CDC applies stiff new rules on would-be MPs

[webfact]

NEW CHARTER
CDC applies stiff new rules on would-be MPs
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Constitution Drafting Commission (CDC) yesterday resolved to put heavy restrictions on the qualifications of MP candidates in a move to curb graft.

CDC spokesman Chatchai na Chiang Mai said there would be 17 restrictions for MP candidates. The following are not allowed to apply as MP candidates:

Drug addicts, bankrupt people or former bankrupts and corrupt individuals, people who face an election ban, people whose election rights have been revoked, people who are being sentenced to jail or are detained under court order, people who served a jail term and were released less than ten years before the election date - except for offences related to negligence or petty offences.

Also banned from applying as MP candidates:

Those dismissed from duty by state agencies or state enterprises for corruption or malfeasance, those who face court orders to have their assets confiscated for being "unusually wealthy".

Those who were sentenced by court for abuse of authority, for committing offences as state officials or state enterprise workers, or committed corruption or malfeasance, those sentenced by a court for electoral fraud, those who were sentenced by the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders to be dismissed from their post

Also on the restricted list:

Members of local councils and member of local administrative organisations.

Former Senators whose terms had ended not more than two years previously.

Those who are workers or employees of state agencies and state enterprises.

Those who are Constitutional Court judges, members of the Election Commission, the Auditor General, National Anti-Corruption Commission members, State Audit Commission members, National Human Rights Commission members.

Those who are banned from holding political posts.

MPs can lose their seats if three/fourths of the executive board of their party rules to dismiss them from the post, except for MPs who quit their party and found a new party within 30 days.

Chatchai said politicians who have been impeached by the National Legislative Assembly and want to apply as MP candidates must have the Election Commission rule on their qualifications. If the EC rules against them, they could appeal the ruling with the Supreme Court, whose verdict is final.

In the case of MPs whose constituency becomes vacant, not because of House dissolution, by-elections would be held within 45 days. For party list MPs, the Parliament President would announce MPs next in line in that party to fill the vacancy. If the party does not have an MP next in line, filling the vacancy is not needed.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/CDC-applies-stiff-new-rules-on-would-be-MPs-30274047.html


-- The Nation 2015-12-01

[shunter]

One small step in the right direction. But will it actually happen, and if it does will some future administration annul the statutes as the ideals clash with their political aims and cronyism?

[tbthailand]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

[JoePai]

The following are not allowed to apply as MP candidates: Drug addicts, bankrupt people or former bankrupts and corrupt individuals,

[billd766]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

Not to mention the previous PM and her brother as well.

[halloween]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

Not to mention the previous PM and her brother as well.

Thaksin fits much better into other classifications.

[smedly]

One small step in the right direction. But will it actually happen, and if it does will some future administration annul the statutes as the ideals clash with their political aims and cronyism?

exactly why it needs to be made extremely difficult for any sitting government to amend the Constitution - just as it is in other countries - the US being a fine example, even make some parts of the Constitution in such a way that they cannot be ammended except by referendum once the proposals pass legal scutiny

[Srikcir]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

[tbthailand]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

Not to mention the previous PM and her brother as well.

yawn, ...

I guess owning a company and having your wealth grow as your company's stock value increases is exactly the same as becoming a multi-millionaire on an soldier's salary...

Really, how lame...

[thelonius]

I don't suppose the braintards have realised they have just banned the entire population of Thailand from becoming MP's - amongst those people ineligible to become MP's;

"people whose election rights have been revoked"

[scorecard]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

So you would be quite happy with drug dealers / drug addicts / drug king pins / unusually wealthy / convicted criminals / those convicted for corruption / those convicted for malfeasance etc., etc., being able to register and take up seats in parliament?

[thelonius]

"MPs can lose their seats if three/fourths of the executive board of their party rules to dismiss them from the post, except for MPs who quit their party and found a new party within 30 days"

Always best to prepare for anything if you're the "right" people - this will probably be known as the "Gen.Anupong/Friends of Newin Clause".

[ldiablo]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

Not to mention the previous PM and her brother as well.

Why, Did the current PM sell the Shin corporation for US $1.8 billion as well?

That certainly doesn't sound unusually wealthy.

