Thread: Divided Thailand seeks elusive 'normalcy'

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

^ I just hope that it is accurate. A lot of hopes and dreams rest upon this new PM. She could do something amazing. She could....

But for that brother of hers, I'd be feeling positive. I hope she can do what she said she would. Her speech (which isn't here) was very good and full of fine words.

Now lets see.

She is the Emu to Thaksin's Rod Hull. I'm amazed people see it any other way.

^
If that meant Prayuth (& Co) getting the Michael Parkinson treatment, I might almost start to think there's something extra in favour of the idea.

Originally Posted by SteveCM

Meet some of the "overwhelming evidence" from someone thought worth quoting by the screen-full.....

Land Destroyer: Meet a Propagandist

He has plenty of followers - Tony Cartalucci Critic

Originally Posted by Thai Intel

Apart from the Democrat Party and media close to it trying to split Pheu Thai Party and Red Shirts and hoping for a confrontation, the Thai establishment have mostly realized much of the above - and is openly seeking to work with Yingluck.

Ain't that the truth..... and not unrepresented here.

Originally Posted by WPR

The appointment might appease the military in that Yuthasak is a former soldier, rather than a civilian taking the ministry’s helm, but he “seems intent on challenging the power of Army Commander Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha,” said Chambers. “I expect a growing clash between Yuthasak and Prayuth,” he added. “This could lead, in 6 months, to enhanced tensions between the civilian sector and military sector.”

Not to make too much of one analyst's opinion, but this element strikes me as one to watch. Last year I attended a talk given by Chambers and he plainly knows the Thai military inside and out......

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The senator, who is on a regional tour of Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia and Vietnam, said he had 'respect for former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva

I reckon the senator just lost any respect he had accrued with his earlier remarks.

From the blog world.....


Time for reform in Thailand… by getting rid of one man, one vote? | Asian Correspondent

By Bangkok Pundit
Aug 16, 2011

In an interview with the Bangkok Post, Suvit Maesincee, the Director of the Sasin Institute for Global Affairs, is quoted as stating:

The party must have the courage to change. So long as the system is what it is, then it’s up to the leader, Khun Yingluck [Shinawatra], to have the courage to change.

I don’t think the fact that Pheu Thai won decisively at the polls means much. Ultimately, Thailand might need to consider whether the system of one man, one vote is best for us or not.

I think that in the future, we will see more class warfare. It is the middle class that pays taxes, but it is the lower class that benefits from populist policies. Resentment about the perceived injustice will build, as the middle class may see the government using their tax money to simply curry favour, rather than for the future development of the country. This is not a question of prai [commoners] and amat [aristocracy] that the red-shirts have built up.

BP: Indeed, because first the electoral system was changed in 2007 to weaken the party-list vote and move to multi-member constituency seats (from 400 single-seat constituencies + 100 party-list MPs to 80 party-list MPs and 400 MPs from multi-member constituencies) to help defeat the pro-Thaksin PPP. This didn’t work so earlier this year the Democrat-led government changed the electoral system to increase the number of party-list seats from 80 to 125, which had been the strength of the Democrats, and reduced the number of constituency seats from 400 to 375, PT’s strength. Ultimately and despite an increase of 33 to 44 party-list seats by the Democrats, the electoral system changes backfired with PT surging to 61 party-list seats from 34.

Hence, we are now reverting back to wondering whether one man, one vote is the answer. Yes, it is sufficiency democracy time. BP has repeatedly blogged about New Politics which was first proposed by the PAD in 2008 and that is moving away from electing 100% of MPs to electing only 30% (later upgraded to 50%) of MPs with the rest being chosen/selected from occupational lists (see posts about this here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here). We only need to look back at the military selected National Legislative Assembly (NLA) in 2007 to see the result.

For the 240 odd members of the NLA you have the government sector including the upper echelons of the judiciary and the police, but also more than 60 former or current military officers (yes, that is right 25%). Then, you have the bankers, lawyers, journalists, artists, retired government officials, and academics. Anything to keep the poor from having representatives or having any power. When you can’t win, change the political system so you don’t have to… One wonders if this will be the first of many calls for such reform….


*h/t to Srithanonchai in this comment at New Mandala

I have followed Thai Intel for some time...

Originally Posted by SteveCM

From the blog world.....


https://thaiintelligentnews.wordpres...n-to-yingluck/

August 15, 2011

Image via Wikipedia

• By Ranger, Thai Intel’s political journalist

How time flies!

I can still remember sitting there at Thailand‘s largest stadium, heavy rain, with about 50,000 mostly Red Shirts, listening to Yingluck’s closing Bangkok election campaign run.

Last week on Twitter, it was a dry and hot Twittering between Red Shirts.

