UDD calls for 1997 Constitution reinstallation

[Lite Beer]

UDD calls for 1997 Constitution reinstallation
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) issued a statement on Sunday, calling for the immediate reinstallation of the 1997 Constitution following the charter draft was shot down.

It said the drafting process was illegitimate, with the self-imposed drafting team and rejection. It called for someone to take responsibility for the failure.

"As the process is illegitimate, we call for the immediate reinstallation of the 1997 Constitution, to lead the country towards a democratic election," UDD said in the statement. It also urged for a new mechanism involving the general public in forming a new drafting committee and charting the reform process.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/UDD-calls-for-1997-Constitution-reinstallation-30268248.html

-- The Nation 2015-09-06

[Artisi]

Probably the most useful comment this week.

[LannaGuy]

and so now we enter the 'waking up and smelling the coffee' stage

[Nickymaster]

Next they gonna mention that the amnesty bill to clear Thaksin if his crimes must be brought back too?

[smutcakes]

Next they gonna mention that the amnesty bill to clear Thaksin if his crimes must be brought back too?

In English?

[heybruce]

But, but, but....it's democratic! And the majority keep electing people that the "quality people" (rich generals, the mad monk, etc) don't like!

[Reigntax]

Next they gonna mention that the amnesty bill to clear Thaksin if his crimes must be brought back too?

The only amnesty sought and granted was by the self appointed pm after committing treason. He can hardly complain about Thaksin although I enjoy knowing his mere existance annoys and scares the hell out of this junta.

Thaksin must be laughing his head off watching them fumble through their daily stuffups and hypocritical policy announcements.

[DKUNPUTAF713]

I whole-heartily agree with the1997 People's Constitution!!!

Just delete Article 112!!!

[Jon Wetherall]

Probably the most useful comment this week.

Agree. Shrewd as well. I always know when I'm starting to feel hungry, my tummy rumbles. Always quietly at first.

[rubl]

Well, why not the 2007 version as improved on the 1997 version with seven years more experience and 'known' areas to improve?

"Deconstructing Thailand's (New) Eighteenth Constitution

Vitit Muntarbhorn"

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

[Nickymaster]

Next they gonna mention that the amnesty bill to clear Thaksin if his crimes must be brought back too?

In English?

ok. When in power, Thaksin's team tried desperately to pass a bill that would clear him of all the crimes he had committed.

One more time? Just let me know.

[MaxLee]

As long as the rich and influential peeps on either side only get attitude adjustments or Warning-4-EVER warnings-but-never-jailed-or-punished, we will be in an eternal loop of saving face

[h90]

Well, why not the 2007 version as improved on the 1997 version with seven years more experience and 'known' areas to improve?

"Deconstructing Thailand's (New) Eighteenth Constitution

Vitit Muntarbhorn"

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

If I recall right the people voted for the 2007 constitution but they never had a referendum for the 1997 constitution so the UDD calls for the most undemocratic constitution.

1997 gave the PM more power than the previous one, therefor they like it....

[rubl]

Thank you for the link.

It cetainly shows how low those drug dealers were. The "cut-off killings" the drug dealers did to innoccent people just to silence them. cut-off killings, families and innocent protected. Makes a person wish more of the drug dealers would have been taken out.

I know of villages that applauded the kiliings. Villagers said everyone knew who was dealing drugs and where but were afraid to try and stop it.When the dealers were killed the villagers felt safer and felt their children were going to be spared from doing drugs. Villagers who were victims to these very bad people felt no remorse to see them killed. They knew no more"cut-off killings' and could live without fear of drug dealers killing anyone they feared would tell on them.

Interesting debate on good and bad killings, I'm sure the UDD of the topic would agree with you.

Let's hope that point of view doesn't get into a constitution though.

[metisdead]

Off topic baiting posts and replies have been removed.

[greenchair]

Well, why not the 2007 version as improved on the 1997 version with seven years more experience and 'known' areas to improve?

"Deconstructing Thailand's (New) Eighteenth Constitution

Vitit Muntarbhorn"

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

If I recall right the people voted for the 2007 constitution but they never had a referendum for the 1997 constitution so the UDD calls for the most undemocratic constitution.

1997 gave the PM more power than the previous one, therefor they like it....

No, the people were told that if they did not accept the 2007 constitution, they could not have elections. The 2007 constitution, changed an elected senate to be an appointed senate.

The 1997 constitution was the first constitution drafted while the country had a democratic government. It is known as the people's constitution, because it had so many human rights and environmental protections. I personally thought it was written beautifully. It is one of the few thai constitutions that might stand the test of time, albeit with a few changes.

Have you read it from beginning to end? ?

[h90]

Well, why not the 2007 version as improved on the 1997 version with seven years more experience and 'known' areas to improve?

"Deconstructing Thailand's (New) Eighteenth Constitution

Vitit Muntarbhorn"

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

If I recall right the people voted for the 2007 constitution but they never had a referendum for the 1997 constitution so the UDD calls for the most undemocratic constitution.

1997 gave the PM more power than the previous one, therefor they like it....

