Call for 'reforms before elections' forces a detour in PM's road map

[Neeranam]

Who are they kidding. The new "Charter" is a blatant attempt at a power grab by the elite whereby key positions wouldn't be directly elected by the people.

Okay, so give all the Thai peoples a vote , and, What will they do..... Sell it to the highest bidder... Are you going to tell me that you believe Thai peoples who blatantly sell their very valuable vote, Are you going to tell me that those same peoples deserve a vote..? They have exactly what they deserve... A Military Junta... and luckily for them , what seems to be a caring one.... Lucky for us Farangs if we don't like it we can close the door behind us... But, as I see the countries infrastructure functioning better now than ever in my thirteen years of living in Thailand, I see happy peoples still working and still smiling, I see happy children still getting to school.... I see trains running, busses running, I see internal investment up and up... What I don't see are corrupt politicians with their noses deep in the trough of taxpayers moneys.... What did John Lennon say...."Give peace a chance"....... Stupid Farangs should keep their noses out of Thai business... and ...Give peace a chance...!! Pass a Chang please...

your last sentence explains why you talk such drivel.

What a incredibly racist ignorant post.

[lostoday]

probably one of the most informative articulate and accurate posts I have ever read on this forum, you sir area a master

If the topic of the thread was Thaksin, the bad guy, is a danger to Thailand because Thai people are too stupid to know who to vote for.

Thaksin is history this thread is about current events - get a clue.

from one extreme to the other

Nothing extreme about it. A simple request to stay of topic instead of the off topic rants about a bogey man invention of a few posters who can't deal with the reality of the situation.

The government has been in need of reforms for 70 years hardly anything new or Thaksinesque about that.

Edited June 14, 2015 by lostoday

[heybruce]

I am no Thaksin fan.

In fact, the sooner Phua Thai disengage from the Thaksin clan and stand on their own two feet, the better.

It's in their interests to do so. If they ditch the connection with Thaksin, poor people from all over Thailand will join them. The reason that these voters haven't already, is their loathing of Thaksin.

Thaksin was the first major politician to realise that in a one vote for one man democracy, a peasant's vote was worth the same as a hi-so's vote.

He also knew that the population of the north and north-east outnumbered the rest of the country.

He also knew that to gain these votes, all he had to do was throw a few crumbs to these people.

These few crumbs were more than what the previous Thai governments had given the north and north-east.

What he unwittingly did, was wake up a sleeping giant which gained political awareness and realised that their acquiescence could not be taken for granted any more.

The toothpaste has been squeezed out of the tube and the army and their backers are trying to shove it back in again.

If the Democrats ever want to get back into power via elections, instead of rigging the political process in their favour, they need to become a truly national party with policies that all the people in Thailand can relate to.

They need to come up with policies that will develop the most undeveloped parts of this country. To listen and act on the aspirations of the poor instead of just being a sock-puppet for the ruling elite and their henchmen.

When I have more time, I will educate you on the methods Thaksin employed to gain so much personal power.

Please understand that the Puea Thai Party is 100% created and owned by the Shinawatra Clan and when you speak of either, you speak of both. The UDD which supports Thaksin/PTP is made up of grass-roots Northern and Isaan people; only their leadership (many 'ex'-communists) is hand-picked and paid for by Thaksin. The UDD is not a democratic organization; they do not get to vote for their leadership.

I wish the Northerners and Isaan people had the kind of financial backing it takes to form and maintain their own independent political party. Right now, Thaksin is paying the fiddler so he gets to call the tunes. Newin Chidchob has proved his independence from Thaksin, has built several profitable businesses (without any apparent graft), is from the NE, and is a charismatic and (mostly) ethical leader but he doesn't have the money to create a nation-wide coalition. Until the non-elite of the North and Isaan can untangle themselves from being pawns of the Shinawatra Mafia Syndicate, they will get only lip-service from PTP. If they become a power in their own right, other parties will have to negotiate with them. That wasn't the case under TRT, PPP, PTP, or the Democrats. If the NCPO can greatly reduce the power/influence of the Thaksin Syndicate and the local Mafia Chiefs, maybe the intimidation of those non-elite/non-Thaksin candidates from the N and NE will lessen and it may allow local leadership to evolve so that the rural people can move past the feudal system they've been living under since forever to representational governance. Thaksin did not dismantle the feudal system, he bought off the leadership and strengthened it (Million Baht Village Fund controlled by the village head). Rural Thai, those who live in the mu baan, have no concept of the freedom that citizens from the West take for granted and their definition of democracy is highly colored (red).

