Thai politics: Top court verdict can be challenged

[webfact]

Top court verdict can be challenged
KASAMAKORN CHANWANPEN
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- Politicians tried in the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders will now have 30 days to appeal after a verdict is delivered, charter drafters agreed yesterday.

However, Chartchai na Chiangmai, a newly appointed spokesman for the Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC), said defendants could only appeal against legal matters. If it is facts they wish to revisit, then they had to produce new evidence, Chartchai said.

This would make everything just and fair for everybody, he said, adding that in the past politicians facing charges in the Supreme Court were not allowed to appeal. This was the final court, Chartchai said.

In the new charter, however, such cases would be tried on the principles of criminal charges, which would require two courts, he said. When the court finds the defendant guilty, he or she can then appeal to the Supreme Court convention, the spokesman said.

He added that the composition of the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders remains the same, and would comprise nine judges picked specifically for each case.

Each judge has to hold a position no lower than that of a Supreme Court judge, he said.

The draft charter has also set out that the courts of justice should have a commission tasked with overseeing transfers, promotions and pay raises, he said, adding that this was to ensure the courts were independent and free of any influence.

Today, the CDC's subcommittee tasked with gathering public opinions on the draft would meet with representatives from different sectors, including the press, women's rights advocates, business and environmental groups, to listen to their opinions.

Chartchai said this served the CDC's purpose of having all sectors participate in the charter writing process.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Top-court-verdict-can-be-challenged-30273278.html


-- The Nation 2015-11-19

[Srikcir]

So will the higher court maybe called The Most Supreme Court Criminal Division established to handle appeals of the Supreme Court's decisions? I can't think of another country that has such duplicity in their judicial system.

Rather than this complexity reminiscent of empire building, it might be simpler to require criminal trails to take place first in the Criminal Court with appeals to one or two higher courts (ie., court of appeals, then supreme court). In that way supreme remains supreme for which there can be no further appeal.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

The problem here, AFAICT, is that Thai appeals courts essentially serve to re-try the original cases heard by the lower courts. Thus you get common situations where someone is found guilty by the criminal court, then found innocent by the Appeals Court, and then 15 years later, found guilty again by the Supreme Court. That's absurd.

The appeals process ought to be restricted to dealing with mistakes or errors in legal procedure or findings of law -- not re-trying cases at every level. But I suspect that's not likely to happen anytime soon.

Meanwhile, on the issue of politicians, as much as I despite the rampant corruption, if they're going to be convicted by criminal courts, they should have SOME right of review/appeal -- which as best as I understand it, right now, they don't have. It's just the Supreme Court's Division for Political Office Holders, and that's it.

Everyone, even the lowest of the low, deserves some kind of appellate review process. Though I can't quite tell from the poorly written OP just what kind of appeal process they're envisioning.

In the new charter, however, such cases would be tried on the principles of criminal charges, which would require two courts,

I'm not sure why the guy above is talking about TWO courts, since Thailand's current criminal justice system involves THREE courts -- criminal, appeals and supreme.

Edited November 19, 2015 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[jaywalker]

Not much of a Supreme Court if they don't have the final say.

Utterly nonsensical, but then again, they can't even measure a marathon properly, so what do you expect?