New Thai charter bans persons with election fraud history from candidacy

[billd766]

what about those who grab office and power without an election? all banned? oh... hang on... that means...

or those who grab office via nominees in their wholly owned political party whilst disqualified themselves?

or those who resign from a caretaker role then change their mind and grab the office back illegally?

Ban them all.

Trivial offences compared to leading a coup.

Trivial, really?

You are quite happy that a convicted criminal (who also has 15 outstanding charges against him) nominates his sister who has NO political experience at all as the PM of a country he once lived in?

You are quite happy that this same person also pays each of the MPs from the party that he owns a salary on top of their official salary?

You are quite happy that he dictated policies to run the country even though by the laws of that country he was not even allowed to vote?

You are quite happy that although he has no legal standing in the country and is a criminal fugitive that he can get the government to give an amnesty (that fortunately didn't happen) to everybody including the members of his political party going back many years to cover any and all offences that may or my have not been committed by them?

And you think that is trivial?

Wow.

[NCFC]

what about those who grab office and power without an election? all banned? oh... hang on... that means...

or those who grab office via nominees in their wholly owned political party whilst disqualified themselves?

or those who resign from a caretaker role then change their mind and grab the office back illegally?

Ban them all.

Trivial offences compared to leading a coup.

Trivial, really?

You are quite happy that a convicted criminal (who also has 15 outstanding charges against him) nominates his sister who has NO political experience at all as the PM of a country he once lived in?

You are quite happy that this same person also pays each of the MPs from the party that he owns a salary on top of their official salary?

You are quite happy that he dictated policies to run the country even though by the laws of that country he was not even allowed to vote?

You are quite happy that although he has no legal standing in the country and is a criminal fugitive that he can get the government to give an amnesty (that fortunately didn't happen) to everybody including the members of his political party going back many years to cover any and all offences that may or my have not been committed by them?

And you think that is trivial?

Wow.

The point is whether the voters of Thailand are happy. Through elections they said they were.

[JAG]

what about those who grab office and power without an election? all banned? oh... hang on... that means...

No, don't worry. they've got an amnesty!

[JAG]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yet again it has to be pointed out that just about everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate to be Prime Minister.

What is more very few would have been under any illusions about Thaksins place in the scheme of things. Pheu Thai won though, didn't they, convincingly, and Yingluck became Prime Minister, with Thaksins presence looming in the background ( I know how you all like such colourful allusions)!

So why not give the "Yingluck was not elected, did not receive a single vote" bleating a rest. It is simply not true.You don't like her, fine. You don't like the system under which she was elected, fine. That is a perfectly respectable position. But unfortunately for you, that does not seem to be a position held by the Thai electorate, who have consistently chosen Thaksin or his proxies. Frankly, denying that yet expressing a preference for a jmilitary junta who took power in a coup, is in democratic terms bullshit. For one who claims to be raised on bullshit, and able to smell it from a mile away, it is strange that you cannot recognise it when you post it!

Edited February 13, 2016 by JAG

[slapout]

As mentioned any criminal activity conviction should be automatic closed door to their consideration as well as those who left the country for the duration of time prior to ''statue of limitation coming into play''

[lucky11]

As any farang would know, the way to skirt this hurdle is Nominee...

Well, we all know the classic example of this ruse!!

[halloween]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yet again it has to be pointed out that just about everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate to be Prime Minister.

What is more very few would have been under any illusions about Thaksins place in the scheme of things. Pheu Thai won though, didn't they, convincingly, and Yingluck became Prime Minister, with Thaksins presence looming in the background ( I know how you all like such colourful allusions)!

So why not give the "Yingluck was not elected, did not receive a single vote" bleating a rest. It is simply not true.You don't like her, fine. You don't like the system under which she was elected, fine. That is a perfectly respectable position. But unfortunately for you, that does not seem to be a position held by the Thai electorate, who have consistently chosen Thaksin or his proxies. Frankly, denying that yet expressing a preference for a jmilitary junta who took power in a coup, is in democratic terms bullshit. For one who claims to be raised on bullshit, and able to smell it from a mile away, it is strange that you cannot recognise it when you post it!

