Big bike forced off road by car on Bangkok highway - video

[Lite Beer]

Chaturon's lawyers seek review of military court's jurisdiction
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- FORMER justice minister Chaturon Chaisang, who is facing the military court for refusing to answer a summons from the military junta, has asked the Criminal Court to review if the military court has the jurisdiction to put him on trial. He also asked the military court to forward his petition to the Constitutional Court to consider if the case against him is legal or not.

The two moves were made by Chaturon's legal team. They say his offence took place before the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) issued order No 37 and No 38 to have people like him face the military court. They also claim that taking a civilian to military court under NCPO orders 37 and 38 contradicts the junta-sponsored provisional constitution. Article 4 of the interim charter states that citizens' rights will be in line with rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). So, Chaturon wants the Constitutional Court to make a ruling on the matter.

The military court of Bangkok told Chaturon yesterday that it has accepted to consider the first argument and will forward the petition to the Criminal Court, thus postponing his trial for the time being. As for the second argument, military court judges said there's no written provision for the military court to act on the matter, so it rejected the call for the charter court to make a judicial review.

Narinphong Jinaphak, Chaturon's lawyer, said it was up to the Criminal Court now to decide if the military court has jurisdiction over Chaturon's case or not. The trial could resume as early as May if the Criminal Court decides that the case should be handled by the military court. Otherwise, a committee would be set up if a final decision is needed on whether the case should be transferred to the Criminal Court or not.

Chaturon, meanwhile, said he would continue to express his political view in order to democratise Thailand but would ensure that this was legal.

In a related development, Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued a call yesterday for an end to the military detention of civilians.

'Detentions a violation of rights'

"Over the past eight months, the military, armed with martial law, has arbitrarily detained hundreds of civilians and tried many in military courts in Bangkok and other provinces, in violation of international law. Those held have been denied access to lawyers and family members. The NCPO has disregarded and refused to seriously investigate detainees' allegations of torture and ill-treatment," the statement read.

In a related development, NCPO spokesperson Colonel Winthai Suvari reiterated that international groups such as Amnesty International and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) have misunderstood the proposed amendment to the 1955 Act on the Organisation of Military Courts, because it had nothing to do with giving the military court the power to put civilians on trial, as rights groups fear.

Winthai said the amendment would only give military commanders power to detain military personnel in far-flung areas of conflicts, or overseas, where the military court's orders could not be issued quickly.

Rights groups claim the amendment, which will soon be considered by the junta-installed National Legislative Assembly (NLA), could enable civilians to be detained by the military court for up to 84 days without judicial review.

Human Rights Watch was the latest to express concern that the amendment could affect civilians. "Thailand's government is trying to hand the military unchecked authority to detain civilians," said Brad Adams, Asia Director at HRW. "Thai lawmakers should reject this military power grab that puts all citizens at risk of prolonged detention without charge."

The European Union (EU) Delegation to Thailand issued a statement yesterday expressing concern about the continued detention of civilians via the military court and urged the government "to restrict the use of such courts to military offences committed by military personnel".

The EU also voiced concern about detention without judicial overview and reminded that Thailand was a state party to the ICCPR and "has a duty to bring suspects promptly before a judge. As a friend and partner of Thailand, the EU has repeatedly called for the democratic process to be restored and for martial law to be lifted. The rule of law and protection and promotion of human rights are crucial elements for stability and progress," the statement said.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Chaturons-lawyers-seek-review-of-military-courts-j-30254076.html

-- The Nation 2015-02-14

[rametindallas]

He hasn't got a prayer in the current environment. Best keep your mouth shut until better times. He shouldn't force them to prove they have the power. If he keeps this up, they may decide to make and example of him for others to see.

[smedly]

all this guy is doing is making noise for his boss - I'd see his point except for one thing that he seems to have omitted or ignored in any of his arguments - martial law

He would be better off just shutting up and maybe reflect on what a stellar job he did while in office along with his mates tarit - charlerm and pongpat to name a few

[scorecard]

"Chaturon, meanwhile, said he would continue to express his political view in order to democratise Thailand but would ensure that this was legal."

Which no doubt means continue the approach of the shin regime.

Mr Chaturon you need a new teacher, at least.