No, the people were told that if they did not accept the 2007 constitution, they could not have elections. The 2007 constitution, changed an elected senate to be an appointed senate.

The 1997 constitution was the first constitution drafted while the country had a democratic government. It is known as the people's constitution, because it had so many human rights and environmental protections. I personally thought it was written beautifully. It is one of the few thai constitutions that might stand the test of time, albeit with a few changes.

Have you read it from beginning to end? ?

The first thing is a lie....It was told many times that if the 2007 constitution is not accepted a modified 1997 constitution will be made + elections.

And appointed senate is the only senate that makes sense. If you have the elected wife and gardener of the politicians as senate it is pointless than you could cancel it all together.

And even if you would be right, the 2007 was approved by the people. The 1997 not.

No I did not read the 1997 constitution because it is a lost time. It is a failed constitution, see all the power abuses of Thaksin and him placing everywhere his cronies. He handpick the army boss (his brother), police and tried to go into the courts as well....separation of power??

I don't know the 2015 constitution but I doubt that the environmental protection will be reduced.

And for the record.....I'll not read the 2015 constitution because it will fail again and most probably it is full of mistakes like the 2007. It is complete nonsense to write a new constitution if you could copy/paste one from a other country.

[seajae]

just add the bit about mp's and corruption and that any one convicted of a crime being not allowed to stand as well as having to serve jail time etc with no protection if they are currently sitting mp's and found to have committed an offence, most will refuse to stand after that on both sides. Remove the protections that are currently installed, make any conviction a lifetime ban and also add the ability to convict defendants whether they are in the country or not and with no time limits/cut offs on the convictions. This would certainly start to make the country behave a touch better than they do now as well as stop the criminal element running overseas to avoid jail time while returning once the time limits have expired.

[Bluespunk]

Who gives a crap what stormtrooper street thugs who have no respect for any point of view that goes against theirs want?

They have no respect for democracy or alternate political voices.

<deleted> 'em.

[waitforusalso]

The 2007 referendum was a joke. By saying the referendum gives it more validity is showing ignorance.

[Jon Wetherall]

just add the bit about mp's and corruption and that any one convicted of a crime being not allowed to stand as well as having to serve jail time etc with no protection if they are currently sitting mp's and found to have committed an offence, most will refuse to stand after that on both sides. Remove the protections that are currently installed, make any conviction a lifetime ban and also add the ability to convict defendants whether they are in the country or not and with no time limits/cut offs on the convictions. This would certainly start to make the country behave a touch better than they do now as well as stop the criminal element running overseas to avoid jail time while returning once the time limits have expired.

A bit naive.

Thailand has a history of prosecutions not being made because of favours owed. You need to temper idealism with reality - the whole culture of patronage and corruption that exists in Thailand starts from way up there and has spread to way down there pretty comprehensively. It trumps every good intention that you or I may have and it isn't going to change before the whole edifice is brought crashing down.

With any building, if the foundations have failed, you have to either dig them out and make new or knock the building down and start again. There isn't a 3rd choice - bad foundations cannot be rehabilitated.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Jon Wetherall

[rubl]

The 2007 referendum was a joke. By saying the referendum gives it more validity is showing ignorance.

Obviously you never read it and compared it with the 1997 version.

More than 90% of the text is the same, additional independence for watchdog organisations. Half elected/appointed senate makes sense but could be debated. Big black blob the coup leader amnesty, but no real surprise. They didn't want to become criminal fugitives I guess, although the coup leader voted for the blanket amnesty bill in 2013, just to be sure.

[rubl]

just add the bit about mp's and corruption and that any one convicted of a crime being not allowed to stand as well as having to serve jail time etc with no protection if they are currently sitting mp's and found to have committed an offence, most will refuse to stand after that on both sides. Remove the protections that are currently installed, make any conviction a lifetime ban and also add the ability to convict defendants whether they are in the country or not and with no time limits/cut offs on the convictions. This would certainly start to make the country behave a touch better than they do now as well as stop the criminal element running overseas to avoid jail time while returning once the time limits have expired.

A bit naive.

Thailand has a history of prosecutions not being made because of favours owed. You need to temper idealism with reality - the whole culture of patronage and corruption that exists in Thailand starts from way up there and has spread to way down there pretty comprehensively. It trumps every good intention that you or I may have and it isn't going to change before the whole edifice is brought crashing down.

With any building, if the foundations have failed, you have to either dig them out and make new or knock the building down and start again. There isn't a 3rd choice - bad foundations cannot be rehabilitated.

Well with the 1997 charter a bad foundation, I guess you disagree with the UDD in this.

I'm a bit more realistic, the 1997 charter in it's 2007 version could be used as starting point. I do not see a need to completely rewrite to get a brand new one.

[Jon Wetherall]

just add the bit about mp's and corruption and that any one convicted of a crime being not allowed to stand as well as having to serve jail time etc with no protection if they are currently sitting mp's and found to have committed an offence, most will refuse to stand after that on both sides. Remove the protections that are currently installed, make any conviction a lifetime ban and also add the ability to convict defendants whether they are in the country or not and with no time limits/cut offs on the convictions. This would certainly start to make the country behave a touch better than they do now as well as stop the criminal element running overseas to avoid jail time while returning once the time limits have expired.