But I didn't say she didn't receive one vote, I said she got her brother's vote, (and the votes of the MPs' he bribes) which allowed him access to cabinet meetings, and to enrich himself from insider trading. Now strangely enough, both those actions are illegal where both of us come from (separately).

If you want to call the resulting government both legitimate and democratic, I'll tell you not to piss on me and tell me it's raining.

[kimamey]

what about those who grab office and power without an election? all banned? oh... hang on... that means...

or those who grab office via nominees in their wholly owned political party whilst disqualified themselves?

or those who resign from a caretaker role then change their mind and grab the office back illegally?

Ban them all.

Trivial offences compared to leading a coup.

Is quite possible that without those trivial offences there wouldn't have needed to be a coup.

[kimamey]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yet again it has to be pointed out that just about everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate to be Prime Minister.

What is more very few would have been under any illusions about Thaksins place in the scheme of things. Pheu Thai won though, didn't they, convincingly, and Yingluck became Prime Minister, with Thaksins presence looming in the background ( I know how you all like such colourful allusions)!

So why not give the "Yingluck was not elected, did not receive a single vote" bleating a rest. It is simply not true.You don't like her, fine. You don't like the system under which she was elected, fine. That is a perfectly respectable position. But unfortunately for you, that does not seem to be a position held by the Thai electorate, who have consistently chosen Thaksin or his proxies. Frankly, denying that yet expressing a preference for a jmilitary junta who took power in a coup, is in democratic terms bullshit. For one who claims to be raised on bullshit, and able to smell it from a mile away, it is strange that you cannot recognise it when you post it!

Is this legal under Thai law and would it be acceptable if it occurred under any party? If not then can it be accepted by the country as a whole? A democratically elected government has a responsibility to the whole kingdom not just their supporters. If it's perfectly legal and acceptable under Thai electoral law why wasn't it made clear? Why didn't Thaksin state clearly that if Thailand voted for PTP he would be in charge?

The new laws need to make clear who can stand for election. Do they have to be resident in Thailand, can they be on the run from the Thai judicial system and do they have to be Thai and how is that defined? These are just some of the situations that need to be clarified so that when voting starts everyone knows who and what they're voting for.

Just for the record whilst I'm not a supporter of coups in general at least this one stopped the violence and protests. That was a perfect opportunity to carry out meaningful reform with the support of politicians from both sides and with peaceful criticism allowed. Politicians will be the ones who will have to work with the system after all. Unfortunately what seems to have happened is something very similar to the mistake that Thaksin made. Concentrating on self interest instead of the long term good of the nation. It's not too late for that to change but I have my doubts that it will.

[LannaGuy]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yet again it has to be pointed out that just about everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate to be Prime Minister.

What is more very few would have been under any illusions about Thaksins place in the scheme of things. Pheu Thai won though, didn't they, convincingly, and Yingluck became Prime Minister, with Thaksins presence looming in the background ( I know how you all like such colourful allusions)!

So why not give the "Yingluck was not elected, did not receive a single vote" bleating a rest. It is simply not true.You don't like her, fine. You don't like the system under which she was elected, fine. That is a perfectly respectable position. But unfortunately for you, that does not seem to be a position held by the Thai electorate, who have consistently chosen Thaksin or his proxies. Frankly, denying that yet expressing a preference for a jmilitary junta who took power in a coup, is in democratic terms bullshit. For one who claims to be raised on bullshit, and able to smell it from a mile away, it is strange that you cannot recognise it when you post it!

But I didn't say she didn't receive one vote, I said she got her brother's vote, (and the votes of the MPs' he bribes) which allowed him access to cabinet meetings, and to enrich himself from insider trading. Now strangely enough, both those actions are illegal where both of us come from (separately).