In the US during the 1960s, so-called 'freedom riders' invaded the US South to inform blacks that they had rights and could influence their government to be more responsive to them. Some of those brave souls were killed (see the movie, "Mississippi Burning") but today, people of color have the political voices of their own with many aldermen, councilors, mayors, and governors coming form their ranks. Isaan and the North have been under the thumb of powerful 'Families' for generations and their vote and opportunities to hear opposing views are tightly controlled. Since Thaksin was the last to buy the 'Families' off, Thaksin is who they've hitched their wagon to and the voice of the people who live under this system can never be heard. If you want reform in Thailand you are going to have to attack and win against an entrenched mafia with tentacles and connections no one has an idea of it reach. The civilian/political mafia have made accommodation with the police mafia. Prayut really wants to get rid of that whole system because Thaksin's Mafia Civil War has cost the country too much already.

Once you understand the structure of Thai society, you can understand how the people have always been controlled by a 'big man'.

BTW, the Democrats will always be a second place party until they get rid of all the old 'mustache petes' from any kind of leadership positions. But they can't do that because those Mafia Dons control all the votes in their fiefdoms. Don't expect much from the Democrats. The PTP will be dissolved soon and its member banned for five years because of their ill-fated attempt to illegally change the constitution: 307 for: 4 abstentions, 0 against was the vote count; just as 'The Paymaster' ordered. If the Democrats, themselves, don't get dissolved, they will have a large base to form a coalition government but they will never dominate the way Thaksin's parties have. I think that is a good thing because Thaksin was attempting to turn Thailand into a Republic and making himself President-for-Life, just like his very good friend in Cambodia, 'The Thug', Hun Sen, has done, and he had the rubber stamp Parliament to implement it. If only he hadn't let the PAD's protest influence him to dissolve Parliament (Dec. 2005), he would still be PM today or maybe 'President Thaksin'. If you like the sound of 'President Thaksin', you probably won't be happy with any reforms in the new Charter or Prayut going after criminal top civil servants (firing whole lists of offenders), top corrupt police (head of CIB), top corrupt mafia/politicians (Nakhon Pathom) as these interfere with the way Thaksin's Mafia Syndicate is set up.

If you care about the Thai people that Thaksin is supposed to represent, forget about defending Thaksin and focus on the challenges of having a real democracy withing the UDD.

"Prayut really wants to get rid of that whole system because Thaksin's Mafia Civil War has cost the country too much already."

"Once you understand the structure of Thai society, you can understand how the people have always been controlled by a 'big man'."

So you think replacing an elected big man with an unelected big man is going to fix things? That is where we disagree.

As has already been pointed out, the topic isn't about Thaksin. However I will point out that the Thai people are showing signs of political maturity beyond what you describe above. Had there been a 2014 election the PTP would have suffered greatly, at best it would have been forced into a broad coalition government, and it might have lost its lead to another party. However the Democrats also would have done poorly, which is why they chose the undemocratic approach of boycotting the election. More important than that, Prayuth and others didn't want an elected government, which is why the coup was staged.

Back on topic, do you think this joke of a charter is going to lead to a functioning democratic government in Thailand? I think it will lead to unconvincing veneer of democracy, while those that Prayuth considers "good people" will have all the power. These good people didn't care about Isaan before Thaksin, and they won't care about Isaan once democratic government is safely contained.

[lostoday]

I feel like a little kid watching a parade and there is a guy in the parade with no clothes. Am I the only one

who wants to know what reforms?

reforms before elections

What reforms? Spell them out 1,2,3,4 and so on.

I think the basis of the reforms are reforming the definition of democratic elections from one vote per one man to; you can vote for whoever you want but I will appoint the majority that makes the rules and on those you can't vote. Did I get that correct?

Edited June 14, 2015 by lostoday

[smedly]

I feel like a little kid watching a parade and there is a guy in the parade with no clothes. Am I the only one

who wants to know what reforms?

reforms before elections

What reforms? Spell them out 1,2,3,4 and so on.

