Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing the current status of the Thai Government basically. Unfortunately, circumstances have kind of propelled me to make these videos because frankly this stuff has an overwhelming impact on the legal environment here in Thailand, Policy making decisions, and just sort of the expat experience here, for lack of a better term. And frankly I think that there is a definite lack of really solid analysis in the English language regarding what is going on in the Thai political sphere so that's why I am making these videos at this point. 

I thought of initially making this video after reading a recent article from the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com. I actually came upon this excerpt while doing some research regarding the Casino Bill. It is from an article titled: Thailand to withdraw Casino Bill as ruling bloc hit by crisis. So as we have discussed in other videos, last week they were unable to even initiate a quorum to get the Parliament open. The current government is not in good shape. One of the major Coalition parties pulled out in the aftermath of the leaked phone call by the then Prime Minister, now suspended, who was talking with Hun Sen over in Cambodia and quite frankly, her conduct raises serious questions both ethical and regarding competence; I've gone into that in great detail in other videos. In any event, the Constitutional Court here in Thailand in a 9-0 decision opted to take on that case to adjudicate whether or not she's fit for office. Meanwhile part of that same decision in a 7-2 ruling, they ordered her suspension pending the adjudication. That's a pretty big deal. I think people need to understand from a legal standpoint, basically there are serious concerns about her conduct, and it is definitely not a foregone conclusion that her Prime Ministership is going to survive that adjudication. Now that then puts it into a kind of an interesting situation compared to the last Prime Minister, we saw who was removed from office by the Constitutional Court. In that instance, Mr. Srettha, they were adjudicating his case, and they opted to leave him in office until the adjudication was complete. Upon their completion of the adjudication, they determined he was no longer fit for office, and he was removed. Then at that point, they brought in a caretaker government, as it is my understanding it is called for under the Constitution; that's the protocol. If a Prime Minister is removed, caretaker government, and they reform and move on. As it sits right now, and as I have discussed in another video, we now have this acting Prime Minister because the current Prime Minister is suspended and there has yet to be an adjudication. So it's a slightly different posture than what we saw in the situation involving Mr. Srettha. That said, quoting directly from this article Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com: "Without a clear majority, the Government may face challenges in passing controversial or essential bills that have been lined up in the coming months. The Budget Bill for the next fiscal year from October is also expected to be taken up for the second and third readings in August." Yeah, as discussed in another video, last week they weren't able to get quorum. Meanwhile, you will keep seeing from the press, they will say there is currently a “razor-thin” majority is I think what I oftentimes see it said; there is a razor-thin majority in terms of this current Government. Well I have serious questions as to that one) UTN, which is apparently still part of this current Coalition, their Executive Board has said one thing, there is apparently fissures within that Party. Meanwhile, the Democrat Party, there have even been defections; people have even resigned from Ministerial Posts that are Democrats, citing that they don't agree with what's going on here. So we don't know for certain but even when the Bangkok Post is sort of bringing up the issue of "without a clear majority" it's worth noting. 

Now just real quickly here. I get into some further analysis, deeper analysis into how this plays with respect to the Expat Community, international finance, international economics, the interplay of all this stuff on a deeper basis on our paid news service. Those who are interested can email us at [email protected], that is [email protected], and you can get further insight there. Another thing I think is worth pointing out, my better half and I have opened a restaurant here in downtown Bangkok between Silom and Surawong Roads and it is American diner style food as well as sort of all day breakfast; it's Pancake Palace. I have discussed this in other videos. I even made an entire video when I was talking about setting it up. If you want, I am around there a fair bit, if you want to kind of shoot the breeze about the news of the day if you will when I am around, happy to do that, but if you are really just interested in American diner style food and breakfast anytime including pancakes, we've also got cheeseburgers, hamburgers, Coke in glass bottles which is one of my personal favourites. We've also got chilli bowls and buffalo wings. If you're interested in that, check out Pancake Palace, link in the description below to our location down here in downtown Bangkok.