If you want to call the resulting government both legitimate and democratic, I'll tell you not to piss on me and tell me it's raining.

and I'll tell you to stop taking the piss and sometimes rain is rain. yes it was legitimate and democratic and it is Thai's business who they elect not yours, nor mine nor the ruling elites army. we know what has happened now, and why, yet you defend it

Edited February 14, 2016 by LannaGuy

[dageurreotype]

According to a poll conducted by of 1,250 people aged 18 and over a whopping 82.88%, rising to 92.72% of respondents want politicians and senators guilty of election fraud of all types barred from government and written into the new Charter. So there goes your 'corruption is okay by majority if it benefits themselves' mantra.

Edited February 14, 2016 by dageurreotype

[tbthailand]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yet again it has to be pointed out that just about everyone who cast a vote for Pheu Thai did so in the full knowledge that Yingluck was their candidate to be Prime Minister.

What is more very few would have been under any illusions about Thaksins place in the scheme of things. Pheu Thai won though, didn't they, convincingly, and Yingluck became Prime Minister, with Thaksins presence looming in the background ( I know how you all like such colourful allusions)!

So why not give the "Yingluck was not elected, did not receive a single vote" bleating a rest. It is simply not true.You don't like her, fine. You don't like the system under which she was elected, fine. That is a perfectly respectable position. But unfortunately for you, that does not seem to be a position held by the Thai electorate, who have consistently chosen Thaksin or his proxies. Frankly, denying that yet expressing a preference for a jmilitary junta who took power in a coup, is in democratic terms bullshit. For one who claims to be raised on bullshit, and able to smell it from a mile away, it is strange that you cannot recognise it when you post it!

But I didn't say she didn't receive one vote, I said she got her brother's vote, (and the votes of the MPs' he bribes) which allowed him access to cabinet meetings, and to enrich himself from insider trading. Now strangely enough, both those actions are illegal where both of us come from (separately).

If you want to call the resulting government both legitimate and democratic, I'll tell you not to piss on me and tell me it's raining.

with your inane trolling responses, do you deserve anything less?

[rubl]

What is meant by "record of election fraud"?

Does this mean an actual court conviction, or the result of some less rigorous process?

I would look very carefully at Charter provisions for banning or restricting politicians. There could be ample opportunity for abuse of power.

There were provisions in both the 1997 and 2007 version of the Charter. I would assume some text is needed in the charter and an organic law on elections and who may stand. Strictly speaking that already exists.

[rubl]

Good for the country nobody gets banned for staging a coup.

The current guy is self-appointed.

But after the next election, there will be another manufactured "crisis", and then he'll be appointed by the constitutional court.

same same but different

No idea why a Constitutional Court is deemed necessary unless it's to copy the American Way.

We Dutch do it different, but we have a functioning legislature.

"Following the practice of many civil law jurisdictions and in contrast to practice in nations such as the United States, the practice of Dutch constitutional law is that judges are not allowed to determine the constitutionality of laws created by the legislature (the government and parliament acting jointly)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_Netherlands

[heybruce]

According to a poll conducted by of 1,250 people aged 18 and over a whopping 82.88%, rising to 92.72% of respondents want politicians and senators guilty of election fraud of all types barred from government and written into the new Charter. So there goes your 'corruption is okay by majority if it benefits themselves' mantra.

You believe Thai polls conducted under a military junta with censorship, where it is illegal to criticize the junta!

[heybruce]

In some countries a person involved in a coup would be permanently banned from politics and the military, as well as spend a long time in prison.

[sjaak327]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yingluck had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, all of them knowing full well who they were voting for as PM.

Tbthailand's remark is spot on.

[halloween]

In some countries a person involved in a coup would be permanently banned from politics and the military, as well as spend a long time in prison.

