Pundit I guess we will have to agree to disagree. You are probably correct in saying I shouldn’t lump the EC in with the judiciary, but it does seem to fit in that segment rather easily. It certainly is more independent of the politicians than say the police force. It does in a way date back to a constitution taking power of election administration out of the hands of the politicians via their control of the Interior Ministry.
Wouldn’t it be nice to know what the carbon footprint of the palace was? Both direct and indirect (the carbon cost of the traffic snarls produced by those motorcades would be interesting, I bet). Those are busy folks, constantly traveling around the country, well except for the King now. Maybe they could use some of that wealth for some carbon offsets.
Ian, can you tell us about the Princeton Premier Registry. Sounds great and I would like to apply, but when I google it a lot of people are saying that it is a scam???!!! Tell me it’s not true.
Thanks Ian, I only posted the letter after seeing that it had been widely circulated (at your request?) on a public email list. I assumed that it was then in the public domain. I have inserted a clarification above and, of course, if you send me the final signed letter after 26 August I am happy to post it.
Thank you for taking interest in this issue, but it would have been good if you’d asked before posting the letter. It would be better to post the final version, together with all the signatures. It will be released on August 26.
As for the report, it is at present just an independently produced report, as you have correctly pointed out. Yes, I agree that it would be good to publish it in a peer-reviewed journal. That, in fact, is the plan, and I will be pursuing that option over the coming months. If you check my references within the report, you will see that I generally publish the results of my fisheries studies in peer reviewed journals. I have published many papers about fisheries in the Khone Falls area. However, the paper will need to be shortened for a journal. Also, it frequently takes 1-2 years to publish an article in a journal. That might be too late for decision-makers presently considering whether to proceed with the Don Sahong Dam. Therefore, I decided to release the report now before trying to publish it in a journal, so that people have access to the information at this crucial time.The report has already been released and is publically available at: http://polisproject.org/PDFs/Baird%202009_Don%20Sahong.pdf
There is much that could be written about alternatives to the Don Sahong Dam. Crucially, the project is presently planned for the only channel in the Khone Falls area that fish can easily migrate up all year (no waterfalls on the channel). There are, however, many other channels in the Khone Falls area that fish cannot migrate up anyway (waterfalls naturally obstruct migrations). Those channels would certainly represent much less damaging options for dam development. Building a dam on the only channel that important fish stocks use to migrate upriver doesn’t make much sense. In addition, building large dams on the mainstream Mekong River is, in my view, not a very good option for many reasons. I would not go into details here, as it would take an extra paper in itself to adequately address all the relevant issues. However, crucially, the Don Sahong Dam could set a precedent for constructing other destructive dams on the mainstream Mekong River. So far, there are no dams on the lower and middle mainstream Mekong River. There are, however, some on the mainstream Mekong River in China.
The Bangkok Post has a story on yet another honor for the king. A Dutch farmer is calling his new tulip ‘Bhumibol’. The story mentions Klaas Koedijk, a Dutch farmer and owner of FA.P. Koeddiik & Zn company. Googling the bits of this produce nothing but Thailand stories. Anyone know anything about the farmer or his company?
I know little about the history of law, but had thought that it wasn’t as simple as you have it above in terms of **no precedent**. I had thought tha many civil law jurisdictions rejected binding notions of precedent in the more formalistic manner of, say, the US system. However, I had thought that precedent was applied (in a sense) through consideration of settled cases-as-law.
You’re roughly correct. The distinction b/w Civil and Common law systems is far more subtle than the caricatured distinction where civil law just follows codes and common law follows precedent. It’s more muddled than that.
Hi Nick,
May I ask why in the world would you put yourself in Pra-arthit road in the first place? Oh, because you wanted to cause a scene, make some news and write some articles, that’s pity. Be more creative on your release, else it’s no more better “make up” story.
Cheers,
Vora
nobody: can you tell us more about this: “Thailand has a (roman) code based legal system and as such each case is decided on its merits regardless of other decisions. ie there is no precedent which tends to be a feature of English common law.”
