Thai Charter panel does not support direct election of Cabinet, PM

[webfact]

Charter panel does not support direct election of Cabinet, PM
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- AN IDEA for people to directly elect both the prime minister and members of Cabinet has been brushed aside by a subcommittee of the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) working on the framework of a new charter.

The committee yesterday maintained the previous system authorising the Lower House to elect the head of government was preferable.

"We will use the same old system as in the 2007 constitution to have the House of Representatives elect the prime minister and approve Cabinet members, said Suchit Bunbongkarn, head of the panel on state policy, Parliament and Cabinet.

However, a minority in the subcommittee reserved their right to debate the proposal for direct election of the PM in a general meeting of the CDC, he said.

Directly electing the prime minister and Cabinet would make the government too strong if a monopoly of power was held by ruling politicians, he said.

Israel once adopted a system to directly elect the PM but changed it later, believing it led to too strong a premiership, Suchit said.

He said that directly electing the head of government, as in the presidential system in the US, might not fit Thai political culture.

In regard to elections, Suchit said the subcommittee proposed to reduce the number of MPs in the House of Representatives to 350 from both party list and constituencies. The smaller number of MPs may enable the Lower House to work more efficiently, he said.

The Senate membership would comprise elected and selected senators, he said, and noted a selection committee for the Senate would include representatives of civil society. The Senate would retain its power to impeach office-holders in executive branches as in the previous charter, he said.

"These are proposals. They could be changed later when the CDC makes its final decision," Suchit said.

The CDC yesterday held a meeting with all 10 sub-committees assigned to collect ideas and proposals from members to put in the constitution.

CDC spokesman Khamnoon Sitthisaman said the meeting assigned Kanchanarat Leeviroj, who is now secretary of the CDC, to chair a subcommittee to write the text of the charter. CDC chief Bowornsak Uwanno, who is a law expert and familiar with constitution drafting, would act as an adviser to the writing subcommittee. Other writers included law expert Banjerd Singkaneti.

Kanchanarat said she would collect all elements, ideas and proposals from all subcommittees and members of the CDC to draft the charter. The constitution, she would draft, would be clear and accurate in all details, she said.

The National Reform Council would consider the framework and elements of the constitution next week, Khamnoon said.

On the subject of an amnesty, which was earlier proposed by a CDC member, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha said any amnesty declaration would not ignite more conflict in the country.

But when asked if it was necessary to have an amnesty for reconciliation, Prayut said the two issues were separate. "No need to link them. If you want reconciliation you can, and we don't need any reason. But the amnesty is about the law and I don't have any suggestions on that matter.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Charter-panel-does-not-support-direct-election-of--30249051.html


-- The Nation 2014-12-03

[chooka]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

[rametindallas]

Why would you have an elected PM? You might as well call the office 'President' if you're going to elect the office.

Is there any country in the world with an elected cabinet? Maybe cabinet members selected by the PM with approval from the Senate.

These CDC members have let their power go to their heads to even consider such changes.

It would probably be better for everyone concerned for them to stay quiet until they have a consensus and then let the people have the last say.

[halloween]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

[djjamie]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

So you don't think the 2011 was fair? They are not going to change the process going by this article.

[NanLaew]

Not much to debate here. Look at history. Thailand has never, ever fully embraced the concept of democracy through a popularly elected government and leadership, never has and never will. Their dalliance with Thaksin and the fact that the majority of people were clearly and REPEATEDLY signalling their desire for ANYTHING but 'more of the same' scared the sh!t out of the elites. Hence the perpetual and never ending round of coup and so-called counter-coup, where the REAL propagators scare the puppet army onto the streets 'for the good of the the palace (and the people)'. They always claim these are done to redress the imbalances but they only serve to perpetuate the ever-widening social divide that prevails in Thailand.

Bank balance trumps social imbalance every time.

[NanLaew]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

Please get over Thaksin. It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy'. It's like a kid learning to ride a bike. Once you take the training wheels off, you are not supposed to put them back on when you feel he's going too fast and going to crash.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans. That and he already had his own coterie of family and sycophants as well as his own bank accounts.

There is only supposed to be one popular person in Thailand. Don't you all know that by now?

[rickirs]

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

Why would you have an elected PM? You might as well call the office 'President' if you're going to elect the office.

Is there any country in the world with an elected cabinet? Maybe cabinet members selected by the PM with approval from the Senate.

These CDC members have let their power go to their heads to even consider such changes.

It would probably be better for everyone concerned for them to stay quiet until they have a consensus and then let the people have the last say.

