PM’s office minister unfazed by moves to seek ruling on constitutionality of key bills 
By The Nation

 

File photo : Suwit

 

BANGKOK: -- PM’s Office Minister Suvit Maesincee said on Monday that he was sure the new laws on national strategy and national reforms would proceed as planned despite any moves aimed at seeking a court ruling on the two bills’ constitutionality.

 

The minister insisted he was not worried about such a development, referring to the decision by the Pheu Thai Party’s Ruangkrai Leekitwattana to submit a petition to the ombudsman’s office, asking it to examine the issue and put the point to the Constitutional Court.

 

The Democrat Party also plans to petition the court as it considers that the laws did not pass public hearings as required under Article 77 of the new charter.

 

Suvit said the government had held extensive public hearings on the laws and followed the stipulations in the charter.

 

He said he believed there would not be any disruption to the plan to put the laws in place as required by the Constitution.

 

The two laws are for the first time addressed in the charter, which has been in effect since April 6.

 

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) passed the national strategy and national reforms laws last Friday, but Ruangkrai has since questioned the process.

 

He claimed that the government had submitted the draft bills to the NLA two days before the Constitution came into effect, while the charter clearly stated that law enactment shall start shortly after it entered into effect.

 

The two bills, if promulgated, would pave the way for long-term development strategy, covering a period of at least 20 years.

 

The national strategy bill has been heavily criticised by some political observers, as it would have a significant number of military top brass sitting along with representatives from other sectors on the national strategy committee, raising fears that national strategy would be dominated by the military.

 

However, NLA lawmakers have defended the composition of the committee, arguing that only one-fifth or one-sixth of the number of people allowed to sit on the panel would be from the military, making it impossible for them to dominate as feared.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30319166

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-06-27

"Suvit said the government had held extensive public hearings on the laws and followed the stipulations in the charter."

 

I think most Thais were held in the dark about these so called laws and that the opposition to the charter were harassed before the lection without independent observers.

Theres that 20 years mentioned again !

Looks like one of the Constitutional Court judges is going to have to duck over to the NLA and borrow the rubber stamp.

5 hours ago, webfact said:

The national strategy bill has been heavily criticised by some political observers, as it would have a significant number of military top brass sitting along with representatives from other sectors on the national strategy committee, raising fears that national strategy would be dominated by the military.

I thought it already was. 

What's the constitutional position on unconstitutional governments?

Dictatorships dont need any rules they make there own rules up as they go  Whatever suiets them will the order of the day what the judges say or people goes in one ear and out the other.

1 hour ago, Belzybob said:

What's the constitutional position on unconstitutional governments?

That when a military coup abolishes a constitution that makes coups illegal and replaces that constitution with one that legalizes the coup - the new junta government is legal. Thailand's Constitutional Court is just along for the ride

11 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

That when a military coup abolishes a constitution that makes coups illegal and replaces that constitution with one that legalizes the coup - the new junta government is legal. Thailand's Constitutional Court is just along for the ride

Are these the same laws thet you referred to with

 

"Charter was promulgated the same day as passage for the two laws.

Hardly a clear abuse of power which by the way the NCPO has a constitutional right to do so under both the Interim Constitution and the 2017 Constitution."

 

If so, no wonder they are unfazed.

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

Are these the same laws thet you referred to with

 

"Charter was promulgated the same day as passage for the two laws.

Hardly a clear abuse of power which by the way the NCPO has a constitutional right to do so under both the Interim Constitution and the 2017 Constitution."

 

If so, no wonder they are unfazed.

The NCPO has a constitutional right ... the NCPO has no rights.

 

Consent of the governed: A condition urged by many as a requirement for legitimate government, that the authority of a government should depend on the consent of the people, as expressed by votes in elections.

Just now, Smarter Than You said:

The NCPO has a constitutional right ... the NCPO has no rights.

 

Consent of the governed: A condition urged by many as a requirement for legitimate government, that the authority of a government should depend on the consent of the people, as expressed by votes in elections.

Take it up with the person I quoted. Personally, I have very little interest in your rants.

Section 44 loosely translated means that the junta, can do what it pleases, how it pleases, when it pleases, to whomever it pleases without regard to anybody who may be displeased by anything it chooses to do

1 hour ago, halloween said:

Take it up with the person I quoted. Personally, I have very little interest in your rants.

Then why do you respond?  Your pathological hatred of all things Thaksin and your unconditional adoration of Prayuth has deprived you of your sovereignty of reason.

1 minute ago, stephen tracy said:

Then why do you respond?  Your pathological hatred of all things Thaksin and your unconditional adoration of Prayuth has deprived you of your sovereignty of reason.

Quite often, I don't. What's it to you besides an opportunity for personal attack?

2 hours ago, Smarter Than You said:

the NCPO has no rights

It does in Section 265 of the 2017 Constitution that was approved by the majority consent of Thai voters in a referendum, albeit under very restrictive and limiting conditions. NCPO's right to invoke Article 44 ends with the installation of the next elected government. To all practical appearances, the NCPO does have constitutional rights that supercede the People's sovereignty.

8 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

It does in Section 265 of the 2017 Constitution that was approved by the majority consent of Thai voters in a referendum, albeit under very restrictive and limiting conditions. NCPO's right to invoke Article 44 ends with the installation of the next elected government. To all practical appearances, the NCPO does have constitutional rights that supercede the People's sovereignty.

You've chopped off half the post.

 

Legitimate governments require the consent of the governed.

 

The Junta does not have the peoples consent - it is illegitimate no matter how many constitutions they write for themselves and how many gerrymandered referendums they hold.