Thaksin Will Return With Pride And Dignity

[blaze]

1997 Constitution was designed to do away with shaky mutliparty system, the idea was that you need a strong party majoirty and strong executive power to implement necessary reforms.

It was all about reforming Thailand then, in all aspects. Bureaucracy reform, education reform, state enterprised reform, media reform etc. etc.

Turned out Thaksin had his own ideas on where these reforms should lead, and no one could stop him. Consitution writers assumed that democracy would garantee that the country would be on the right course, they put a lot of trust in people, and we know how it ended. These time around they didn't trust people as much, and they have a good reason, methinks.

I asked this question before- and I certainly don't want it to sound confrontational or in any sense derisive- because its not meant that way. But would, in your opinion, Thailand be better off with a legislature chosen by the Privy council- directly or indirectly- from the various sectors of society? Not too dissimliar from the current NLA.

The sectors could organize themselves and among their membership, nominate people to be considered by the Privy council or some arm of it.

This would save on the costs of elections, reduce the spectre of vote buying, get rid of the dominance of local puu yais in national politics and very likely eliminate the need for future coups- since the Privy council would have the authority to dissolve government if it starts getting nutty.

Why drag the privvy council into politics? There are other bodies that could be involved. The privy council has a specific duty already.

I chose Privy Council because they enjoy (or have) more trust than any body you wish to name- but if you want to substitute any other body of wise and prudent people- feel free- the question remains.

[blaze]

No, not totally appointed Senate, they've had one like that before 1997.

I'm not entirely pro half appointed Senata either, I'm just saying they have a valid argument. To be honest I don't even know what they need the Senate for exactly. Form follows the function, remember, and Senate's functions are not clear. A bit of legislation, a bit of appointing 'independent' bodies, a bit of scrutinising the government. There are other bodies to perform these functions (apart from "independent" agencies part).

I think for selecting members of National Broadcasting Commission, for example, they do need professional opinions from appointed half of the Senate just as they need society's side represented, too, from elected half.

With a 3/5 vote, the senate can initiate impeachment proceedings. The Senate also appoints the EC- which is kind of interesting considering that the appointed members of the senate attain their positions through appointment by committees established by---- the EC. (Have I got that right? Correct me if I'm wrong)

They also appoint the National Counter Corruption Committee, The State Audit Commission, the members of the Constitutional Court- and .... some other stuff including something about MPs caught in flagrante delectico -which was just too racy to follow. (I'm not kidding- I guess in constitutional law, flagrante delectico means more than what I thought it did).

[hammered]

1997 Constitution was designed to do away with shaky mutliparty system, the idea was that you need a strong party majoirty and strong executive power to implement necessary reforms.

It was all about reforming Thailand then, in all aspects. Bureaucracy reform, education reform, state enterprised reform, media reform etc. etc.

Turned out Thaksin had his own ideas on where these reforms should lead, and no one could stop him. Consitution writers assumed that democracy would garantee that the country would be on the right course, they put a lot of trust in people, and we know how it ended. These time around they didn't trust people as much, and they have a good reason, methinks.

I asked this question before- and I certainly don't want it to sound confrontational or in any sense derisive- because its not meant that way. But would, in your opinion, Thailand be better off with a legislature chosen by the Privy council- directly or indirectly- from the various sectors of society? Not too dissimliar from the current NLA.

The sectors could organize themselves and among their membership, nominate people to be considered by the Privy council or some arm of it.

This would save on the costs of elections, reduce the spectre of vote buying, get rid of the dominance of local puu yais in national politics and very likely eliminate the need for future coups- since the Privy council would have the authority to dissolve government if it starts getting nutty.

Why drag the privvy council into politics? There are other bodies that could be involved. The privy council has a specific duty already.

I chose Privy Council because they enjoy (or have) more trust than any body you wish to name- but if you want to substitute any other body of wise and prudent people- feel free- the question remains.

Im sure several countries have bodies likeyou mention so why not in Thailand indeed. It may also be the only way farmers reps would ever get in parliament too. However, it is up to the Thai people and their leaders at the end of the day.

One thing in Thailand is there sems little middle ground in terms of constitutional ideas of democracy. On the one hand you have often western educated idealists saying everything shouldbe totally elected and proposing constitutions that have electroal systems more democratic than those in most western countries while forgetting that few democratic institutions actually exist and any civil society is still developing and not too quickly. On th eother hand you have those who want to basically see a feudal control over everyhting and no change from old traditons. Reconciling these two with no middle ground is nigh on impossible, so what you suggest may be a way ahead. A free and fairly elected lower house together with some form of appointed conservative upper house that acts as a check. This system has worked for hundreds of years in the UK which remains the worlds longest running democratic country and only after several hundred years has the upper house selection process started to be changed. Maybe Thailand needs to walk before it can run politically. It is also easier at a later date to increasefreedom and increase what is elected when society reaches that point as has happened in the UK.

[blaze]

1997 Constitution was designed to do away with shaky mutliparty system, the idea was that you need a strong party majoirty and strong executive power to implement necessary reforms.

It was all about reforming Thailand then, in all aspects. Bureaucracy reform, education reform, state enterprised reform, media reform etc. etc.