I think the basis of the reforms are reforming the definition of democratic elections from one vote per one man to; you can vote for whoever you want but I will appoint the majority that makes the rules and on those you can't vote. Did I get that correct?

is being ignored a common feature in you life

see how many actually reply to your instructions

[lostoday]

I feel like a little kid watching a parade and there is a guy in the parade with no clothes. Am I the only one

who wants to know what reforms?

reforms before elections

What reforms? Spell them out 1,2,3,4 and so on.

I think the basis of the reforms are reforming the definition of democratic elections from one vote per one man to; you can vote for whoever you want but I will appoint the majority that makes the rules and on those you can't vote. Did I get that correct?

is being ignored a common feature in you life

see how many actually reply to your instructions

I'm not flaming anyone you are. I asked a simple question. That you don't know the answer to. So, like the bully in kindergarten you make fun of the person who asks the question because you don't know the answer.

Smedly I'll bet you can't answer the question that is the basis of this thread. What are the reforms?

[rubl]

I feel like a little kid watching a parade and there is a guy in the parade with no clothes. Am I the only one

who wants to know what reforms?

reforms before elections

What reforms? Spell them out 1,2,3,4 and so on.

I think the basis of the reforms are reforming the definition of democratic elections from one vote per one man to; you can vote for whoever you want but I will appoint the majority that makes the rules and on those you can't vote. Did I get that correct?

is being ignored a common feature in you life

see how many actually reply to your instructions

I'm not flaming anyone you are. I asked a simple question. That you don't know the answer to. So, like the bully in kindergarten you make fun of the person who asks the question because you don't know the answer.

Smedly I'll bet you can't answer the question that is the basis of this thread. What are the reforms?

To help you two, the reforms are listed with some details in part 2 "Various Fields of Reform" section 281 - 296 in the draft Charter. tbthailand posted a link to the English version draft of April 2015 before.

[lostoday]

I feel like a little kid watching a parade and there is a guy in the parade with no clothes. Am I the only one

who wants to know what reforms?

reforms before elections

What reforms? Spell them out 1,2,3,4 and so on.

I think the basis of the reforms are reforming the definition of democratic elections from one vote per one man to; you can vote for whoever you want but I will appoint the majority that makes the rules and on those you can't vote. Did I get that correct?

is being ignored a common feature in you life

see how many actually reply to your instructions

I'm not flaming anyone you are. I asked a simple question. That you don't know the answer to. So, like the bully in kindergarten you make fun of the person who asks the question because you don't know the answer.

Smedly I'll bet you can't answer the question that is the basis of this thread. What are the reforms?

To help you two, the reforms are listed with some details in part 2 "Various Fields of Reform" section 281 - 296 in the draft Charter. tbthailand posted a link to the English version draft of April 2015 before.

The national reforms dictated by the constitution reflect the demands of the anti-government protesters who wanted an unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics.

I think that about sums it up. If you have anything factual to add feel free.

Edited June 14, 2015 by lostoday

[rubl]

is being ignored a common feature in you life

see how many actually reply to your instructions

I'm not flaming anyone you are. I asked a simple question. That you don't know the answer to. So, like the bully in kindergarten you make fun of the person who asks the question because you don't know the answer.

Smedly I'll bet you can't answer the question that is the basis of this thread. What are the reforms?

To help you two, the reforms are listed with some details in part 2 "Various Fields of Reform" section 281 - 296 in the draft Charter. tbthailand posted a link to the English version draft of April 2015 before.

The national reforms dictated by the constitution reflect the demands of the anti-government protesters who wanted an unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics.

I think that about sums it up. If you have anything factual to add feel free.

That sums up your opinion and that of others who are opposed. As such you didn't add any factual either.

Don't worry, I just wanted to make sure you that both of you knew what we talk about here

[lostoday]

I'm not flaming anyone you are. I asked a simple question. That you don't know the answer to. So, like the bully in kindergarten you make fun of the person who asks the question because you don't know the answer.

Smedly I'll bet you can't answer the question that is the basis of this thread. What are the reforms?

To help you two, the reforms are listed with some details in part 2 "Various Fields of Reform" section 281 - 296 in the draft Charter. tbthailand posted a link to the English version draft of April 2015 before.

The national reforms dictated by the constitution reflect the demands of the anti-government protesters who wanted an unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics.

I think that about sums it up. If you have anything factual to add feel free.

That sums up your opinion and that of others who are opposed. As such you didn't add any factual either.

