Puppet Election Commission criticized

18 11 2018

In a follow-up to our most recent post on election rigging,, the Bangkok Post reports that the Open Forum for Democracy Foundation (P-NET) “is calling on the Election Commission (EC) to exercise independence in redrawing the election constituencies, saying it is a first step towards a free and fair election.”

P-NET is “urging the poll agency to be independent in doing its job and take into account factors such as demographic changes, public participation and voter convenience, in demarcating the boundaries of constituencies.”

In fact, these are all things that were “promised,” but the military junta’s use of Article 44 now makes the whole process opaque, secretive and manipulable.

P-NET calls the junta’s intervention “outright interference,” noting that the dictatorship’s intervention “comes after the EC completed the job and was about to publish it in the Royal Gazette.”

It adds that the junta’s intervention “may lead to the unfair carving out of electoral boundaries in the favour of certain parties, especially pro-military ones…”. The use of the word “may” is rather too weak; it seems clear that this is what the military junta is doing.

One important quibble is with the notion that boundary setting is “a first step towards a free and fair election.” As we have repeatedly pointed out, the military junta has engaged in massive election rigging. The first step in that was the 2014 coup itself, with the major effort being the rule-setting that began with the junta’s 2016 constitution, which led to a cascade of rules meant to rig the election. That makes electoral boundary interference only the most recent step.





Commentary on the junta’s rigged election I

19 10 2018

There have been several recent articles on the junta’s rigged election. We will look at some of these in this and further posts.

PPT kind of liked a piece at Deutsche Welle that begins with a statement of fact that has been neglected by other media: “Thailand’s military government says it wants to hold elections early next year, after the generals cemented their control over the state and its institutions.”

Academic Wolfram Schaffar says there’s “growing discontent even among sections that have been traditionally close to the military” over its repeated failure to keep its promises on elections and to stick in power.

We are not convinced that the 2014 military coup was “met with widespread approval,” or that the DW characterization of the period prior to the coup is accurate.

It is on stronger ground when quoting Schaffar as saying that the “military took over not to repair democracy, but to stay in power indefinitely…”, or at least to ensure that no real electoral democracy emerged.

It notes the rigging of the rules via an anti-democratic constitution, approved in a rigged referendum where “all sorts of restrictions were imposed, including barring any public discussion over the constitution as well as curtailing the freedom of expression, assembly and the press.”

The resulting rules mean “a weakening of the Thai parliament and strengthened the hand of the prime minister.” Schaffar says the “military is now closely intertwined with the country’s political bodies and institutions…”.

He correctly observes that the “next elections will not be free and fair.”

DW also notes that the “military stands above everything and will likely retain its dominant position…”. It also notes the unfairness of the current regime that campaigns for elections while banning its opponents from organizing and campaigning.

Free election? No. Fair election? No.





Rigging the future III

17 10 2018

We know we are late on posting on the junta’s grand strategy for rigging the future, but it remains an important story.

What really surprised PPT is that some politicians said they “are ready to follow the 20-year national strategy, published in the Royal Gazette on Saturday, with the aim of turning Thailand into a developed country by 2037…”.

Sure, they “worry it could end up outdated or may not come to pass,” but they seem unwilling to declare that the junta’s plan is to hamstring any government the military doesn’t fully control.

It is “a tool for the junta regime to get rid of an elected government in the future.”

Peua Thai, which should know better, said “those who work in politics must study it and prepare to follow it.” How very Red Guardish!

But the party is far more on the ball when it says that “amending the constitution as a whole would be a higher priority than changing this law in particular.”

That makes sense and is critical. But, as shown in the past, this proposal will be rudely opposed by anti-democrats.

Government spokesman Lt Gen Sansern Kaewkamnerd said The Dictator insists the strategy is critical for “reform” – code for the anti-democrats and their political system. Sansern said: “The period over the next five years is the most important as the next government will have to follow this framework, although it can be adjusted.”

But as critics suggest, the main point is that if “any government pursuing a policy interpreted as not being in line with the national strategy will face legal action” and probably legal dissolution.





Doubling down on double standards V

11 10 2018

The Revenue Department has recently decided that it should allow “tax deductions for contributions to political parties, with a cap of 10,000 baht for individual taxpayers and 50,000 baht for companies.” A report states:

The amended Revenue Code, which is currently having a public hearing running through Oct 15, is to comply with Section 70 of the 2017 charter, stipulating that those who contribute to political parties can deduct income tax.

The department considered it appropriate to permit both individuals and corporate taxpayers to claim political contributions and donations as expenses for income tax deductions, the source said.

Yet, the junta’s Election Commission has warned ” about receiving donations as the act is still prohibited by the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO).”

EC secretary-general Sawaeng Boonmee said that the ban on parties that still exists prevents “political activities, including fundraising for political purposes…”.

Double standards, You bet. The junta is doing all it can to win its rigged election.





