From: trin@tlaeng.enet.dec.com (Trin Tantsetthi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.thai
Subject: Re: Nov 4: Chuan leaves Supreme Court president appointment to minister
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:59:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: tlaeng.1992Nov5.065923.135
Organization: Digital Equipment (Thailand), Ltd.

In article <1992Nov4.072617.6151@gw.wmich.edu>, cooneys@gw.wmich.edu writes:
> Does anyone in the group understand and have a personal view 
> about this fight within the judiciary? In simplified terms, 
> what's going on? What are the issues?

There is a flaw in the system. Members of the Judicial Commission are
elected by the judges themselves. But with the current election system and
the relatively small number of members in the Judicial Commission, it is
possible that a group of judges could take effective control of the
Judicial Commission by using a loophole in JC election process.

The issue was identified by former Justice Minister of the first Anand
administration and a change was made. Those who were dethroned escalated the
issue as a direct intervention from Administrative power to Juridical power;
the latter has been proud of being "independent" from politicians. While
ministers in the Anand-I administration were not politicians, the judges
couldn't let such interference go otherwise it would set an example for
politicians to interfere juridical electoral system in the future. So there
was a fierceful fight just before the March'92 election.

I think both sides had their own points but arrogance and pride had pushed
them too far. The controversy was raised before His Majesty and the royal
advice was that some judges who behaved unethically were NOT to be fired
from the present posts since it was not that serious (I am under an
impression that they did someting not quite right according to the present
administrative procedures) but when they retire they won't get their pension
-- I would appreciate if some kind netters who are civil servants or
understand Thailand's administrative procedures well enough could explain
this kind of "punishment" in a proper way.

Then it was the end of the Anand-I administration. The issue was carried
forwarded to the Suchinda administration which had no time to run the
country. Then, the May crackdown and the Anand-II regime proposed a new
structure for the Juridicial Commission which will have some twenty members
instead of 9; some of which were appointed.

The amendment to JC structure was made into law by an issue of a decree.
After the previous election, the parliament turned down the decree. So, JC
election was staged using the old structure. And some judges who were
"punished" have been re-elected.

I am under an impression that the Chuan government will submit the JC
reform bill to the parliament again. Details are unknown to me.

My assertions:
 - There is a flaw in structure of the Juridicial Commission
   (KhaNa^GumMaGaan Kaa"Rat"ChaGaan Tu'LaaGaan -- Gaw.Taw.) Amendment to the
   structure of the JC has to be proposed by Justice Ministry and approved
   by the parliament beforfe becoming effective.
 - If the structure of the JC is to be changed, the judges will take it as
   a direct intervention from "external" power sources. By Constitution and
   tradition, administrative/legislative/juridical powers are considered
   independent from each other, at least in theory.
 - It's a war of pride and ego. And it's not going to end easily.

Trin
Disclaimers: Comments expressed here are mine. There's nothing to do with my 
  employer. I offer no guarantee that my statements are reflection  of
  facts. They're just my personal impression of the situation as assessed
  from local newspapers and TVs. While I claim I have no intention to and
  gain no benefit from distorting the story, please make some reservations
  when reading my comments. You haven't heard the story from the other side
  -- whoever got hurt by my statements don't have a chance to defend
  themselves.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.thai