Parties to escape dissolution for 'overthrow of democracy'

[webfact]

CONSTITUTION WATCH
Parties to escape dissolution for 'overthrow of democracy'
NITIPOL KIRAVANICH
THE NATION



BUT INDIVIDUALS WOULD BE PUNISHED FOR ANY UNDEMOCRATIC POWER GRAB: CDC

BANGKOK: -- INDIVIDUALS - not their political parties or organisation - who plot to overthrow a democratic regime or seek power through undemocratic means would be punished by the new constitution, drafters proposed yesterday.

In a clause to protect the constitution, Article 68 of the draft charter forbids an overthrow of the democratic system with the monarch as the head of state.

Citizens will also have the right under the new constitution to petition the Constitutional Court to halt any action deemed as an attempt to obtain political power through unconstitutional means.

Article 68 of defunct 2007 Constitution says "in the case where the Constitutional Court makes a decision compelling the political party to cease to commit the act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order the dissolution of such political party."

The severity of the punishment is yet to be decided, but will be stipulated later in an organic law.

"A person cannot use their rights in a way that would cause the overthrow of the democratic system under the monarchy under this constitution, or to obtain executive power in governing the country by methods not covered in this constitution," the first part of the draft charter article stipulates.

"In the case that a person's actions fit the criteria of the first section, whoever acknowledges the act could file a complaint to the Constitutional Court for final arbitration. In this regard, the Constitutional Court has the authority to order the halt of such action and give other orders … However, the exercise of this right must not affect the criminal case for the accused," the |second section of the proposed article states.

It seems that Article 68 could be used against anyone who calls for changing the democratic system to that of a republic, and the name of one prominent academic who is regarded as being pro-republican was mentioned during yesterday's CDC deliberations. As for the latter part of the first section of the article, it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power, such as through a military coup. Meanwhile, one CDC member said giving the Constitutional Court the authority to intervene in cases against an accused would strengthen the charter, and also protect it.

The same member also cited the case of Germany in 1919, when there was a parliamentary vote to change executive power to a dictatorial system, giving rise to Nazism - and eventually the Second World War. Germany had no constitutional protection at that time against changes to its political system, the committee was told.

Another reason to support the draft article is that it could also promote a closer bond with citizens, who would be given a role to protect the constitution - the Kingdom's 20th - even though it is considered the highest national law, the CDC member explained.

The article aims to deter those who want to change the political system as well as those who want to illegally seize power, the charter-drafter added.

Furthermore, the committee has come to the conclusion that dissolving political parties for the crime of trying the overthrow the political system is not right, as the individuals involved should be taken to court and punished, instead.

Such a penalty on political parties existed under the now-abrogated 2007 charter, its exclusion being made in order to bring the constitution more in line with the international norm, it was said.

The CDC member reasoned that dissolving a political party would not promote a better balance for the political system, but would in fact stall the country's development and lead to severe social and political disputes.

The committee resolved to draft Article 68 in accordance with the suggestions discussed.

Questions were raised, however, as to where the line should be drawn and whether or not exercising academic freedom to discuss and debate a republic system should be considered as an attempt to overthrow the system.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Parties-to-escape-dissolution-for-overthrow-of-dem-30251860.html


-- The Nation 2015-01-14

[Somtamnication]

It won't work. These people have no idea what a democracy is.

How can you ask someone to stop making ice cream somtam if they have never made it before? Anyone who has observed Thais over the years in any number of actions, know that they work like a pack of wolves.

[Kooweerup]

Says the Junta who overthrew a government. Do as I say and not as I do.

[NongKhaiKid]

It won't work. These people have no idea what a democracy is.

How can you ask someone to stop making ice cream somtam if they have never made it before? Anyone who has observed Thais over the years in any number of actions, know that they work like a pack of wolves.

Saddam Hussein once supposedly said the law was whatever he wrote on a piece of paper and so it is with democracy here as whoever is in power decides what democracy is at that time and what suits them best is democracy.

Incidentally how can petitioning the Constitutional Court stop a coup as the military will be in control and martial law in place long before a petitioner(s) and his, her or their lawyers get anywhere near a court ?

Military men hell bent on taking control irrespective of the excuse will of course heed any court order to cease and desist, i don't think !

Edited January 13, 2015 by NongKhaiKid

[ExPratt]

"...., it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power... such as through a military coup. ."

​BRILLIANT !!! , I feel completely reassured now. Why hasn't this been thought of before ?

[Thailand]

"...., it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power... such as through a military coup. ."

​BRILLIANT !!! , I feel completely reassured now. Why hasn't this been thought of before ?

Hard to believe it says that, maybe lost in translation?

But TIT, oh the irony of it. More fodder for the incumbent joke factory!

[ExPratt]

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

"...., it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power... such as through a military coup. ."


​BRILLIANT !!! , I feel completely reassured now. Why hasn't this been thought of before ?

Hard to believe it says that, maybe lost in translation?

But TIT, oh the irony of it. More fodder for the incumbent joke factory!

I don't know , I wouldn't put any crass, ironic statement past them .They are either stupid or think everyone else is. Full sentence " As for the latter part of the first section of the article, it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power, such as through a military coup"

[snottgoblin]

The land of make believe exists in that arena of the Thai mind that is nowhere near reality. I ask you. do the Thai's really have any concept of reality, truth , honesty integrity etc ?

[apetley]

What a sad state of affairs when an individual can be persecuted for even debating an alternative form of 'democracy' than that which is likely to be imposed. All that is required now is the setting up of the 'Thought Police'.