Don't worry, I just wanted to make sure you that both of you knew what we talk about here

You think so eh? You are out of your depth here Rubi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_interim_constitution_of_Thailand

[rubl]

To help you two, the reforms are listed with some details in part 2 "Various Fields of Reform" section 281 - 296 in the draft Charter. tbthailand posted a link to the English version draft of April 2015 before.

The national reforms dictated by the constitution reflect the demands of the anti-government protesters who wanted an unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics.

I think that about sums it up. If you have anything factual to add feel free.

That sums up your opinion and that of others who are opposed. As such you didn't add any factual either.

Don't worry, I just wanted to make sure you that both of you knew what we talk about here

You think so eh? You are out of your depth here Rubi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_interim_constitution_of_Thailand

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

[ikke]

Can anyone please write here what exactly these reforms are , and if there has been any reform carried out so far ?

Would be happy to read some, but until now I haven't seen any reform except from getting rid of the Taksin clan.

[lostoday]

The national reforms dictated by the constitution reflect the demands of the anti-government protesters who wanted an unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics.

I think that about sums it up. If you have anything factual to add feel free.

That sums up your opinion and that of others who are opposed. As such you didn't add any factual either.

Don't worry, I just wanted to make sure you that both of you knew what we talk about here

You think so eh? You are out of your depth here Rubi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_interim_constitution_of_Thailand

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

I read it and it says the same thing. " The national reforms concern unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics. I posted the information before. Like I said you are out of your depth here better stick to topics that are less intellectually demanding. You got called. Time to show the information (details on reforms) if you have any. You don't.

The constitution has been criticized for failing to precisely specify when the reforms would be published. No one has any information more than I presented on the reforms. Vague references requiring me to find information that is nonexistent does not work.

[lostoday]

Can anyone please write here what exactly these reforms are , and if there has been any reform carried out so far ?

Would be happy to read some, but until now I haven't seen any reform except from getting rid of the Taksin clan.

Good question. I've been asking all night.

[rubl]

That sums up your opinion and that of others who are opposed. As such you didn't add any factual either.

Don't worry, I just wanted to make sure you that both of you knew what we talk about here

You think so eh? You are out of your depth here Rubi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_interim_constitution_of_Thailand

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

I read it and it says the same thing. " The national reforms concern unelected reform council to carry out national reforms with a view to eradicating the influence of Yingluck and Thaksin in Thai politics. I posted the information before. Like I said you are out of your depth here better stick to topics that are less intellectually demanding. You got called. Time to show the information (details on reforms) if you have any. You don't.

The constitution has been criticized for failing to precisely specify when the reforms would be published. No one has any information more than I presented on the reforms. Vague references requiring me to find information that is nonexistent does not work.

Well thank you very much for your expert opinion. Let me rest the little bit of intellect I have, it's 11PM anyway. I leave to topic for others to obfuscate on.

BTW a grep on Thaksin or Yingluck doesn't get any hit in either Interim or draft constitution. Strange. Even Shinawatra or Pheu Thai is not mentioned.

So, reforms as described in the draft constitution. No need to find non-existing info, just read the draft.

[rubl]

Can anyone please write here what exactly these reforms are , and if there has been any reform carried out so far ?

Would be happy to read some, but until now I haven't seen any reform except from getting rid of the Taksin clan.

Good question. I've been asking all night.

Well, if you don't want to read the draft constitution with part 2 article 281 - 296, you'll never know.

The 'get rid of Thaksin' isn't even mentioned by the way, but maybe that's implicit with ban on convicts, fugitives and so.

Enjoy your evening chaps.

[lostoday]

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

I told you before that I read it. Go ahead and post the sections you refer to.

http://www.student-weekly.com/pdf/200415-constitution-en.pdf

Here's one.

In order to execute the reform on science and technology under this section promptly and continuously, the Committee on national reform of science and technology shall be established within one year as from the date that this Constitution is promulgated. It shall have duties to reform the education and develop human in all aspects of life, to prescribe policies, strategic plans, to scrutinize the allocation of budget on education and human development including conducting and improving all laws necessary to resolve any obstacles to the development of science and technology of the country.