That said, getting back to this issue. Again the current “Government” as it were if you will which I use quotation marks and things. We have this “acting” Prime Minister which first of all I have serious qualms about because as I discussed in other videos, I mean he's a Communist or whatever you want to call it, he was once a Communist; I have a hard time believing that you lose all of those convictions especially having gone into the jungle at one point as a guerrilla and we discussed in the past, he is currently acting on behalf of the Prime Minister who is suspended pending an adjudication regarding her conduct with regard to the recently leaked phone calls during which she referred to our own Field Commander here in Thailand as the "opponent", and as I have discussed in other videos I've got serious qualms about her as well and I am wondering what this new "government" is going to look like with regard to World Economic Forum because they seem to be real buddy, buddy with them, at least the last two Prime Ministers - Srettha and Ms. Paetongtarn - and frankly I have serious questions about that. Why are we letting in some supranatural organization whose goal is to subvert sovereignty of nation states and as they have said themselves, all of us "to own nothing and be happy", I mean really calls into question all of this. 

Meanwhile again this Government is sitting in a precarious position with regard to its votes or lack thereof possibly in Parliament and then there seems to be a completely dismissive attitude regarding due process issues from this current acting PM. Getting into that, again from the Bangkok Post,  bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: DPM Phumtham says he can dissolve House. First of all, it's worth noting, there has been a real attitude of "because we say so" coming off of this Government. As I have discussed in other videos regarding Cannabis and as I'm discussing in a video made contemporaneously with this, this whole attitude of "oh, we don't need a law, we can just do whatever we want, and things are just opinions", even though said institutions are saying things especially like, oh I don't know there are licenses for these dispensaries already issued. "Oh, we'll just disregard that and do whatever we want!" That attitude has been really pervasive, and it is looking like now it is coming through in the form of statements made by the Deputy Prime Minister, now "acting" Prime Minister. Quoting directly: "Deputy Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai dismissed the Council of State's (CoS) opinion about the acting Prime Minister's power to dissolve the House of Representatives as just one of many legal views." Well yeah, they are only the Council of State. I mean it's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but in an American context it would be like the President just ignoring the Supreme Court. I mean there's a reason they issue opinions; they are there for a reason. It's because that is the due process of the way the system works. That said, quoting further: "His remarks on Monday followed media reports that the CoS (Council of State) told the July 3 special Cabinet meeting get an acting Prime Minister had no legal authority to dissolve the house." Yeah, and that calls into question the whole difference between acting Prime Minister and a caretaker Prime Minister which we will get to here in a moment. Again because of the posture of Paetongtarn being suspended, which I don't know why at this point she won't just step aside, and I've said this before and I'll say it again, if this was a man would this even be happening? I'm not going into a whole battle of the sexes thing, but first of all would you be having a conversation where you called the counterparty in a Border dispute, where you called your own Field Commander an "opponent"? I fail to see where anybody that is cognizant of how sovereign entities interact in a confrontational situation, I don't know how you would do that. But then meanwhile, the point I am trying to make is she's in suspension, which leads to the situation of she hasn't been adjudicated removed and we can speculate as to whether she would be or not; I think that the votes on how the case was taken up by the Constitutional Court is at least somewhat indicative, but okay, we can't draw a conclusion as of yet because they haven't made their call, but he's standing in as an 'acting'. Meanwhile, he's not a caretaker and so it is this weird nebulous position. Well the Council of State has come down and said, "well no, this is our adjudication of the powers under that circumstance”, and this is just being sort of disregarded. Let's quote that again. "His remarks on Monday followed media reports that the CoS told the July 3 special Cabinet meeting that an acting Prime Minister had no legal authority to dissolve the house." Quoting further: "Mr. Phumtham, who is currently serving as the acting Prime Minister, said the CoS' opinion given by its Secretary-General does not constitute a formal stance and is being treated as one of several legal views being considered after Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra was suspended from duty, pending a Court ruling." It's just "oh no I don't care about that."