[tbthailand]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

So you would be quite happy with drug dealers / drug addicts / drug king pins / unusually wealthy / convicted criminals / those convicted for corruption / those convicted for malfeasance etc., etc., being able to register and take up seats in parliament?

yes.

If they are elected by the people.

See, if people have done something wrong and have served their time, then they are still just people, not pariah.

Your implication is that they are still, currently breaking the law. In that case, they should be tried and, if found guilty, locked up. At which point, their MP seat would become open again.

Got it?

[scorecard]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

So you would be quite happy with drug dealers / drug addicts / drug king pins / unusually wealthy / convicted criminals / those convicted for corruption / those convicted for malfeasance etc., etc., being able to register and take up seats in parliament?

yes.

If they are elected by the people.

See, if people have done something wrong and have served their time, then they are still just people, not pariah.

Your implication is that they are still, currently breaking the law. In that case, they should be tried and, if found guilty, locked up. At which point, their MP seat would become open again.

Got it?

I don't agree with you, never will on this subject.

[scorecard]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices". Certainly an interesting comment.

There's always the point that a very large % of Thai's have a very limited to zero understanding of:

- What 'democracy' really means and the benefits it can bring.

- How the process should work.

- The critical pillars of democracy that need to be protected.

Since the introduction of democracy to Thailand a very large % of politicians have done little to nothing to develop Thailand with strong benefits for all Thais and the public has grown to understand that 'this is the way it works'. Plus a large number of these politicians (all flavors) have raped the country and got away with it.

If these scaly folks were kept out and there was better overall education on this subject (desperately needed) then surely there is a chance that there would be valuable progress in a much better direction.

[baboon]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

Nor will it be for the state to decide here. As always, the army wil, especially in cases where candidates they don't like somehow manage to jump through the hoops and are elected.

[phoenixdoglover]

"MPs can lose their seats if three/fourths of the executive board of their party rules to dismiss them from the post, except for MPs who quit their party and found a new party within 30 days"

Always best to prepare for anything if you're the "right" people - this will probably be known as the "Gen.Anupong/Friends of Newin Clause".

Yes, this clause has all kinds of potential for abuse. Imagine getting a million votes, and then being removed by a few power brokers.

Nah. That would never happen in Thailand.

[tbthailand]

All these restrictions have just one goal - limit the Thai People's Right to Self-Determination.

The autocracy cannot trust the Thai electorate at large to deliver the kind of government the autocracy can expect and tolerate. This is not demoracy.

"It is the right of the voters to make catastrophic choices. That is part of the essence of real democracy. The right to make a choice necessarily includes the right to make a bad choice. The legislature should never lightly infringe on the power of the people of this state to choose whoever they would to represent their interests in public office." - August 4, 2015, TM for link.

The charter writers should rather focus that every voter has the chance to express his or her opinion by casting a vote for whomever they would in a free and fair election. If voters make a poor choice, they will suffer the consequences. It is not for the State to decide.

So you would be quite happy with drug dealers / drug addicts / drug king pins / unusually wealthy / convicted criminals / those convicted for corruption / those convicted for malfeasance etc., etc., being able to register and take up seats in parliament?

yes.

If they are elected by the people.

See, if people have done something wrong and have served their time, then they are still just people, not pariah.

Your implication is that they are still, currently breaking the law. In that case, they should be tried and, if found guilty, locked up. At which point, their MP seat would become open again.

Got it?

I don't agree with you, never will on this subject.

that's OK.

In America, there are relatively low age requirements which change depending on the office. Except for President and VP, there are not nationality requirements. There are essentially no other restrictions when talking about federal positions - might be different in States since they get to set their own rules, but generally, I don't know of any.

So no restrictions on education levels, blah, blah, blah... everything that the CDC is looking at.

If a politician is crooked and caught, then they go through the legal process. And a lot of them do.

Corruption exists everywhere. It's not unique to politics. Corruption needs to be addressed on it's own level of law-breaking.

The Thai elites and junta want so desperately to link the two (and they have for decades) because it is their way to demonize the representatives of the people of Thailand and to justify maintaining control of the country by themselves and for themselves.

Thai citizens are the losers.

[billd766]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

Not to mention the previous PM and her brother as well.

yawn, ...

I guess owning a company and having your wealth grow as your company's stock value increases is exactly the same as becoming a multi-millionaire on an soldier's salary...

