Legislative Assembly and the National Reform Council."

This should tell you enough about the NLA/NRC/CDC, and that the next Constitution will be acceptable to the PDRC and their sponsors, the Amart (aka: Good People ™ )

If only the NCPO/NLA/NRC had appointed some knowledgeble Pheu Thai experts and common folks red-shirts. They said not to want to participate, but surely they hadn't expected to be taken by their word. It would seem that is

[heybruce]

There probably always will be patronage in government appointments, but in a democratic system the voters can change to people who do the appointing.

What democratic system here in Thailand ??? They have no idea and the politicians haven't, Thai style yes.

Currently there is no democracy in Thailand. Before there was a monitored election and a legitimate elected government.

A legitimate elected government that once installed lied, got caught lying and lied again, ignored parliamentary procedures, broke the law, refused to accept court decisions they didn't like, openly threatened and intimated judges before they made rulings, refused to act transparently, produce figures, or be accountable, intimidated, threatened, and removed people who spoke against them, openly cavorted with a criminal fugitive, openly admitted said criminal skyped into cabinet meetings, allowed said criminal to choose cabinet members - a cabinet that was shuffled 6 times in less than 3 years, had a nominal PM/DM who very rarely attended parliament or committees or did any work, and allowed attacks and killings of those who protested against them to go unchecked and unpunished.

A very interesting form of democracy.

So no attempt to defend the current dictatorship, just criticism of what preceded it. I won't go off-topic addressing every point you made, I'll just point out that the PTP government was elected and attempted to give the voters the chance to eject them in a new election. The current government wasn't elected and won't go until they are ready to, regardless of what the Thai people want.

[rubl]

worgeordie, on 02 Nov 2014 - 09:07, said:

Writing a new charter should be easy ,just take the best bits

from the umpteen charters they have had in the past.

regards Worgeordie

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

[tbthailand]

So you accept polls conducted under a dictatorship and censorship by organizations such as the Thai Researchers in Community Happiness Association, but you don't accept election results. Who's posting nonsense?

You and some others have been spreading misleading lies about the poll in the other thread. I tend to be sceptical of local polls except, sometimes the NIDA polls have some veracity.

The poll you are referring to was conducted by Master Poll - read the Op properly. A leader of Thai Researchers in Community Happiness (awful title, I'd agree) commented. They did not conduct the poll.

At least try and make accurate criticism.

Maybe I misunderstand what you just wrote, but the Master Poll and TRICHA are the same thing.

http://masterpoll.net/menu1.html

Thanks for the correction. Yes, I got it wrong - mea culpa.

Apology to Heybruce too.

no problem, was just checking and wasn't sure if that was what you meant. There are a quite a few polling companies, and it's hard to keep 'em separate.

[Baerboxer]

A legitimate elected government that once installed lied, got caught lying and lied again, ignored parliamentary procedures, broke the law, refused to accept court decisions they didn't like, openly threatened and intimated judges before they made rulings, refused to act transparently, produce figures, or be accountable, intimidated, threatened, and removed people who spoke against them, openly cavorted with a criminal fugitive, openly admitted said criminal skyped into cabinet meetings, allowed said criminal to choose cabinet members - a cabinet that was shuffled 6 times in less than 3 years, had a nominal PM/DM who very rarely attended parliament or committees or did any work, and allowed attacks and killings of those who protested against them to go unchecked and unpunished.

A very interesting form of democracy.

So no attempt to defend the current dictatorship, just criticism of what preceded it. I won't go off-topic addressing every point you made, I'll just point out that the PTP government was elected and attempted to give the voters the chance to eject them in a new election. The current government wasn't elected and won't go until they are ready to, regardless of what the Thai people want.

You introduced comments about the previous Shin family regime which I replied to. You claim they were democratically elected, which was true. I comment that once in power they behaved in a way most democracies would not accept. Do you wish to dispute that?

The usual Shin apologist approach - can't defend the truth so divert it or claim it's off topic.

PTP and their red shirt followers decided not to partake in the reforms when invited to do so. Now they complain they're not involved. Somehow, that sort of nonsense isn't surprising from them. This post is about that. Another statement of nonsense from a PTP representative.

This post is not about the current government, it's about the comments made by a former PTP MP.

