Anti-democratic law

In its 11 February press release, the anti-democrat spokesman regailed reporters with questions about “law.”

While investigations are ongoing, the spokesman “questioned why Yingluck and her cabinet were aiding and abetting murderers, such as the gunman who killed Sutin Taratin…”.

PPT doesn’t see any evidence at all for this claim. It seems like a smokescreen to take attention away from their own murderous intent on 1 February at Laksi. They needn’t have worried for the royalist courts have ordered that arrest warrants against the easily identifiable gunmen at Laksi cannot be executed.

The Bangkok Post reports that the court refused to allow the “arrest warrants for three suspects in the Laksi clash on charges of attempted murder. They are Wiwat Yodprasit, 24, Surachet Treenopparat, 49, and Danai (surname unknown).”

Police say Wiwat of Phitsanulok was the gunman who “fired a gun [and assault weapon] hidden in a corn bag…”. The Post then helpfully adds that this was “to protect anti-government protesters during the shoot-out.” Actually it wasn’t, as the gunman was an attacker.

Surachet from Bangkok was the anti-democratic guard with a handgun photographed a million times on that Saturday.

Still not enough for the anti-democratic courts.

They anti-democrat press release also whines about “PDRC stage leader Sonthiyan Chuenruthainaitham who was arrested on 10 February 2014.”

They condemned “Yingluck’s arrest of Sonthiyan [sic.] for violating human rights.” They went on: “He has not been allowed to post bail. Moreover, this morning non-uniformed police officers climbed his front gate and searched his residence without a search warrant.”

Presumably we can now expect the anti-democrats to demand these rights for each and every lese majeste victim. We doubt it because this lot are hypocritical liars.

In any case, the royalist courts have ordered bail for Sonthiyan.

Thailand’s judiciary really has gotten itself into a position virtually never seen outside a banana republic, fascist state or the most authoritarian regimes. They are totally politicized, ignore written law and even the constitution, and make stuff up as they go along.

PPT has no problem with the constitutional right to bail – as in Sonthiyan’s case, but when we compare this with lese majeste cases or even the court’s decisions on red shirt cases, and it is seen to be selective, preferential and political “justice.”