I know little about the history of law, but had thought that it wasn’t as simple as you have it above in terms of **no precedent**. I had thought tha many civil law jurisdictions rejected binding notions of precedent in the more formalistic manner of, say, the US system. However, I had thought that precedent was applied (in a sense) through consideration of settled cases-as-law. If not this, then I had thought that precendent was limited to, say, a supreme or high court.
Any comments or views, especially related to the Thai system would be appreciated.
Well, gee jonfernquest, thanks for this: “Anonymous pompous and intellectually autocratic Thai Studies academics never subject to adequate scrutiny or debate will eventually bring about the demise of their field!”
Isn’t trying to publish in journals and books where academics are subject to scrutiny. And when they apply for jobs, apply for grants, get assessed by hundreds of students each year, apply for promotion, etc. Don’t they debate in conferences and workshops? That might not be “adequate” in your terms, but it is considerable scrutiny. And don’t confuse blogs for academic work.
Hopefully you will be able to keep saving us from all those “intellectually autocratic Thai Studies academics” through your perpetual oversight.
athitha. Thai people must be less influenced by the media than you imagine or Thaksin’s near total domination of the media, especially television, when he was in power would have kept him in power indefinitely. However, his attempts to get people to eat the news he fed them on government TV and his personal TV station, along with his efforts to force the Press into line by squeezing their advertising revenues, ultimately failed. Why was this?
LA says At the time most people, both pro and anti-Thaksin, and the press suspected he was making financial arrangements with some judges
Well the press certainly speculated, but you seem to dismiss McCargo’s theory and the newspaper quotes from the judges.
Also I didn’t hear that many cries of innocence from Thaksin’s lawyers which tends to suggest that an out of court deal has been reached. Also, and I’m saying this without any legal knowledge, I suspect in most Western countries the judges reaction would be charge the lawyers with contempt. I’m sure Judge John Deed of TV fame would.
They are charged with contempt so how can they complain about what happened? They will get another contempt charge thrown at them. Contempt of court where the judge(s) just make a decision on a matter without a trial is usually related to minor matters which occur in the court. You don’t seem perturbed by hearings held where you can’t defend yourself and which sentence you to jail. This particular court has a conflict of interest as it was judicial staff at this court which who were allegedly offered a bribe.
Interesting how your definition of judiciary is expanded to include the independent agencies.
“I want to deliver raw information and otherwise missing facts, so that it is easier for interested parties to find their own interpretation of what is going on.”
That’s absolutely right!
Many journalists, esp. from Thailand, should take this seriously. Thai people got brain-washed by Thai media for quite awhile. Many of white-collars, they don’t have time to follow the news. They go home late and turn TV on, the manipulated news then pops up by local TV channels trying to flood information . The reporters just grab local newspaper and read out loud for those who are lazy to read. They never think out of box, just eat whatever the media feed them.
Talking about the point of view, they got convinced by those “academia” guys who act as if they are super experts. If you say something differently from those experts, these white collar guys would say “hey, you know nothing, those high-respected academia // journalists // elites said so, it must be absolutely right because they are good people” something like that.
And if you insist your idea, they would ask “you got paid by Thaksin? Thaksin is your daddy?”
I think Porman may have missed the obvious symbolism in the worship of the body parts of the decapitated pig. This is quite possibly a post-modernist representation of the strong desire of Thaksin and other red shirt leaders to get their snouts back into the trough as quickly as possible.
Thai elected MPs are almost certainly no more corrupt than English ones 300 years ago, when that country was emerging from absolutism towards democracy, and party politics were polarised into absolutist and protodemocratic camps. I doubt that Thaksin is any more corrupt than Sir Robert Walpole was. The classic royalist judge at a slightly earlier time was Lord Justice Jeffreys, zealously loyal to the Crown, up to his ears in party politics, and whose behaviour was far worse than that of the present Thai judges (with the possible exception of the bloody Preah Vihear affair). Do you stand for absolutism in that struggle too, Les Abbey?