“The Thai establishment is trying to create a split between Pheu Thai Party and the Red Shirts,” said one, with another Red Shirts, saying, “The Thai establishment is Brain-Dead and have to rely on guns and judicialization to run Thailand.”

And yet, a Thai Rath analysis says, quote: “When Yingluck lays a solid foundation, anything can be done.” And yet, again, this morning, a key Red Shirts told me, quote: “There is no way Yingluck can be more popular than Taksin.”

So, here I am this morning, walking through the hall-way of my condo, and saw the lonely Bangkok Post newspaper, in a condo with 300-400 units, and it says, quote: “The government will give 10 million baht to dead Red Shirts from the crack-down.”

How does one, make any sense of Thailand?

So when I get confuse, I normally turn to Matichon, the Thai newspaper for the intellect, that has a very neutral status-quo political position. And as I was going through my Matichon resources - one article struck me. “There is nothing new in Thailand and everything that is going on is just a repeat of things that have happened before,” says the article.

The Thai establishment have always rely on guns and the control of the law to come to power and remain in power in Thailand. And for a coup to occur, there needs to be a great deal of civil unrest and public support. Other than those reasons, the Thai establishment, have never held power.

So that leads to my analysis-based on Thailand’s political history:

First, the only way for civil unrest to occur in Thailand, at this point, is a split between the Pheu Thai Party and the Red Shirts. The threat of a Yellow Shirts civil un-rest is minimal.

Secondly, there is no rationale for a coup - the Thai public and the globe just will not accept it-if there is no massive un-rest on the streets. And the other reason for coup is changes to the internal power balance in the Thai military - that causes too much ripple.

Thirdly, the Thai justice system, is known to everyone as serving the establishment-with both supporters and opposition to that situation-with a counter balance being the reconciliation committee research and the reports of various global level units - on top of very well-known published cases that supports the assertions of a crooked justice system.

Fourth, for the Red Shirts, Taksin is more important than Yingluck-providing both a cushioning for Yingluck, but also support for the Red Shirts.

Indeed, time flies!

Apart from the Democrat Party and media close to it trying to split Pheu Thai Party and Red Shirts and hoping for a confrontation, the Thai establishment have mostly realized much of the above - and is openly seeking to work with Yingluck.

As for the Red Shirts, some are talking about a political party, some are talking about waiting for Yingluck to gain more political footing and some are openly revolting.

But from following so may Red Shirts Twitter-very few Red Shirts are fighting among themselves. The consensus, with the Red Shirts, is mostly, “We are Red Shirts no matter what.”

As I sat there, all wet and cold in the rain, with those 50,000 Red Shirts, listening to Yingluck election closing campaign words, like most Thais, what really got me voting for Yingluck was here words, quote:

“I will not seek revenge, but will solve Thailand’s problems.”

Obviously, the part about not seeking revenge, relates mostly to appeasement with the Thai establishment and the part about solving Thailand’s problems, can be related to many things - but the cause of a great deal of civil unrest in Thailand, relates to the Thai establishment treatment of the Red Shirts.

It rain and it rain so hard that day at the stadium, 1,000s of Red Shirts who were listening to Yingluck, ran out for cover of the roofed cover of the stairs of the stadium - and that included me. And it rain just so hard, the noise covered most of what Yingluck was saying - even with massive sound system.

Shaking wet from the cold, I knew even then-that Yingluck would be walking a tight-rope.

Already, a newly appointed minister - said he would strictly enforce lese majeste laws and another said he is hands off about Thailand’s political prisoners. Clearly, Yingluck is stressing the first part of her promise-meant to appease the Thai establishment. The joke, with the Democrat Party, currently, is that, quote: “A new Amart is taking roots.”

This morning, my Red Shirts women friend I mentioned at the start of this report, told me after I asked her for pointers to write this article, said, quote: “It all boils down to Yingluck.”

• The Following is from World Political Review:

Yingluck Walking Political ‘Tightrope’ in Thailand

By Guy Taylor | 12 Aug 2011

Thailand’s new Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra made headlines this week by forming a cabinet void of any members tied to the nation’s pro-democracy “Red Shirt” movement.

Yingluck is the sister of Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted from the prime minister seat in 2006 by a military coup, and it is widely accepted that her election as the first female to hold the office depended heavily on support from the Red Shirts.

But she’s taking care now not to identify herself too closely with the movement whose massive demonstrations brought Bangkok to its knees last year. According to Paul Chambers, head of research at the Southeast Asian Institute of Global Studies at Thailand’s Payap University, “Yingluck is walking a difficult tightrope between appeasing the Red Shirts and placating the royalists as well as the military.”

“By not having any Red Shirts in her cabinet, it shows that she is trying to placate the powers that be,” Chambers told Trend Lines in an email exchange yesterday. “If Red Shirts had been included, a military coup against her might have occurred.”

