POLITICS
Article 44 'inspired' by France
WIRAJ SRIPONG,
PRAVIT ROJANAPHRUK
THE NATION



Wissanu defends law to foreign diplomats but Thai legal expert says comparison inappropriate

BANGKOK: -- THE PROVISION for the use of absolute power is not without precedent and the current Article 44 of the interim charter was partly inspired by Article 16 of the French constitution of 1958, Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam told foreign diplomats at the Foreign Ministry yesterday.

Wissanu was defending the special powers now wielded by the chief of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha.

"Article 44 is not new to Thai people. Also, such a provision is not new to international society. Originally, we created Article 17 [during the time of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat] - the original idea for Article 44 - but we almost copied the principle of Article 17 in the interim constitution of 1959 from Article 16 of the French constitution, albeit with some modification. Certainly they are not the same, but they are very similar," said Wissanu, who is also the legal adviser to the Prayut government.

Wissanu went on to highlight the use of provisions similar to Article 44 in the history of Thai law. They included Article 17 that was implemented in 1959 and 1972, Article 21 implemented in 1976 and Article 27 implemented in 1977 and 1991.

According to Wissanu, this law was invoked for the purpose of assuring continuity and stability during the reform process, including the reconciliation process.

Wissanu said five groups of people might be affected by the implementation of this law. They are:

Those who had lost their political power after the coup;

Those who have been affected by social or economic measures imposed by the NCPO;

Those who wanted to stir up a crisis in society;

Those who want to interrupt the promulgation of the new constitution, including pushing for election for their own benefit

People who would like to express their opinion in a radical way in response to injustice from officials.

Colonel Winthai Suvari, spokesman for the NCPO, said that Article 44 will only be applied to four groups of people: Those who violate the lese majeste law; those who breach the Internal Security Act; those who possess war weapons; and those who breach the order of the NCPO.

According to Wissanu, the scope of this law will only cover orders issued by the NCPO after the coup up until September.

Sixty-six embassies sent their representatives to Wissanu's briefing yesterday, while ambassadors from 16 nations were present. Only three questions were allowed and answered before the meeting ended with Wissanu stating he had to leave. Phuttipong Ponganekgul, a law lecturer at a private university who asked that the name of the university not be revealed due to the sensitivity of the situation, said it was not possible to defend Article 44 by comparing it to the French constitution.

First, the French president is elected, unlike Prayut who had staged a coup and hence lacked legitimacy. Second, Phuttipong said Article 44 was beyond checks and balances unlike Article 16 of the French constitution in which the Constitutional Council - the Thai equivalent of the Constitutional Court - can scrutinise the conditions for the use of the power.

Article 16 of the French constitution was in fact amended in 2008, something Wissanu did not refer to. In 2008, Article 16 was reviewed by the French parliament and a new provision was added to impose a time frame for the use of such power. The use of such power, unlike the Thai version, can also be reviewed after 30 days. The president of the Senate or the House of Representatives or 60 senators or 60 MPs can approach the Constitutional Council to review the necessary conditions that would allow the use of the provision.

More importantly, the amended version of Article 16 of the French constitution stated that 60 days after the power has been used, the Constitutional Council will have full power to control and revise the use of Article 16 at any moment, if the Council sees the necessity to do so.

Thai version vs French version

Here's how Article 44 of the Provisional Constitution compares with Article 16 of the French Constitution of 1958:

Thailand's Article 44 of the Provisional Constitution

"In the case where the Head of the National Council for Peace and Order is of the opinion that it is necessary for the benefit of reform in any field and to strengthen public unity and harmony, or for the prevention, disruption or suppression of any act which undermines public peace and order or national security, the Monarchy, national economics or administration of State affairs, whether that act emerges inside or outside the Kingdom, the Head of the National Council for Peace and Order shall have the powers to make any order to disrupt or suppress regardless of the legislative, executive or judicial force of that order."

France's Article 16 of the 1958 Constitution

"Where the institution of the Republic, the independence of the Nation, the integrity of its territory or the fulfilment of its international commitments are under serious and immediate threat, and where the proper functioning of the constitutional public authorities is interrupted, the President of the Republic shall take measures required by these circumstances, after formally consulting the Prime Minister, the Presidents of the Houses of Parliament and the Constitutional council."

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Article-44-inspired-by-France-30257645.html


-- The Nation 2015-04-08

So if it all goes pearshaped it will all the fault of foreigners, again !

Big loss of face though to admit having to get inspiration from another country.

Arai wa? Sacre bleu!

So if it all goes pearshaped it will all the fault of foreigners, again !

Big loss of face though to admit having to get inspiration from another country.

yep it's not our fault, it's those bloody foggies that made us do it. I thought Prayuth was going to stamp out pirating.

Edited April 7, 201511 yr by chooka

Comparison inappropriate? How about darn right ridiculously stupid!

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

Comparison inappropriate? How about darn right ridiculously stupid!

Well, we didn't want you to feel bad, but yes, sometimes you are.

Deputy PM Wissanu has demonstrated that while the Thai regime can fool the Thai population with half-truths, it cannot fool foreigners nor those who actually know the facts.

Well done to the Law lecturer for speaking out. No wonder Wissanu made a hasty exit after 3 questions from the floor ... unlike his boss, he did not have a handy banana skin to throw at the questioners.