And in other countries they would become "President for Life" though that may be a shorter reign than expected. Neither is likely here.

But how about MPs who accept bribes to vote to order, and ministers who allow criminals to access cabinet meetings? Or is that part of the "new" style of democracy?

[halloween]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yingluck had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, all of them knowing full well who they were voting for as PM.

Tbthailand's remark is spot on.

Actually, PTP had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, with the expectation that Yingluk would be nominated as PM. In fact, given that Thaksin bribes the PTP MPs to vote to order, he could have nominated any of the party list candidates above the cut-off or any of non-party list MPs.

And at any subsequent party meeting, she could have been deposed due to her less than stellar performance. No surprise why she was not.

[MaeJoMTB]

Does it ban persons that have overthrown previous governments by force?

[heybruce]

In some countries a person involved in a coup would be permanently banned from politics and the military, as well as spend a long time in prison.

And in other countries they would become "President for Life" though that may be a shorter reign than expected. Neither is likely here.

But how about MPs who accept bribes to vote to order, and ministers who allow criminals to access cabinet meetings? Or is that part of the "new" style of democracy?

No, it's a very old style of democracy. Sometimes it takes decades for democracy to sufficiently entrench itself before the voters begin to demand an end to corruption. Recent examples of this are in Guatemala, Honduras and Brazil. Argentina may be heading in this direction as well. I can think of no examples of corrupt military governments ending corruption.

So long as the government elected in a largely fair, internationally monitored election continues to allow fair, internationally monitored elections, a flawed democracy is far better than a military d...., um, a military style government.

[sjaak327]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yingluck had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, all of them knowing full well who they were voting for as PM.

Tbthailand's remark is spot on.

Actually, PTP had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, with the expectation that Yingluk would be nominated as PM. In fact, given that Thaksin bribes the PTP MPs to vote to order, he could have nominated any of the party list candidates above the cut-off or any of non-party list MPs.

And at any subsequent party meeting, she could have been deposed due to her less than stellar performance. No surprise why she was not.

And since Yingluck was number one on that list AND the focus off the campaign my remark is factually correct. That she could've been replaced by another one is hardly strange, nor is it against the law.

Tbthailand's remark also still stands, other than all of those party list PM's, Prayuth received 0 votes.

[tbthailand]

is becoming "PM" without having a single vote casted for you considered "election fraud"?

Can you name a recent PM who was NOT a party list candidate? Yingluk did have a single vote cast for her, her brother's.

Yingluck had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, all of them knowing full well who they were voting for as PM.

Tbthailand's remark is spot on.

Actually, PTP had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, with the expectation that Yingluk would be nominated as PM. In fact, given that Thaksin bribes the PTP MPs to vote to order, he could have nominated any of the party list candidates above the cut-off or any of non-party list MPs.

And at any subsequent party meeting, she could have been deposed due to her less than stellar performance. No surprise why she was not.

you are straining awfully hard to make an issue of something that was not an issue for any of the Thai voters...

Not to mention throwing a "but Thaksin" wrench into the topic....

good job.... carry on.

[halloween]

Actually, PTP had 15.7 million voters voting on the party list, with the expectation that Yingluk would be nominated as PM. In fact, given that Thaksin bribes the PTP MPs to vote to order, he could have nominated any of the party list candidates above the cut-off or any of non-party list MPs.

And at any subsequent party meeting, she could have been deposed due to her less than stellar performance. No surprise why she was not.

you are straining awfully hard to make an issue of something that was not an issue for any of the Thai voters...

Not to mention throwing a "but Thaksin" wrench into the topic....

good job.... carry on.

I am pointing out that Yingluk's name did not appear on any ballot, and that the electorate voted for the party that nominated her, but that was subject to change. That is far more factual than your claim.

Sorry for mentioning Thaksin. Of course he had nothing to do with PTP, the election campaign, or the nominated choice of PM - other than paying the bribes and being allowed access to cabinet meetings.