Doubling down on double standards III

2 10 2018

It is reported that “[c]alls are mounting for Prime Minister [Gen] Prayut Chan-o-cha [The Dictator] and the four cabinet ministers who are at the helm of the Palang Pracharath Party to step down due to a potential conflict of interest in the lead-up to the election.”

“Potential”?? Isn’t that “actual”? And hasn’t this been happening for several months? Even years? In fact, the 2014 coup and, the constitution referendum and all the rules acceded to by a puppet National Legislative Assembly have been a mammoth election rigging scheme.

Prime Minister’s Office Minister Kobsak Pootrakool and his cheating buddies have “claimed the four ministers will not abuse their authority during the campaign.”

Look! Flying pigs!

Even the yellowish former Election Commission activist Sodsri Sattayatham observed that “the cabinet positions afford the four ministers the opportunity to act improperly in their own interests.”

But that’s exactly the point! They expect to be able to do this.

Sodsri says they are not “legally required to step down, it is political etiquette that they should resign from ministerial posts when deciding to step into politics…”.

Huh? “Step into politics”? These guys have been politically engaged forever! A coup and a junta is a very big political intervention. Sodsri is engaging in yellow nonsense about “good” people and “bad” politicians.

And laws? What does the junta care for laws? There are constitutional requirements about standing for election, but none that prevent the junta from rigging the election – something the constitution itself does.

Of course, the junta’s constitution does not prevent any junta member from being prime minister or, as we quickly read it, from being ministers in the next government. There are constitutional requirements about how minister should behave when an election is to be held. But it would seem that the junta’s regime is immune from constitutional requirements. It keeps its NLA, keeps making decisions that bind a future government, etc, all things restricted by the constitution. But double standards apply to the junta.

We did notice that The Dictator should not be able to serve as prime minister because he has violated two requirements of the constitution: he lacks the required integrity and he has failed to comply with ethical standards. By leading a coup, he should be disqualified on these grounds. But this junta is subject to double standards.

We also noted that a prime minister “shall not hold office for more than eight years in total, whether or not holding consecutive term” (section 158). That means supporting The Dictator will likely mean he can serve only about 3 to 3.5 years, depending on when the “election” is held. That will be some relief for many.

Puea Thai’s Chaturon Chaisang is right that “the ministers … must refrain from disbursing money in ways that might seem as though they are attempting to gain political support, as well as stop approving long-term projects and stall transfers of officials.”

That’s what usually applies when an election is pending and is required under the 2017 constitution, but that would require standards other than the junta’s double standards.

Meanwhile, the unrestrained ministers are in full campaign mode declaring double standards apply to them.

The Bangkok Post also reports that one of Palang Pracharath’s still “covert” members, Somkid Jatusripitak “has defended four cabinet ministers who are facing mounting criticism over potential conflicts of interest after taking the helm of the Palang Pracharath Party.”

Somkid and his master

Of course he does. They are his boys. He recruited them and came up with the strategy for the party and how it will seek to maintain The Dictator in place following rigged elections.

Somkid went further, campaigning for his boys and their/his party, saying all four are “deserving of support…” and he implies that they will stand for election. We think they are barred from that, but it may be that he expects and has promised them that they will be unelected ministers under a new junta-based government.

Somkid also explained that the constitution does not apply to the junta, stating that “several government projects cannot be stalled any longer…. They [the four ministers] must speed up their efforts and follow through on those projects, which can serve as a key foundation for the future of the country…”. Section 168 will not be applied to the junta and its men.

But junta legal manipulator Wissanu Krea-ngam seemed less sure than he was and “suggested the four ministers should tread carefully and avoid any actions that could be perceived as a conflict of interest.” He said, “[b]ased on the charter, they must act neutrally.”

This highlights the obvious double standards. If pressure is maintained, we wonder if the truculent Gen Prayuth will eventually have to ditch them for fear of the obvious rigging being rather too obvious and damaging to his campaign for the premiership.

Rather oddly, we see that the Democrat Party’s Abhisit Vejjajiva agrees with PPT when he observes that “the charter indicates those in office need to quit within 90 days of the charter being promulgated if they want to contest the poll. Those who fail to resign are not expected to play a part in the election.”

He’s right to observe that “the Palang Pracharath Party … is … trying to evade the spirit of the charter.” But there’s more. They are trying to avoid the constitutional requirements.

At PPT, we are no supporters of the junta’s constitution, which needs to be thrown out and rewritten as a “people’s constitution,” but it is satisfying to see that those who rigged that charter are now being caught by it.





Doubling down on double standards I

1 10 2018

Deputy Prime Minister for Legal Affairs Wissanu Krea-ngam has done more than most in supporting the destruction of rule of law in Thailand. He prefers rule by (junta) law and blatant double standards.