Where outgoing Prime Minister Abhisit Vajjajiva faced issues of legitimacy stemming from criticisms that his rise had been engineered by the military and royal family, Chambers said Yingluck now faces a similar criticism derived “from what might appear to be her image as a mere proxy of her brother Thaksin.”

That said, if she moves too far away from the Red Shirts as she goes forward, it “could lead to a split in the pro-Thaksin camp between pragmatists and radicals,” said Chambers. Such a split would increase the chances of her government being undermined by anti-Thaksin groups such as the nationalist “Yellow Shirts,” whose clashes with the Red Shirt movement have defined much of country’s political paralysis in recent years.

From a distance, Yingluck’s relatively peaceful ascension to the prime ministership this summer appeared to signal something of an end to that paralysis.

But according to Chambers, “The political conflicts and impasses are merely in remission rather than having passed.” Chambers added that the likelihood is high for demonstrations against the government to resume in the months ahead.

In the interim, he said, “Yingluck’s government will attempt to pass a new minimum wage law. There will be other similar populist measures. But whether this government can successfully implement such measures before it is kicked out of office by anti-Thaksin forces is still in doubt.”

It has been argued, meanwhile, that the military is the final arbiter of what happens in Thailand. In announcing her cabinet Wednesday, Yingluck tapped Gen. Yuthasak Sasiprapa, a close ally of her brother, to be defense minister.

The appointment might appease the military in that Yuthasak is a former soldier, rather than a civilian taking the ministry’s helm, but he “seems intent on challenging the power of Army Commander Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha,” said Chambers. “I expect a growing clash between Yuthasak and Prayuth,” he added. “This could lead, in 6 months, to enhanced tensions between the civilian sector and military sector.”

Originally Posted by LooseBowels

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

The senator, who is on a regional tour of Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia and Vietnam, said he had 'respect for former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva

I reckon the senator just lost any respect he had accrued with his earlier remarks.

No, he was quite confused, giving respect to new and any government. Bloody politician

Low trust in court's impartiality: poll

Low trust in court's impartiality: poll

By THE NATION
Published on August 19, 2011

Some 37 per cent of people in Bangkok and its vicinity surveyed by Dusit Poll said they did not trust the Constitution Court, adding they felt the court appeared to pass verdicts based on double standards or political pressure.

The poll questioned 1,174 people in Bangkok and its vicinity between August 13 to 17. Only 25.5 per cent of respondents said they trusted the court.

As many as 37.5 per cent also said they did not really know the role of the Constitution Court.

Some 48 per cent of respondents said they had more trust when cases were related to government |corruption, while 47.8 per cent of respondents |said they had less trust in the Constitution Court |when cases related to the constitutional rights to |freedom of assembly were tested by groups of protesters.

Forty-three per cent of respondents added they did not trust the court's handling of cases that led to the banning of politicians from politics. Some 30 per cent of respondents, meanwhile, urged the court to be impartial and transparent.

Vasan Soipisut, a Constitution Court judge defended the court by stating that people may not really understand what constitutes double standards, adding that judges cannot just give a verdict that pleased the public but must adhere to what is right.

On the appointment of a new president of the Constitution Court, Vasan said the new president would likely be announced next Wednesday.

"I don't know who that will be and although I'm most senior I don't know if I'll get [the job] or not," he said.

Society prejudiced against the uneducated poor, seminar hears

EQUAL RIGHTS

Society prejudiced against the uneducated poor, seminar hears


By Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation on Sunday
Published on August 21, 2011

Children are being 'taught to acquire an elitist approach against the poor'

Bias in society against poor people with low education poses a major barrier for the acceptance of equal political rights in Thailand, a symposium concluded yesterday.

Some parents are making their young children look down on poor people like street sweepers by inculcating the idea that they should study hard in order to avoid becoming a street sweeper, said red-shirt co-leader and Pheu Thai MP Wiphuthalang Phattanaphumthai. "They make children hate street sweepers from early childhood. But how can Bangkok survive if all street sweepers stop working for a day?"

Wiphuthalang said the elitist viewpoint that looks down on the poor and less educated, especially those from the North and Northeastern regions, does not necessarily arise from one's social background.

"You are elite or serf not by birth but from your consciousness. It is a threat to the democratic system," he said, at the symposium on myths about lowly educated poor Thais being stupid and a drag on Thai society.

The meeting was organised by Thailand Mirror, a liberal group of red shirts, at the October 14 Monument. The event comes at a time when some formally educated Thais who are disappointed by the latest general election results began asking whether Thailand should continue to accept the concept of universal suffrage or not.

"The chains that kept us in servitude were not physical ones but mental ones," Wiphuthalang said, adding that although King Rama V ended slavery a century ago, many Thais continue to want to be enslaved by the elite.

