Meechai says NCPO has demanded more than just non-elected Senate

[MZurf]

"if the elected government behaves and doesn't attempt to push through amnesties for criminals"

What gives a bunch of unelected appointees the right to decide what constitutes proper behavior for an elected government? The voters get to do that during elections, or the courts do it if illegal acts are involved.

What if the elected government campaigned on a promise to revoke amnesties for coup leaders and won convincingly? What if this elected government not only revoked the amnesties for the coup leaders but then charged them with treason? That's how it would work in a normal democracy.

One of the functions of the appointed Senate is to protect the military from checks and balances. Too bad, it would do democracy in Thailand a world of good if an elected government could demonstrate to the military that it can no longer stage coups with impunity.

in your opinion

Very astute observation. Yes, in my opinion democracy is better than military rule, and staging a coup against an elected government is...I can't get specific or the post will be deleted and my posting privileges suspended again. We're not allowed to be honest here. Of course censorship is one of the characteristics of military rule that junta enthusiasts insist is no big deal.

Clearly in your opinion military rule, even rule by a corrupt, self-serving military such as this one, is better than democracy.

That is not my opinion at all and if you actually read any on my posts you would know that, I am no junta enthusiast but I have also seen how so called democracy has not worked here time and time again with rotten governments causing people justifiably to take to the streets because of their power abuse - we all know how it works

A properly written constitution and enforcement of law would go a long way to solving the issues, it is clear that Thai (in fact all)governments need a very strict well understood framework to work within and powerful agencies in place to deal with them when they abuse, it is actually no different in the west, The US constitution started with a few smart men writing rules for all to follow - it was not done from within a democracy but helped set the framework for one to develope, it was written on the backend of wars and severe civil conflict, although not perfect there was a genuine enthusiasm for all to develop and make it work.

The abuse here is on many fronts and they all need dealt with, no elected government has ever made any attempt to address it (and no previous constitution has ever been written properly to effectively stamp it out) simply because they are enriching themselves, the Thai system is rotten to the core simply because the framework has never been written properly to address it, and everyone with a brain can see that, it needed to change, is Prayuth the man to do it - only time will tell, neither you or me knows how this will turn out, I am willing to give it a chance because I see no alternative except conflict and I am certain that there are evil people that would like to see a civil war here and have already made several attempts to start one.

Certain Thai people believe that winning an election gives the ultimate power to do as they like, I have heard this many times and is fundamentally flawed, the ultimate power is not the government - it is the constitution (all the people) - the framework that it provides along with laws and social structure.

Certain people are claiming this constitution is not democratic - my interpretation of that statement is - this constitution doesn't allow us to have ultimate power to abuse and forces the elected government to work within a framework of rules.......well here's the rub, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT SHOULD BE

"That is not my opinion at all and if you actually read any on my posts you would know that, I am no junta enthusiast but I have also seen how so called democracy has not worked here time and time again with rotten governments causing people justifiably to take to the streets because of their power abuse - we all know how it works"

And junta rule and coups have achieved exactly what???

"Certain people are claiming this constitution is not democratic - my interpretation of that statement is - this constitution doesn't allow us to have ultimate power to abuse and forces the elected government to work within a framework of rules.......well here's the rub, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT SHOULD BE"

Fair enough-you're happy with eternal old elite/junta rule. Good to get that out into the open.

[MZurf]

Oddly enough the former foreign minister Kasit seems to share my view.

http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20160310-ASIA-300-TAKING-A-PLUNGE/Viewpoints/Kasit-Piromya-Thai-conservatives-quest-for-power-courts-chaos?n_cid=NARAN012

Fantastic article. Thx for the link. The author sums up the situation (and recent political history of Thailand (since the abdication)) clearly and succinctly. I particularly liked how he explained how the current PTB, came to enjoy their position and status over last the near century. Great read!

Comments about the article by the junta supporters would be most welcome. IMO it's spot on and exactly my impression of the political situation in this country.

[jayboy]

good post but remember this is Thailand and their past political history is less that perfect, you only have to look at some of the people that have held office here and the stuff they have done, I don't support the army stepping in as they do but I also think the alternative would be significantly worse, Thailand has been on the brink several times in these last few years, it's not hard to imagine how that could have turned out when you look at what is going on in other countries right now throughout the world, humans are generally self destructive and evil, greed and power holds no bounds

As for the senate - the point I'm making is - what difference does it make at the end of the day, if the elected government behaves and doesn't attempt to push through amnesties for criminals or try and get rid of agencies that are there to combat corruption or try to amend the constitution in such a way that it thwarts checks and balances etc and runs the country properly with the peoples interest in mind as it is supposed to - what does it matter, the only people that lose are those that have ill intent which for me is a good thing no matter how you look at it, I honestly don't see what the issue is

"if the elected government behaves and doesn't attempt to push through amnesties for criminals"

What gives a bunch of unelected appointees the right to decide what constitutes proper behavior for an elected government? The voters get to do that during elections, or the courts do it if illegal acts are involved.