I was impressed with the Montesano’s attention to the campaign of hatred against Thaksin, and suggest that this campaign is also directed against other elected members of parliament, out of the same absolutist self interest. The hate rhetoric is meant to persuade people that the elected politicians are somehow worse than the men with guns and the filthy-rich courtiers.
Thanks Ty, michael, athita, doctorJ, and all others. 🙂
“doctorJ”:
I am trying very hard not to interpret, and to leave my opinions out as much as i can. It’s not that i have no opinions, i have lots of opinions on all things i am working on. I am just not that great on ideology – i am rather pragmatic when it comes to politics.
But what i see is lacking in the reporting in the traditional medias are the bare facts. So much is mixed up with personal opinions of writers themselves (just look at the Nation articles covering this event), and the foreign media is forced to explain in their articles the background in every story, has extremely limited space, which leaves even less space to for just the raw data.
In my blog articles i can’t, and will not compete with traditional medias. I want to deliver raw information and otherwise missing facts, so that it is easier for interested parties to find their own interpretation of what is going on.
It is actually quite simple what i am doing – i am there where things happen, and write what i saw and experienced. I corroborate with my sources (which at times is not that easy as there often is much conflicting information).
In addition to that, i try to get readers a sense of how it felt being there, emotionally and atmospherically.
With all that, i don’t really think i need to interpret anything, i don’t want to be dragged into ideological debates – people can and should make up there own mind.
It is positive to see some non-academic posters on this site. Interesting debate. Thank you.
Just a few comments:
C16. Thailand has a (roman) code based legal system and as such each case is decided on its merits regardless of other decisions. ie there is no precedent which tends to be a feature of English common law.
Quite how a group of judges or the EC for that matter are selected or by whom doesnt necessarily mean they will always find the way those who appointed them or selected them wanted. The next few upcoming cases will be interesting to watch for this reason.
The unfolding drama of Thailand is not yet over and it only with hindsight that what happened is going to be fully understood. All analysis right now leaves too many questions that will only be answered after the event. imho. Still the desire to be a barroom or lecture hall analyst is still in all of us I guess.
RN I think you too are suffering from Bangkok Pundit’s problem of trying to make facts fit your answer. Again the logic of it just being collateral damage that many of the MPs who could be considered friendly to the Bangkok elite may lose their seats and put the Abhisit government in danger doesn’t really fit.
So just to make my thoughts clear. The judiciary should follow the rule of law. These laws are made by governments, which in Thailand change from elected to military and back again with frightening regularity. The judiciary has allegiance to the crown but it still has to follow the rule of law.
In most democratic countries the judiciary is independent of the law-makers. It’s allegiance is to something else, be it the state as in the US or the crown as it is in constitutional monarchies. It doesn’t make the laws as that is law-makers job.
So if we look at what’s going on in Thailand we see the judiciary is enforcing laws like it hasn’t done in recent history. We can say some of the laws included in the most recent constitution were not made by elected representatives so shouldn’t be enforced. The opposing argument would be that the constitution was accepted by a referendum. Against that some will say that the referendum for various reasons was unfair and undemocratic.
For me, as a foreigner looking on, the laws attempting to stop political corruption were long overdue. To see some of the old faces like Newin and Banharm squirming under these new laws is fun. To see Thai courts enforcing both new laws and old as they should be is a good thing. Will the politicians eventually write a new constitution and get through amnesty laws? Probably. Will that be a positive for democracy in Thailand? I doubt it.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
Pundit I guess we will have to agree to disagree. You are probably correct in saying I shouldn’t lump the EC in with the judiciary, but it does seem to fit in that segment rather easily. It certainly is more independent of the politicians than say the police force. It does in a way date back to a constitution taking power of election administration out of the hands of the politicians via their control of the Interior Ministry.