Attachai Anantamaek, former TV star and an active red-shirt member, said those who looked down on poor and less educated people were "extreme right wing conservative". He said society should recognise that those with higher educational qualification are not necessarily smarter, as others could also learn to be wise through their life experience and from discussing and deliberating issues with others.

"It's a mistake to think that educated people are smart. There's no one who is knowledgeable about everything. Sometimes, by reading more books you end up being the kind of person that [the ruling elite] wants you to be."

The panel also discussed the role of lese majeste law in hampering freedom of political speech and concluded that more efforts were needed to push for the amendment if not for the abolition of the law so people can discuss real politics openly.

Chiang Rai MP for Pheu Thai, Visaradee Techateerawat, said even though the stereotype of poor and less educated people being naive and not befitting of equal political right exists, the majority of the people can still make their political voice count by binding together during elections.

Visaradee added that sometimes she discovers that working class people like motorcycle taxi driver know more about some political issues than she does. She also added that although a number of villagers still accept vote-buying money from politicians to vote for certain candidates or party, the increasing reality is that they do not always vote for the party which gave them money.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Low trust in court's impartiality: poll

Low trust in court's impartiality: poll

By THE NATION
Published on August 19, 2011

Some 37 per cent of people in Bangkok and its vicinity surveyed by Dusit Poll said they did not trust the Constitution Court, adding they felt the court appeared to pass verdicts based on double standards or political pressure.

The poll questioned 1,174 people in Bangkok and its vicinity between August 13 to 17. Only 25.5 per cent of respondents said they trusted the court.

As many as 37.5 per cent also said they did not really know the role of the Constitution Court.

Some 48 per cent of respondents said they had more trust when cases were related to government |corruption, while 47.8 per cent of respondents |said they had less trust in the Constitution Court |when cases related to the constitutional rights to |freedom of assembly were tested by groups of protesters.

Forty-three per cent of respondents added they did not trust the court's handling of cases that led to the banning of politicians from politics. Some 30 per cent of respondents, meanwhile, urged the court to be impartial and transparent.

Vasan Soipisut, a Constitution Court judge defended the court by stating that people may not really understand what constitutes double standards, adding that judges cannot just give a verdict that pleased the public but must adhere to what is right.

On the appointment of a new president of the Constitution Court, Vasan said the new president would likely be announced next Wednesday.

"I don't know who that will be and although I'm most senior I don't know if I'll get [the job] or not," he said.

It is no wonder people have no confidence in the thai courts, after all they were tampered with by the junta proxy government, and you only have to look at the one-eyed judgement after one-eyed judgement to realise they were got at.

Thats why all the judgements of these kangaroo appointee courts must be nullified immediately , and if there really is a case to answer then it must be heard by a product of the new democratically elected government.

You can't argue with that

From the blog world..... (something of a contrast with The Notion's arithmetic - and this for a poll conducted "in Bangkok and its vicinity") ^^^


Poll: 57% have little or no confidence in the Constitution Court | Asian Correspondent

By Bangkok Pundit
Aug 24, 2011

Suan Dusit conducted a poll between Aug 13-17 surveying 1,174 people in Bangkok and neighboring provinces on the subject of “Constitution Court in the eyes of the people”. Details of the people are available from Matichon.*

Q. When people were asked whether they had confidence in the Constitution Court, the answers were

-37.62% – have little confidence. Reasons given were that for some previous decisions was a decision of double standards.
-23.53% – have confidence. Reasons given were belief in the process, way the constitution court considers decisions etc
-19.31% – have no confidence. Reasons given is delay in decisions and politics interfering.
-17.54% – have a lot of confidence. Reasons given was that court has duty to uphold the law. Judges have ability.

Q. When people were asked what had caused them to have less confidence in the court.

-47.82% answered that it was decisions related to various political protest groups
-43.47% answered that it was decisions related to dissolution of political parties
-8.71% answered that it was related to the Thaksin share concealment case

BP: So 57% have little or no confidence in the Court…. Given the role of the court in the past few years of dissolving political parties and banning politicians (and not dissolving other political parties), it is not surprising see how confidence has fallen although you do have the 2001 case against Thaksin which he won narrowly meaning there is a lack of confidence from a different perspective as well.

In recent years, the judiciary have played an increased role – see here, here, and here. One additional problem that BP sees – and why BP is surprised there was even a poll on this issue! – is contempt of court. If you criticise members of the judiciary or their decisions, they will charge you with contempt (also see these posts about contempt of court here and here) where those who you criticise will act in judgment on what you said. This hasn’t stopped the judiciary from making public comments criticising politicians and the political system. Who will guard our judicial guardians?