Really, how lame...

Equal yawn. I guess being the PM and changing the law on company ownership just a few days before you sell it after buying the shares from your own family (not to mention paying no tax on the deal) is exactly the same and strictly kosher too.

No lamer than your poor excuse.

[Bellacissa]

"...people who are being sentenced to jail or are detained under court order..."

I foresee a great big round up a few days before the election.

[halloween]

that's OK.

In America, there are relatively low age requirements which change depending on the office. Except for President and VP, there are not nationality requirements. There are essentially no other restrictions when talking about federal positions - might be different in States since they get to set their own rules, but generally, I don't know of any.

So no restrictions on education levels, blah, blah, blah... everything that the CDC is looking at.

If a politician is crooked and caught, then they go through the legal process. And a lot of them do.

Corruption exists everywhere. It's not unique to politics. Corruption needs to be addressed on it's own level of law-breaking.

The Thai elites and junta want so desperately to link the two (and they have for decades) because it is their way to demonize the representatives of the people of Thailand and to justify maintaining control of the country by themselves and for themselves.

Thai citizens are the losers.

Many of us living here will be quite happy that Thailand is not becoming more like the US, that is why we live here.

You might also consider the democratic requirements of an informed and educated populace, and the level of voter participation here compared to the US.

[tbthailand]

... for being "unusually wealthy".

I guess the current self-appointed "PM" will just have to enjoy it while it lasts...

Not to mention the previous PM and her brother as well.

yawn, ...

I guess owning a company and having your wealth grow as your company's stock value increases is exactly the same as becoming a multi-millionaire on an soldier's salary...

Really, how lame...

Equal yawn. I guess being the PM and changing the law on company ownership just a few days before you sell it after buying the shares from your own family (not to mention paying no tax on the deal) is exactly the same and strictly kosher too.

No lamer than your poor excuse.

I never said that it was kosher. I never claimed Thaksin was a saint. Go entrap some other poster.

As you well know, business people make lots of money because there is lots of money to be made in business, and Military men in Thailand make lots of money because, .... ???

Don't be so thick....

now back to yawning...

[tbthailand]

that's OK.

In America, there are relatively low age requirements which change depending on the office. Except for President and VP, there are not nationality requirements. There are essentially no other restrictions when talking about federal positions - might be different in States since they get to set their own rules, but generally, I don't know of any.

So no restrictions on education levels, blah, blah, blah... everything that the CDC is looking at.

If a politician is crooked and caught, then they go through the legal process. And a lot of them do.

Corruption exists everywhere. It's not unique to politics. Corruption needs to be addressed on it's own level of law-breaking.

The Thai elites and junta want so desperately to link the two (and they have for decades) because it is their way to demonize the representatives of the people of Thailand and to justify maintaining control of the country by themselves and for themselves.

Thai citizens are the losers.

Many of us living here will be quite happy that Thailand is not becoming more like the US, that is why we live here.

You might also consider the democratic requirements of an informed and educated populace, and the level of voter participation here compared to the US.

I don't like the direction that the US society is going in general and I don't like the anti-democratic movements there any more than I like the anti-democratic movements here.

I do think that having very few limitations for politicians is a good idea - and that it encourages people of all stripes to participate in the process. It's also clear that corruption is not more naturally linked to politics than it is to any other profession - but the elite in Thailand don't like democracy at all and one way to discredit it is by discrediting those who participate in the process - those are the only points I was making in that comparison.

Not surprised that you did not get the point...

[billd766]

yawn, ...

I guess owning a company and having your wealth grow as your company's stock value increases is exactly the same as becoming a multi-millionaire on an soldier's salary...

Really, how lame...

Equal yawn. I guess being the PM and changing the law on company ownership just a few days before you sell it after buying the shares from your own family (not to mention paying no tax on the deal) is exactly the same and strictly kosher too.

No lamer than your poor excuse.

I never said that it was kosher. I never claimed Thaksin was a saint. Go entrap some other poster.

As you well know, business people make lots of money because there is lots of money to be made in business, and Military men in Thailand make lots of money because, .... ???

Don't be so thick....

now back to yawning...

There has only been one business man who changed the laws of the country to his own benefit and that was Thaksin.

Thank you three times for the personal insult.

Should I respond to it in kind?

I don't think so as you are not worth the effort.