Of course there is nothing that would limit the CDC/NRC from establishing a Presidential system, ie., similar to both the USA and South Korea. The retention of the PM seems almost locked into the Thai culture.

[bkkgooner]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

what a load of rubbish, did you even read the article?

It leads to me a monopoly of power which government is not meant to be about, it;s meant to be about taking take care of everyone living here not just the ones who voted for you.

[NanLaew]

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

Why would you have an elected PM? You might as well call the office 'President' if you're going to elect the office.

Is there any country in the world with an elected cabinet? Maybe cabinet members selected by the PM with approval from the Senate.

These CDC members have let their power go to their heads to even consider such changes.

It would probably be better for everyone concerned for them to stay quiet until they have a consensus and then let the people have the last say.

Of course there is nothing that would limit the CDC/NRC from establishing a Presidential system, ie., similar to both the USA and South Korea. The retention of the PM seems almost locked into the Thai culture.

This faux debate about how a German government structure or a Presidential system may be right for Thailand is just so much obfuscation. Those responsible for these public musings are fully aware that whatever governing structure Thailand eventually embraces, as long as the appointed leader understands that he is only a public facade for where the real power lies. Like every leader since the summer of 1946 bar one*, he will be bought and paid for.

* They couldn't afford that one!

[halloween]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

Please get over Thaksin. It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy'. It's like a kid learning to ride a bike. Once you take the training wheels off, you are not supposed to put them back on when you feel he's going too fast and going to crash.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans. That and he already had his own coterie of family and sycophants as well as his own bank accounts.

There is only supposed to be one popular person in Thailand. Don't you all know that by now?

I nominated Thaksin and his puppet because they were not elected to anything, simply using his wealth to buy power. There is very little democratic about the abuse of the party list system that he used to gain office for himself, his sister, and cronies, and to reward his criminal lackeys.

[NanLaew]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

what a load of rubbish, did you even read the article?

It leads to me a monopoly of power which government is not meant to be about, it;s meant to be about taking take care of everyone living here not just the ones who voted for you.

But they are already taking care of everyone living here. There's the seat on the board at Thai Airways and a bit of national park for the retiring air force chap with the obligatory Khunying title with gong for his big-haired wife.

...and when it gets cold next month in Chiang Rai, they will hand out 200 yellow blankets to the lower orders living here.

[NanLaew]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

Please get over Thaksin. It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy'. It's like a kid learning to ride a bike. Once you take the training wheels off, you are not supposed to put them back on when you feel he's going too fast and going to crash.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans. That and he already had his own coterie of family and sycophants as well as his own bank accounts.

There is only supposed to be one popular person in Thailand. Don't you all know that by now?

I nominated Thaksin and his puppet because they were not elected to anything, simply using his wealth to buy power. There is very little democratic about the abuse of the party list system that he used to gain office for himself, his sister, and cronies, and to reward his criminal lackeys.

Yeah, yeah... you're right.

Now hold still a minute while I put these training wheels back on your bike.

[chooka]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

So you don't think the 2011 was fair? They are not going to change the process going by this article.

People voted and the country wasn't seized at the barrel of a military rifle for one persons family heirloom. Yea a he'll of a lot fairer than the current situation but that is Thailand, if you lose and election you send in the army and take it.

[chooka]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

Please get over Thaksin. It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy'. It's like a kid learning to ride a bike. Once you take the training wheels off, you are not supposed to put them back on when you feel he's going too fast and going to crash.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans. That and he already had his own coterie of family and sycophants as well as his own bank accounts.

There is only supposed to be one popular person in Thailand. Don't you all know that by now?

It's the old, throw in the one single word into a debate, (Thaksin) the run down the road waving your arms in the air whilst skipping and shouting I win, I win. I said Thaksin and I am so smart. Don't know why I said it in the cricket forum but I won the debate with that magic word.

[rametindallas]

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

Why would you have an elected PM? You might as well call the office 'President' if you're going to elect the office.

Is there any country in the world with an elected cabinet? Maybe cabinet members selected by the PM with approval from the Senate.

These CDC members have let their power go to their heads to even consider such changes.

It would probably be better for everyone concerned for them to stay quiet until they have a consensus and then let the people have the last say.

Of course there is nothing that would limit the CDC/NRC from establishing a Presidential system, ie., similar to both the USA and South Korea. The retention of the PM seems almost locked into the Thai culture.

This faux debate about how a German government structure or a Presidential system may be right for Thailand is just so much obfuscation. Those responsible for these public musings are fully aware that whatever governing structure Thailand eventually embraces, as long as the appointed leader understands that he is only a public facade for where the real power lies. Like every leader since the summer of 1946 bar one*, he will be bought and paid for.