… and if one green royal should …
Wouldn’t it be nice to know what the carbon footprint of the palace was? Both direct and indirect (the carbon cost of the traffic snarls produced by those motorcades would be interesting, I bet). Those are busy folks, constantly traveling around the country, well except for the King now. Maybe they could use some of that wealth for some carbon offsets.
17 August 2009: petition day
The other side of the coin.
http://www.manager.co.th/Politics/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9520000095155
Development options for Laos?
Ian, can you tell us about the Princeton Premier Registry. Sounds great and I would like to apply, but when I google it a lot of people are saying that it is a scam???!!! Tell me it’s not true.
http://blogpond.com.au/2008/02/21/princeton-premier/
Development options for Laos?
Thanks Ian, I only posted the letter after seeing that it had been widely circulated (at your request?) on a public email list. I assumed that it was then in the public domain. I have inserted a clarification above and, of course, if you send me the final signed letter after 26 August I am happy to post it.
Development options for Laos?
Thank you for taking interest in this issue, but it would have been good if you’d asked before posting the letter. It would be better to post the final version, together with all the signatures. It will be released on August 26.
As for the report, it is at present just an independently produced report, as you have correctly pointed out. Yes, I agree that it would be good to publish it in a peer-reviewed journal. That, in fact, is the plan, and I will be pursuing that option over the coming months. If you check my references within the report, you will see that I generally publish the results of my fisheries studies in peer reviewed journals. I have published many papers about fisheries in the Khone Falls area. However, the paper will need to be shortened for a journal. Also, it frequently takes 1-2 years to publish an article in a journal. That might be too late for decision-makers presently considering whether to proceed with the Don Sahong Dam. Therefore, I decided to release the report now before trying to publish it in a journal, so that people have access to the information at this crucial time.The report has already been released and is publically available at:
http://polisproject.org/PDFs/Baird%202009_Don%20Sahong.pdf
There is much that could be written about alternatives to the Don Sahong Dam. Crucially, the project is presently planned for the only channel in the Khone Falls area that fish can easily migrate up all year (no waterfalls on the channel). There are, however, many other channels in the Khone Falls area that fish cannot migrate up anyway (waterfalls naturally obstruct migrations). Those channels would certainly represent much less damaging options for dam development. Building a dam on the only channel that important fish stocks use to migrate upriver doesn’t make much sense. In addition, building large dams on the mainstream Mekong River is, in my view, not a very good option for many reasons. I would not go into details here, as it would take an extra paper in itself to adequately address all the relevant issues. However, crucially, the Don Sahong Dam could set a precedent for constructing other destructive dams on the mainstream Mekong River. So far, there are no dams on the lower and middle mainstream Mekong River. There are, however, some on the mainstream Mekong River in China.
Royal news, graduations and honours
The Bangkok Post has a story on yet another honor for the king. A Dutch farmer is calling his new tulip ‘Bhumibol’. The story mentions Klaas Koedijk, a Dutch farmer and owner of FA.P. Koeddiik & Zn company. Googling the bits of this produce nothing but Thailand stories. Anyone know anything about the farmer or his company?
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
RK says –
I know little about the history of law, but had thought that it wasn’t as simple as you have it above in terms of **no precedent**. I had thought tha many civil law jurisdictions rejected binding notions of precedent in the more formalistic manner of, say, the US system. However, I had thought that precedent was applied (in a sense) through consideration of settled cases-as-law.
You’re roughly correct. The distinction b/w Civil and Common law systems is far more subtle than the caricatured distinction where civil law just follows codes and common law follows precedent. It’s more muddled than that.
Thaksin supporters magazine
I agree with Frank, another piece of junk publishing.
17 August 2009: petition day
Hi Nick,
May I ask why in the world would you put yourself in Pra-arthit road in the first place? Oh, because you wanted to cause a scene, make some news and write some articles, that’s pity. Be more creative on your release, else it’s no more better “make up” story.