Or maybe you like this one.

to amend the law in order to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition. The law shall promote free and fair competition between businesses, amongst the private sector, and between the state enterprises and private sector. This shall include a prevention of large business operators to abuse their dominant powers. In the case where it is necessary for the state to monopolize in a business which is beneficial to the majority of the public, the state shall supervise in order to ensure fairness to the consumers.

This is one of my favorites.

Any act done by a person holding political position, State official or the owner of business with a view to obstruct or interfere the presentation of news or an expression of opinions in public issue of the person under paragraph one or paragraph two, irrespective of whether such act has been done directly or indirectly, shall be deemed as wilfully misuse of power and take no effect except where such act has been done through the enforcement of law or professional ethics.

[rubl]

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

I told you before that I read it. Go ahead and post the sections you refer to.

http://www.student-weekly.com/pdf/200415-constitution-en.pdf

Here's one.

In order to execute the reform on science and technology under this section promptly and continuously, the Committee on national reform of science and technology shall be established within one year as from the date that this Constitution is promulgated. It shall have duties to reform the education and develop human in all aspects of life, to prescribe policies, strategic plans, to scrutinize the allocation of budget on education and human development including conducting and improving all laws necessary to resolve any obstacles to the development of science and technology of the country.

Or maybe you like this one.

to amend the law in order to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition. The law shall promote free and fair competition between businesses, amongst the private sector, and between the state enterprises and private sector. This shall include a prevention of large business operators to abuse their dominant powers. In the case where it is necessary for the state to monopolize in a business which is beneficial to the majority of the public, the state shall supervise in order to ensure fairness to the consumers.

This is one of my favorites.

Any act done by a person holding political position, State official or the owner of business with a view to obstruct or interfere the presentation of news or an expression of opinions in public issue of the person under paragraph one or paragraph two, irrespective of whether such act has been done directly or indirectly, shall be deemed as wilfully misuse of power and take no effect except where such act has been done through the enforcement of law or professional ethics.

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

[graft]

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

I told you before that I read it. Go ahead and post the sections you refer to.

http://www.student-weekly.com/pdf/200415-constitution-en.pdf

Here's one.

In order to execute the reform on science and technology under this section promptly and continuously, the Committee on national reform of science and technology shall be established within one year as from the date that this Constitution is promulgated. It shall have duties to reform the education and develop human in all aspects of life, to prescribe policies, strategic plans, to scrutinize the allocation of budget on education and human development including conducting and improving all laws necessary to resolve any obstacles to the development of science and technology of the country.

Or maybe you like this one.

to amend the law in order to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition. The law shall promote free and fair competition between businesses, amongst the private sector, and between the state enterprises and private sector. This shall include a prevention of large business operators to abuse their dominant powers. In the case where it is necessary for the state to monopolize in a business which is beneficial to the majority of the public, the state shall supervise in order to ensure fairness to the consumers.

This is one of my favorites.

Any act done by a person holding political position, State official or the owner of business with a view to obstruct or interfere the presentation of news or an expression of opinions in public issue of the person under paragraph one or paragraph two, irrespective of whether such act has been done directly or indirectly, shall be deemed as wilfully misuse of power and take no effect except where such act has been done through the enforcement of law or professional ethics.

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

I'm sure you'll be able to confirm, but aren't the extracts that lostoday posted above a sample of those very articles you keep on about? That being the case surely you can see what he and others are questioning - the lack of details of the supposed "reforms". It's all legalese about the supposed aim but with "no flesh on the bones".

For example, the reform "to amend the law to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition". Not one word on how this is to be achieved, it's just hot air. Can you honestly imagine this reform being applied to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly of CP? - it's not going to happen.

as for the misuse of power of a person holding a political position..........who's going to determine that, the new Ministry of Morals applying Prayuths preachy value set?

It is all so reminiscent of Sutheps strident calls for "Reforms before Election" but with no definition of what those reforms should be.

Perhaps the last word on what this is really all about should be from the man himself, no, not Suthep, the other one;

“Laws will be modernised so we can have good and honest people to run the country."

Ah, the "good people" argument, as long as they are our "good people".

Edited June 15, 2015 by graft

[lostoday]

I told you before that I read it. Go ahead and post the sections you refer to.

http://www.student-weekly.com/pdf/200415-constitution-en.pdf

Here's one.