Turned out Thaksin had his own ideas on where these reforms should lead, and no one could stop him. Consitution writers assumed that democracy would garantee that the country would be on the right course, they put a lot of trust in people, and we know how it ended. These time around they didn't trust people as much, and they have a good reason, methinks.

I asked this question before- and I certainly don't want it to sound confrontational or in any sense derisive- because its not meant that way. But would, in your opinion, Thailand be better off with a legislature chosen by the Privy council- directly or indirectly- from the various sectors of society? Not too dissimliar from the current NLA.

The sectors could organize themselves and among their membership, nominate people to be considered by the Privy council or some arm of it.

This would save on the costs of elections, reduce the spectre of vote buying, get rid of the dominance of local puu yais in national politics and very likely eliminate the need for future coups- since the Privy council would have the authority to dissolve government if it starts getting nutty.

Why drag the privvy council into politics? There are other bodies that could be involved. The privy council has a specific duty already.

I chose Privy Council because they enjoy (or have) more trust than any body you wish to name- but if you want to substitute any other body of wise and prudent people- feel free- the question remains.

Im sure several countries have bodies likeyou mention so why not in Thailand indeed. It may also be the only way farmers reps would ever get in parliament too. However, it is up to the Thai people and their leaders at the end of the day.

One thing in Thailand is there sems little middle ground in terms of constitutional ideas of democracy. On the one hand you have often western educated idealists saying everything shouldbe totally elected and proposing constitutions that have electroal systems more democratic than those in most western countries while forgetting that few democratic institutions actually exist and any civil society is still developing and not too quickly. On th eother hand you have those who want to basically see a feudal control over everyhting and no change from old traditons. Reconciling these two with no middle ground is nigh on impossible, so what you suggest may be a way ahead. A free and fairly elected lower house together with some form of appointed conservative upper house that acts as a check. This system has worked for hundreds of years in the UK which remains the worlds longest running democratic country and only after several hundred years has the upper house selection process started to be changed. Maybe Thailand needs to walk before it can run politically. It is also easier at a later date to increasefreedom and increase what is elected when society reaches that point as has happened in the UK.

Where this approach was applied I believe was the Communist states. There- or at least in some of the East bloc countries, committees of communist party members elected legislators. How much power they enjoyed re issues like foreign affairs etc, I don't know.

Actually that would be a much more democratic way of doing things than the situation I posed above- the problem with my proposal is that it relies on the vision, the values and the righteousness of the selecting committee. Their vision is the only one that will be actualized. And it may not reflect the vision of the majority of the citizens- there are NO checks and balances then. (In communist countries this wasn't so much of a problem because the vision and political values of the head honchos were (on paper) those of the 'electorate').

I dont know how often the House of Lords (or for that matter, the Canadian Senate- an entity which an increasing number of people want to see abolished entirely) rejects bills. I think the American senate is much more active in that regard. Though I've never quite understood the role of an elected senate when you already have an elected legislature. I suppose the idea is that once you are in the senate, you drop your political biases in favor of sound judgement- yet oddly, in Canada, the last act of a PM is to appoint senators from his own party- almost as a reward. The polite term is 'political patronage'.

[h90]

Interesting display of farang manners in this thread albeit, from the sloppy syntax and bad grammar, a rather downmarket sample.I know of no ordinary Thai (ie outside the ruling elite), whether anti-Thaksin or a supporter, who wants to see the former PM humiliated and insulted.

A Thai friend who joined in the demonstrations in Bangkok against Thaksin told me that he was profoundly shocked by the alleged reports of Thaksin being drenched with water in a London restaurant.His line was that Thais are very forgiving and although Thaksin must stay away for some years, no Thai would wish to harm or humiliate him.

I'm not sure this is entirely true and there are some Thais who would gladly kick Thaksin in the goolies.But it is certainly the case that Thais are very forgiving, sometimes too much so in my view.

My wife told, if she would see Thaksin she would kill him with whatever weapon she can find.

[younghusband]

Interesting display of farang manners in this thread albeit, from the sloppy syntax and bad grammar, a rather downmarket sample.I know of no ordinary Thai (ie outside the ruling elite), whether anti-Thaksin or a supporter, who wants to see the former PM humiliated and insulted.

A Thai friend who joined in the demonstrations in Bangkok against Thaksin told me that he was profoundly shocked by the alleged reports of Thaksin being drenched with water in a London restaurant.His line was that Thais are very forgiving and although Thaksin must stay away for some years, no Thai would wish to harm or humiliate him.

I'm not sure this is entirely true and there are some Thais who would gladly kick Thaksin in the goolies.But it is certainly the case that Thais are very forgiving, sometimes too much so in my view.

My wife told, if she would see Thaksin she would kill him with whatever weapon she can find.

Did she give a reason?

[Plus]

With a 3/5 vote, the senate can initiate impeachment proceedings.

So can the parlament

The Senate also appoints the EC- which is kind of interesting considering that the appointed members of the senate attain their positions through appointment by committees established by---- the EC. (Have I got that right? Correct me if I'm wrong)

The more reasons to have appointed Senate - they are likely to be more impartial when it comes to EC selection

They also appoint the National Counter Corruption Committee, The State Audit Commission, the members of the Constitutional Court...

