Big parties unhappy with new law

[webfact]

Big parties unhappy with new law
By CHANIKARN PHUMHIRAN 
KHANITTHA THEPPAJORN 
THE NATION

 

 

Politicians question why individuals will be singled out and could face death

 

BANGKOK: -- POLITICIANS FROM the major parties have expressed dissatisfaction with the revision of the political parties law, casting doubt over why politicians and party members have been singled out as the only persons subject to the death penalty if found guilty of trading political positions for money.

 

Ongart Klampaiboon, a prominent member of the Democrat Party, yesterday said he had observed that the severest punishment would be enforced only in regard to politicians or members of political parties, and would not apply to those in other high-ranking positions, such as civil servants or a non-MP prime minister.

 

Kanin Boonsuwan of the Pheu Thai Party voiced similar sentiment, as well as concern over possible slander and abuse or arbitrary use of the law. 

 

Full story: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30302606

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2016-12-22

[canuckamuck]

More obsession with crushing sub-elite representation.

[trogers]

Because history has shown political parties have buy and sell positions en mass, like acquisitions and mergers of the corporate world.

[ramrod711]

Big parties unhappy with new law

 

Big parties should have done a better job of looking after their constituents rather than lining their own pockets. I for one have no sympathy, if the threat of capitol punishment keeps them honest, good.

Edited December 22, 2016 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[chainarong]

The death penalty is both stupid and barbaric, all that is needed is a disbar for life and 10 years in the can, a death penalty signifies a direct copy cat from China , their human rights record is nothing to be delighted about. ...........................................

[klauskunkel]

Politicians are not unhappy with the computer law, not unhappy with the defamation law, not unhappy with the I-lost-my-face-and-it's-your-fault law, but definitely unhappy with a law that targets politicians.

[robblok]

I am against the death penalty but given that it is never put to use in Thailand means its a paper tiger. It just means long jailtime and I do agree with that but the politicians are right should apply for civil servants too. Corruption can only be fought here with hars punishment. 

[worgeordie]

When there is an election,and the parties are back in Parliament,

can they not just repeal any laws they dont like,which will be most

i suspect.

regards worgeordie

[canuckamuck]

21 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

When there is an election,and the parties are back in Parliament,

can they not just repeal any laws they dont like,which will be most

i suspect.

regards worgeordie

They could in a government that doesn't have a large number of seats designated to the military

[piersbeckett]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

I am against the death penalty but given that it is never put to use in Thailand means its a paper tiger. It just means long jailtime and I do agree with that but the politicians are right should apply for civil servants too. Corruption can only be fought here with hars punishment. 

That's right, the whole public sector, military, police, judiciary, executive, right down to the staff of the tessabaan, the land office and the water department. Jail first then execution upon summary conviction.

Edited December 22, 2016 by piersbeckett
addition

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, worgeordie said:

When there is an election,and the parties are back in Parliament,

can they not just repeal any laws they dont like,which will be most

i suspect.

regards worgeordie

 

And risk a military sponsored Bangkok shutdown and the constitution court idioscrantic ruling? History beckons. 

[maewang99]

how about instead of a death penalty....

just instruct the Thai SEC that non-Thai Thai residents can enforce the existing Thai laws against Thai brokers and banks, working on behalf of an overseas bank or broker... from using nominees to hold Thai securities?

or sign onto and enforce the higher level FATCA conventions.

and then you will have, at the minimum, less nominees holding Thai securities to investigate... which includes anyone who manages to waggle himself or herself or any family member thereof a state issued (USA) driver's license of any kind, and that's pretty much it.   

now the whole world is computerized and there is no reason to not use the name of the actual security holder.... over a nominee entity.

.....and I can file a correct and complete Thai tax return.. which I can't right now because if ****anyone**** uses an overseas bank or broker... even in the good ol' USA.... their Thai holdings are held in the name of a nominee 100% of the time.... and commingled with other holdings as well.... all of the time.

Always.

example, when Kiatnakin/Phatra does my personal trades, on the Stock Exchange of Thailand, for my broker in the USA, Charles Schwab & Company... it's all held in nominee name only (Gerlach & Company FBO Schwab Customer) instead of my real everyday actual.... name... the one my mom gave me and is on my Social Security card.... for darn sure and all of which [except my ID and Social Security number and any other information about me at all] is a matter of record the Thai SEC has in it's hands right now. And then....to keep it extra secret... Charles Schwab also uses one more Thai regulated intermediary, Citibank, to make sure it is as big of a hassle as they can make it for anyone or thing to unwind. 

but the Thai SEC will say they already have laws and regulations to enforce this.. including a Tax Treaty with the USA which has a Non Discrimination Clause..... the foreigner has the right to hire lots and lots of expensive legal counsel to sue his or her bank or broker in the US courts... and as for all the other hundreds or maybe even thousands of folks that hold Thai securities....  using a US bank or broker.... none of them would be doing something naughty like..... insider trading... hiding assets. they always tell their US broker that they are Thai or Thai USA dual.... because of FATCA?

but Thai securities are not registered in the name of the actual security holder... and yet it would be easy to do and keep up to date on a daily if not even real time basis because the folks who manage other folks money are really good at keeping track of this information.... and we are talking about publicly traded securities.. not cash in a retail bank account.
 