What if the elected government campaigned on a promise to revoke amnesties for coup leaders and won convincingly? What if this elected government not only revoked the amnesties for the coup leaders but then charged them with treason? That's how it would work in a normal democracy.

One of the functions of the appointed Senate is to protect the military from checks and balances. Too bad, it would do democracy in Thailand a world of good if an elected government could demonstrate to the military that it can no longer stage coups with impunity.

in your opinion

Very astute observation. Yes, in my opinion democracy is better than military rule, and staging a coup against an elected government is...I can't get specific or the post will be deleted and my posting privileges suspended again. We're not allowed to be honest here. Of course censorship is one of the characteristics of military rule that junta enthusiasts insist is no big deal.

Clearly in your opinion military rule, even rule by a corrupt, self-serving military such as this one, is better than democracy.

That is not my opinion at all and if you actually read any on my posts you would know that, I am no junta enthusiast but I have also seen how so called democracy has not worked here time and time again with rotten governments causing people justifiably to take to the streets because of their power abuse - we all know how it works

A properly written constitution and enforcement of law would go a long way to solving the issues, it is clear that Thai (in fact all)governments need a very strict well understood framework to work within and powerful agencies in place to deal with them when they abuse, it is actually no different in the west, The US constitution started with a few smart men writing rules for all to follow - it was not done from within a democracy but helped set the framework for one to develope, it was written on the backend of wars and severe civil conflict, although not perfect there was a genuine enthusiasm for all to develop and make it work.

The abuse here is on many fronts and they all need dealt with, no elected government has ever made any attempt to address it (and no previous constitution has ever been written properly to effectively stamp it out) simply because they are enriching themselves, the Thai system is rotten to the core simply because the framework has never been written properly to address it, and everyone with a brain can see that, it needed to change, is Prayuth the man to do it - only time will tell, neither you or me knows how this will turn out, I am willing to give it a chance because I see no alternative except conflict and I am certain that there are evil people that would like to see a civil war here and have already made several attempts to start one.

Certain Thai people believe that winning an election gives the ultimate power to do as they like, I have heard this many times and is fundamentally flawed, the ultimate power is not the government - it is the constitution (all the people) - the framework that it provides along with laws and social structure.

Certain people are claiming this constitution is not democratic - my interpretation of that statement is - this constitution doesn't allow us to have ultimate power to abuse and forces the elected government to work within a framework of rules.......well here's the rub, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT SHOULD BE

Your misunderstanding - and it is a very great one - is exemplified by your comparison of the American Founding Fathers with those who are attempting to impose a rigged charter on the Thai people.Jefferson, Madison and the others were men of genius who had an embracing vision of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness which was to inspire not only America but the whole world.

In contrast in present day Thailand the whole effort is directed towards the retention of privilege, power and wealth for a small minority - and to frustrate popular democracy.The contrast between the inclusive American Constitution and the grubby circus promoting vested interests could scarcely be more contrasting.Certainly there is a need for a framework of rules but these will only emerge in a properly participatory process, not one dominated by thugs and appointed stooges.

[phoenixdoglover]

Going back to the tenor of Meechai's comments about the NCPO requests to amend the Charter...

I wonder if Meechai in the not too distant future will try to wash his hands, and disavow responsibility for this mess. Frankly, Version 2 of the draft Charter is looking like a stacked deck, especially with this strong push from the Junta for 5 years of "special conditions".

Kinda reinforces the idea about the rejection of Version 1, that military guys were instructed to vote against it as it was not accommodating the Junta desire for strong continuity.

I expect Version 2 to crash and burn, and for the Junta to simply move forward with a document they claim had broad input by good people. By recent logic, this would be an "indirect approval" by the electorate, or some such nonsense.

[heybruce]

"if the elected government behaves and doesn't attempt to push through amnesties for criminals"

What gives a bunch of unelected appointees the right to decide what constitutes proper behavior for an elected government? The voters get to do that during elections, or the courts do it if illegal acts are involved.

What if the elected government campaigned on a promise to revoke amnesties for coup leaders and won convincingly? What if this elected government not only revoked the amnesties for the coup leaders but then charged them with treason? That's how it would work in a normal democracy.

One of the functions of the appointed Senate is to protect the military from checks and balances. Too bad, it would do democracy in Thailand a world of good if an elected government could demonstrate to the military that it can no longer stage coups with impunity.

in your opinion

Very astute observation. Yes, in my opinion democracy is better than military rule, and staging a coup against an elected government is...I can't get specific or the post will be deleted and my posting privileges suspended again. We're not allowed to be honest here. Of course censorship is one of the characteristics of military rule that junta enthusiasts insist is no big deal.