Cheers,
Vora
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
nobody: can you tell us more about this: “Thailand has a (roman) code based legal system and as such each case is decided on its merits regardless of other decisions. ie there is no precedent which tends to be a feature of English common law.”
I know little about the history of law, but had thought that it wasn’t as simple as you have it above in terms of **no precedent**. I had thought tha many civil law jurisdictions rejected binding notions of precedent in the more formalistic manner of, say, the US system. However, I had thought that precedent was applied (in a sense) through consideration of settled cases-as-law. If not this, then I had thought that precendent was limited to, say, a supreme or high court.
Any comments or views, especially related to the Thai system would be appreciated.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
Well, gee jonfernquest, thanks for this: “Anonymous pompous and intellectually autocratic Thai Studies academics never subject to adequate scrutiny or debate will eventually bring about the demise of their field!”
Isn’t trying to publish in journals and books where academics are subject to scrutiny. And when they apply for jobs, apply for grants, get assessed by hundreds of students each year, apply for promotion, etc. Don’t they debate in conferences and workshops? That might not be “adequate” in your terms, but it is considerable scrutiny. And don’t confuse blogs for academic work.
Hopefully you will be able to keep saving us from all those “intellectually autocratic Thai Studies academics” through your perpetual oversight.
17 August 2009: petition day
athitha. Thai people must be less influenced by the media than you imagine or Thaksin’s near total domination of the media, especially television, when he was in power would have kept him in power indefinitely. However, his attempts to get people to eat the news he fed them on government TV and his personal TV station, along with his efforts to force the Press into line by squeezing their advertising revenues, ultimately failed. Why was this?
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
LA says At the time most people, both pro and anti-Thaksin, and the press suspected he was making financial arrangements with some judges
Well the press certainly speculated, but you seem to dismiss McCargo’s theory and the newspaper quotes from the judges.
Also I didn’t hear that many cries of innocence from Thaksin’s lawyers which tends to suggest that an out of court deal has been reached. Also, and I’m saying this without any legal knowledge, I suspect in most Western countries the judges reaction would be charge the lawyers with contempt. I’m sure Judge John Deed of TV fame would.
They are charged with contempt so how can they complain about what happened? They will get another contempt charge thrown at them. Contempt of court where the judge(s) just make a decision on a matter without a trial is usually related to minor matters which occur in the court. You don’t seem perturbed by hearings held where you can’t defend yourself and which sentence you to jail. This particular court has a conflict of interest as it was judicial staff at this court which who were allegedly offered a bribe.
Interesting how your definition of judiciary is expanded to include the independent agencies.
17 August 2009: petition day
Hello again Nick,
I totally agree with your idea
“I want to deliver raw information and otherwise missing facts, so that it is easier for interested parties to find their own interpretation of what is going on.”
That’s absolutely right!
Many journalists, esp. from Thailand, should take this seriously. Thai people got brain-washed by Thai media for quite awhile. Many of white-collars, they don’t have time to follow the news. They go home late and turn TV on, the manipulated news then pops up by local TV channels trying to flood information . The reporters just grab local newspaper and read out loud for those who are lazy to read. They never think out of box, just eat whatever the media feed them.
Talking about the point of view, they got convinced by those “academia” guys who act as if they are super experts. If you say something differently from those experts, these white collar guys would say “hey, you know nothing, those high-respected academia // journalists // elites said so, it must be absolutely right because they are good people” something like that.
And if you insist your idea, they would ask “you got paid by Thaksin? Thaksin is your daddy?”
That’s the problem.
17 August 2009: petition day
I think Porman may have missed the obvious symbolism in the worship of the body parts of the decapitated pig. This is quite possibly a post-modernist representation of the strong desire of Thaksin and other red shirt leaders to get their snouts back into the trough as quickly as possible.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
Thai elected MPs are almost certainly no more corrupt than English ones 300 years ago, when that country was emerging from absolutism towards democracy, and party politics were polarised into absolutist and protodemocratic camps. I doubt that Thaksin is any more corrupt than Sir Robert Walpole was. The classic royalist judge at a slightly earlier time was Lord Justice Jeffreys, zealously loyal to the Crown, up to his ears in party politics, and whose behaviour was far worse than that of the present Thai judges (with the possible exception of the bloody Preah Vihear affair). Do you stand for absolutism in that struggle too, Les Abbey?