Edited December 22, 2016 by maewang99

[Ricardo]

2 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

Politicians are not unhappy with the computer law, not unhappy with the defamation law, not unhappy with the I-lost-my-face-and-it's-your-fault law, but definitely unhappy with a law that targets politicians.

 

God forbid that politicians should be deterred, from selling political positions for money, whatever is the World coming to ? 

[smedly]

it's called corruption and when concerning politicians is at the very top of the tree, simple solution - play by the rules

[toofarnorth]

I will find something else to read. I thought big parties had something to do with a knees up on NY eve.

[greenchair]

3 hours ago, worgeordie said:

When there is an election,and the parties are back in Parliament,

can they not just repeal any laws they dont like,which will be most

i suspect.

regards worgeordie

 

Some of the laws are directly correlated with the constitution, which is illegal to change and anyway cannot be changed without approval from the senate, which are the ones writing all these laws. 

I think? ??please correct me if I am wrong. 

[Cuchulainn]

9 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Big parties unhappy with new law

 

Big parties should have done a better job of looking after their constituents rather than lining their own pockets. I for one have no sympathy, if the threat of capitol punishment keeps them honest, good.

 

+1

 

Well said Ramrod. I agree 100%. 

[elgordo38]

9 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Big parties unhappy with new law

 

Big parties should have done a better job of looking after their constituents rather than lining their own pockets. I for one have no sympathy, if the threat of capitol punishment keeps them honest, good.

Capital punishment hmm who decides who gets punished thats the question. 

[elgordo38]

Big parties what a joke. There are not left under the new laws. The junta has effectively turned you into political eunuches. Your democracy window dressing. What person under threat of death would want to be a politician holding a Wild Bill Hickock poker hand. 

[heybruce]

"... the severest punishment would be enforced only in regard to politicians or members of political parties, and would not apply to those in other high-ranking positions, such as civil servants or a non-MP prime minister. "

 

No surprise here, the law only applies to politicians, not the people currently running the country, and who will continue to run the country for the foreseeable future.

[sjaak327]

The irony. This law summarizes what is wrong with the junta. Over the top punishment ractified by an appointed rubber stamp parliament, appointed by people that comitted high treason and countless offenses of the type this law introduces.

 

And some people seem to agree or accept, really ? The word hypocrite seems to be unknown..

[elgordo38]

46 minutes ago, heybruce said:

No surprise here, the law only applies to politicians, not the people currently running the country, and who will continue to run the country for the foreseeable future.

They will never get their head handed to them on a silver platter. Marionettes wanted with strings attached. 

[candide]

It's funny to see that most Junta huggers pretend not to have noticed the core claim of the OP, which is that all people (civil servants, members of "independent" organisations, military, etc...) should be subject to the same law, and not only politicians. 

[elgordo38]

47 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

The irony. This law summarizes what is wrong with the junta

Don't do as I do do as I say. 

[dageurreotype]

1 hour ago, elgordo38 said:

Big parties what a joke. There are not left under the new laws. The junta has effectively turned you into political eunuches. Your democracy window dressing. What person under threat of death would want to be a politician holding a Wild Bill Hickock poker hand. 

 

In a land where greed surpasses everything, including the will to live, I would say quite a few.

[elgordo38]

1 minute ago, dageurreotype said:

 

In a land where greed surpasses everything, including the will to live, I would say quite a few.

Should come with a warning label "Dangerous for your health"

[smedly]

1 hour ago, candide said:

It's funny to see that most Junta huggers pretend not to have noticed the core claim of the OP, which is that all people (civil servants, members of "independent" organisations, military, etc...) should be subject to the same law, and not only politicians. 

do you really have to resort to cheap insults and name calling to get your point across

[smedly]

what the current administration are doing is setting up a political platform and framework of rules were an elected government might just manage to go full term without bringing massive deadly protest onto the streets 

[DavidVincent]

I am quite confident those who want this law to be created and enforced will welcome the same law for the Army and their nepotism...

 

We all know what is happening : the army is weakening the politicians and will rule, not even hidden anymore, to enforce the continuity of the traditional establishment. They will also scare the general public with 112 and article 44 to maintain them in an Orwellian way of life...and some of them, even here, continue to support such actions...pathetic

[DavidVincent]

3 minutes ago, smedly said:

what the current administration are doing is setting up a political platform and framework of rules were an elected government might just manage to go full term without bringing massive deadly protest onto the streets 

You know perfectly this is not the goal of the current "PM".