In order to execute the reform on science and technology under this section promptly and continuously, the Committee on national reform of science and technology shall be established within one year as from the date that this Constitution is promulgated. It shall have duties to reform the education and develop human in all aspects of life, to prescribe policies, strategic plans, to scrutinize the allocation of budget on education and human development including conducting and improving all laws necessary to resolve any obstacles to the development of science and technology of the country.

Or maybe you like this one.

to amend the law in order to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition. The law shall promote free and fair competition between businesses, amongst the private sector, and between the state enterprises and private sector. This shall include a prevention of large business operators to abuse their dominant powers. In the case where it is necessary for the state to monopolize in a business which is beneficial to the majority of the public, the state shall supervise in order to ensure fairness to the consumers.

This is one of my favorites.

Any act done by a person holding political position, State official or the owner of business with a view to obstruct or interfere the presentation of news or an expression of opinions in public issue of the person under paragraph one or paragraph two, irrespective of whether such act has been done directly or indirectly, shall be deemed as wilfully misuse of power and take no effect except where such act has been done through the enforcement of law or professional ethics.

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

You are confusing people. It is not "article" it is "section." If you google article you get no where. If you google section you find the information. There is a reason you don't post any of the information like I did. Why don't you tell the people.

[rubl]

I'm just having a discussion in the "2010" topic with Baboon, about "I read it on the Internet, so it must be true"

BTW the Interim Constitution is just that, interim. May I suggest you read the draft constitution (English version of April 2015) which gives details on the reforms as I indicated before.

I told you before that I read it. Go ahead and post the sections you refer to.

http://www.student-weekly.com/pdf/200415-constitution-en.pdf

Here's one.

In order to execute the reform on science and technology under this section promptly and continuously, the Committee on national reform of science and technology shall be established within one year as from the date that this Constitution is promulgated. It shall have duties to reform the education and develop human in all aspects of life, to prescribe policies, strategic plans, to scrutinize the allocation of budget on education and human development including conducting and improving all laws necessary to resolve any obstacles to the development of science and technology of the country.

Or maybe you like this one.

to amend the law in order to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition. The law shall promote free and fair competition between businesses, amongst the private sector, and between the state enterprises and private sector. This shall include a prevention of large business operators to abuse their dominant powers. In the case where it is necessary for the state to monopolize in a business which is beneficial to the majority of the public, the state shall supervise in order to ensure fairness to the consumers.

This is one of my favorites.

Any act done by a person holding political position, State official or the owner of business with a view to obstruct or interfere the presentation of news or an expression of opinions in public issue of the person under paragraph one or paragraph two, irrespective of whether such act has been done directly or indirectly, shall be deemed as wilfully misuse of power and take no effect except where such act has been done through the enforcement of law or professional ethics.

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

I'm sure you'll be able to confirm, but aren't the extracts that lostoday posted above a sample of those very articles you keep on about? That being the case surely you can see what he and others are questioning - the lack of details of the supposed "reforms". It's all legalese about the supposed aim but with "no flesh on the bones".

For example, the reform "to amend the law to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly and restriction to competition". Not one word on how this is to be achieved, it's just hot air. Can you honestly imagine this reform being applied to systematically and effectively prevent, reduce, restrict or destroy monopoly of CP? - it's not going to happen.

as for the misuse of power of a person holding a political position..........who's going to determine that, the new Ministry of Morals applying Prayuths preachy value set?

It is all so reminiscent of Sutheps strident calls for "Reforms before Election" but with no definition of what those reforms should be.

Perhaps the last word on what this is really all about should be from the man himself, no, not Suthep, the other one;

“Laws will be modernised so we can have good and honest people to run the country."

Ah, the "good people" argument, as long as they are our "good people".

This may surprise you, but if a few sentences are taken out of the draft constitution I am not able to immediately recognise from which section they come.

So, you both found the articles on reforms. Why keep on asking for me to point them out then?

As for interpretation, go ahead.

[rubl]

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

You are confusing people. It is not "article" it is "section." If you google article you get no where. If you google section you find the information. There is a reason you don't post any of the information like I did. Why don't you tell the people.

Terribly sorry if I confused you. I will try to be more consistent in naming sections sections, including S44.

BTW I understand that even without my articles you still found the information on reforms. After graft pointing this out I could indeed see that the sentences you quoted came from the articles sections 281 - 296. Mind you, since you found the info on reforms I'm wondering why you asked for it.