In at recent report, he “has confirmed that Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha [The Dictator] is not obligated to step down as head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) [the military junta].” He reportedly claimed that “Gen Prayut doesn’t have to resign as NCPO chief whether he wishes to join a political party or decides to run in the forthcoming election.”

We don’t know that Wissanu was quoted accurately. If he was, then he seems to be ignoring the identical provisions of Sections 264 and 265 of the 2017 constitution which state, referring to the Council of Ministers and the NCPO:

The provisions in section 263 paragraph seven shall also apply to an application to stand as a candidate in an election of a Member of the House of Representatives of a person holding office in the National Council for Peace and Order mutatis mutandis.

Section 263 paragraph 7 states:

In the first general election subsequent to the date of the promulgation of this Constitution, a Member of the National Legislative Assembly may not stand as a candidate for a Member of the House of Representatives, except by vacating office of the Member of the National Legislative Assembly within ninety days from the date of promulgation of this Constitution.

We would guess – we are not legal “experts” like Wissanu – that this rules out The Dictator from standing for election in the first election, whenever it is held. That would seem to apply to all ministers and members of the junta.





Meechai as military lackey

12 09 2018

Meechai Ruchupan has loyally served several military and military-backed regimes.

Meechai has faithfully served royalist and military regimes, being a in various legal and political positions to prime ministers Sanya Dharmasakti, Kukrit Pramoj, Seni Pramoj, Thanin Kraivichien, General Kriangsak Chamanan, General Prem Tinsulanonda and Anand Panyarachun. His main task in all of these positions has been to embed Thai-style (non) democracy. rather than an electoral democracy where the people are sovereign.

He also worked for Prime Minister Chatichai Choonhavan, but when Chatichai was ousted in a miltiary coup led by General Suchinda Kraprayoon and his National Peace-Keeping Council (NPKC) in 1991, Meechai was hoisted by his military allies into the acting premier’s position before Anand was given the top job by the military, probably on royal advice.

Later, the military had Meechai appointed the leader of a charter-drafting committee, leading to the 1991 Constitution, which eventually led to the May 1992 massacre. In drafting that constitution, Meechai simply plagiarized bits of a charter that had been used earlier by a military regime. The major “achievement of that constitution was in allowing an “outsider” prime minister. Sound familiar? Yes, that’s what he has recycled into the 2017 constitution.

Like many of the “good” people, he is arrogant, practices nepotism, lies for his bosses and political allies, slithers before the monarchy, he’s a “constitutional expert” who practices and supports double standards and the retrospective application of laws. You get the picture.

Thai PBS now reports that, against all evidence, Meechai has claimed to not be a military lackey. As the report begins:

Every coup-maker of the past two decades needed his service. Seizing power doesn’t end with just toppling the incumbent governments. Coup announcements and executive orders need to be issued. And more importantly, interim constitutions need to be drafted.

And his track records have proven that nobody could have done a better job with all these necessary paperworks than Meechai Ruchuphan.

It is well more than two decades, but let’s go on.

Maybe he’s been to a fortune teller who predicts that Meechai will burn in the fires of hell for an eternity or perhaps he’s writing a self-congratulatory book. But whatever the reason, Meechai improbably claims that “he was inadvertently dragged [sic.] into a few coups despite the fact that he hardly knew any of the generals involved.”

He reckons that the multiple coup leaders just needed his legal expertise. In other words, he claims he’s just a tool for the men who repeatedly act illegally in overthrowing legal governments and smashing constitutions.

A tool he might be, but a willing and blunt tool. Willingly plagiarizing and willingly taking positions and pay from dull dictators.

But none of that means, at least in Meechai’s fairy tale, “that he would follow every marching order from the military.”

That he’s piling up buffalo manure is illustrated in his ridiculous claims about the 2006 coup.

He says the first he was ever at the army headquarters was during the 2006, which he knew nothing of. Really? Seriously? More unbelievable is his statement that he “didn’t even know at the time who was leading the coup. There were three of them there and I knew only afterward … [who] they were…”.

He is imitating the Deputy Dictator making stupid and unbelievable stuff in the belief that the public are gullible morons. That Meechai thinks anyone would believe that he, a military servant for decades, didn’t know three of the most powerful generals is laughable.

Then he lies about the 2014 coup: “His service was enlisted once again by the people he didn’t know.” Yes, that’s right, didn’t know anyone. He lies:  “I didn’t know Gen Prayut and didn’t even know what he looked like…”.

We assume that when he was President of the military-appointed National Legislative Assembly after the 2006 coup he kept his eyes closed the whole time so that he didn’t see NLA member Gen Prayuth.

He goes on and on with this stream of fermenting lies to claim “that even under military dictatorship … he was by no means an unquestioning subordinate of those in power.”

Meechai is unscrupulous and a military lackey. He doesn’t feel like a lackey because his ideas on anti-democracy fit the generals ever so perfectly.

The arrogance of the man is as stunning at Gen Prawit’s.