HM asks courts to solve crisis
From the Bangkok Post - 04/26/06
www.bangkokpost.com/News/26Apr2006_news01.php
Quote:
HM asks courts to solve crisis
One-party election 'not democratic'
His Majesty the King has refused requests to invoke Article 7 of the constitution to end the political gridlock, saying it would be inconsistent with democracy.
Instead, he asked the country's top courts to help solve the crisis. He also said a single-party election was not democratic.
''Do not abandon democracy,'' he said.
His Majesty said it was wrong to cite Article 7 and seek a royally appointed prime minister.
''That's not democratic rule. Excuse me for saying this, it's the kind of administration which disregards democratic rule. It's unreasonable,'' he said.
The King was speaking to groups of new judges appointed to the benches of the Supreme Administrative Court and other lower courts who were granted separate audiences at the Klai Kangwon Palace at Hua Hin in Prachuap Khiri Khan.
Article 7 has been the focus of demands by the People's Alliance for Democracy and the opposition Democrat party for the replacement of caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra by a royally installed head of government.
His Majesty said Article 7 did not permit the King to exercise power at whim.
''The article refers to the full effect of the constitutional monarchy. It doesn't permit the King to do whatever he wishes. If he did, it would be overstepping his mark, doing something beyond his authority. That's not democracy,'' he said.
The article does not provide the leeway for the King to issue any directives for the purpose of manipulation.
''Some people may say King Rama IX likes to do what he wants, but I've never done that,'' he said.
Since becoming King he had seen the constitution rewritten several times. He had never used the constitution or the law as a means to impose his will. If he had done so, the country would have collapsed a long time ago.
All laws had been properly decreed.
His Majesty said the parliament must have a quorum to convene. There must be 500 MPs present before the new parliament could open.
A parliament was not functional until there was a quorum. There may be attempts to work around it by convening the first meeting without a quorum.
''But that would be playing it by ear and muddling through,'' he said.
''You can't play it by ear in governing the country. You can't pass the buck and try to finish everything in haste. It's not right to dump it in the King's lap, which is worse,'' His Majesty told the judges.
People counted on the courts, particularly the Supreme Court, to uphold justice. They felt the courts were honest and knowledgable in the application of the law.
''If no one follows the law and righteous administration, the country will be in a shambles, as we are experiencing now, because we are short of the 500 MPs.
''It's not workable,'' he said.
He suggested the courts consult with other courts such as the Administrative Court on what steps should be taken. The courts must urgently decide, otherwise the country would collapse.
The King said it was a most critical time and the judges must do their duty.
The judges must consult knowledgable people, fashionably called the ''Nation's Saviours''. He said the term ''rescue the nation'' was often used but he did not know why the nation had to be rescued because it has not yet sunk to its demise.
Steps should be taken to prevent the nation from being shattered, so that people would not need to save it.
He said people across the country and worldwide still had faith in the Supreme Court judges, who were knowledgable people and had the determination to save the country in times of distress.
The King seriously advised the Supreme Administrative Court to intervene in the ''non-democratic'' general election to help the country get through its difficulties.
Addressing the Supreme Administrative Court judges, the King said the court should keep watch on the election because of its quick schedule and possible stalemate due to lone candidates standing in many constituencies.
An election where sole candidates from a single political party, in this case the ruling Thai Rak Thai, run in their constituency was ''non-democratic''.
''It is impossible for a democratic election to have one party, one man. One candidate does not equate with democracy,'' the King said.
The King said sole candidacies cannot lead to the full membership of the House because a sole candidate must have support from at least 20% of all eligible voters in a constituency.
The issue of a sole candidacy was important because it would never lead to the full membership of the House.
''If there are not enough elected people, then democratic rule cannot function,'' the King said.
The King said the court had the right to make its points about the election because the judges had sworn before him to work for democracy.
''I ask you not to neglect democracy ... You must look carefully into administrative issues. If you cannot do it [solve the problem], then it should be you who resign, not the government, for failing to do your duty. Carefully review the vows you have made,'' said the King.
If I was wearing a hat, I would doff it to HM - The more I read/learn about this man, the more impressed I am. I can understand why the reverence and respect for the King and his family goes far beyond mere laws! I can only hope that the Thai Supreme Court can do a better job for that country than ours did for us back in 2000 (remember - when Bush won the presidency by...five votes...at least once they threw out the millions cast by everyone else in America!)