[rickirs]

Chaturon raises some challenging legal issues that traditionally seem to have been accepted fait accompli by Thai society, if only because it has over the decades become numb from military coups. The unilateral right of the military to assume sovereignty over the Thai people at a time of its choosing seems to be an ingrained concession by Thais. Chaturon is attempting in effect to put the NCPO coup on trial.

Chaturon's particular reference to conflict in the Interim Charter between Article 4 and Article 44 is notable, although he should have also cited Articles 2 and 3.

Article 2: Thailand is a democratic monarchy

Article 3: Sovereign power belongs to all Thais

Article 4: Recognizes human dignity, rights, liberties and equality of the Thais

Article 44: the NCPO Leader is empowered with absolute power to order any action regardless of the legislative, executive, or judicial sectors.

Thailand is not now a democracy. NCPO through armed force controls of all three branches of the government and operates with complete impunity from the Thais electorate for its actions. The NCPO is the law of the land.

Sovereign power belongs to the NCPO and not to any democratic constituency. NCPO alone decides without regard to consistency and balance the extent of any Thais’ rights, liberties and equality. There is no redress or appeal to NCPO decisions and actions.

Chaturon actually is borrowing on similar issues raised by Abhisit last July. Abhisit “believed that Article 44 violates the intention of Article 3. Abhisit warned that “an interim charter that restricts basic rights might have adverse political ramifications.” The Nation 2014-07-09/24.

Just as a wild card Chaturon should add the contradiction between Articles 3 and 48. Article 48 gives the NCPO, its subordinates, and sub-subordinates amnesty for the coup. If the Thai people objected to the Yingluck amnesty bill because of the manner in which it bypassed political opposition, they should find fault with the NCPO’s self-declared amnesty.

Ultimately, Chaturon’s complaint will be tabled indefinitely if not rejected outright. Why? It’s called "playing against a stacked deck.”

Srisuwan Janya filed a complaint in August 2014 with the Office of the Ombudsman against the appointment of the NLA, saying it was unconstitutional. If approved by the Ombudsman it would be forwarded to the Constitutional Court. What happened to that complaint? Coincidentally in September 2014, former Deputy permanent Secretary for Defense General Wittawat Ratchatanan was selected by General Prayuth and approved by the NLA as a new Ombudsman.

[ExPratt]

Fair play to him , standing up for himself whilst showing the injustices this current Mob are presiding over

[yellowboat]

Less than nimble minds will always label those questioning the junta as Shin supporters, while conveniently ignoring the validity of the question.

"Article 4 of the interim charter states that citizens' rights will be in line with rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). So, Chaturon wants the Constitutional Court to make a ruling on the matter". Is asking for clarification a Shin tactic or a legal right ?

So surprising and worrisome so many westerner do not give a toss about freedom of speech and due process.

[trogers]

He brought the issue to the wrong court. Try the International Court of Justice in Hague.

[SoFarAndNear]

I think what is legal or not legal doesn't count for NCPO anymore...

[Baerboxer]

Fair play to him , standing up for himself whilst showing the injustices this current Mob are presiding over

Do you think he'll stand up and show the injustice of allowing a non elected criminal fugitive to run a government?

Probably not as said criminal fugitive gave him his ministerial position and instructs him what to do.

And you think known, self admitting liars, selected and managed by a criminal fugitive, are the right sort of people to talk about injustice?

[Baerboxer]

He brought the issue to the wrong court. Try the International Court of Justice in Hague.

Try reading what the International Court of Justice in the Hague actually does.

Perhaps he should apply for asylum - the EU would be a good bet, they let anyone in. He could apply for benefits real quick too.

[Baerboxer]

Less than nimble minds will always label those questioning the junta as Shin supporters, while conveniently ignoring the validity of the question.

"Article 4 of the interim charter states that citizens' rights will be in line with rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). So, Chaturon wants the Constitutional Court to make a ruling on the matter". Is asking for clarification a Shin tactic or a legal right ?

So surprising and worrisome so many westerner do not give a toss about freedom of speech and due process.

It should be a legal right.

Even for someone who worked for a criminal fugitive and his gang.

[smedly]

Less than nimble minds will always label those questioning the junta as Shin supporters, while conveniently ignoring the validity of the question.

"Article 4 of the interim charter states that citizens' rights will be in line with rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). So, Chaturon wants the Constitutional Court to make a ruling on the matter". Is asking for clarification a Shin tactic or a legal right ?