If you think the Shin's and their pals have the slightest interest in real democracy you real are living in a parallel world,

[fab4]

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

Conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room - the military. What in your opinion was wrong with the 2007 charter (and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background) which incidentally was binned by the very same organisation that wrote it 7 years ago, that necessitates yet another rewrite? It was deemed good enough (under sufferance by some no doubt) in 2011 for, as abhisit stated for the record, free and fair elections, so what has changed in the interim?

The checks and balances worked, the CC stomped on any changes that the former government tried to make and yet here we are, another coup, another constitution. The only conclusion I can make is that those free and fair elections in 2011 led to the wrong result in certain peoples eyes and that this reiteration will aim to correct that situation. There cannot be any other reason.

Caveat - any replies that mention that old standby, vote buying, will be instantly ignored.

[fab4]

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

Conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room - the military. What in your opinion was wrong with the 2007 charter (and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background) which incidentally was binned by the very same organisation that wrote it 7 years ago, that necessitates yet another rewrite? It was deemed good enough (under sufferance by some no doubt) in 2011 for, as abhisit stated for the record, free and fair elections, so what has changed in the interim?

The checks and balances worked, the CC stomped on any changes that the former government tried to make and yet here we are, another coup, another constitution. The only conclusion I can make is that those free and fair elections in 2011 led to the wrong result in certain peoples eyes and that this reiteration will aim to correct that situation. There cannot be any other reason.

Caveat - any replies that mention that old standby, vote buying, will be instantly ignored.

It's all gone painfully quiet - ask a relevant question about the necessity of yet another rewrite and all those who have been screaming for reforms on this forum...........................say nothing

[tbthailand]

A legitimate elected government that once installed lied, got caught lying and lied again, ignored parliamentary procedures, broke the law, refused to accept court decisions they didn't like, openly threatened and intimated judges before they made rulings, refused to act transparently, produce figures, or be accountable, intimidated, threatened, and removed people who spoke against them, openly cavorted with a criminal fugitive, openly admitted said criminal skyped into cabinet meetings, allowed said criminal to choose cabinet members - a cabinet that was shuffled 6 times in less than 3 years, had a nominal PM/DM who very rarely attended parliament or committees or did any work, and allowed attacks and killings of those who protested against them to go unchecked and unpunished.

A very interesting form of democracy.

So no attempt to defend the current dictatorship, just criticism of what preceded it. I won't go off-topic addressing every point you made, I'll just point out that the PTP government was elected and attempted to give the voters the chance to eject them in a new election. The current government wasn't elected and won't go until they are ready to, regardless of what the Thai people want.

You introduced comments about the previous Shin family regime which I replied to. You claim they were democratically elected, which was true. I comment that once in power they behaved in a way most democracies would not accept. Do you wish to dispute that?

The usual Shin apologist approach - can't defend the truth so divert it or claim it's off topic.

PTP and their red shirt followers decided not to partake in the reforms when invited to do so. Now they complain they're not involved. Somehow, that sort of nonsense isn't surprising from them. This post is about that. Another statement of nonsense from a PTP representative.

This post is not about the current government, it's about the comments made by a former PTP MP.

If you think the Shin's and their pals have the slightest interest in real democracy you real are living in a parallel world,

You introduced comments about the previous Shin family regime which I replied to. You claim they were democratically elected, which was true. I comment that once in power they behaved in a way most democracies would not accept. Do you wish to dispute that?

Yes. prove your point, don't just claim it.

Case in point, the first lawsuit by the dems was in Aug 2011. The Yingluck government was under continuous scrutiny for almost 3 years. If the government had done something against the constitution, then they would have been hung out to dry instantly.

You are just making a claim that is in no way justified.

[NamKAheng]

He urged the National Anti-Corruption Commission to check how military members of the Prayut Cabinet amassed hundreds of million of baht in wealth. "I believe they may have earned income from land deals,'' he alleged.

How about starting by investigating how you made your millions?

[tbthailand]

He urged the National Anti-Corruption Commission to check how military members of the Prayut Cabinet amassed hundreds of million of baht in wealth. "I believe they may have earned income from land deals,'' he alleged.

How about starting by investigating how you made your millions?

maybe, ... land deals??

[jcisco]

You mean protesters gave the army an excuse. Either way democracy is gone and Thailand currently has a dictatorship, which seems to please some people.

I think it is a bit too easy to miss what precipitated the current venture out of the barracks and it was certainly was not protesters. While they were a contributing factor the number 1 actor in the pre-coup dynamic was the RTP. They sat on their hands and absolved themselves of their duty,and let violence and the situation to escalate.

The army would have little need to mobilize to bring to a close protests, if the police were doing their job, rather than standing by already being politicized and wielded as such by the then sitting government.

Democracy cannot and will not be effective, suitable or sustainable within thailand while the administrations Law enforcement dept, and the judicial branch cannot do their jobs properly and without favor to any side of the political divide let alone on any sort of ethical standing.

[rubl]

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

Conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room - the military. What in your opinion was wrong with the 2007 charter (and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background) which incidentally was binned by the very same organisation that wrote it 7 years ago, that necessitates yet another rewrite? It was deemed good enough (under sufferance by some no doubt) in 2011 for, as abhisit stated for the record, free and fair elections, so what has changed in the interim?

The checks and balances worked, the CC stomped on any changes that the former government tried to make and yet here we are, another coup, another constitution. The only conclusion I can make is that those free and fair elections in 2011 led to the wrong result in certain peoples eyes and that this reiteration will aim to correct that situation. There cannot be any other reason.

Caveat - any replies that mention that old standby, vote buying, will be instantly ignored.

Conveniently forgetting that lots of people (and not only foregin TVF posters) complaint about the 2007 Constitution, about the 'biased' way checks and balances worked out, about law only used against the poor, etc., etc.

So, reforms anyone?

BTW you're so passe in your last sentence. 'vote buying' has evolved beyond handing out money before or during the election. It's now more the 'profitable pre-election promises', the local elite using social control and pressure to have their chargeYvote 'correctly'. Even PM yingluck gave a prime example when she promised seemless cooperation with the BMA when her candidate would be elected.

[rubl]

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

Conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room - the military. What in your opinion was wrong with the 2007 charter (and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background) which incidentally was binned by the very same organisation that wrote it 7 years ago, that necessitates yet another rewrite? It was deemed good enough (under sufferance by some no doubt) in 2011 for, as abhisit stated for the record, free and fair elections, so what has changed in the interim?

The checks and balances worked, the CC stomped on any changes that the former government tried to make and yet here we are, another coup, another constitution. The only conclusion I can make is that those free and fair elections in 2011 led to the wrong result in certain peoples eyes and that this reiteration will aim to correct that situation. There cannot be any other reason.

Caveat - any replies that mention that old standby, vote buying, will be instantly ignored.

It's all gone painfully quiet - ask a relevant question about the necessity of yet another rewrite and all those who have been screaming for reforms on this forum...........................say nothing

Tjeez man, you waited 2-1/2 hours just for me to reply? If only I had known. My apologies, I had already logged out for the night. I was playing some songs for my 2 year old grand daughter, that seemed a somewhat better way of spending a Sunday evening.

[fab4]

No charter is perfect, but why not take one from a country that seems be working, eg, Australia, Canada, New Zealand..

Oh, wait, none give power to the military.

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

Conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room - the military. What in your opinion was wrong with the 2007 charter (and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background) which incidentally was binned by the very same organisation that wrote it 7 years ago, that necessitates yet another rewrite? It was deemed good enough (under sufferance by some no doubt) in 2011 for, as abhisit stated for the record, free and fair elections, so what has changed in the interim?

The checks and balances worked, the CC stomped on any changes that the former government tried to make and yet here we are, another coup, another constitution. The only conclusion I can make is that those free and fair elections in 2011 led to the wrong result in certain peoples eyes and that this reiteration will aim to correct that situation. There cannot be any other reason.

Caveat - any replies that mention that old standby, vote buying, will be instantly ignored.

Conveniently forgetting that lots of people (and not only foregin TVF posters) complaint about the 2007 Constitution, about the 'biased' way checks and balances worked out, about law only used against the poor, etc., etc.

So, reforms anyone?

BTW you're so passe in your last sentence. 'vote buying' has evolved beyond handing out money before or during the election. It's now more the 'profitable pre-election promises', the local elite using social control and pressure to have their chargeYvote 'correctly'. Even PM yingluck gave a prime example when she promised seemless cooperation with the BMA when her candidate would be elected.