* They couldn't afford that one!

as long as the appointed leader understands that he is only a public facade for where the real power lies

That statement is cynical beyond words and is disproved by Thaksin winning two elections and his two nominee governments winning both their elections. Thaksin and his nominee governments were clearly brought down because of their extremely unconstitutional behavior i.e. just cause and not because he 'introduced populism to the Thai people'.

Like every leader since the summer of 1946 bar one*, he will be bought and paid for. * They couldn't afford that one!

If you are referring to Thaksin, he was bought and paid for by the US government.

This year Mr. Thaksin launched a "war on drugs" that led to the killings of some 2,500 suspected dealers; human rights groups charge that many were the victims of extrajudicial assassinations by officially sponsored death squads. Rejecting proposals for constitutional reforms meant to prevent him from accumulating too much power, he recently declared that "democracy is only a tool" for achieving other ends.

A U.S. administration intent on promoting democracy might be expected to quickly distance itself from such a leader. Instead, the Bush administration has embraced Mr. Thaksin.

http://2bangkok.com/2bangkok-news-7794.html

If what you write is true, why don't they just install a perpetual military dictatorship? Why keep the façade of democracy when it creates so much trouble for them? Sorry, but I ain't buyin' what you're sellin'.

Edited December 3, 2014 by rametindallas

[rametindallas]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

what a load of rubbish, did you even read the article?

It leads to me a monopoly of power which government is not meant to be about, it;s meant to be about taking take care of everyone living here not just the ones who voted for you.

But they are already taking care of everyone living here. There's the seat on the board at Thai Airways and a bit of national park for the retiring air force chap with the obligatory Khunying title with gong for his big-haired wife.

...and when it gets cold next month in Chiang Rai, they will hand out 200 yellow blankets to the lower orders living here.

and when it gets cold next month in Chiang Rai, they will hand out 200 yellow blankets to the lower orders living here.

You really should veil your anti-monarchy rhetoric better.

[rametindallas]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

Please get over Thaksin. It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy'. It's like a kid learning to ride a bike. Once you take the training wheels off, you are not supposed to put them back on when you feel he's going too fast and going to crash.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans. That and he already had his own coterie of family and sycophants as well as his own bank accounts.

There is only supposed to be one popular person in Thailand. Don't you all know that by now?

Please get over Thaksin

Nobody who lives in Thailand can get over Thaksin! He is/was absolutely the most divisive figure in Thailand's history.

It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy

No, Thaksin was not 'cut down to size' for introducing populism to the Thai people. He was ejected for using his parliamentary dictatorship to try to change the entire form of government to one that elects a president and his goal was to emulate Hun Sen and become Thailand's first 'President for Life'. He was undemocratic and unconstitutional in his methods. That is why he was 'cut down to size'. Stop your lying propaganda.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans.

Saying that Thaksin had morals and integrity is the biggest lie I have heard this year. You really drank deeply from the Thaksin brain-washing cup.

[rametindallas]

Not much to debate here. Look at history. Thailand has never, ever fully embraced the concept of democracy through a popularly elected government and leadership, never has and never will. Their dalliance with Thaksin and the fact that the majority of people were clearly and REPEATEDLY signalling their desire for ANYTHING but 'more of the same' scared the sh!t out of the elites. Hence the perpetual and never ending round of coup and so-called counter-coup, where the REAL propagators scare the puppet army onto the streets 'for the good of the the palace (and the people)'. They always claim these are done to redress the imbalances but they only serve to perpetuate the ever-widening social divide that prevails in Thailand.

Bank balance trumps social imbalance every time.

Look at history

Anyone looking at history would know your post is nothing more that propaganda, lies and mis-truths. For any reader who doesn't know the history of Thaksin, I will give you one statement by him that shows his true colors:

PM'S DECLARATION:'Democracy is not my goal'

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/PMS-DECLARATIONDemocracy-is-not-my-goal-90316.html

There is only one man responsible for all the discord of the past 12 years, there is only one man who is responsible for the renewed insurrection in the Deep South, there is only one man responsible for 2,500 extra-judicial killings of drug suspects, there is only one man responsible for the deaths during the manufactured protests of 2010, and on and on. His name is Thaksin Shinawatra, and he has used the money he made off the system that you condemn to subvert the Thai government to his personal and family's benefit. You Thaksin supporters should get another job because your boy isn't coming back. He is a cancer on society and we are vigilant now. Never again will he or his nominee party get into a position to do more damage.

where the REAL propagators scare the puppet army onto the streets 'for the good of the the palace (and the people)'.

p.s. you really need to moderate yourself in your anti-monarchy statements.