I was impressed with the Montesano’s attention to the campaign of hatred against Thaksin, and suggest that this campaign is also directed against other elected members of parliament, out of the same absolutist self interest. The hate rhetoric is meant to persuade people that the elected politicians are somehow worse than the men with guns and the filthy-rich courtiers.
17 August 2009: petition day
Thanks Ty, michael, athita, doctorJ, and all others. 🙂
“doctorJ”:
I am trying very hard not to interpret, and to leave my opinions out as much as i can. It’s not that i have no opinions, i have lots of opinions on all things i am working on. I am just not that great on ideology – i am rather pragmatic when it comes to politics.
But what i see is lacking in the reporting in the traditional medias are the bare facts. So much is mixed up with personal opinions of writers themselves (just look at the Nation articles covering this event), and the foreign media is forced to explain in their articles the background in every story, has extremely limited space, which leaves even less space to for just the raw data.
In my blog articles i can’t, and will not compete with traditional medias. I want to deliver raw information and otherwise missing facts, so that it is easier for interested parties to find their own interpretation of what is going on.
It is actually quite simple what i am doing – i am there where things happen, and write what i saw and experienced. I corroborate with my sources (which at times is not that easy as there often is much conflicting information).
In addition to that, i try to get readers a sense of how it felt being there, emotionally and atmospherically.
With all that, i don’t really think i need to interpret anything, i don’t want to be dragged into ideological debates – people can and should make up there own mind.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
It is positive to see some non-academic posters on this site. Interesting debate. Thank you.
Just a few comments:
C16. Thailand has a (roman) code based legal system and as such each case is decided on its merits regardless of other decisions. ie there is no precedent which tends to be a feature of English common law.
Quite how a group of judges or the EC for that matter are selected or by whom doesnt necessarily mean they will always find the way those who appointed them or selected them wanted. The next few upcoming cases will be interesting to watch for this reason.
The unfolding drama of Thailand is not yet over and it only with hindsight that what happened is going to be fully understood. All analysis right now leaves too many questions that will only be answered after the event. imho. Still the desire to be a barroom or lecture hall analyst is still in all of us I guess.
Montesano on Thailand in April 2009
RN I think you too are suffering from Bangkok Pundit’s problem of trying to make facts fit your answer. Again the logic of it just being collateral damage that many of the MPs who could be considered friendly to the Bangkok elite may lose their seats and put the Abhisit government in danger doesn’t really fit.
So just to make my thoughts clear. The judiciary should follow the rule of law. These laws are made by governments, which in Thailand change from elected to military and back again with frightening regularity. The judiciary has allegiance to the crown but it still has to follow the rule of law.
In most democratic countries the judiciary is independent of the law-makers. It’s allegiance is to something else, be it the state as in the US or the crown as it is in constitutional monarchies. It doesn’t make the laws as that is law-makers job.
So if we look at what’s going on in Thailand we see the judiciary is enforcing laws like it hasn’t done in recent history. We can say some of the laws included in the most recent constitution were not made by elected representatives so shouldn’t be enforced. The opposing argument would be that the constitution was accepted by a referendum. Against that some will say that the referendum for various reasons was unfair and undemocratic.
For me, as a foreigner looking on, the laws attempting to stop political corruption were long overdue. To see some of the old faces like Newin and Banharm squirming under these new laws is fun. To see Thai courts enforcing both new laws and old as they should be is a good thing. Will the politicians eventually write a new constitution and get through amnesty laws? Probably. Will that be a positive for democracy in Thailand? I doubt it.