CDC scraps party dissolution clause but retains death penalty in party bill

 

 

BANGKOK: -- The Constitution Drafting Committee has agreed to delete a provision in the political party bill which empowers the Constitutional Court to dissolve a party and to withdraw the right to contest an election of the party’s executive committee if it fails to perform one of the four mandatory tasks.

 

The four tasks which all political parties must perform are: to promote knowledge and understanding about democratic system with the King as the head of state; to propose guidelines of national development; to promote public participation and to promote national reconciliation.

 

CDC spokesman Norachit Singhaseni said the committee agreed to substitute a new provision empowering the Election Commission to warn political parties in case they do not perform any of the four tasks and, if they ignore the warning, the EC will be authorized to cut the financial subsidy for political parties.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/cdc-scraps-party-dissolution-clause-retains-death-penalty-party-bill/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2016-12-20

Given the last generation or two of Thai politicians, few of them would be really missed by the majority of Thai people.

'Relax, we won't dissolve your party... We'll just kill you instead!'

A very risky business to be in politics with this death penalty looming on the sidelines. 

How hard would it be to set someone up for this. 

It's not going to stop the buying of positions. They will just find another way to have the money backhanded. 

CDC pulls back on some new political party rules
By KHANITTHA THEPPAJORN 
THE NATION

 

Norachit

 

SEED-FUND SUM FOR INDIVIDUALS REDUCED WHILE MINIMUM NUMBER OF MEMBERS HALVED TO 10,000

 

BANGKOK: -- THE CONSTITUTION Drafting Commission (CDC) yesterday backed down on some new rules in the recently introduced political party law, reducing the seed funding for individuals to Bt1,000 and cutting the number of members a party had to recruit to 10,000 from 20,000.

 

The annual membership fee of Bt100, however, remained in the law despite controversy.

 

The revision of the draft law followed heavy criticism that the new rules were unrealistic and unfriendly to political enthusiasts aspiring to form a new party.

 

Full story: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30302514

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2016-12-21

Chinese man executed 21 yrs ago has now been exonerated. He was INNOCENT.  How many other innocent people have been executed by state sanctioned murder? Death penalty should be abolished world wide.  

48 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Chinese man executed 21 yrs ago has now been exonerated. He was INNOCENT.  How many other innocent people have been executed by state sanctioned murder? Death penalty should be abolished world wide.  

Yes, the death penalty is wrong and executing somebody for a non-violent crime is beyond contempt.  The junta's true colors are well known now.  They are creating a very sad chapter in Thai history. 

Edited December 21, 20169 yr by yellowboat

Reminds one a little bit of Duterte. We do not like what you are doing. (in his case it rarely has anything to do with drugs, as stated). So you must die.

5 minutes ago, yellowboat said:

Yes, the death penalty is wrong and executing somebody for a non-violent crime is beyond contempt.  The junta's true colors are well known now.  They are creating a very sad chapter in Thai history. 

Its just for show, the death penalty is not applied anymore you know that as well as I do. 

5 minutes ago, robblok said:

Its just for show, the death penalty is not applied anymore you know that as well as I do. 

No point in having it on the books then, if it is not to be applied. You either have the death penalty or you don't.

Just now, baboon said:

No point in having it on the books then, if it is not to be applied. You either have the death penalty or you don't.

Not sure to be honest, but the fact remains they have the death-penalty in the books here but they have not executed anyone in a long time. So effectively its not used. This law will make politicians a lot more careful about buying and selling their positions. Now it comes down to equal enforcement. 

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Not sure to be honest, but the fact remains they have the death-penalty in the books here but they have not executed anyone in a long time. So effectively its not used. This law will make politicians a lot more careful about buying and selling their positions. Now it comes down to equal enforcement. 

"Now it comes down to equal enforcement."

 

Well that's the thing, isn't it? You and I rob a bank and kill a policeman each. You hang because you are criminal scum and I get life because the judge's sister is married to this lovely English bloke.

Mind you, I'm sure a few on here would far prefer that to be the other way round and forget the bank analogy...

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

"Now it comes down to equal enforcement."

 

Well that's the thing, isn't it? You and I rob a bank and kill a policeman each. You hang because you are criminal scum and I get life because the judge's sister is married to this lovely English bloke.