Can the judiciary really act as the entity to settle political disputes?
*Not sure why, but this poll is not available on the Suan Dusit website. In case, you were wondering if Matichon has pulled this poll out of thin air, BP can report the poll has received widespread coverage in the Thai language media across all newspapers, Than Setakit, ASTV Manager, Daily News, Post Today etc.

btw, There is a Wikileaks cable entitled “THAI PRIME MINISTER SOMCHAI DISREGARDS ARMY COMMANDER’S SUGGESTION HE RESIGN” (08BANGKOK3143) date October 17, 2008 and the key paragraph is:

6. (C) Anuporn Kashemsant, a foreign liaison officer for <snipped> in the Principal Private Secretary’s office, remarked to us October 17 that various political maneuvers were ongoing. He said ”a coup like what happened September 19, 2006 is not one of the options” for resolving Thailand’s political crisis, because the military had proven it was incapable of running the country. His qualification evoked the remark of former Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun on October 16 (ref A) to Charge that there would not be ”a coup in the traditional sense of the word.” Anuporn hinted that significant developments likely would take place in the coming days, but refused to predict what might occur, beyond saying there were two possible paths forward.

BP: Indeed, there was not a coup in the traditional sense of the word, but there was a judicial coup about 6 weeks later…

Are the poor, less educated, pulling us down?

BURNING ISSUE

Are the poor, less educated, pulling us down?

By Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
Published on August 24, 2011

How sound is the dominant belief amongst educated and wealthy Thais that poor and less educated folks are essentially stupid, corrupt, violence and a drag on national progress?

Answer: more of a myth, or at best, half the picture of today's Thailand.

Some cling to these self-perpetuating beliefs in order to justify rule by the few, others use it to support ideas like Thailand need to do away with the notion of universal suffrage.

Are poor and less-educated people necessarily stupid?

While they are less formally educated, poor people learn from life's experiences. Call it life's education, many poor people exhibit the ability in understanding real politik. Many, who are red shirts, see Thaksin Shinawatra not as a man of virtue but a politician who delivers, despite all his ethical shortcomings. On the contrary, many of the so-called educated middle class and elites long for virtuous rulers although it's most unlikely not to be found in any mortal person.

Are poor and less-educated people more corrupt?

Yes, the vote selling. But who does the vote buying anyhow? And who are the bigger cheaters: the big politicians found of virtually all parties, the corporate fat cats 'committed' to handing tea money and kick backs, bureaucratic bosses too ready to accept bribe, and the invisible hand/s who cannot really be made accountable?

It is foolish to think a section of the populace has a monopoly on corruptibility.

Are poor and less-educated Thais more violence prone?

Reds burning down Bangkok last May comes to many people's mind though the court verdict has yet to be handed down. But think about structural violence. The system which ensures that most poor remains poor and less educated through systematic exploitation and suppression is very violent. Structural violence is much less visible, like most people not knowing that they engage in daily slaughtering when they eat meats, fish and so on whom the slaughter house have conveniently done the dirty job for them.

Lack of equal access to quality education, legal assistance, even political rights themselves is part of structural violence. Yes, there's social mobility, but very few manage to climb up and even less manage to look back and care for the millions others who didn't make it.

Are poor and less educated people a drag to national progress?

Yes, if they are prevented from maximizing their potential and contributing to society. This leads us to the question of whether people on top who suppress and exploit majority of the people from developing their potentials are in fact the main drag to national progress or not?

Can Thai society really progress when its populace is fed with daily propaganda detrimental to the use of rational facility? Are the elite and middle class who suppress political voices of the majority of the people through supporting military coup not a drag to national progress?

All this doesn't mean poor and less educated folks are always right simply because they are poor or less educated, however. But when majority of Thai people are prevented from contributing, it's rather like society where majority are prevented from swimming. The whole society may just simply drown one day because the few by themselves cannot keep the society afloat forever.

Verdicts must be reasonable: Judge

SPECIAL REPORT

Verdicts must be reasonable: Judge

By Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
Published on August 26, 2011

Court verdicts must be "reasonable and explainable" in order to avoid dissatisfaction by the public, Administrative Court President Hasawut Vititviri-yakul has said.

Hasawut made the remark when welcoming members of the media who went to learn about the work of the Administrative Court, which is entering the second decade of its existence.

Over the past 10 years, a rising number of people have regarded the court as a beacon of judicial hope amid growing distrust of other courts, especially the Constitution Court, which fared poorly in a recent poll, when a third of respondents said they doubted its political impartiality.

Judge Saithip Sukatiphan, deputy spokesperson of the Administrative Court, said some members of the public may see the court as being liberal or more attuned to human rights due to the fact the court's underlying principle was "respect for rights and liberty of citizens".

Saithip said such a view only began taking root in Thailand over the past decade or two. This coincided with the foundation of the court in 1999.