This is really troubling stuff and when you take it in the totality of the circumstances with all the background, with this World Economic Forum nonsense and then the fact that this guy is a Communist, I mean he was an avowed Communist, and now just "oh, the Council of State, their opinion on the matter doesn't matter", on a really serious issue. The issue of whether or not he can dissolve the House. I mean and this is just being dismissed out of hand? Apropos of what? And what gives him the authority to dismiss it? Quoting further: "Questions have now arisen as to whether Mr. Phumtham has the power to dissolve the House.." - well yeah, when the Council of State has apparently affirmatively said no - quoting further: "..should Ms. Paetongtarn eventually be removed from Office by the Constitutional Court. According to Mr. Phumtham, his power to dissolve the house is not the issue to focus on at this stage." Really? Quoting further: Quote: "What we should focus on is how to work and deliver to fully secure public confidence. We should avoid [creating] uncertainty and speculation," - well if you want to fully secure public confidence, maybe adhere to the Council of State's rulings. Moreover, if you want to avoid creating uncertainty and speculation, maybe adhere to the Council of State's ruling. And meanwhile, the whole answer was a non-answer; it's just political platitudes. Quoting further: "Addressing a call by a group of northeastern MPs, the Cabinet Ministers who are list-MPs should give up their MP status to allow those further down the list to move up and take their places, Mr. Phumtham said the proposal was worth consideration." Now this goes to the issue of the fact that last week they couldn't get quorum in the Parliament because there weren't enough people there to actually get the thing open. So now they are trying to through sort of I don't know, legislative Parliamentary musical chairs, resign folks that are already in the Cabinet to get other people in so that they can get quorum, when in reality what we should be looking at is the fact that look, they can't get quorum because it is looking like they are losing their legislative mandate; that is really what it is coming down to. One of the major Coalition Parties pulled out of the Coalition following the leak of the phone call because they had serious concerns about the conduct of the Prime Minister, I do as well by the way. And meanwhile, others, I have a feeling that others in the "Coalition", I put that in quotes, have their own concerns about this and they are not able to get quorum and so now they are kind of playing all kinds of shell games to try to get the thing back open. Quoting further: "The proposal is intended to prevent a lack of quorum that has scuppered a number of House Meetings recently, especially after the Bhumjaithai Party exited the Coalition and left the government with a slim majority.." - and I even call into question as noted in the first article that we quoted, whether or not that “slim majority” is actually there - quoting further: "He added that Cabinet Ministers whose role in the house is limited should step back to focus fully on Ministerial work." Oh, is that the concern? or is it to play musical chairs so that you can basically manage to force through a quorum that may or may not have a real legislative mandated legitimacy. Quoting further: "PM's Office Minister Suchart Tancharoen on Monday agreed that list MPs should step aside after being appointed Cabinet Ministers, saying he plans to resign as a list-MP following his appointment." Well was that protocol 2 months ago, when you had a clear Coalition which by the way, the “Core” Coalition party at this point the “Rump” Coalition if you will Party, forced out effectively that Coalition partner because they basically just didn't like working with them which it is getting to seem to be a trend with these folks of just "whatever we say is what needs to happen". Never mind if we have a consensus on it; never mind that institutions that are specifically tasked with making rulings regarding our prerogatives, never mind what they have to say, we're just going to do it. 

I mean this whole thing is getting to be just basically absurd. I mean at this point we have a Communist acting Prime Minister, or former Communist whatever, once avowed Communist acting Prime Minister, and he is saying, "I don't really need to listen to the Council of State". We have seen the Public Health Minister say, "oh I don't really need to go along with notions such as the Doctrine of Codification in a Civil Law System and I am just going to go ahead and do whatever I want with regard to 18,000 licensed premises regarding Cannabis.” I mean it is looking to me like a trend of "oh we just don't care what the legislative consensus is, what any consensus is. We just kind of want to do what we want and everybody else's opinion, you can just pound sand." It's concerning to me. I hope we see some positive developments with regard to this, and we will certainly be keeping you updated on this channel as the situation evolves.