Back to 2005 royalism II

19 06 2013

In an earlier report that PPT posted on, it was stated that the Thai Patriotic Front or Network had dredged up a ploy that was the strategy that marked the People’s Alliance for Democracy as a royalist instrument.

It was reported that the so-called Patriots had:

filed a petition seeking the Royal appointment of a new prime minister, citing what it described as failures by the current government on such issues as amnesty legislation, the rice-pledging policy and the Bt2-trillion infrastructure loans.

Chaiwat Sinsuwong and his small band anti-elected government ultra-royalists have submitted a “petition to the Royal Household Bureau seeking the Royal appointment of a new prime minister.”

Another story at The Nation told us more about this group’s undemocratic wet dreams about royal intervention. That account makes considerable sense, telling the royalist loonies that they are a bunch of neanderthals and that they should learn from recent history.

Now Chaiwat has corrected a bunch of apparent misconceptions. Specifically, he and one of his mad mates have “denied reports that they filed a petition signed by 8 million supporters asking for a new royally endorsed PM.”

Nope, they they didn’t go to the Royal Household Bureau pleading for the use of Article 7.

They went to the Royal Household Bureau pleading for the use of Article 3.

The statement seems to be saying, “Look, we aren’t just PAD throwbacks but we have something new!” Of course they haven’t. The recourse to the feudal elements of Thailand’s political hierarchy is still the act of ultra-royalist dinosaurs.

The “group had taken recourse in Article 3 of the Constitution to seek help from His Majesty as they did not see any progress after filing the petition with the Supreme Court and military last Wednesday.”

We imagine they asked the military for a coup.PAD

Apparently the petition:

cites problems stemming from the government’s parliamentary dictatorship, harassing state officials, allowing large-scale graft, kow-towing to leaders of foreign countries, putting the country’s sovereignty at risk by negotiating with separatists and failing to take action against those who debase the royal institution.

It is the usual nonsense that the more bizarre royalists peddle.

Article 3 of the constitution actually states:

The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people. The King as Head of State shall exercise such power through the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers and the Courts in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

Chaiwat’s lot seem lost in the constitution. As far as we can tell, this article is meant to circumscribe the powers of the monarchy, but we guess that they know that the monarchy has seldom taken much notice of such provisions.

The bottom line seems to be that the royalists continue to want to oust an elected government by any means other than an election.



%d bloggers like this: