Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08BANGKOK2488
2008-08-20 10:36:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Bangkok
Cable title:
PEOPLE'S POWER PARTY DISSOLUTION: NOT YET
how-toVZCZCXRO4671 PP RUEHCHI RUEHCN RUEHDT RUEHHM DE RUEHBK #2488 2331036 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 201036Z AUG 08 FM AMEMBASSY BANGKOK TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4053 INFO RUEHZS/ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN NATIONS RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 6252 RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 8955 RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 4828 RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 0973 RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON 2363 RUEHCHI/AMCONSUL CHIANG MAI 5552 RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI
C O N F I D E N T I A L BANGKOK 002488
SIPDIS
NSC FOR PHU
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/19/2018
TAGS: PGOV PINR TH
SUBJECT: PEOPLE'S POWER PARTY DISSOLUTION: NOT YET
REF: A. BANGKOK 02357
B. BANGKOK 02091
Classified By: Charge D'Affaires James F. Entwistle, reason 1.4 (b) and
(d).
C O N F I D E N T I A L BANGKOK 002488
SIPDIS
NSC FOR PHU
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/19/2018
TAGS: PGOV PINR TH
SUBJECT: PEOPLE'S POWER PARTY DISSOLUTION: NOT YET
REF: A. BANGKOK 02357
B. BANGKOK 02091
Classified By: Charge D'Affaires James F. Entwistle, reason 1.4 (b) and
(d).
1. (C) Summary and comment: On a day when Thailand was
anticipating two legal decisions on issues of national
political significance, nothing happened. The long awaited
ruling by the Election Commission (EC) on possible
dissolution of the People's Power Party was deferred until
September 2, and the Supreme Administrative Court refused to
issue an injunction to block three Cabinet officials who had
been indicted on corruption charges from carrying out their
duties, claiming it did not have jurisdiction in the case.
These two non-developments mean that Thailand's political
landscape, for now, remains unchanged. Although this could
be interpreted as evidence that the most influential
institutions in Thailand have determined that former Prime
Minister Thaksin's departure from Thailand resolves the main
issue clogging the countries political arteries, it could
also merely be a reluctance by these institutions to further
roil the waters and an acknowledgment of the importance of
their decisions. End summary and comment.
2. (SBU) On Wednesday, August 20 Thai press reported that the
EC deferred its ruling on whether the Peoples Power Party
should be dissolved because of electoral fraud committed by
former house speaker and PPP deputy leader Yongyuth
Tiyapairat. The official reason given to the press was that
EC members needed more time to assess critical evidence and
testimony before making a decision.
3. (C) Two Embassy contacts in the EC office, Mr. Jakkarin
Komolsiri (protect),Secretary to Elections Commissioner
Sodsri Sattayatham, and Mr. Bunyakiat Rakchartcharoen
(protect),Director of the Election Division, told us that
the decision to put off the ruling on the PPP case had
stemmed from technical errors involving information and
evidence in the case, and not political interference. (Note:
Neither Jakkarin nor Bunyakiat would elaborate on what the
technical errors were. End note.) Separately, Ekkaphap Polsue
(protect),former Deputy Secretary General to the Prime
Minster, gave us a more complete reason for the deferment.
Without citing his sources, Ekkaphap claimed that that the
deferment was due to a split in the EC. He said two of the
election commissioners (no names given) were adamant that
Yongyut,s electoral fraud was an issue of individual guilt,
so the entire PPP should not bear the punishment. The
remaining three commissioners saw it as a broader issue
involving the entire political party because of Yongyuth,s
position as deputy leader. Ekkaphap said the deferment was
the result of all the commissioners agreeing that more time
was needed in the hope of achieving a clear consensus on the
ruling.