Not only did I not forget "that lots of people (and not only foregin TVF posters) complaint about the 2007 Constitution", I made a point of stating that I was one of those who didn't agree with it;

"and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background"

so, sorry, what was your point again? Oh, that people didn't agree with the 2007 constitution, well, that includes the same organisation that wrote it so it's hardly a revolutionary viewpoint, though I do recall you at times defending the 2007 constitution as not much different to the 1997 charter - and that I do disagree with.

If I could be bothered, I could quote many examples of "profitable pre-election promises" from all political parties here and abroad, that's how politics works, rubl or are you too naive to know/admit that?

OK I broke my rule, you mentioned vote buying and I didn't ignore your post. Perhaps I should have done, it's hardly been life-changing.............................

[tbthailand]

Wrong reason. It's more that Constitutions, Law Systems and Societies grow up together. Forcing an alien Constitution on a population and make it work would require lots of law changes, social changes, mindset changes, etc., etc. The current 'exercise' can be a good step in the right direction and maybe even speed up things, but personally I expect Thailand needs another generation (or two) before all take hold.

The problem with forcing even good changes is that societies tend to be conservative in the sense of being slow to accept changes and too much pressure can lead to 'revolt'. A balance between 'change now' and 'two centuries evolution' is difficult.

All IMHO

Conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room - the military. What in your opinion was wrong with the 2007 charter (and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background) which incidentally was binned by the very same organisation that wrote it 7 years ago, that necessitates yet another rewrite? It was deemed good enough (under sufferance by some no doubt) in 2011 for, as abhisit stated for the record, free and fair elections, so what has changed in the interim?

The checks and balances worked, the CC stomped on any changes that the former government tried to make and yet here we are, another coup, another constitution. The only conclusion I can make is that those free and fair elections in 2011 led to the wrong result in certain peoples eyes and that this reiteration will aim to correct that situation. There cannot be any other reason.

Caveat - any replies that mention that old standby, vote buying, will be instantly ignored.

Conveniently forgetting that lots of people (and not only foregin TVF posters) complaint about the 2007 Constitution, about the 'biased' way checks and balances worked out, about law only used against the poor, etc., etc.

So, reforms anyone?

BTW you're so passe in your last sentence. 'vote buying' has evolved beyond handing out money before or during the election. It's now more the 'profitable pre-election promises', the local elite using social control and pressure to have their chargeYvote 'correctly'. Even PM yingluck gave a prime example when she promised seemless cooperation with the BMA when her candidate would be elected.

Not only did I not forget "that lots of people (and not only foregin TVF posters) complaint about the 2007 Constitution", I made a point of stating that I was one of those who didn't agree with it;

"and don't take that as I agree with it, or it's background"

so, sorry, what was your point again? Oh, that people didn't agree with the 2007 constitution, well, that includes the same organisation that wrote it so it's hardly a revolutionary viewpoint, though I do recall you at times defending the 2007 constitution as not much different to the 1997 charter - and that I do disagree with.

If I could be bothered, I could quote many examples of "profitable pre-election promises" from all political parties here and abroad, that's how politics works, rubl or are you too naive to know/admit that?

OK I broke my rule, you mentioned vote buying and I didn't ignore your post. Perhaps I should have done, it's hardly been life-changing.............................

not only did he mention vote buying, he didn't even try to address the question.

have another cup of joe on me -->

[heybruce]

A legitimate elected government that once installed lied, got caught lying and lied again, ignored parliamentary procedures, broke the law, refused to accept court decisions they didn't like, openly threatened and intimated judges before they made rulings, refused to act transparently, produce figures, or be accountable, intimidated, threatened, and removed people who spoke against them, openly cavorted with a criminal fugitive, openly admitted said criminal skyped into cabinet meetings, allowed said criminal to choose cabinet members - a cabinet that was shuffled 6 times in less than 3 years, had a nominal PM/DM who very rarely attended parliament or committees or did any work, and allowed attacks and killings of those who protested against them to go unchecked and unpunished.

A very interesting form of democracy.

So no attempt to defend the current dictatorship, just criticism of what preceded it. I won't go off-topic addressing every point you made, I'll just point out that the PTP government was elected and attempted to give the voters the chance to eject them in a new election. The current government wasn't elected and won't go until they are ready to, regardless of what the Thai people want.

You introduced comments about the previous Shin family regime which I replied to. You claim they were democratically elected, which was true. I comment that once in power they behaved in a way most democracies would not accept. Do you wish to dispute that?