A few examples of the court's rulings were given. One involved a man who in 2007 successfully filed a case against the Railway Authority of Thailand to remove advertising stickers covering Bangkok to Chiang Mai train windows that blocked passengers' view out. The court eventually ruled that such ads violated "passengers' dignity" and constituted an action which treated passengers as inanimate "objects", Judge Vajira Chobtaeng, another deputy spokesperson of the court, said.

Another example was how shop owners at Klong Thom in Bangkok lost a case after they tried to force the Bangkok Metropolitan Administra-tion to remove street-side vendors who collectively form the Klong Thom flea market, saying they were an inconvenience to their businesses. But judges in the case stated that the famous flea market was "a community way of life which had existed for decades" and should be allowed to continue, after weighing the damage incurred by shophouse owners and the benefit of the flea market to the public.

Saithip noted that at times the court deals with the tension between personal rights versus public rights.

The court recently set up a special chamber to deal with environmental cases, which indicates growing recognition of the importance of such matters, as well as impact assessments for state agencies and various projects.

Hasawut said this was due to recognition that impacts on the environment often went beyond the immediate vicinity or surrounding community near a plant or project site.

Some new judges with specialised knowledge have been recruited and others sent for training on environment-related subjects. The start of the new chamber will help speed up cases, especially as the court operates not on the traditional accusatorial system but on an interrogational basis.

Article 55 of laws relating to the Administrative Court states that it "may hear oral evidence, documentary evidence or experts or evidence other than the evidence adduced by the parties, as is appropriate".

Another chamber will also be launched soon to handle matters relating to human-resource management by state agencies. Bureaucrats or staff at state agencies who feel they have been unjustly demoted, transferred or mistreated will be able to have their cases heard in a specialist court.

Hasawut said delays in rulings could also be unjust, especially if the aggrieved party had to retire before the verdict was given.

More controversial exercises of state power do not come under the court's jurisdiction. Actions by security officers under an Emergency Decree are one example. And the court has not managed to figure out how to legally deal with military coups d'etat, which have plagued the Kingdom. A common reaction by judges or courts is that they have to accept coup-makers who usurp power and tear up the Constitution simply because generals "become the state and law" and usually grant themselves amnesty for unconstitutional actions.

^ Administrative court, Constitution court, I still dont see any PAD yellow nutters getting justice from them

From the blog world.....


https://thaiintelligentnews.wordpres...ck-government/

Political Analysis: Thai Style Democracy to “Kick In” by December to “Kick Out” Yingluck government

31 August 2011

• by Ranger, Thai Intel’s political journalist

Two of Red Shirts leader, including Chartuporn, said today the word on the street is that in December, after <snipped - sorry>, there will be an organized attempt to get rid of the Yingluck government - done through the so-called “Thai Style Democracy.”

• “The Pheu Thai Party and the Red Shirts will have to support each other to get through the period and keep the mandate of the Thais going,” said a key Red Shirts leader, Chatuporn.

The concept of “Thai Style Democracy” is fundamentally not Democratic, as Pavin, an iconic journalist in Thailand have written often: “Those that can govern can not get elected, but those that can get elected can not govern.”

According Thai Intel’s conversation with a few key Red Shirts strategist today - the strategy to topple the Yingluck government, will be similar to what Taksin, and several pro-democracy Thai government had to face in the past.

• First Wave of Attack: First, as Taksin faced, it was a barrage of Thai press that is controlled mostly by the establishment-greatly criticizing the government. Arguably, this phase has started.

• Destabilizing Tactic: Second, as Taksin and other pro-Democracy government faced, the Democrat Party would then fill the ranks of small group of protesters who were galvanized by the press-to swell the protest ranking.

• Alienation: Thirdly, the military begin to take open side against the pro-democracy government, tilting the balance of civil servants and state employee enterprise workers.

• Crisis of Legitimacy: Fourthly, the courts steps in with judicialization, finding fault with pro-democracy government.

• The Kill: Fifth, with all the above pressure, the pro-democracy political party brakes-up, and the defected go and join the Democrat Party in forming the government.

According to the Red Shirts strategist, the above steps have been the normal routine order - however, with Yingluck government, the order may change.

^Ah, we are back to the (judicial?) coup like rumours again (why not add it to that thread, Steve?), from the ever entertaining Jatuporn. I wonder if this prediction will be as reliable as the months and months of such rumours he went on and on about before (which of course proved to be total bullshit).

If it proves true, then I expect the biggest movement of people ever seen here, I'll be out on the streets for one. I can't see any type of coup working here now. Maybe by December the great propaganda machine that we are apparently subject to will have convinced enough people to support such a move. However, that looks very unlikely. Some pretty dramatic things need to occur first. Yingluck is riding high in the opinion polls and does have a very recent massive election win behind her.