Clearly in your opinion military rule, even rule by a corrupt, self-serving military such as this one, is better than democracy.

That is not my opinion at all and if you actually read any on my posts you would know that, I am no junta enthusiast but I have also seen how so called democracy has not worked here time and time again with rotten governments causing people justifiably to take to the streets because of their power abuse - we all know how it works

A properly written constitution and enforcement of law would go a long way to solving the issues, it is clear that Thai (in fact all)governments need a very strict well understood framework to work within and powerful agencies in place to deal with them when they abuse, it is actually no different in the west, The US constitution started with a few smart men writing rules for all to follow - it was not done from within a democracy but helped set the framework for one to develope, it was written on the backend of wars and severe civil conflict, although not perfect there was a genuine enthusiasm for all to develop and make it work.

The abuse here is on many fronts and they all need dealt with, no elected government has ever made any attempt to address it (and no previous constitution has ever been written properly to effectively stamp it out) simply because they are enriching themselves, the Thai system is rotten to the core simply because the framework has never been written properly to address it, and everyone with a brain can see that, it needed to change, is Prayuth the man to do it - only time will tell, neither you or me knows how this will turn out, I am willing to give it a chance because I see no alternative except conflict and I am certain that there are evil people that would like to see a civil war here and have already made several attempts to start one.

Certain Thai people believe that winning an election gives the ultimate power to do as they like, I have heard this many times and is fundamentally flawed, the ultimate power is not the government - it is the constitution (all the people) - the framework that it provides along with laws and social structure.

Certain people are claiming this constitution is not democratic - my interpretation of that statement is - this constitution doesn't allow us to have ultimate power to abuse and forces the elected government to work within a framework of rules.......well here's the rub, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT SHOULD BE

"I am no junta enthusiast"

Funny, you certainly seem to prefer coups to elections, and military rule to democracy.

"so called democracy has not worked here time and time again with rotten governments causing people justifiably to take to the streets because of their power abuse - we all know how it works"

Yes, we know how it works. An unrepresentative minority of mostly Bangkok people take to the streets to protest against an elected government and the army stages a coup. When people take to the streets to protest against an unelected government the military crushes them. Democracy is allowed for at most one or two elections and then is overthrown with a coup.

"A properly written constitution and enforcement of law would go a long way to solving the issues,"

The military has never written a proper constitution, and it's had many opportunities. The military is also the biggest criminal organization in Thailand and keeps itself above the law.

"The abuse here is on many fronts and they all need dealt with, no elected government has ever made any attempt to address it (and no previous constitution has ever been written properly to effectively stamp it out) simply because they are enriching themselves, the Thai system is rotten to the core simply because the framework has never been written properly to address it, and everyone with a brain can see that, it needed to change, is Prayuth the man to do it - only time will tell, neither you or me knows how this will turn out, I am willing to give it a chance because I see no alternative except conflict and I am certain that there are evil people that would like to see a civil war here and have already made several attempts to start one."

I won't attempt to address this long run-on sentence, I'll just answer your question--No, Prayuth is clearly not the man to resolve Thailand's many problems. Anyone who reads uncensored international news knows this (more on this later). Prayuth is the man to drag Thailand back to where Burma was about twenty years ago.

"this constitution doesn't allow us to have ultimate power to abuse and forces the elected government to work within a framework of rules.......well here's the rub, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT SHOULD BE"

But this constitution doesn't allow the military to be subjected to rules or end its abuses, and any elected government that attempts to rein in the military will immediately be toppled in another coup.

Thailand needs a constitution not written to satisfy the military, an extended period without coups and military rule, and a military that stays in the barracks and as accountable to an elected government. This constitution has it the other way around.

Here's an example of some uncensored news that may help you understand. Please take note of the first sentence:

"Some generals come up with a plan for saving Thailand from democracy."

http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21693251-some-generals-come-up-new-plan-saving-thailand-democracy-twentieth-time-lucky

[heybruce]

Oddly enough the former foreign minister Kasit seems to share my view.

http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20160310-ASIA-300-TAKING-A-PLUNGE/Viewpoints/Kasit-Piromya-Thai-conservatives-quest-for-power-courts-chaos?n_cid=NARAN012

Excellent article. I especially liked the paragraph near the end:

"Yet Thailand has come a long way in the making of a democratic polity. Conflicts, confrontations and divisiveness are not justifications for any particular group to have a permanent hold on power. The people have been empowered and aided by information technology, and they have experienced their sovereign rights. They are the ultimate arbitrators of the life of democratic Thailand, and they will eventually assert their rights."

I agree. The generals and their elite supporters can either relinquish power peacefully or lose power violently. I hope they choose the sensible option, I'm not sure they're smart enough to do so.