The usual Shin apologist approach - can't defend the truth so divert it or claim it's off topic.

PTP and their red shirt followers decided not to partake in the reforms when invited to do so. Now they complain they're not involved. Somehow, that sort of nonsense isn't surprising from them. This post is about that. Another statement of nonsense from a PTP representative.

This post is not about the current government, it's about the comments made by a former PTP MP.

If you think the Shin's and their pals have the slightest interest in real democracy you real are living in a parallel world,

The comment I introduced was:

"There probably always will be patronage in government appointments, but in a democratic system the voters can change to people who do the appointing."

I stand by it; the PTP government was incompetent, but they were elected and attempted to let the Thai people elect another government. Any illegal activities should have been dealt with in the courts, the incompetence should have been dealt with by elections. You're the one who took a one sentence statement about democracy as an opportunity to go on an off-topic Shinawatra rant.

You wrote:

"PTP and their red shirt followers decided not to partake in the reforms when invited to do so."

Why should people who opposed the coup now support the junta? Why lend legitimacy to the NRC by participating when the NCPO will ultimately decide what reforms will be allowed? I'm sure the supporters of the PTP would like to reform the military and make it clear in the new constitution that the military serves the nation and is under the control of the elected civilian government. There is no way the NCPO will approve of reforms of this nature, so what would be the point of participation from people who want the kind of reasonable limits on military power that most democracies take for granted?

I think the majority of the Thai people are interested in real democracy, but that the military's only interest is in restraining democracy.

Edited November 3, 2014 by heybruce

[ginjag]

A legitimate elected government that once installed lied, got caught lying and lied again, ignored parliamentary procedures, broke the law, refused to accept court decisions they didn't like, openly threatened and intimated judges before they made rulings, refused to act transparently, produce figures, or be accountable, intimidated, threatened, and removed people who spoke against them, openly cavorted with a criminal fugitive, openly admitted said criminal skyped into cabinet meetings, allowed said criminal to choose cabinet members - a cabinet that was shuffled 6 times in less than 3 years, had a nominal PM/DM who very rarely attended parliament or committees or did any work, and allowed attacks and killings of those who protested against them to go unchecked and unpunished.

A very interesting form of democracy.

So no attempt to defend the current dictatorship, just criticism of what preceded it. I won't go off-topic addressing every point you made, I'll just point out that the PTP government was elected and attempted to give the voters the chance to eject them in a new election. The current government wasn't elected and won't go until they are ready to, regardless of what the Thai people want.

You introduced comments about the previous Shin family regime which I replied to. You claim they were democratically elected, which was true. I comment that once in power they behaved in a way most democracies would not accept. Do you wish to dispute that?

The usual Shin apologist approach - can't defend the truth so divert it or claim it's off topic.

PTP and their red shirt followers decided not to partake in the reforms when invited to do so. Now they complain they're not involved. Somehow, that sort of nonsense isn't surprising from them. This post is about that. Another statement of nonsense from a PTP representative.

This post is not about the current government, it's about the comments made by a former PTP MP.

If you think the Shin's and their pals have the slightest interest in real democracy you real are living in a parallel world,

The comment I introduced was:

"There probably always will be patronage in government appointments, but in a democratic system the voters can change to people who do the appointing."

I stand by it; the PTP government was incompetent, but they were elected and attempted to let the Thai people elect another government. Any illegal activities should have been dealt with in the courts, the incompetence should have been dealt with by elections. You're the one who took a one sentence statement about democracy as an opportunity to go on an off-topic Shinawatra rant.

You wrote:

"PTP and their red shirt followers decided not to partake in the reforms when invited to do so."

Why should people who opposed the coup now support the junta? Why lend legitimacy to the NRC by participating when the NCPO will ultimately decide what reforms will be allowed? I'm sure the supporters of the PTP would like to reform the military and make it clear in the new constitution that the military serves the nation and is under the control of the elected civilian government. There is no way the NCPO will approve of reforms of this nature, so what would be the point of participation from people who want the kind of reasonable limits on military power that most democracies take for granted?

I think the majority of the Thai people are interested in real democracy, but that the military's only interest is in restraining democracy.

Ask the Thai that question and they have no idea of the meaning, let alone how it should operate. Test for you ask a Thai person you meet in the street, after all these are the ones that vote------but get a Thai to speak and ask in THAI they would be shy as they always are if they do not know anything.