So surprising and worrisome so many westerner do not give a toss about freedom of speech and due process.

I think you will find that most do, the part you are missing is were the last government bombed grenaded shot at and murdered their own people including children and anyone that stood up against them while they robbed thieved the country blind all at the behest of a convict living abroad on the run

So right now I will take the lesser of two evils while they put reforms in place so it won't happen again

Plus anyone questioning the current administration - just look into their background and past performance and see if they have the integrity to question anyone

Edited February 14, 2015 by smedly

[trogers]

Less than nimble minds will always label those questioning the junta as Shin supporters, while conveniently ignoring the validity of the question.

"Article 4 of the interim charter states that citizens' rights will be in line with rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). So, Chaturon wants the Constitutional Court to make a ruling on the matter". Is asking for clarification a Shin tactic or a legal right ?

So surprising and worrisome so many westerner do not give a toss about freedom of speech and due process.

I think you will find that most do, the part you are missing is were the last government bombed grenaded shot at and murdered their own people including children and anyone that stood up against them while they robbed thieved the country blind all at the behest of a convict living abroad on the run

So right now I will take the lesser of two evils while they put reforms in place so it won't happen again

Plus anyone questioning the current administration - just look into their background and past performance and see if they have the integrity to question anyone

Like Saddam screaming "Injustice" while being led to the gallows...

[rubl]

Chaturon raises some challenging legal issues that traditionally seem to have been accepted fait accompli by Thai society, if only because it has over the decades become numb from military coups. The unilateral right of the military to assume sovereignty over the Thai people at a time of its choosing seems to be an ingrained concession by Thais. Chaturon is attempting in effect to put the NCPO coup on trial.

Chaturon's particular reference to conflict in the Interim Charter between Article 4 and Article 44 is notable, although he should have also cited Articles 2 and 3.

Article 2: Thailand is a democratic monarchy

Article 3: Sovereign power belongs to all Thais

Article 4: Recognizes human dignity, rights, liberties and equality of the Thais

Article 44: the NCPO Leader is empowered with absolute power to order any action regardless of the legislative, executive, or judicial sectors.

Thailand is not now a democracy. NCPO through armed force controls of all three branches of the government and operates with complete impunity from the Thais electorate for its actions. The NCPO is the law of the land.

Sovereign power belongs to the NCPO and not to any democratic constituency. NCPO alone decides without regard to consistency and balance the extent of any Thais’ rights, liberties and equality. There is no redress or appeal to NCPO decisions and actions.

Chaturon actually is borrowing on similar issues raised by Abhisit last July. Abhisit “believed that Article 44 violates the intention of Article 3. Abhisit warned that “an interim charter that restricts basic rights might have adverse political ramifications.” The Nation 2014-07-09/24.

Just as a wild card Chaturon should add the contradiction between Articles 3 and 48. Article 48 gives the NCPO, its subordinates, and sub-subordinates amnesty for the coup. If the Thai people objected to the Yingluck amnesty bill because of the manner in which it bypassed political opposition, they should find fault with the NCPO’s self-declared amnesty.

Ultimately, Chaturon’s complaint will be tabled indefinitely if not rejected outright. Why? It’s called "playing against a stacked deck.”

Srisuwan Janya filed a complaint in August 2014 with the Office of the Ombudsman against the appointment of the NLA, saying it was unconstitutional. If approved by the Ombudsman it would be forwarded to the Constitutional Court. What happened to that complaint? Coincidentally in September 2014, former Deputy permanent Secretary for Defense General Wittawat Ratchatanan was selected by General Prayuth and approved by the NLA as a new Ombudsman.

Actually Chatuporn is just trying to annoy it would seem. Maybe he likes the peace and quiet he's enjoying in jail while waiting for his trial to be able to commence again.

As for the Ombudsman, no idea. Maybe he mailed a copy of the Interim Constitution to k. Sisuwan and ask her to point out to which article it would go against. He would also appreciate if it could be indicated if any of the NLA members didn't meet the requirements as listed in the constitution.

Rumour has it that in the mean time the Ombudsman is going through all open issues left by his predecessor. He may start to ask again about the Thaksin passport the Yingluck government sneakily issued when the nation was preocupied by water issues.