And if it is not, then will someone please remove this guy from a position in which he is able to provoke anxiety and influence others.

So, he's back in his groove. Oh, how I've missed this.

I wonder if anyone ever calls him on his stuff. They certainly didn't before.

I guess we shall see. It would certainly be a very foolish 'establishment' to try the above suggested stuff...

As all of the listed phases have occurred in recent memory, foolishly initiated or otherwise, I see no reason to dismiss the notion out of hand. And that's before one considers the great unmentionable.

IMO the key sentence is: “The Pheu Thai Party and the Red Shirts will have to support each other to get through the period and keep the mandate of the Thais going”.

As noted before, there are transparent efforts to drive a wedge between the two elements - not unrepresented here on TD. It's no more than a salutary warning and a call to guard against the evident dangers.

Originally Posted by LooseBowels

Administrative court, Constitution court, I still dont see any PAD yellow nutters getting justice from them

Maybe a taste of the same kind of"justice" they dished out when they were in power? I suppose what goes around comes around...eventually.

Originally Posted by SteveCM

As all of the listed phases have occurred in recent memory, foolishly initiated or otherwise, I see no reason to dismiss the notion out of hand. And that's before one considers the great unmentionable.

IMO the key sentence is: “The Pheu Thai Party and the Red Shirts will have to support each other to get through the period and keep the mandate of the Thais going”.

As noted before, there are transparent efforts to drive a wedge between the two elements - not unrepresented here on TD. It's no more than a salutary warning and a call to guard against the evident dangers.

Fair enough. It did happen before and it could happen again. We will see.

I always wanted to see the red shirts morph into something more than a Pheu Thai protection device. I think Pheu Thai should be able to manage on their own.

For me the red shirts (not the Thaksin proxy leadership, but the real grassroots people) represented a hope for this country. A real change. A positive move. A means to actually create a real, lasting change here.

Sadly I think that is looking like a lost cause at the moment, as the leadership have all (except Sombat) been consumed by the government machine (which I am sure was part of Thaksin's plan from the outset...create, control, use and then disperse).

I hope for some people to emerge in the movement who aren't government aligned and actually want *real* change here, but I suspect Pheu Thai/Thaksin have been very clever in choosing who they wanted to be involved in government. They certainly wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of a protest for democratic reform here.

If Yingluck gives them enough of what they want, then they may be pacified. Imagine how things would be if the grassroots folks turned on Pheu Thai.....now that would be interesting.

Transparency essential for democracy campaigner

BURNING ISSUE

Transparency essential for democracy campaigner

By Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
Published on September 7, 2011

The not-for-profit prachatai.com online newspaper has come under ferocious accusations of late, to wit that the left-leaning newspaper is actually a fake and an agent of the "neo-imperialist" United States, to use the word of its accuser, who comes by the name of Tony Cartalucci.

Cartalucci has for months demanded on Twitter that prachaitai.com reveal its funding sources but has failed to reveal his own identity.

He went on to attack prachatai on his August 10 blog posting, accusing the paper of undermining the Thai establishment's "legitimacy".

"They are traitors not just to the Thai people and the Thai nation, but traitors to humanity … traitors who wilfully help usher in global governance under the dominion of autocrats who openly plot a global scientific dictatorship."

Yours truly, who has been contributing to prachatai on a pro-bono basis since the September 19, 2006 military coup, after learning that the Thai mainstream mass media are mostly pro-coup, confesses to being disturbed upon hearing such vicious accusations made by someone who does not even reveal his or her true self.

To be fair, you can read more of Cartalucci's rantings at landdestroyers.blogspot.com.

Knowing prachatai staff for nearly five years, this writer feels they are mostly highly committed to forging a more open and democratic Thailand. Over the past five years, it has established itself as a reliable voice for real political debate, for detailed reports about the marginalised and those tried under the undemocratic lese majeste law as well as the Computer Crimes Act.

This apparently includes the director of prachatai, Chiranuch Premchaiporn, who's on trial facing a possible 20-year jail sentence for failing to remove 10 allegedly defamatory remarks about the monarchy from its webboard "quickly enough".

"Who is this person?" some prachatai staff asked me. I said I didn't know, and as much as it may sound unfair, I think the primary burden of proof falls upon prachatai itself because of its mission to promote a more transparent and democratic society.

Prachatai eventually disclosed its funding sources, with names like the US-based National Endowment for Democracy (NED) spending roughly Bt1.5 million for fiscal 2011-12. In the 2010-11 year, the same amount was funded by NED, while Bt1.8 million came from George Soros' Open Society Foundation.

While there is no clear evidence that prachatai is toeing the US foreign policy line on politics through its writings and reporting, which by the way includes Thai-language commentaries written by people of various political persuasions, it would be best for prachatai to try to diversify its funding sources as much as possible.