Deputy PM Wissanu has demonstrated that while the Thai regime can fool the Thai population with half-truths, it cannot fool foreigners nor those who actually know the facts.

Well done to the Law lecturer for speaking out. No wonder Wissanu made a hasty exit after 3 questions from the floor ... unlike his boss, he did not have a handy banana skin to throw at the questioners.

I would have to agree that your assumption is correct. Nobody schedules a conference with over 70 people especially representatives from other countries just to leave after 3 questions. My guess is that he didn't know how to answer them so rather than showing ignorance or showing he was wrong he just made an excuse to leave early.

Sometimes I think of the funniest things when I read these gems of Thai journalism! Like: Demolition team boss to homeowner "Yer mate, we were supposed to blowup the house next door but we blew up yours by mistake. It's OK your insurance will cover it....see ya later."

You can't fool those looking into the box but you can fool those inside the box. Problem is that the box started having cracks some time ago

Wow. They just keep digging the hole even deeper and wider.

Speaking about making a fool of yourself against the whole world, I think this one must break all records.

There is NO defense for Article 44.

Speaking about making a fool of yourself against the whole world, I think this one must break all records.

Noooo. There's only one competitor who holds all the latest records for making a fool of himself.

Oh Deary Dear!!! Shot in the foot again...

1958?

Wasn't that the end of the Algerian war and the almost collapse of the French state after it's defeat.

This coming after a whole series of conflicts and crises leading up to this defeat?

In effect the end of France as a colonial power?

Not quite the same circumstances really.

I wonder how long it will be before the French get the hump at being held up as the role model for this regime?

Nothing similar.

Even if the texts was similar which is not the case, In France we are speaking about an elected PRESIDENT.

In Thailand you have an HEAD OF STATE + a PRIME MINISTER. None of them elected.

In art. 44, I understood that the guy taking the power would the Prime Minister. You cannot compare a Prime Minister with a President which is at the same time in charge and head of state.

And you will still have farangs hailing this as a good thing and a necessary thing and throw in the odd civil war comment too!!

Well, if things go wrong (which they will) he can point the finger at France as it's their fault.

I wonder how long he is going to put up with us mosquitos.

>>Sixty-six embassies sent their representatives to Wissanu's briefing yesterday, while ambassadors from 16 nations were present. Only three questions were allowed and answered before the meeting ended with Wissanu stating he had to leave. <<

Or in other words, he fled with his tail between his legs!!

No doubt the embassy representatives were less than impressed................

Inspired by France ?? The French had a big revolution, right ?

Yes, going on about Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9

"Liberté, égalité, fraternité, French for "liberty, equality, fraternity",^[1] is the national motto of France and the Republic of Haiti, and is an example of a tripartite motto. Although it finds its origins in the French Revolution, it was then only one motto among others and was not institutionalized until the Third Republic at the end of the 19th century.^[2] Debates concerning the compatibility and order of the three terms began at the same time as the Revolution."

Inspired by France ?? The French had a big revolution, right ?

Yes, going on about Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libert%C3%A9,_%C3%A9galit%C3%A9,_fraternit%C3%A9

"Liberté, égalité, fraternité, French for "liberty, equality, fraternity",^[1] is the national motto of France and the Republic of Haiti, and is an example of a tripartite motto. Although it finds its origins in the French Revolution, it was then only one motto among others and was not institutionalized until the Third Republic at the end of the 19th century.^[2] Debates concerning the compatibility and order of the three terms began at the same time as the Revolution."

Forgot Brutality?

It's not a very smart comparison. Article 16 - which is basically a 'state of emergency' has only be used once back in the early sixties during the Algerian war. Andit's been quite controversial with moves to put in safeguards against it being abused. Indeed the failure of Parliament at the time to be an adequate watchdog against DeGaulle's extension of Article 16 at the time is seen by many as something of a black mark.

Some people might say it's an odd thing to compare your law too, unless the hope is that the French bit will stick without details and help deflect criticism, which probably is true I guess.

Edited April 8, 201511 yr by Rumblecat

First, the French president is elected, unlike Prayut who had staged a coup and hence lacked legitimacy. Second, Phuttipong said Article 44 was beyond checks and balances unlike Article 16 of the French constitution in which the Constitutional Council - the Thai equivalent of the Constitutional Court - can scrutinise the conditions for the use of the power.

And that ladies and gentlemen says all you need to know about Prayut and the legitimacy of his government.

It would be interesting to see what the French gov has to say as a response. I now wonder how much longer the rest of the world will stand idly by and allow this to continue without considering sanctions.

How is article 44 modelled on the French article 16? They share no similarity at all. Article 44 gives absolute power to a person who brought himself to power with tanks and he has to consult nobody. Article 16 is based on a democratically elected President who has to consult with his PM, parliament and the constitutional council. And this clown is Prayuth's legal advisor?

Thailand Coup 2014- the gift, that keeps on giving!

Nothing similar.

Even if the texts was similar which is not the case, In France we are speaking about an elected PRESIDENT.

In Thailand you have an HEAD OF STATE + a PRIME MINISTER. None of them elected.

In art. 44, I understood that the guy taking the power would the Prime Minister. You cannot compare a Prime Minister with a President which is at the same time in charge and head of state.

yes - taking the wonderful Thai logic to its conclusion as you have pointed out, maybe the PM should charge himself with LM?

France number 1

Maybe Thailand has forgot the time they came to England and Germany to ask for help, to stop France invading them.