[rubl]

Fair play to him , standing up for himself whilst showing the injustices this current Mob are presiding over

It would seem he receives all the help required from the Military Court. They may not go out of their way to cater to all his whims, but they don't seem to obstruct reasonable requests either. In that sense there don't seem to be injustices to show.

As for the 'mob', no idea what you refer to.

[ubonjoe]

A off topic post bringing another country into the discussion and replies to it have been removed.

[Si Thea01]

Fair play to him , standing up for himself whilst showing the injustices this current Mob are presiding over

No injustices ever from your mob? Or is there only one side to you rhetoric?

[Briggsy]

Chaturon is a very different political animal from most of the thugs / godfathers / criminal business fraternity that make up the majority of powerful politicians in this country.

He has a strong socialist ideology and is much less likely to sacrifice his principles for cash and shut up and keep a low profile until allowed back to the trough than the rest of the bunch.

There are a few of these in Thai politics but not many and they are viewed as odd and dangerous by the traditional conservative elite whose power base lies in the upper echelons of the civil service, military, judiciary and the circle surrounding the Court. The treatment they receive is often much more severe including formal and informal punishment including restriction on movement, restriction of expression, exile and extrajudicial assassination.

I think many posters fail to differentiate between the vastly different types of political animal in the red camp.

[ratcatcher]

Chaturon raises some challenging legal issues that traditionally seem to have been accepted fait accompli by Thai society, if only because it has over the decades become numb from military coups. The unilateral right of the military to assume sovereignty over the Thai people at a time of its choosing seems to be an ingrained concession by Thais. Chaturon is attempting in effect to put the NCPO coup on trial.

Chaturon's particular reference to conflict in the Interim Charter between Article 4 and Article 44 is notable, although he should have also cited Articles 2 and 3.

Article 2: Thailand is a democratic monarchy

Article 3: Sovereign power belongs to all Thais

Article 4: Recognizes human dignity, rights, liberties and equality of the Thais

Article 44: the NCPO Leader is empowered with absolute power to order any action regardless of the legislative, executive, or judicial sectors.

Thailand is not now a democracy. NCPO through armed force controls of all three branches of the government and operates with complete impunity from the Thais electorate for its actions. The NCPO is the law of the land.

Sovereign power belongs to the NCPO and not to any democratic constituency. NCPO alone decides without regard to consistency and balance the extent of any Thais’ rights, liberties and equality. There is no redress or appeal to NCPO decisions and actions.

Chaturon actually is borrowing on similar issues raised by Abhisit last July. Abhisit “believed that Article 44 violates the intention of Article 3. Abhisit warned that “an interim charter that restricts basic rights might have adverse political ramifications.” The Nation 2014-07-09/24.

Just as a wild card Chaturon should add the contradiction between Articles 3 and 48. Article 48 gives the NCPO, its subordinates, and sub-subordinates amnesty for the coup. If the Thai people objected to the Yingluck amnesty bill because of the manner in which it bypassed political opposition, they should find fault with the NCPO’s self-declared amnesty.

Ultimately, Chaturon’s complaint will be tabled indefinitely if not rejected outright. Why? It’s called "playing against a stacked deck.”

Srisuwan Janya filed a complaint in August 2014 with the Office of the Ombudsman against the appointment of the NLA, saying it was unconstitutional. If approved by the Ombudsman it would be forwarded to the Constitutional Court. What happened to that complaint? Coincidentally in September 2014, former Deputy permanent Secretary for Defense General Wittawat Ratchatanan was selected by General Prayuth and approved by the NLA as a new Ombudsman.

Actually Chatuporn is just trying to annoy it would seem. Maybe he likes the peace and quiet he's enjoying in jail while waiting for his trial to be able to commence again.

As for the Ombudsman, no idea. Maybe he mailed a copy of the Interim Constitution to k. Sisuwan and ask her to point out to which article it would go against. He would also appreciate if it could be indicated if any of the NLA members didn't meet the requirements as listed in the constitution.

Rumour has it that in the mean time the Ombudsman is going through all open issues left by his predecessor. He may start to ask again about the Thaksin passport the Yingluck government sneakily issued when the nation was preocupied by water issues.

Are we talking about Chatuporn , Chaturon or Chatter on, which they both seem good at?