Is it the best to entrust judicial appotments to eleceted representatives? First thing they'd do is to stack judiciary with their own people, effectively putting themselves avobe the law.

>>>>

As I understand the body that appoints the senators itself represents various sectors in the society, and military got only one seat. That means that no one can dominate the process - not a bad idea. The candidates themselves are nominated by professional bodies within their sectors, so in a way it is a democratic process, it's just not every citizen is allowed to participate.

Privy Council might be respected, but it will quickly change if they get themselves into politics. Don't fight with pigs in the mud - you will get dirty even if you win or fight "clean".

[hammered]

The old betting vote buying tactic is highlighted on the back of the Post today. According to them it is being employed in Chantaburi. It is not something as new as they make out and has been used even in Bangkok in the past.

It is a shame the reporters dont get abit of investigative fever and actually name names although I am sure we all remember when journalists requested to have their names removed from pieces they wrote that could be consdidered critical of the Thaksin regime before it fell. Being an investigatibe journo in Thailand is probably a career that carries a short life span.

[Tony Clifton]

Investigative journalism around Neanderthals or mafia politicians is a dangerous business indeed.

[sriracha john]

"Peggy Sue getting dressed and ready for Johnny to go to the Prom" (Homecoming preparations)...

Officers who guarded Thaksin return to Bangkok from South

Two senior policemen who had once been in charge of personal security for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife and were transferred to regular police work in the South have been sent back to Bangkok.

Their transfer to the Special Branch was ordered immediately the Samak Sundaravej government took power.

Police Lieutenant Colonels Kornthawas Sawasdiroj and Wathanyoo Witthayaphalothai were moved to Narathiwat and Yala a week before the 2006 military coup.

The Nation

[TAWP]

Nice indication...

[sriracha john]

Former Police Guards of Exiled Premier to be Transferred Back to Bangkok

After the new administration of Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej took office, two senior police officers, who were formerly in charge of personal security for deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife, Pojaman, were transferred back to Bangkok from their regular police mission in the South.

The two police officers guarding the exiled premier and his wife during the Thaksin administration, Police lieutenant colonels Wathanyoo Witthayaphalothai and Kornthawas Sawasdiroj were transferred to regular police work in the “insurgent-torn” provinces of Narathiwat and Yala one week before the outburst of the military coup on September 19, 2006.

Their recent transfer to the Special Branch of Metropolitan Police was immediately in place following the Samak Government’s assumption of office.

- Thailand Outlook

[sriracha john]

Sondhi warns Government not to abuse authority to help Thaksin

Sondhi Limthongkul, Manager Group owner, Thursday vowed to take to the street again if the new government abuses its authority to interfere in the judicial process against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

He said he had talked with his allies from the defunct People's Alliance for Democracy and all agreed to hold rallies again if the government tried to whitewash Thaksin.

"And I believe that the masses will join us. At least those who used to join our rallies will come out again and new people will join us," Sondhi said.

- The Nation

[sriracha john]

*post deleted until The Nation decides on final wording of article *

Edited February 8, 2008 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

and here we go... with news from another outlet... get those bodyguards identified above ready...

Exiled Premier Might Return to Thailand this Month

Despite his earlier announcement to return home in May this year, deposed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra might return to the country by the end of this month, claimed a People Power Party (PPP) source Friday.

According to Matichon Online, the PPP source reported that the exiled premier has suddenly changed his mind due to a reported conflict between him and his staunch supporter, PM Samak Sundaravej on differences in opinions regarding coalition’s policies.

Upon his wife’s return to the country last month to fight her corruption charges, Pojaman said her husband planned to return home in May this year.

Meanwhile, new Interior Minister, Chalerm Yoobamrung said Thaksin plans to end his self-imposed exile in April and return to the country then.

- Thailand Outlook

[sonnyJ]

Sondhi warns Government not to abuse authority to help Thaksin

Sondhi Limthongkul, Manager Group owner, Thursday vowed to take to the street again if the new government abuses its authority to interfere in the judicial process against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

He said he had talked with his allies from the defunct People's Alliance for Democracy and all agreed to hold rallies again if the government tried to whitewash Thaksin.

"And I believe that the masses will join us. At least those who used to join our rallies will come out again and new people will join us," Sondhi said.

- The Nation

Unbelievable. Here we go again.

But "Will we get to win this time" - as Rambo said.

These two fine gentlemen seem to have developed some understanding of the farang strategies in warfare.

Why they both can't just settle it nicely like a Thai should. They could both win. And the country...

Peace

[Ricardo]

Investigative journalism around Neanderthals or mafia politicians is a dangerous business indeed.

Indeed. Even more dangerous when that mafia is wearing uniforms and brandishing M16s.

But I heard that the Forestry department workers were eventually disarmed ?

[Tony Clifton]

The Virgin Mary has appeared on turtles

Jesus on potato chips.

Now Thaksin on toast.

He's coming...

[sonnyJ]

Toast of the town