[NanLaew]

Riposte deferred due to your screwed up formatting.

[NanLaew]

That statement is cynical beyond words and is disproved by Thaksin winning two elections and his two nominee governments winning both their elections. Thaksin and his nominee governments were clearly brought down because of their extremely unconstitutional behavior i.e. just cause and not because he 'introduced populism to the Thai people'.

...

If what you write is true, why don't they just install a perpetual military dictatorship? Why keep the façade of democracy when it creates so much trouble for them? Sorry, but I ain't buyin' what you're sellin'.

If you must talk about Thaksin all the time then you must realize that he was NOT the appointed leader. He was by your own admission a twice-elected leader. That is very different from being the 'appointed' one that I am talking about. The people that do the appointing don't normally have to vote BTW.

I never claimed what I write as being the truth. The truth only comes from Prayuth and his acolytes. Don't you know that?

Because a perpetual military dictatorship looks bad, that's why. However, you can varnish a turd. There's a large one right next door in Burma in case you hadn't noticed. By your reckoning, I guess that one is 'bought and paid for' by the Obama administration, no?

I'm not selling anything so put your purse away.

[NanLaew]

But they are already taking care of everyone living here. There's the seat on the board at Thai Airways and a bit of national park for the retiring air force chap with the obligatory Khunying title with gong for his big-haired wife.

...and when it gets cold next month in Chiang Rai, they will hand out 200 yellow blankets to the lower orders living here.

and when it gets cold next month in Chiang Rai, they will hand out 200 yellow blankets to the lower orders living here.

You really should veil your anti-monarchy rhetoric better.

Why did you not repeat the quote the bit about, "... the seat on the board at Thai Airways and a bit of national park for the retiring air force chap with the obligatory Khunying title with gong for his big-haired wife."

You do acknowledge that it can and does happen, no?

I should veil what now?

PS. Did you know that sometimes the blankets are blue?

[NanLaew]

Please get over Thaksin

Nobody who lives in Thailand can get over Thaksin! He is/was absolutely the most divisive figure in Thailand's history.

It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy

No, Thaksin was not 'cut down to size' for introducing populism to the Thai people. He was ejected for using his parliamentary dictatorship to try to change the entire form of government to one that elects a president and his goal was to emulate Hun Sen and become Thailand's first 'President for Life'. He was undemocratic and unconstitutional in his methods. That is why he was 'cut down to size'. Stop your lying propaganda.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans.

Saying that Thaksin had morals and integrity is the biggest lie I have heard this year. You really drank deeply from the Thaksin brain-washing cup.

Any topical history of Thailand would indicate that Thaksin is far from being the "absolutely the most divisive figure in Thailand's history". Don't worry if you think you missed anything. The current appointed one has already very publicly declared that the Thaksin era will be expunged from the nations history books. In that respect, who are you talking about again?

Yes, Thaksin and his sycophants were eventually rejected, no argument there. But I think you and I will have to disagree on who he was ultimately rejected by. Please don't some back with quotes of Bangkok rallies that were attended by thousands of angry 'whistle blowers' either. They were only there because of the free pad thai and water. The cool weather was a bonus too.

If you think I hold Thaksin in any kind of thrall, I guess a lot of what I have said must have gone clean over your head.

Read again, I never said that Thaksin had either morals or integrity. I did suggest that whatever traits he did have in lieu of these isn't a basic failing that is unique to him.

PS. Thaksin doesn't rent ANY space in my pretty little head. How about yours?

Edited December 4, 2014 by NanLaew

[NanLaew]

Look at history

Anyone looking at history would know your post is nothing more that propaganda, lies and mis-truths. For any reader who doesn't know the history of Thaksin, I will give you one statement by him that shows his true colors:

PM'S DECLARATION:'Democracy is not my goal'

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/PMS-DECLARATIONDemocracy-is-not-my-goal-90316.html

There is only one man responsible for all the discord of the past 12 years, there is only one man who is responsible for the renewed insurrection in the Deep South, there is only one man responsible for 2,500 extra-judicial killings of drug suspects, there is only one man responsible for the deaths during the manufactured protests of 2010, and on and on. His name is Thaksin Shinawatra, and he has used the money he made off the system that you condemn to subvert the Thai government to his personal and family's benefit. You Thaksin supporters should get another job because your boy isn't coming back. He is a cancer on society and we are vigilant now. Never again will he or his nominee party get into a position to do more damage.

where the REAL propagators scare the puppet army onto the streets 'for the good of the the palace (and the people)'.

p.s. you really need to moderate yourself in your anti-monarchy statements.

