Online Real Estate Marketing Strategies
On 24 November 1997, the Senate voted to remove the name of Supreme Court Vice-president Amphorn Thongprayoon, on the grounds that his credentials were dubious and on allegations that he had defaulted on three million baht in debt. The Supreme Court requested a ruling from the Constitutional Tribunal chaired by the House speaker. The Supreme Court was furious, arguing the constitution did not empower the senate to do background checks or to reject Supreme Court nominees.
Sunai Phasuk of Human Rights Watch described the ruling as “essentially a judicial coup” that could escalate more legal cases against protesters, possibility a treason. This could lead to an end to Thailand’s constitutional monarchy rule and replacing with absolute monarchy. It was seen as another politicised intervention on the side of conservatives, royalists, by the independent court. Jonathan Head of BBC described this ruling forcefully shuts down any room in Thailand for public discussion of the monarchy, but private discussion and social media discussion will continue on, regardless of the government efforts to stop.
Bangkok: Supervision and Examination Bureau, Senate Secretariat General. 2003). Constitutional Court and its Execution of Constitutional Missions (PDF) (in Thai). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0; additional terms may apply. Somyot Chueathai; et al. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Worachet Pakeerut; et al. Worachet Pakeerut (2003). Constitutional Court Procedure: Comparison between Foreign Constitutional Courts and Thai Constitutional Court (PDF) (in Thai). 2003). Rule of Law and Power to Issue Emergency Decrees: Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision on Enactment of Emergency Decree Excising Telecommunication Business, BE 2546 (2003) (PDF) (in Thai). Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. This page was last edited on 28 December 2022, at 12:41 (UTC).
The opposition New Aspiration Party (NAP) did not have the votes to defeat the bills, and therefore, on the last day of debate, invoked Article 219 of the Constitution to question the constitutionality of an emergency decree. The NAP argued that since there was no emergency nor necessary urgency (under Article 218(2)), the government could not issue any emergency decrees. Article 219, however, specifically notes the constitutionality of an emergency decree can be questioned only on Article 218(1) concerning the maintenance of national or public safety, national economic security, or to avert public calamity.
The Court is back with greater vigour and is also empowered to introduce to the National Assembly the draft laws concerning the Court itself. If you are you looking for more in regards to condo for sale bangkok 2 million baht look into our internet site. Three are SCJ judges and are selected by the SCJ plenum through secret ballot. Such panel is composed of the SCJ president, the SAC president, the president of the House of Representatives, the opposition leader and one of the chiefs of the constitutional independent agencies (chief ombudsman, president of the election commission, president of the National Anti-Corruption Commission or president of the State Audit Commission). Two are experts in law approved by the Senate after having been selected by a special panel. Two are SAC judges and are selected by the SAC plenum through secret ballot.