[lostoday]

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

You are confusing people. It is not "article" it is "section." If you google article you get no where. If you google section you find the information. There is a reason you don't post any of the information like I did. Why don't you tell the people.

Terribly sorry if I confused you. I will try to be more consistent in naming sections sections, including S44.

BTW I understand that even without my articles you still found the information on reforms. After graft pointing this out I could indeed see that the sentences you quoted came from the articles sections 281 - 296. Mind you, since you found the info on reforms I'm wondering why you asked for it.

Because anyone reading the reforms comes to the same conclusion Bloomberg came to.

"The draft constitution presented in Thailand last week grants "everything that every citizen ever felt the need to fight for," according to the junta-appointed committee that wrote it. By diminishing the role of those same citizens in government, however, it’s far more likely to prolong the country's political stalemate."

That's why you will not post any of the reforms. Posting them would make you look foolish.

[rubl]

What reforms? Well, read the document you posted, especially part 2 article 281 - 296.

You are confusing people. It is not "article" it is "section." If you google article you get no where. If you google section you find the information. There is a reason you don't post any of the information like I did. Why don't you tell the people.

Terribly sorry if I confused you. I will try to be more consistent in naming sections sections, including S44.

BTW I understand that even without my articles you still found the information on reforms. After graft pointing this out I could indeed see that the sentences you quoted came from the articles sections 281 - 296. Mind you, since you found the info on reforms I'm wondering why you asked for it.

Because anyone reading the reforms comes to the same conclusion Bloomberg came to.

"The draft constitution presented in Thailand last week grants "everything that every citizen ever felt the need to fight for," according to the junta-appointed committee that wrote it. By diminishing the role of those same citizens in government, however, it’s far more likely to prolong the country's political stalemate."

That's why you will not post any of the reforms. Posting them would make you look foolish.

Well, it would seem not anyone reading the draft charter comes to the same conclusion as Bloomberg.

BTW you posted the draft charter as PDF, I listed which articles sections describe the reforms. Why do you want me to post 16 articles sections? Can you not open the PDF yourself? Are you afraid posters don't know how to handle PDFs? I'm afraid the mods wouldn't welcome me to post 16 articles sections which I would probably have to split over a dozen page long posts in order to avoid encountering limits in the forum software.

PS the Bloomberg quote comes from this editorial

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-20/thailand-needs-elected-leaders-not-a-new-constitution

Interesting that Bloombergs editors don't like a proportional representation. Coming from a 'somewhat' democratic country like the Netherlands I find that curious to say the least. Almost as if coalition governments are bad and single party government good. Aren't politicians supposed to be able to cooperate, work for the good of the country and so?

[phoenixdoglover]

Can anyone please write here what exactly these reforms are , and if there has been any reform carried out so far ?

Would be happy to read some, but until now I haven't seen any reform except from getting rid of the Taksin clan.

Good question. I've been asking all night.

Well, if you don't want to read the draft constitution with part 2 article 281 - 296, you'll never know.

The 'get rid of Thaksin' isn't even mentioned by the way, but maybe that's implicit with ban on convicts, fugitives and so.

Enjoy your evening chaps.

Here is a summary:

Under the general heading

Part 2, Various Fields of Reforms

Section 281 - one sentence introduction

Sections 282 to 296 - lists of suggested reforms grouped under various headings. In total, 77 reform items are listed.

However, what is more interesting is what is contained in the preceding sections in Part 1.

For the benefit of the continuous reform of the country, there shall be the National Reform Assembly and the National Reform Strategy Committee which shall consist of the following persons and origins: (1) the National Reform Assembly shall consist of members not exceeding one hundred and twenty persons, whom are appointed by the King....

The National Reform Assembly and the National Reform Strategy Committee shall have the following powers and duties...

...proposing policies and recommendation for reform

...present plans and procedure

...promote education, research, and publication

...create and develop potentials of the public to be good citizens

...follow up and evaluate the work of related agencies

In other words, a very large Committee will be created, entirely appointed, and with no power to implement reforms whatsoever.

I'm not kidding. But such is the nature of most of the Committees described in the Draft Charter. They are:

- appointed from the elite segments of society, with a focus on institutions that are headquartered in Bangkok

- get involved in almost everything

- and have no real power

I believe they are designed to "gum up the works" of the actual legislative bodies.

