When will this stop?

[PattayaMale]

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said Friday that if necessary teargases may be used to prevent protesters from storming into the Government House complex.

 

But the use of teargases would be the last measure the government would resort to if protesters attempt to storm in and seize the complex, Abhisit said.

 

The protesters led by the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship plan to rally at the Government House Saturday to demand the government to give in to their four-point demand, including replacing the current charter with the 1997 one and dissolving the House.

[Guest Oogleman]

The genie is out of the bottle.

 

ordinary folk no longer fear the police or army.

 

It would take a major crackdown to change that.

[Guest fountainhall]

And I see that opposition MPs are considering an impeachment motion against Abhisit. This is becoming a huge farce!

[Guest shebavon]

"And I see that opposition MPs are considering an impeachment motion against Abhisit. This is becoming a huge farce! "

 

It sort of reminds me of post WWII Italy. Did they not have something like 85 governments in 40 years?

 

Personally, I like the Abhisit Government at least so far, and wish him success in efforts to bring some semblance of sanity to the Thai Govt.

 

 

[KhorTose]

I like the Abhisit Government at least so far, and wish him success in efforts to bring some semblance of sanity to the Thai Govt.

 

While Abhisit is charming and gives a great face to Thailand, he is still one man's choice. Call me an American, but I would be happier with a truly representative government.

 

[Guest fountainhall]

Call me an American, but I would be happier with a truly representative government.

 

You're American . The debate over representative government on this Board went on for quite a while, I seem to recall. So I'll not say more, other than Abhisit's lot seem preferable to the last three governments we've had. I just wish his media people would teach him not to glance away from the interviewer so often when on TV. It makes him appear 'shifty'.

[Gaybutton]

Personally, I like the Abhisit Government at least so far, and wish him success in efforts to bring some semblance of sanity to the Thai Govt.

I give him a lot of credit for owning up to what was done to the Rohingya boat people who were cast adrift at sea to die, after having been beaten on shore. But he still has a long way to go before he becomes Thailand's Obama. If nothing else, at least the 'Government of the Month Club' has gone dormant . . . for the time being.

[Guest lvdkeyes]

At least he is the best looking PM Thailand has had for a long long time.

[KhorTose]

At least he is the best looking PM Thailand has had for a long long time.

 

I won't argue with that. However, he speaks, dresses, and acts just like the rest of us Farangs. To me that means he has very little in common with the people he is supposed to be representing.

If he is that good a prime minister let him run and be elected by the majority of the people who voted for the people who where removed from office by that joke of due process.

[Guest fountainhall]

If he is that good a prime minister let him run and be elected by the majority of the people who voted for the people who where removed from office by that joke of due process.

 

Oh no! Here we go again! Sorry in advance but I just get pissed off when outsiders, however well-meaning, propose their ideas of democracy as the ideal for other peoples and other countries.

 

I guess you knew this would open up the proverbial can again! What is "due process"? One-man-one-vote as that man would like to vote? One-man-one-vote as that man is paid or persuaded by other outside pressure to vote? Are election results always a mirror of what the majorty of the people want? Is the two party system in the US, leavened as it is by corruption at many levels, true democracy at work? Is the multiparty system - as in Israel and Italy, where who gets in to power is often decided behind closed doors - true deomcracy at work?

 

The US does not even have a one-man-one-vote system. It has an electoral college system which, when stymied as in 2000, requires politically appointed judges to make the people's decison for the people, contrary to the people's vote!

 

In many countries, does the democratic process not come down to money and power - and those who are moneyed and powerful? Strip money and powewr out of the system and have a truly free and fair election and then talk about "due process" - and I'll 'buy' that

[KhorTose]

Oh no! Here we go again! Sorry in advance but I just get pissed off when outsiders, however well-meaning, propose their ideas of democracy as the ideal for other peoples and other countries.

 

That is not what I am talking about at all. Please, let me fill you in on some Thai politics, after I relate what due process is.

 

Due process is the principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a person according to the law of the land, instead of respecting merely some or most of those legal rights. Due process has also been frequently interpreted as placing limitations on laws and legal proceedings, in order for judges instead of legislators to define and guarantee fundamental fairness, justice, and liberty.

 

One member of the last government (PAD) was convicted of buying votes. Because of his conviction the whole government was thrown out and the ministers were forbidden to run again. This happened only after PAD started talking about Amnesty for Thaskin. Well guess what, one member of Albhisit Vejjajiva's party was recently convicted of bribery and nothing is happening.

 

Same law, two standards or lack of due process. I could also discuss how unfair the trail of that one PAD member was but won't. They can set up any system they want, but if they plan just to keep the small group of well-off people led by one very well off family, then they should do that and quit trying to pretend that they are a country that respects the rule of law.

[Guest fountainhall]

That is not what I am talking about at all

 

I obviously got out of bed on the wrong side this morning. Or was it this afternoon? Thanks for the clarification. I quite agree with what you say.

[Bob]

At risk of pissing off some - and I don't have that intent - due process has nothing to do with some of the notions posted here. It simply means a "fair process" (yes, the word "process" is there for a reason).

 

Due process has nothing to do with equal protection of the laws (applying the same laws equally to all persons) and has nothing to do with the substantive law itself (e.g., a stupid law really has nothing to do with due process).

 

The manner in which one conducts the ajudication - the ability to testify, the ability to cross-examine witnesses, the ability to call witnesses to testify in your behalf - is what due process is all about. In other words, if their going to nail you for violating some law (whether a smart or silly law), it's done in a fair manner so, even if you don't like the outcome, you believe that you fairly had your chance to present your side of the story. And impartial judges and juries and reasonable evidentiary rules (rules that would exclude, for example, unreliable hearsay) are part of true due process.

[PattayaMale]

It is hard for me to understand how people feel upset when "outsiders" feel they they have a better answer of how a government should govern since I think there are some rights that every person should have. I am not talking about the form of the government, representative or not.

 

But rights such as fair and unbiased treatment should be a goal. In Thailand it seems that the haves and haves not are treated very differently. But where is the perfect society? I love living in Thailand, and hope that over time the poor people of the country will be able to have a bigger voice in their government. I believe it is not the act of voting that gives this bigger voice, but the vesting of power in those elected instead of those not elected....police, military, judiciary.