May 13, 2006


I was thinking about the elections in Thailand; so just put my thoughts into words.

The judges declared the previous elections null and void. The reason was it was unconstitutional and undemocratic because the oppositions boycotted the elections.

My thoughts:-
1. The judges did this only after meeting the beloved Thai king. If that was the reason shouldn’t the judges have done it earlier or even stopped the elections?

2. Won’t this be a bad precedent. What if the ruling and the smaller parties gang together to boycott the next elections? Or in future, parties that don’t like this or that decide to boycott the elections?

3. I believe the parties boycotted elections because they knew that Thaksin’s party would win . If they were certain they could win would they have boycotted?


Victor said...

If that happened in Singapore, it won't be declared undemocratic or unconstitional. They will just declare walkovers for all 84 parliamentary seats and hold an unprecedented victory parade.

Chris Sim said...

It's quite incredible that an election can be called at their whim and fancy, and then subsequently declaring it null and void. Some politicians like those in Taiwan and Korea even get into fight during parliament debate in the House of Law. What kind of message are they trying to tell their people? That it is ok to be "lawless" in the House? tsk tsk tks.