Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06BANGKOK2502
2006-04-28 11:10:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Bangkok
Cable title:  

ANNULLING THE ELECTIONS? THE COURTS DECIDE TO

Tags:  PGOV PHUM TH SNAP 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

281110Z Apr 06
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BANGKOK 002502 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/27/2016
TAGS: PGOV PHUM TH SNAP
SUBJECT: ANNULLING THE ELECTIONS? THE COURTS DECIDE TO
THINK ABOUT IT

REF: BANGKOK 02425

Classified By: Charge d'Affaires a.i. Alex A. Arvizu, reason 1.4 (b) (d
)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BANGKOK 002502

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/27/2016
TAGS: PGOV PHUM TH SNAP
SUBJECT: ANNULLING THE ELECTIONS? THE COURTS DECIDE TO
THINK ABOUT IT

REF: BANGKOK 02425

Classified By: Charge d'Affaires a.i. Alex A. Arvizu, reason 1.4 (b) (d
)


1. (C) SUMMARY: The chairs of the three high courts met
April 28 to consider solutions to the political dilemmas
posed by the April elections for members of parliament. They
were responding to the very strong words of the respected
King, who had delivered tough criticisms of the election
during speeches on April 25. The courts today disappointed
some in the opposition, who had hoped that they would annul
the troubled elections on the spot. The courts only pledged
that they would consider the many cases now before them
calling for nullification or other measures, that they would
do so expeditiously, and that they would consult together to
ensure their decisions were consistent. This was immediately
followed by a decision of the Administrative Court suspending
the final round of voting scheduled for Saturday. This
Administrative Court decision tends to support the view of
many here who believe that the courts will eventually annul
the elections, but the way forward is still not clear. If
there are new elections after three or four months, Thaksin
may decide that his "political break" is over, and try to
come back as prime minister. If the courts do not annul the
election, this controversy will result in an even further
weakened mandate for this Parliament. END SUMMARY


2. (C) In response to the King's message on April 25, the
chairs of the three high courts met today to consider
solutions to the problems posed by the parliamentary
elections (reftel). They announced after a meeting on Friday
morning (April 28) that each court will work on the
election-related cases under its jurisdiction, and that they
will resolve them in a speedy fashion, but gave no deadline.
They also said that the courts would consult together in
order to ensure that the cases would be resolved in a
consistent fashion. This announcement disappointed some who
had hoped for a quick decision to annul the vote. The
Administrative Court subsequently issued an injunction
suspending the final round of voting scheduled for Saturday,
pending a decision on whether to annul the entire series of

election in April. The April 28 decision tends to support the
view of many that the courts will ultimately decide to annul
the vote.

COURTS AT ODDS
--------------


3. (C) According to leaked accounts in the press, the
courts held differing views on the problem going in to the
meeting. The Constitutional Court is generally considered to
be lined up with the ruling Thai Rak Thai (TRT) party. It
reportedly favors opening the new Parliament regardless of
the complaints about the election procedures. (TRT leaders
have also publicly supported that view.) The final round
vote on Saturday would have gotten TRT close to the full
quorum. Because the Electoral Commission (EC) opened up
registration for new candidates again this week for
Saturday's election, all 14 races in the remaining districts
were multi-candidate. They should have produced "winners"
in each case, even if they took the seat with only a few
thousand votes. This would have left only one unfilled seat,
since one TRT party list candidate has dropped out to join
the monkhood. Until the Administrative Court injunction
today, it might have been plausible to convene the slightly
undersized Parliament, but this choice appear off the menu
for now.


4. (C) The Supreme Court appears to support annulling the
elections, but it may have a weaker claim to authority over
the issue. The Administrative Court's position is less
clear; it appears to have a stronger claim to jurisdiction
over some of the key issues, and most of the lawsuits filed
against the elections are before this court now. These
lawsuits call for annulling the election and even for
annulling the decree dissolving the previous Parliament,
based on legal and procedural errors. For example, one suit
claims that the Constitution limits the circumstances under
which the Parliament can be dissolved, and that those
conditions were not met. Others claim that the voters'
constitutionally guaranteed rights to secrecy were violated
by the new position of the voting booths, which allowed the
voters' ballots to be seen. Other suits claim that the
registration of new candidates after the first round of
voting was illegal.


5. (C) Before the King's speech, it appeared unlikely that
any of these suits would actually result in the annulling of
the elections, but now it is possible. In Bangkok, the
so-called "Bangkok elite", the anti-Thaksin press and
opposition seem to think that this will happen. The NSC
Secretary-General told us that the King made it "very clear"

SIPDIS
that these elections were "not acceptable." (Comment: "Very
clear" is stretching it, but it's all relative. End comment)
Political party contacts are already talking about the
likelihood of new elections in July or August, to give time
for people to switch parties.

LIMBO
--------------


6. (C) The justices' very broad assurances leave a lot of
questions unanswered. There are several possible ways
forward from this point. If the next round of the elections
is not held, it does not appear that that Parliament can
legally convene. The current caretaker government would
presumably continue in power until the lawsuits are resolved,
and the country would be without a House of Representatives
until the courts examine all the cases. Political limbo
would likely continue.

WHAT ABOUT THAKSIN?
--------------


7. (C) The caretaker Prime Minister is traveling abroad and
has made no public comment since the King's speech. There is
a lot of speculation about how the courts' eventual decision
will affect his pledge to "take a break" from politics for
the next session of parliament. Thaksin's explanation
emphasized that he was stepping aside in large part out of
respect for the King, to ensure that the country could
concentrate on the upcoming celebrations for his 60th
anniversary in June. If there are new elections in, say,
August, Thaksin conceivably could decide that break time was
over. He could plan to return as PM if TRT won its expected
majority (although the opposition parties would almost
certainly do much better than they did in 2005, particularly
in Bangkok and the central region.)

COMMENT -- THE SUSPENSE IS KILLING US
--------------


8. (C) The repercussions of the King's speech are still
playing out. More information about the courts' views should
come out in the near future, together with at least a
notional timeline for the courts' decisions. If the courts
rule that the elections should not be annulled, there will be
considerable backlash; the controversy will further erode the
legitimacy of a parliament that already suffers from an
extraordinarily weak claim to a mandate. If they annul the
vote, we're largely back to where we started in February.

ARVIZU