Interior minister: People can make criticisms on draft charter without conflict of opinion

BANGKOK, 12 April 2016 (NNT) – Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda said that people can voice their opinion on a draft constitution as long as their views are not prompting public confusion.

Though there would certainly be both sides of contention among those who agree and disagree with the draft charter, he said the people should focus on what can make the country move forward.

Touching on red bowls being distributed to villagers in the provinces by former Red Shirt activists, the interior minister said that the authorities have investigated the case and called on the people to understand and avoid possible conflict of opinion.


-- NNT 2016-04-12

There is no confusion whatsoever.

• ​Don't mention how the draft charter is rigged to virtually ensure RTA power for as long as they want
• Any discussion of the draft charter must be fawning and sycophantic, lest one be jailed for 10 years
• Vote for it or not, it doesn't make one iota of difference either way, because we will just impose whoever we want anyway
• Don't mention the 30 billion baht for the referendum, nor call a spade a spade

Welcome to Democracy in Thailand.

" Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda said that people can voice their opinion on a draft constitution as long as their views are not prompting public confusion."

That makes as much sense as saying: "You are free to engage in as much sex as you want, as long as you remain a virgin".

Edited April 11, 201610 yr by jaltsc

Transparency was promised on Day 1 so why doesn't the junta bin the overused euphemisms such as ' avoid conflict of opinion ' etc and tell it like it is,

Do As You're Told, Or Else !

So they have investigated the red bowl incident and called on people to understand and avoid possible conflict of interest.

Ok so please what law did the lady break? just to be clear and avoid the so-called conflict of interest, any other things red is a 10 year gaol term also?

like red apples? how about eating strawberries in public? a can of coke coz it's just to red? or that evil falang white devil Santa coz he is red red red.......

Commenting on the draft is ok if no conflict of interest is broken, WHO'S conflict of interest are you talking about? YOUR'S?

Transparency was promised on Day 1 so why doesn't the junta bin the overused euphemisms such as ' avoid conflict of opinion ' etc and tell it like it is,

Do As You're Told, Or Else !

To be fair "do as you're told or else" is fairly transparent.

Playing the good cop bad cop routine no doubt. Meant to be ambiguous with no clarity. Clearly a tactic to confuse and intimidate.

Playing the good cop bad cop routine no doubt. Meant to be ambiguous with no clarity. Clearly a tactic to confuse and intimidate.

You maybe give him too much credit - it could be more a case of "we understand that our 'leader' is almost universally regarded as an imbecile, so maybe we back down a little".

He you at the government house, you are asking the Thai people to vote for or against the charter.

I can assure you there will be a no vote, meaning critizism and confusion. Are you asking the Thai public to vote for extensive documentation

a well educated thai will have problems understanding it all.

So, what are you going to do? Put all in jail?

Ever thought about the fact that a no vote would really mean for you guys to go back to your barracks?

would you be able to get away with it by expressing it as " I definitely like the way the draft charter says ABC " however " I have concerns about XYZ "

Christ one minute I am saddled with 10 years in the can for voicing an opinion, now I can , will U spiffs ever get it right, I have no conflict with the Charter, anyone who is automatically appointed or selected without a people vote, isn't going to get much air time on my show, that's not a conflict that's an opinion............................

There are 2 questions:

1. The PM will be elected by the House of Representatives and must be a member of this House.

2. The PM will be elected by both the Senate and the House of Representatives and does not have to be a member of either.

For both questions you can vote YES or NO.

Obviously these 2 questions contradict each other and are mutually exclusive.

So what happens if both questions get a majority of YES votes?

Confusing, right?

But Interior Minister Anupong said if one is prompting public confusion, he will go to jail. Who will go to jail for asking these 2 questions?

A public referendum should be able to get the true will of the voters. Anything else is against basic principles of law and results must be considered as null and void.

People can make criticisms on draft charter without conflict of opinion

morons...

Last night i asked my girlfriend who is a well educated woman and speaks English rather well if she and her family were going to go and vote in August in the referendum for the draft constitution and she had absolutely no idea what i was going on about.

The failed 2015 draft Charter contained 285 sections.

The 2016 proposed Charter contains "only" 279 sections

Help is on the way. Meechai has promised the Charter can be summarized in 10 or fewer key points. This raises a few obvious questions, but to avoid confusion, I will simply say "Doh!".

The inventors of mass confusion implore you not to add to their prodigious output.

" Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda said that people can voice their opinion on a draft constitution as long as their views are not prompting public confusion."

That makes as much sense as saying: "You are free to engage in as much sex as you want, as long as you remain a virgin".

Bad analogy. Unless you have no imagination, you can have plenty of sex while the hymen remains intact.

Simply announce "This is not a criticism of the charter" but it could be made better if

A-B-C- D were changed to X-Y-Z, and H-G-I, where dropped all together because they

are just stupid ideas.

'Anupong Paochinda ... called on the people to understand and avoid possible conflict of opinion.' Well, if they understand, Mr. Interior Minister, their opinion is highly likely to conflict with the official version. So the question is: do you understand?

Christ one minute I am saddled with 10 years in the can for voicing an opinion, now I can , will U spiffs ever get it right, I have no conflict with the Charter, anyone who is automatically appointed or selected without a people vote, isn't going to get much air time on my show, that's not a conflict that's an opinion............................

That's is more likely a fact than an opinion.

Christ one minute I am saddled with 10 years in the can for voicing an opinion, now I can , will U spiffs ever get it right, I have no conflict with the Charter, anyone who is automatically appointed or selected without a people vote, isn't going to get much air time on my show, that's not a conflict that's an opinion............................

That's is more likely a fact than an opinion.

Facts , bloody fact all facts and no fiction , sounds like a country I know.

As long as there are no more than 5 people voicing their opinion.

And as long as you are willing to accept to serve a possible 10 year jail term for voicing your opinion. Etc,etc, etc.