2 replies to this topic

[Sexpat]

NLA members say no to non-elected prime ministers

Council for National Security urged to make sure new charter conforms

"Two prominent members of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) yesterday asked the Council for National Security (CNS) to ensure the post-coup charter would not permit a non-elected prime minister.

NLA political-reform committee chairman Noranit Setabutr said the country would face chaos if such a situation were allowed."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/12/17...cs_30021734.php

[Hedda]

There was a strong lead editorial in the BKK Post on Sunday opposing any attempt to allow an appointed, non-elected Prime Minister. It's not clear if the folks pushing that concept are prepared to go to the wall and put it in the new constitution to be approved in a referendum.

There also seems to be more talk these days about having all or part of the Senate to become an appointive position. Clearly, some of the people in charge are not comfortable with elected politicians, regardless of what the constitution says.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/Perspective/17Dec2006_pers005.php

[Bob]

I don't know but I suspect that all talk about appointive offices originates from the palace. Previously, there has been comment made that Thailand needs "Thai" democracy which supposedly is quite different from "western" democracy. I'm beginning to think that the difference some wish is that somebody other than the people will decide who holds the real power in Thailand. And I wonder if this stems from greed for power or the simple belief that the people are unfit to choose (after all, they went for Shinawatra in a big way).
Puzzling power struggle going on there (most behind closed doors, of course).