| |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
|
Everyone denies this. We are not here to provide you with the answers or our thoughts, just the facts and questions we have for you to decide for yourself if the Courts of Law remain independent as claimed or not.
- Why did the junta state in Announcement No.3 that “All the Courts of Law, other than the Constitutional Tribunal, shall continue to decidecases in accordance with the provisions of law and the Order of the Democratic Reform Council (or the junta, so to speak).
The junta did the coup and ousted the democratically elected government, revoked the Constitution of the Kingdom of 1997, the only constitution in Thailand the people have direct participation in. Then the junta announced its own Interim Constitution of 2006, then why did the junta need to repeat itself in this Announcement No.3. Or is the reason is to make sure that the will of the junta is above and beyond the rule of law and even the Court of Justice needs to obey!
Many questions come to our mind: If the junta, or the so called Democratic Reform Council commit certain actions in violation of the laws, the Court has to apply the rules of law or does the Court need to comply with the ‘order' of the junta as specified in the Announcement No.3? Which one is more sacred, the laws of the country or the ‘order' of the junta? If someone were to believe that such someone has power over the Court, will there be fairness and justice in our society? Who shall the people turn to for fairness and justice?
- Why did the junta appoint the permanent secretary to the Ministry of Justice immediately after the coup? Why did the junta not appoint other permanent secretaries of other Ministries?
If the junta did not do so, would Mr. Jaran Pakdeetanakul be appointed to this powerful post? Was he the next one in the line of command or did he have to be transferred from the Court to occupy this post? Was this a ‘big surprise' to all in the Ministry of Justice as well as the Court?
What is so special with the Ministry of Justice that the junta has to appoint its ‘friend' to this position? Or was this well planned as a powerful tool to justify the coup by making ‘illegitimate' all actions of the ousted government. Is this just another brick, another step to bring the General to achieve his dream.
- Why did the recently retired Supreme Court President accept the junta's appointment as Minister of the Ministry of Justice?
As all know, there are 3 branches of sovereign power; the administration led by the prime minister, the legislative led by the Chairman of the House of Representatives, the justice led by the President of the Supreme Court.
Even though the President of the Supreme Court may be the least ‘powerful' among these peers, especially when compared to the prime minister, but so far they have been considered and praised as the ‘purest'. All the judges take pride in this fact. We all know and share the same thought.
It was not the first time the President of the Supreme Court stepped out of the sacred shrine to help a troubled Thailand . The late Professor Sanya Thammasak, the ex-President of the Supreme Court and, after his retirement, the chairman of the Privy Council, the most respected member of the Privy Council Thailand ever seen, took the role of prime minister after the black October 1973 event where the military killed hundreds of democracy campaigners.
But now the ex-leader of Justice accepted the post to be just one of the administrative officers for the prime minister who was his peer. Why? This has never happened before in Thailand .
Never before in the history of the Supreme Court has the leader of the Court joined politics after their retirement.
- Why did the junta renew the terms of offices of Mr. Panya Tanonroad, the current President of the Supreme Court and Mr.Akratorn Jularat, the Current President of the Administrative Court ?
Why does this extension have to be stated in the draft constitution of 2007 but during the public hearing sessions of this very constitution, the issue has never been raised to the interest or attention of the public?
The Judges always take pride in their profession. They decide cases under His Majesty's Name, with the sacred duty to preserve justice for the people. That is why the Judges maintain their lives and careers with very high standards of ethical and proper conduct. They live their lives not for material rewards, fame or money but for fairness, justice and the public good.
Never before in the history of the Courts of Justice of Thailand was a Judge appointed by a junta or anyone outside their strict and well-respected rules and regulations.
The retiring judges now can get their terms extended if they are willing to do so, but the rules on this are general, applied to every judge and stated in the Laws enacted by the democratically elected House of Representatives.
No judge in the legal history of Thailand has been appointed by junta, nor their terms renewed by the order of the junta.
Thai people have always had a good opinion about the Court of Justice. How could this happen? Why?
All these questions and facts need answers. The Thai people deserve truth and sincerity. In order to make informed decisions, facts need to be disclosed, not hidden. All the agendas must be put on the table and opened for discussion and questions, not hidden with the intention to conceal it. No one can make decisions on behalf of the Thai people just because they think they are more intelligent.
Are we at the dawn of the modern dark age?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