Oh dear Christ on a bike!.... why can't people see BEYOND the big bogeyman Thaksin? Quoting and re-quoting his misdemeanors, human rights violations, nepotism, scams and what have you really indicates a very shallow perception of what he represented still represents.

That's twice you have alluded to "anti-monarchy statements" and "anti-monarchy rhetoric." Do you realise that in the Thailand of boundless happiness that you appear to crave, those accusations could in themselves be construed as defamatory? No, you probably don't.

Thanks for the joust though... although yours was a bit of a one-trick pony. Your elaborate cutting, pasting and formatting must have taken ages and I feel for you. It certainly was a challenge for me to compose any fast responses but it did allow me to think through my replies for which I must thank you. I trust that you can try something similar.

Edited December 4, 2014 by NanLaew

[mikemac]

Can't have an election like that as we will loose again. We need a system that totally favours the side of the elite. None of this fair elections, ban those earning less than 30 million per year from even voting now that would be fair for the elite.

if Thaksin was directly elected, he would have to face scrutiny of the press and public of his (lack of) morals and integrity, Yingluk's experience, and their family's financial dealings. Far better to buy a party's worth of politicians and appoint yourself or a puppet.

Please get over Thaksin. It could have been ANYONE that introduced populism to the Thai people through the ballot box and they would have been similarly cut down to size with the perpetual admonition that Thailand needs a 'special democracy'. It's like a kid learning to ride a bike. Once you take the training wheels off, you are not supposed to put them back on when you feel he's going too fast and going to crash.

This grand scrutiny of the only popularly elected leader only revealed that he was cut from the same cloth when it comes to morals, integrity and financial shenanigans. That and he already had his own coterie of family and sycophants as well as his own bank accounts.

There is only supposed to be one popular person in Thailand. Don't you all know that by now?

NaLaew, you seem to think some posters, like myself, keep bringing up Thaksin because of his populist policies or his popularity (as a result of them) but you would be wrong, and I see these comments as nothing more than a diversion, to take our minds off his criminal record and the underhanded way he abused office.

You cannot use his name and the word "democracy" in the same sentence, he is a very un-democratic person and proved this by running the PTP illegally while in Dubai in -cough hack cough- "self imposed exile".

He is a guilty criminal and his popularity will mean nothing if he ever faces the court.

[NanLaew]

NaLaew, you seem to think some posters, like myself, keep bringing up Thaksin because of his populist policies or his popularity (as a result of them) but you would be wrong, and I see these comments as nothing more than a diversion, to take our minds off his criminal record and the underhanded way he abused office.

You cannot use his name and the word "democracy" in the same sentence, he is a very un-democratic person and proved this by running the PTP illegally while in Dubai in -cough hack cough- "self imposed exile".

He is a guilty criminal and his popularity will mean nothing if he ever faces the court.

Someone else has left the Thaksin washing machine on the perpetual rinse and repeat cycle? Does repeatedly re-telling the unethical and illegal things that Thaksin did make you feel better? If one isn't sounding off ad nauseum on his human rights violations in the south, the other is regurgitating his humongous tax dodge in his dealings with Temasek. I am not arguing because you are all correct... but my poor ears are bleeding. To be honest, I wonder why you have to keep bringing it up.

You may find it hard to equate his name with anything democratic... and I agree 100%. But keeping in mind the key matter in this thread title, specifically "Thai charter panel does not support direct election of cabinet & PM", how does the following read with you?

"Thailand moving quickly towards true democracy"

Anything response that uses the terms 'special democracy' or refers to 'a period of reconciliation' isn't allowed BTW.

It's the old, throw in the one single word into a debate, (Thaksin) the run down the road waving your arms in the air whilst skipping and shouting I win, I win. I said Thaksin and I am so smart. Don't know why I said it in the cricket forum but I won the debate with that magic word.

I think you are right chooka.

... where's the walking away, shaking my head emoticon when you really need it?

[Fatty123]

Love how they think they can get a few 'academics' together and reinvent democracy.

Let's face it. The elite are only interested in a system that gives them total power. Year in, year out. Thailand is wasting time and money on these 'plans'. Save money and time by putting that army uniform back on , call a 'd' a 'd' and just get on with it. Because we all know what happens if we let those toothless simpletons have a say, don't we? You lose. you scweam and scweam until your sick and shove a load of tanks (paid for by the people you're supposed to protect) onto the streets to threaten everyone into submission.

These 'commitees' and 'councils' do not legitamise you as being democratic. Just have done with it, put those stripes back on and stop with the charades.