A bit naive.

Thailand has a history of prosecutions not being made because of favours owed. You need to temper idealism with reality - the whole culture of patronage and corruption that exists in Thailand starts from way up there and has spread to way down there pretty comprehensively. It trumps every good intention that you or I may have and it isn't going to change before the whole edifice is brought crashing down.

With any building, if the foundations have failed, you have to either dig them out and make new or knock the building down and start again. There isn't a 3rd choice - bad foundations cannot be rehabilitated.

Well with the 1997 charter a bad foundation, I guess you disagree with the UDD in this.

I'm a bit more realistic, the 1997 charter in it's 2007 version could be used as starting point. I do not see a need to completely rewrite to get a brand new one.

Don't agree. Any constitution drafted by a hell-broth of a former army chief, state land-encroacher and current PC is unlikely to be a democratic improvement on anything. The 2007 version is a Frankenstein Thaksin-phobic charter, Useless and pointless for the Thai people.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Jon Wetherall

[rubl]

just add the bit about mp's and corruption and that any one convicted of a crime being not allowed to stand as well as having to serve jail time etc with no protection if they are currently sitting mp's and found to have committed an offence, most will refuse to stand after that on both sides. Remove the protections that are currently installed, make any conviction a lifetime ban and also add the ability to convict defendants whether they are in the country or not and with no time limits/cut offs on the convictions. This would certainly start to make the country behave a touch better than they do now as well as stop the criminal element running overseas to avoid jail time while returning once the time limits have expired.

A bit naive.

Thailand has a history of prosecutions not being made because of favours owed. You need to temper idealism with reality - the whole culture of patronage and corruption that exists in Thailand starts from way up there and has spread to way down there pretty comprehensively. It trumps every good intention that you or I may have and it isn't going to change before the whole edifice is brought crashing down.

With any building, if the foundations have failed, you have to either dig them out and make new or knock the building down and start again. There isn't a 3rd choice - bad foundations cannot be rehabilitated.

Well with the 1997 charter a bad foundation, I guess you disagree with the UDD in this.

I'm a bit more realistic, the 1997 charter in it's 2007 version could be used as starting point. I do not see a need to completely rewrite to get a brand new one.

Don't agree. Any constitution drafted by a hell-broth of a former army chief, state land-encroacher and current PC is unlikely to be a democratic improvement on anything. The 2007 version is a Frankenstein Thaksin-phobic charter, Useless and pointless for the Thai people.

No need to agree, no need to endanger your membership. I must admit a certain admiration for the inventive way to describe the 2007 charter. Obviously you're not a Thaksin supporter.

So, did you already read about the 2007 constitution, its improvements and area to still tackle?

http://www.thailawforum.com/articles/Thailand-Eighteeth-Consititution.html

[djjamie]

Now this is the typical reaction we can expect from the UDD. No constructive rebuttal, but simply denouncement and stating it is "my way or the highway". No ability to budge or meet anyone half way like normal democracies work. I would not be surprised if Jatuporn comes out and makes some hollow promises by suggesting that they will discuss red breasted birds or the like. The promises of which never ever eventuate.

We have a 1997 constitution that had undesirable consequence that resulted in a tyrannical prime minister, controlling a passive cabinet. The governing political party manipulated the constitutional doctrine and held absolute control in the Parliament that resulted in the executive checks and balances mechanism being skewed and thrown off balance.

Luckily in 2006 this monocratic megalomaniac was removed from power much to the joy of the majority. The coup leaders installed an interim constitution in the meantime. In a national referendum in August 2007, the majority of Thai voters approved the new constitution.

So we have a flawed constitution that allowed corruption to flourish and that foster dishonest manipulation of checks and balances much to the light of some so no wonder the UDD want it reinstated. Of course as per their standard play book they disrespect the majorities wishes who wanted the 2007 constitution so they can install a constitution that allows further abuse of the system at the majorities detriment.

The old chestnut of an excuse that the people were forced to vote for the 2007 constitution holds no weight either with the majority of Northerners voting AGAINST it. So this only reinforces that the majority of Thai's are not respected if the vote goes against a certain political party.

[than]

I whole-heartily agree with the1997 People's Constitution!!!

Just delete Article 112!!!

The Art.112 is not a constitutional article, but from Penal code.... It's necessary to protect the Institution

[Jon Wetherall]

I whole-heartily agree with the1997 People's Constitution!!!

Just delete Article 112!!!

The Art.112 is not a constitutional article, but from Penal code.... It's necessary to protect the Institution

Who says?

Protest the Institution from who and from what?

Edited September 6, 2015 by Jon Wetherall

[EnglishJohn]

Next they gonna mention that the amnesty bill to clear Thaksin if his crimes must be brought back too?

In English?

Oh dear, he typed 'if' instead of 'of' and you got all confused. Never mind, you still make the minimum grade to understand red-shirt rhetoric. They keep it nice and simple for you.

[EnglishJohn]

Prayuth should tell the UDD that he does not negotiate with terrorists.