In this context, I would view those Part 2 Sections as "wish lists" only.

As for the 77 individual reform ideas, I read through many of them, and while some of them look worthy, others are downright confusing. Unlike other parts of the Draft Charter, these Sections suffer from poor translation; which suggests problems with the original Thai text.

If I had the editor's pen, I would replace all these Sections, with a simple statement.

"On the first day of the first term of the National Assembly (House and Senate), the National Reform Committee shall submit a list of proposed reforms, with proposed legislative language where applicable, for consideration by the National Assembly. The National Reform Committee shall thereafter be dissolved."

Edited June 15, 2015 by phoenixdoglover

[lostoday]

Terribly sorry if I confused you. I will try to be more consistent in naming sections sections, including S44.

BTW I understand that even without my articles you still found the information on reforms. After graft pointing this out I could indeed see that the sentences you quoted came from the articles sections 281 - 296. Mind you, since you found the info on reforms I'm wondering why you asked for it.

Because anyone reading the reforms comes to the same conclusion Bloomberg came to.

"The draft constitution presented in Thailand last week grants "everything that every citizen ever felt the need to fight for," according to the junta-appointed committee that wrote it. By diminishing the role of those same citizens in government, however, it’s far more likely to prolong the country's political stalemate."

That's why you will not post any of the reforms. Posting them would make you look foolish.

Well, it would seem not anyone reading the draft charter comes to the same conclusion as Bloomberg.

BTW you posted the draft charter as PDF, I listed which articles sections describe the reforms. Why do you want me to post 16 articles sections? Can you not open the PDF yourself? Are you afraid posters don't know how to handle PDFs? I'm afraid the mods wouldn't welcome me to post 16 articles sections which I would probably have to split over a dozen page long posts in order to avoid encountering limits in the forum software.

PS the Bloomberg quote comes from this editorial

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-20/thailand-needs-elected-leaders-not-a-new-constitution

Interesting that Bloombergs editors don't like a proportional representation. Coming from a 'somewhat' democratic country like the Netherlands I find that curious to say the least. Almost as if coalition governments are bad and single party government good. Aren't politicians supposed to be able to cooperate, work for the good of the country and so?

If you are not afraid to discuss any of the reforms why don't you list the ones you think will work? Have you found the reform that says, "change of governments shall not be by force?"

[baboon]

Actually it was democratic as everyone and his dog knew who was actually calling the shots for the previous government, but voted them in anyway.

I remember at the time thinking those voters must be mental, but it was their choice. Given enough time, the PTP may well have been hounded out of office via the ballot box - the correct way to do things as agreed by most bar a few cranks/fascists on here.

Edited June 16, 2015 by baboon

[theoldgit]

Members have differing views on this subject, that's fine but please keep it civil.

[rubl]

Actually it was democratic as everyone and his dog knew who was actually calling the shots for the previous government, but voted them in anyway.

I remember at the time thinking those voters must be mental, but it was their choice. Given enough time, the PTP may well have been hounded out of office via the ballot box - the correct way to do things as agreed by most bar a few cranks/fascists on here.

Well, that's one of the reasons reforms are needed. To prevent that criminal fugitives can fool the population in voting for his proxy so he can run the country to his liking.

Of course it would be nice to let some criminals run the place till they're amassed enough dough, but to prevent them to get in helps a democracy a bit more. 'stable, horse, gate' and so.

[LannaGuy]

Actually it was democratic as everyone and his dog knew who was actually calling the shots for the previous government, but voted them in anyway.

I remember at the time thinking those voters must be mental, but it was their choice. Given enough time, the PTP may well have been hounded out of office via the ballot box - the correct way to do things as agreed by most bar a few cranks/fascists on here.

Well, that's one of the reasons reforms are needed. To prevent that criminal fugitives can fool the population in voting for his proxy so he can run the country to his liking.

Of course it would be nice to let some criminals run the place till they're amassed enough dough, but to prevent them to get in helps a democracy a bit more. 'stable, horse, gate' and so.

more twaddle from Rubl as the ousted PM has NEVER been accused, charged or indicted for ANY crime

the old 'we don't trust the electorate so we, the elite, have to save them from themselves' should be consigned to the bin of history and no decent, honest and freedom loving person would defend such anti-democratic rhetoric.

Except, of course, a few right wing fascist farangs who think they know better and what's 'good for Thailand'