[Docno]

Please... does someone have a cure for uncontrollable laughter?

(And, just curious ... is there a word in the Thai language for "irony"?)

[binjalin]

The land of make believe exists in that arena of the Thai mind that is nowhere near reality. I ask you. do the Thai's really have any concept of reality, truth , honesty integrity etc ?

The short answer is...

N* (censored)

[englishoak]

Luckily the military isnt a political party or organisation so..................thats alright then

[wabothai]

The army is not an organization?

[Eric Loh]

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

"...., it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power... such as through a military coup. ."

​BRILLIANT !!! , I feel completely reassured now. Why hasn't this been thought of before ?

Hard to believe it says that, maybe lost in translation?

But TIT, oh the irony of it. More fodder for the incumbent joke factory!

I don't know , I wouldn't put any crass, ironic statement past them .They are either stupid or think everyone else is. Full sentence " As for the latter part of the first section of the article, it is intended to thwart any future unlawful seizure of political power, such as through a military coup"

The military got a way to circumvent that article if adopted by just abolishing the charter when they stage a coup. Done that umpteen times.

[fgmr]

Why bother with the fiasco and expense of publishing a new constitution?

How many Thais actually read and understood the existing one when it was published?

This country does need strong incorruptible leadership?

Stop trying to impose western style democracy in the SEA?

Without the strong leadership of Lee Kuan Yeu over many decades, withstanding criticism from foreign governments about his control of media, judiciary and most other branches of power would Singapore be as successful as it is now?

We foreigners live in Thailand of our own volition, as we learn more of Thainess we either accept it and shut up or repatriate ourselves to the lands we all have left behind. If you are a frequent visitor here and do not like the way officialdom meets your needs then use your feet and stay away: after all the world is awaiting your next choice of abode or holiday.

Meanwhile, let the ex General get on with trying to sort things out. If he were able to stay in power for the next decade and be seen to be clearing up the mess, increasing foreign investment and trade and raising the standard of living I am sure he would receive the gratitude of the populous at large.

If the PM /ex General were to emulate some of the actions of the former Singapore PM then the Thai media are going to be in for a rough ride.

[Trouble]

Why bother with the fiasco and expense of publishing a new constitution?

How many Thais actually read and understood the existing one when it was published?

This country does need strong incorruptible leadership?

Stop trying to impose western style democracy in the SEA?

Without the strong leadership of Lee Kuan Yeu over many decades, withstanding criticism from foreign governments about his control of media, judiciary and most other branches of power would Singapore be as successful as it is now?

We foreigners live in Thailand of our own volition, as we learn more of Thainess we either accept it and shut up or repatriate ourselves to the lands we all have left behind. If you are a frequent visitor here and do not like the way officialdom meets your needs then use your feet and stay away: after all the world is awaiting your next choice of abode or holiday.

Meanwhile, let the ex General get on with trying to sort things out. If he were able to stay in power for the next decade and be seen to be clearing up the mess, increasing foreign investment and trade and raising the standard of living I am sure he would receive the gratitude of the populous at large.

If the PM /ex General were to emulate some of the actions of the former Singapore PM then the Thai media are going to be in for a rough ride.

The posters are not the ones trying to impose western style democracy in Thailand or anywhere else. The Thais did that themselves back in 1932 when things changed from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy. It is the Thais themselves or what goes as a deliberative body that seem to be interested in constantly rewriting the constitution. Amazing that constitutional monarchies seem to work everywhere else as in Europe but the Thais can't seem to get the constitution right for some reason. Anyone can see that the constitution is constantly rewritten to suit those in power at the time. The whole idea of a constitutional court to decide what is written in and/or correct under the constitution is shear crap. If they can't write a constitution in the 21st century that is fairly clear and unambiguous then they have a real problem. Sure there will always be laws that need to be interpreted under the constitution but by giving the monkeys in the court who follow the politics of the moment the authority to determine what political activities are constitutional is foolhardy. They will always agree with the people in power at the moment.

The references to the Monarchy within drafts and the insistence by certain people on protecting the Monarchy against even political discussion are not because the Monarchy itself needs protection, it is because all those who depend on the status quo worry about preserving it. It seems to me that rather than being free to discuss the issues affecting Thailand the Monarchy, which is so revered, has its hands tied by the very people interested in protecting it. The people of Thailand have no problem with the institution itself and it is obvious that they respect it. It certainly brings the nation together historically and nationalistically. It seems like everyone speaks for the monarchy except the monarch.

Further, If by your statement you mean to say that strong leadership is needed you are probably correct. Maybe Thailand should just change the constitution to allow the Monarch to dissolve the government and call for elections when things get out of hand. Certainly it would be no worse than a bunch of generals taking over every 5 years and trying to reinvent the wheel.

Let's face it, the problem is really not about the constitution, it is not about the monarchy, it is not about the form of government, it is about the rampant corruption at every level. It seems that even when people are caught red-handed there is no punishment to fit the crime. It is just about a struggle for being on top of the pyramid to see who can rape the country the most.

[kinmaew]

"Article 68 of the draft charter forbids an overthrow of the democratic system with the monarch as the head of state"

If I am reading this correct this means that therefore its absolutely impossible to even suggest a motion to get rid of the s 112 law?

If that is correct its undemocratic as all legislation should be allowed to be revised/reviewed/removed in any civilized country - Thailand will therefore never change. Why do they even bother with talking about "Democracy" bloody waste of time.