Prachatai insisted in its English-language funding disclosure that "none of our foreign donors has ever put up any demands connected to the funds they provided, nor did they interfere with our reporting". But one can hardly be independent if a major bulk of its income comes from a few organisations.

Being too dependent on funding from the US can make prachatai shy about being critical of the US' role abroad, Thailand included. The same can be said of, say, any newspaper owned by a big corporate, which perhaps cannot be fully trusted to report critically on, not to mention criticise, the business of such a firm.

Another example is, how much can we trust a television station to criticise a major politician when the station's owner is the son of that politician?

Cartalucci's conspiracy may be farfetched, delirious even, but then prachatai.com, as a self-avowed "independent" media champion for democracy, must try harder to be less dependent on funding sources aligned with a superpower.

Equally responsible for ensuring the survival of prachatai are the local and foreign readers of this bilingual website, however. As a Thai saying goes, "one cannot borrow someone's nose to breathe forever".

Bangkok Post : Prawase calls for 'new consciousness'

Prawase calls for 'new consciousness'

• Published: 7/09/2011 at 11:00 AM
• Online news:

A new way of thinking is needed if human rights are to prevail as the norm in society, and this can best be achieved if people make more use the frontal lobe of their brain, to balance crude survival traits with a new civility, senior academic Prawase Wasi said at the opening of biennial conference of the Asia Pacific Forum of National Rights Institutions on Wednesday.

Human rights do not exist in isolation but could fully function through a level new consciousness if peoole use the frontal part of their brain, recognising political, social and economic equality and upholding civility, Dr Prawase said at the start of the two-day gathering.

He said respect for human dignity was central to human rights, but was rare to find nowdays.


Senior academic Prawase Wasi (Photo by Pattarachai Preechapanich)

"We need a new consciousness to transcend all kinds of prejudice and abuse," the social commentator said.

He said the UK and US were considered models for liberal democracies, but the reality showed that personal freedom alone was not enough to guarantee equality.

"People's reactions in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the Fukushima nuclear leaks seemed different.

"Also recent riots in England raised questions why human rights violation occurred in those model countries," said Dr Prawase, also chair of the National Reform Assembly.

He said the above examples showed that political equality alone was not adequate to explain human rights standards - it had to be accompanied by social and economic equality.

Democracy in form only would not do any good for human rights, "Thailand is an example, with no civility, human right violations still occur," he said.

Humans were biologically equipped with the potential to live together with dignity, equality, civility and equanimity.

"We should make more use of the frontal area of our brain, the neocortex, instead of the hind brain which functions for crude survival," Dr Prawase. said

Brain development was related to social conditions, he said. Injustice, violence and abuses stimulated the hind brain at the expense of the fore brain, while equality and civility activated fore brain development.

It was time for the world to shift gear, from the back of the brain to the development of the frontal brain, he said.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Bangkok Post : Prawase calls for 'new consciousness'

Prawase calls for 'new consciousness'

• Published: 7/09/2011 at 11:00 AM
• Online news:

A new way of thinking is needed if human rights are to prevail as the norm in society, and this can best be achieved if people make more use the frontal lobe of their brain, to balance crude survival traits with a new civility, senior academic Prawase Wasi said at the opening of biennial conference of the Asia Pacific Forum of National Rights Institutions on Wednesday.

Human rights do not exist in isolation but could fully function through a level new consciousness if peoole use the frontal part of their brain, recognising political, social and economic equality and upholding civility, Dr Prawase said at the start of the two-day gathering.

He said respect for human dignity was central to human rights, but was rare to find nowdays.


Senior academic Prawase Wasi (Photo by Pattarachai Preechapanich)

"We need a new consciousness to transcend all kinds of prejudice and abuse," the social commentator said.

He said the UK and US were considered models for liberal democracies, but the reality showed that personal freedom alone was not enough to guarantee equality.

"People's reactions in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the Fukushima nuclear leaks seemed different.

"Also recent riots in England raised questions why human rights violation occurred in those model countries," said Dr Prawase, also chair of the National Reform Assembly.

He said the above examples showed that political equality alone was not adequate to explain human rights standards - it had to be accompanied by social and economic equality.

Democracy in form only would not do any good for human rights, "Thailand is an example, with no civility, human right violations still occur," he said.

Humans were biologically equipped with the potential to live together with dignity, equality, civility and equanimity.

"We should make more use of the frontal area of our brain, the neocortex, instead of the hind brain which functions for crude survival," Dr Prawase. said

Brain development was related to social conditions, he said. Injustice, violence and abuses stimulated the hind brain at the expense of the fore brain, while equality and civility activated fore brain development.

It was time for the world to shift gear, from the back of the brain to the development of the frontal brain, he said.

Interesting.