Mind you, I'm sure a few on here would far prefer that to be the other way round and forget the bank analogy...

It always comes down to equal enforcement but its something both sides do. Remember how Tarit was set after Abisith and so on. Both sides use the law to go after their opponents. Its far from desirable (one of the reasons i like a change of goverment once in a while) because then they go after the other side.  I am sure with YL in power they would never have gone after the fake G2G rice deals while a big crime was committed. 

1 minute ago, robblok said:

It always comes down to equal enforcement but its something both sides do. Remember how Tarit was set after Abisith and so on. Both sides use the law to go after their opponents. Its far from desirable (one of the reasons i like a change of goverment once in a while) because then they go after the other side.  I am sure with YL in power they would never have gone after the fake G2G rice deals while a big crime was committed. 

I am not disagreeing with you, but you do make the case for why the death penalty should not even be on the books for political offences such as vote buying / rigging. No political faction and their buddies in the justice system can be trusted in its use.

Just now, baboon said:

I am not disagreeing with you, but you do make the case for why the death penalty should not even be on the books for political offences such as vote buying / rigging. No political faction and their buddies in the justice system can be trusted in its use.

I am not seeing this as a death penalty because its never done, i am seeing this as a high punishment. But it would have been better if they just said minimum so many years ect. 

 

I 100% agree with your last assessment that no political faction can be trusted. However I do believe in strong laws in this country for corruption and combine that with an goverment change (I even like it if PTP gets in power after the army and goes after misdeeds of the army) once in a while. This is the only way to fight corruption here tough laws and a government change. Now I am bored with the army they have been in power too long and their single gateway bothers me a lot (mainly worry about slower downloads / skype problems / dropbox problems I know its selfish). I also don't like it because it might help keep video's of government official or others wrongdoing if it does not suit the rulers at the time (whoever they might be because I really don't believe that a PTP or democrats would do away with such a nice tool to use against opponents once its there). Otherwise the defamation laws would be gone already. 

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Reminds one a little bit of Duterte. We do not like what you are doing. (in his case it rarely has anything to do with drugs, as stated). So you must die.

 

So you agree that if somebody murders a person they should be taken to court an if found guilty, be sentenced to death.

 

As you were the one who brought Duterte's name up, what should happen to him, President or not?

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-38311655

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38337746

 

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/150783/duterte-admits-killing-3-hostage-takers-davao-city

 

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/150783/duterte-admits-killing-3-hostage-takers-davao-city

 

 

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

 

So you agree that if somebody murders a person they should be taken to court an if found guilty, be sentenced to death.

 

As you were the one who brought Duterte's name up, what should happen to him, President or not?

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-38311655

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-38337746

 

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/150783/duterte-admits-killing-3-hostage-takers-davao-city

 

https://globalnation.inquirer.net/150783/duterte-admits-killing-3-hostage-takers-davao-city

 

 

 

A complete misinterpretation of my post. I dislike Duterte very much, and consider him to be a criminal, serial murderer. My point was that any time a death penalty is imposed, it can be used for political gain. Duterte should be charged with thousands of counts of murder, and locked up for life, or face the death penalty. 

For any gung ho young people that might want to enter politics there should be a warning sign attached. 

"Entering Politics Could Be Dangerous To Your Health"

On 21/12/2016 at 1:30 PM, spidermike007 said:

 

A complete misinterpretation of my post. I dislike Duterte very much, and consider him to be a criminal, serial murderer. My point was that any time a death penalty is imposed, it can be used for political gain. Duterte should be charged with thousands of counts of murder, and locked up for life, or face the death penalty. 

 

I am sorry if you think I misinterpreted your post.

 

I agree 100% with you on Duterte but he was elected as the President of the Philippines and perhaps now many of those who voted for him are waking up to what he is really like.

 

Better to charge him for the 3 he has admitted to, and be fairly sure of a conviction (from his own mouth) than on the hope that he will be arrested, tried and convicted of something in a gray area.

 

A bit like King Henry ll of England saying "Who will rid me of this troublesome priest? "

 

Perhaps he meant or not but he certainly did nothing to stop it.

 

A little similar to Thaksin a while ago. Did he really mean to say what he did? Only he really knows but many people took it upon themselves to deal with it and the collateral fall out was very large.