4. (SBU) In the other non-event of significance, the Supreme
Administrative Court decided it did not have jurisdiction to
rule on a People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) law suit
regarding the ability of three members of Prime Minister
Samak,s cabinet to maintain their positions. According to
press sources, the court forwarded the case to the Central
Administrative Court, which it said had jurisdiction over the
matter. Separately, however, the Council of State, a bureau
under the office of the Prime Minister that advises the Prime
Minister and cabinet on legal matters, issued an advisory
opinion that the three ministers did not need to step down
form their positions because they were not members of the
current cabinet when the alleged offense occurred. (Note: See
reftel A. The PAD alleged that Deputy Prime Minister/Finance
Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, Labor Minister Uraiwan
Thienthong, and Deputy Transportation Minister Anurak
Jureemart had violated Thai law when they refused to resign
their positions despite the fact that the Supreme Court's
Department for Holders of Political Positions had accepted
their "dereliction of duty" case for trial. End note.)
ENTWISTLE
SIPDIS
NSC FOR PHU
E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/19/2018
TAGS: PGOV PINR TH
SUBJECT: PEOPLE'S POWER PARTY DISSOLUTION: NOT YET
REF: A. BANGKOK 02357
B. BANGKOK 02091
Classified By: Charge D'Affaires James F. Entwistle, reason 1.4 (b) and
(d).
1. (C) Summary and comment: On a day when Thailand was
anticipating two legal decisions on issues of national
political significance, nothing happened. The long awaited
ruling by the Election Commission (EC) on possible
dissolution of the People's Power Party was deferred until
September 2, and the Supreme Administrative Court refused to
issue an injunction to block three Cabinet officials who had
been indicted on corruption charges from carrying out their
duties, claiming it did not have jurisdiction in the case.
These two non-developments mean that Thailand's political
landscape, for now, remains unchanged. Although this could
be interpreted as evidence that the most influential
institutions in Thailand have determined that former Prime
Minister Thaksin's departure from Thailand resolves the main
issue clogging the countries political arteries, it could
also merely be a reluctance by these institutions to further
roil the waters and an acknowledgment of the importance of
their decisions. End summary and comment.
2. (SBU) On Wednesday, August 20 Thai press reported that the
EC deferred its ruling on whether the Peoples Power Party
should be dissolved because of electoral fraud committed by
former house speaker and PPP deputy leader Yongyuth
Tiyapairat. The official reason given to the press was that
EC members needed more time to assess critical evidence and
testimony before making a decision.
3. (C) Two Embassy contacts in the EC office, Mr. Jakkarin
Komolsiri (protect),Secretary to Elections Commissioner
Sodsri Sattayatham, and Mr. Bunyakiat Rakchartcharoen
(protect),Director of the Election Division, told us that
the decision to put off the ruling on the PPP case had
stemmed from technical errors involving information and
evidence in the case, and not political interference. (Note:
Neither Jakkarin nor Bunyakiat would elaborate on what the
technical errors were. End note.) Separately, Ekkaphap Polsue
(protect),former Deputy Secretary General to the Prime
Minster, gave us a more complete reason for the deferment.
Without citing his sources, Ekkaphap claimed that that the
deferment was due to a split in the EC. He said two of the
election commissioners (no names given) were adamant that
Yongyut,s electoral fraud was an issue of individual guilt,
so the entire PPP should not bear the punishment. The
remaining three commissioners saw it as a broader issue
involving the entire political party because of Yongyuth,s
position as deputy leader. Ekkaphap said the deferment was
the result of all the commissioners agreeing that more time
was needed in the hope of achieving a clear consensus on the
ruling.
4. (SBU) In the other non-event of significance, the Supreme
Administrative Court decided it did not have jurisdiction to
rule on a People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) law suit
regarding the ability of three members of Prime Minister
Samak,s cabinet to maintain their positions. According to
press sources, the court forwarded the case to the Central
Administrative Court, which it said had jurisdiction over the
matter. Separately, however, the Council of State, a bureau
under the office of the Prime Minister that advises the Prime
Minister and cabinet on legal matters, issued an advisory
opinion that the three ministers did not need to step down
form their positions because they were not members of the
current cabinet when the alleged offense occurred. (Note: See
reftel A. The PAD alleged that Deputy Prime Minister/Finance
Minister Surapong Suebwonglee, Labor Minister Uraiwan
Thienthong, and Deputy Transportation Minister Anurak
Jureemart had violated Thai law when they refused to resign
their positions despite the fact that the Supreme Court's
Department for Holders of Political Positions had accepted
their "dereliction of duty" case for trial. End note.)
ENTWISTLE