NRC panels oppose judicial body changes

[webfact]

NRC panels oppose judicial body changes
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- THE NATIONAL Reform Council's panel on law and justice reform has teamed up with the NRC's panel on political reform to seek the removal of provisions in the draft charter that may undermine the independence of the judiciary.

Seree Suwanpanont, chairman of the law and justice panel, was responding yesterday to a protest by 1,130 judges who had signed their names against the move to increase the proportion of "outsiders" or non-judges on the Judicial Commission to one-third.

The panels also want to change the provisions that allow the commission's resolutions to be challenged.

The two panels believe these two provisions may expose the judicial branch to outside interference, which would fracture the constitutional system of checks and balances.

The opposition by the judges could hurt the chances that the new charter will be accepted. The Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) should review its decision, Seree said.

Udom Fuangfoong, an NRC member and former Supreme Court vice president, said he joined the two panels because there was no justification to increasing outsiders on the Judicial Commission.

He also rejected appeals of commission's rulings, saying the draft charter was framed in a way that was wide open to interpretation.

"The CDC should not change what is already good - this is not reform," he said.

Paiboon Nititawan, a CDC member, said the CDC had no idea of letting outsiders meddle in judicial affairs but wanted to bring the Judicial Commission closer to the people.

Since many judges disapproved of the provisions, the CDC was willing to review them.

He said he would propose that only two specialists who are non-judges can become members of the Judicial Commission.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NRC-panels-oppose-judicial-body-changes-30262550.html

-- The Nation 2015-06-18

[Bannum opinions]

"The two panels believe these two provisions may expose the judicial branch to outside interference, which would fracture the constitutional system of checks and balances"

With all due respect to Thailand's eminent judges, why is it that when it comes to politically related 'judging', the majority side of the electorate screams bloody murder about double standards all the time. They see the judicial system as being in the pocket of the anti-democrats. The fracturing referenced in this quote is a fact for many already.......How does one 'unfracture " it?

It is too bad that the judiciary is seen as such by so many......Beginning with Thaksin's removal as PM and the subsequent demonization campaign using the judiciary as cover.... plus Samak's cooking thing...... unequal application to what used to be 'red' or 'yellow' just by looking at who is jailed and who is not, etc...... there are myriad examples of how those challenging Democratic results have used the judiciary as cover....Even today, Yingluck is pursued in this manner.....This reality continues even thought that previous red-yellow divide has morphed into a clear Democracy/Anti-democracy divide.

No-one would argue that in a straight-up election, without tampering to advantage one side, Yingluck would win an election massively.

Not sure how that imbalance can be fixed....How they could ensure that politically, these judges don't come from one side of the political divide. Short of turfing the whole bunch and starting over...But how would one vet political intentions of those who replace the current group dismissed by a huge sector of the electorate.

Only when both sides declare faith and trust in the judiciary with respect to political stuff, can one say the problem is fixed...One side of that divide is far removed from such declarations.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Bannum opinions

[bangkokfrog]

Sounds like some people don't want to be held to account. Forget the political side. How about sentencing an old couple to 15 years in jail for picking mushrooms in a forest (as their forefathers have probably done for generations), but let spoiled rich kids free on bail for horrendous crimes knowng that if truly guilty they have the means and opportunity to skip the country? The Thai judicual system is a joke, with no sense of checks and balances or legal precedence. It is all up to the whim or mood of the judge on the day.

Edited June 18, 2015 by bangkokfrog

[geriatrickid]

I have the impression that some don't want their business segment interfered with. Everyone likes competition until it impacts their bottom line.

[timewilltell]

The Thai judiciary apply a strange mindset bereft of any understanding of the princikes of Justice and preside over a set of laws that they twist out to f reality. I am certain they need far more than a few non- judges on the commission, they need to be reeducated and held to account.

I agree that there should be limited political interference but not that there should be no political sway. The judges are appointed to uphold the law, laws that are made by politicians who are supposed to implement laws according to the ideals of the people who voted them in.

New judges should not all come from the same political camp and should be those that are most capable of proper interpretation of the law. The several I have had the misfortune to meet are incapable of writing a judgement so I hold them in rather low esteem. Or maybe they are really bright and just the n the take.

[greenchair]

The very thing that the judge's are opposing.

Is the same as what the judge's have helped impose on the Thai people.

Not very nice, is it! !!!

[Srikcir]

"outside interference, which would fracture the constitutional system of checks and balances."

Where was the voice of all these judges when the NCPO abolished the 2007 Constitution? Or any of the previous constitutions?

They should have all resigned en masse as a protest to the violation of the checks and balances in place. But not a word of protest from one judge, even when the NCPO invoked Article 44 which gave the NCPO judicial power even over the Supreme Court.

Their silence in exchange for protection of their jobs might be considered CORRUPTION.

[Fat Haggis]

The Thai Judiciary and it's interpretations of Justice should be HIGH on the reforms list..

[phoenixdoglover]

"Under the present system, judges summerize [sic] testimony and record the summary by tape-cassette recorders. Court reporters then transcribe the summary in typewriting. Later on, judges read the transcript and allow witnesses, parties and lawyers to review the transcript. Judges have the authority to correct the transcript if there are any argument. The transcript will be signed by all of them by the end of the hearing session."

http://www.aseanlawassociation.org/docs/w1_thai.pdf

This was written in 2004. Is it still true today?

Can you imagine the potential for abuse and corruption, and the insufficiency of the appeals process, when the only official record of testimony is a Judge's summary?