What they really need to do is make section 44 a special law that can only be used by the appointed senate. This could be used to protect the people from unscrupulous politicians and eliminate disenters. ??

Did they Poll 50 Officers to get this result?

1 hour ago, greenchair said:

What they really need to do is make section 44 a special law that can only be used by the appointed senate. This could be used to protect the people from unscrupulous politicians and eliminate disenters. ??

Such special powers are already provided in the 2016 draft constitution. With members of the NCPO having ex-officio self appointments to the next Senate, the military remains in effect in control of any elected government as the so-called "Dark Government."

11 hours ago, yellowboat said:

Thai judges should be made to defend Thai law in the face of article 44, unless they care not to do so.  Article 44 is in place to circumvent their rulings, their judgment.

The Constitutional Court has already ruled that Articles of the Interim Constitution, ie., Article 44, are constitutional. Thai judges who rule against the use of Article 44 application would be held unconstitutional. There is nothing for the judges to defend other than the Interim Constitution - or lose their jobs. Has nothing to do with caring or good judgement.

 

What should have happened when the junta imposed its Interim Constitution in 2014 on the Thai people is that the Constitutional Court judges (and maybe the entire judicial system) should have resigned en mass rather than recognize the legitimacy of the junta to overthrow an elected government, abolish the 2006 Constitution and replace it with the junta's handcrafted Interim Constitution that provided for absolute power over the three branches of the government. But the Constitutional Court (originally organized by an earlier junta) has been and continues to be a vehicle for the elite to subvert democracy and the sovereignty of the Thai people. And according to this survey, the Thai people are happy with their loss of (albeit weak) democracy.

15 hours ago, bobmac10 said:

All the polls conducted by the junta are absolute fantasy.

I doubt whether a poll is actually conducted, who can say anyway? Anyone who knows the truth can't speak out for fear of being arrested and held for attitude adjustment.

George Orwell would be laughing right now.

George Orwell will be rolling over in his grave. He thought he was writing fiction.

19 hours ago, rooster59 said:

although 72.3% of people it surveyed has less to least understanding of Section 44,

I guess that says it. The people polled don't know what S44 is all about. Great result guys.

 

I thought this section gave the power directly to Prayuth so it would need rewording anyway, or would it?

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

Such special powers are already provided in the 2016 draft constitution. With members of the NCPO having ex-officio self appointments to the next Senate, the military remains in effect in control of any elected government as the so-called "Dark Government."

Oh yes, but wouldn't section 44 be a real doosie to add to that. 

In fact, who needs other laws, why don't they just use 44 for everything. 

12 hours ago, Wilsonandson said:

Yes, I think the majority of Thai's are happy with the way things are at the moment. The junta seems to have mellowed out recently. The international community has also become more comfortable with the juntas grip on power. Plenty are happy that there is peace in Thailand and that the junta has a strong control during a time of woe.

In essence Thai's are happy to wait for democracy. There's no hurry. We have all the time in the world said Louis Armstrong and that song is very appropriate.

You and djjamie think the majority of Thais are happy. Here is a radical suggestion; why not let the Thais decide themselves in a national referendum with full freedom of expression and assembly?

No? What a shocker!

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

The Constitutional Court has already ruled that Articles of the Interim Constitution, ie., Article 44, are constitutional. Thai judges who rule against the use of Article 44 application would be held unconstitutional. There is nothing for the judges to defend other than the Interim Constitution - or lose their jobs. Has nothing to do with caring or good judgement.

 

What should have happened when the junta imposed its Interim Constitution in 2014 on the Thai people is that the Constitutional Court judges (and maybe the entire judicial system) should have resigned en mass rather than recognize the legitimacy of the junta to overthrow an elected government, abolish the 2006 Constitution and replace it with the junta's handcrafted Interim Constitution that provided for absolute power over the three branches of the government. But the Constitutional Court (originally organized by an earlier junta) has been and continues to be a vehicle for the elite to subvert democracy and the sovereignty of the Thai people. And according to this survey, the Thai people are happy with their loss of (albeit weak) democracy.

Outstanding explanation !  So it was never a serious court of law, but a tool for the entitled to subjugate the average Thai.   The judges are more or less just civil servants who do not engage in debate or defend its integrity.

20 hours ago, smutcakes said:

There is no way they could risk leaving Section 44 there. If PTP got in they could disband the Senate, remove this Governments amnesty and charge them all with treason and lock them up. Not a hope in hell they would risk leaving it open.

Remember, if and when there are elections, the junta stays in power until a new government is formed.

 

Prayuth will be the "next" PM... a distant 2nd place possibility is that he goes to the privy council and his brother or Jaba the hut becomes the next PM

 

Under that constellation, they will want to keep Art 44. It's quite handy after all.

 

We're under the boot for a long time to come... That is the bottom line

On 3/4/2017 at 3:26 PM, darksidedog said:

Unbelieveable. 78.4% think they should keep article 44 even though 72.3% had little or no understanding of it.

How can you express an opinion, on something you don't understand? Oh, Thailand!

I remember reading two opinion polls published side by side in the Bangkok Post many years ago. Not as a deliberate contrast but just incidentally published that way. Unfortunately, I can't reference it and did not record it. One was about the death penalty - 80 percent or so wanted it to be kept on the books. The other was about whether the Thai police and courts corruptly convict innocent people and about 80 percent or so thought they did.