Hopefully there will be some flights in the weekend. Maybe
even some Thai pilots will come if they are not locked up in Bangkok due to the
military coup last week.
torsdag 29. mai 2014
onsdag 28. mai 2014
"- Vi er ikke ansvarlige for egen helse"
Selv om du mesker deg med junkfood, er du ikke ansvarlig
hvis du blir syk, argumenterer ny filosofisk avhandling.
(Foto: Colourbox.com)
Verken røykere, overspisere, alkoholikere, øko-friker, mosjonister eller
noen andre er ansvarlige for sin egen helse, konkluderer en ny filosofisk
avhandling.– Man kan ikke være ansvarlig for noe som helst når man ikke har en fri vilje, og det er det ingen grunn til å tro at vi har. Det er alltid en årsak til at vi handler som vi gjør, sier filosof Martin Marchman Andersen, som nettopp har forsvart sin doktoravhandling på Københavns Universitets Institut for Medier, Erkendelse og Formidling i Danmark.
Ansvar og ulikhet
Helse har sammenheng med sosiale vilkår, og de som har lite, har også den dårligste helsen. Og jo lenger utdannelse, jo sunnere er livet.
– Derfor diskuterer man ofte ulikhet på helsefeltet. Diskusjonen har stor innflytelse på hvordan helsegodene blir fordelt, så det er viktig å få presise teoretiske svar, sier Martin Marchman Andresen, som i sin avhandling tar et oppgjør med en holdning om at en viss ulikhet på helsefeltet derfor er rettferdig.
Determinert til usunn livsstil
Selv om noen kan slutte å røyke, slanke vekk de overflødige kiloene og legge om livsstilen, er det enkelte individet aldri ansvarlig for om han eller hun klarer det, mener Andresen.
Mennesket kan ikke være ansvarlig for egen helse eller noe som helst annet, for ingen av oss er herre over de valgene vi treffer i livet. Det er alltid en årsak til at vi handler og lever som vi gjør, og den årsaken har vi som individer ikke fullstendig kontroll over, argumenterer han:
– Du kan selvfølgelig endre livsstilen din og leve sunt, men du kan aldri være ansvarlig hvis du ikke greier det. Livet vårt og valgene våre er alltid determinert av de mulighetene vi har, av oppvekst, miljø, genetikk, sosiale forhold, samfunnsstrukturer og andre forhold vi ikke har innflytelse over. Det er en uendelig lang liste av årsaker til at et menneske handler på en bestemt måte.
Den frie viljen skutt ned
Vi kan bare være ansvarlige for helsen vår hvis vi har mulighet for å handle annerledes enn vi gjør, for eksempel spise sunnere, slutte å røyke eller trene mer. Men den muligheten har vi ikke alltid, ifølge Andersen, for vi har ikke noen fri vilje.
– Fri vilje er ikke et spørsmål om vi kan gjøre hva vi vil,
men om vi kan bestemme hva vi vil, sier han.
Vitenskap handler om å finne årsakerHvis vi som individer har en fri vilje, ville vi uten videre kunne starte nye kjeder av årsaker og virkninger, såkalte kausalkjeder, som verken er forårsaket av noe annet (pre-determinert) eller vilkårlige.
– Det er vanskelig å se hvordan det skulle være mulig. For hvis et individ foretar seg noe som ikke er pre-determinert, så følger det at denne begivenheten ikke har noen årsak. Men det er uforenelig med vårt vitenskapelige verdensbilde, hvor vi forklarer begivenheter, inkludert menneskelige handlinger, ved å finne årsakene som ligger bak, sier Andersen.
Ulikhet er urettferdig
Det er altså alltid en årsak til at folk lever usunt, og den årsaken kan de ikke kontrollere, konkluderer filosofen.
Derfor kan man ikke bruke det personlige ansvaret som en begrunnelse for at storrøykere, overvektige eller andre med en usunn livsstil skal betale mer enn andre for å få medisinsk behandling, eller at de skal bakerst i køen.
Fordeler ved ulikhet
Likevel kan det være gode grunner til å late som vi har et personlig ansvar. Politikere kan for eksempel prøve å få befolkningen til å endre atferd og leve sunnere ved å appellere til ansvarsfølelsen deres.
– Det er forskjell på om folk er ansvarlige og å holde folk ansvarlige, sier Andersen.
I løpet av ph.d.-studiene sine har Andersen publisert artikler i flere internasjonale vitenskapelige tidsskrifter innen fagfeltet folkehelse og etikk.
Referanser:
M. Marchman Andersen, 2013: Social inequality in health, responsibility and egalitarian justice, Journal of Public Health. Doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdt012
Ugeskrift for Læger, 2005; Sociale forskellige i københavnernes forventede levetid med godt helbred.
Thomas B. Lund m.fl., 2012: Attitudes to Publicly Funded Obesity Treatment and Prevention, Obesity – A Research Journal. DOI: 10.1038/oby.2011.84
Magareth Whitehead 1992; The Concepts and Principles of Equity and Health,
© Videnskab.dk. Oversatt av Lars Nygaard for forskning.no.
"Obesity experts appalled by EU move to approve health claim for fructose"
Food firms using fructose will be able to boast of
health benefits despite fruit sugar being implicated in soaring US obesity
levels
An obese woman in Maryland. Experts believe use of
high-fructose corn syrup caused obesity to rise fastest in the US. Photograph:
Tim Sloan/AFP/Getty
Obesity experts say they are
appalled by an EU decision to allow a "health claim" for fructose,
the sweetener implicated in the disastrous upsurge in weight in the US.Fructose, the sugar found in fruit, is used in Coca-Cola, Pepsi and other sweetened US drinks. Many believe the use of high-fructose corn syrup caused obesity to rise faster in the US than elsewhere in the world. Europe has largely used cane and beet sugar instead.
But the EU has now ruled that food and drink manufacturers can claim their sweetened products are healthier if they replace more than 30% of the glucose and sucrose they contain with fructose.
The decision was taken on the advice of the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa), on the grounds that fructose has a lower glycaemic index (GI) – it does not cause as high and rapid a blood sugar spike as sucrose or glucose.
But, say obesity experts, fructose is metabolised differently from other sugars – it goes straight to the liver and unprocessed excess is stored there as fat, building up deposits that can cause life-threatening disease.
There is potential for products high in sugar including soft drinks, cereal bars and low-fat yoghurts to make health claims by using fructose. Lucozade Original contains 33g of sugar in a 380ml bottle, Sprite has 21.8g of sugar in 330ml cans and Dr Pepper 34.1g per 330ml.
Kellogg's Nutri-Grain Elevenses bars have 18g of sugar in a 45g bar – so are more than a third sugar.
Barry Popkin – distinguished professor in the department of public health at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill in the US, who co-authored the groundbreaking paper linking high-fructose corn syrup to obesity in 2003 – said the ruling would lead to claims from food and drink firms that would mislead consumers.
"This claim is so narrow and it will confuse a whole lot of people," he said. "That's what the industry does an awful lot of. People see it and think, 'ah maybe it's healthy.'
"It brings into question the whole area of health claims. They are made on such short-term effects."
Drinking pomegranate juice might give you all the vitamin C and antioxidants you need that day, but six months of regular drinking could raise the risk of diabetes, he said.
A health claim relating to a lower glycaemic index ignored the wider and more important public health issue, he said: that we should all consume less fructose and other sugars.
George Bray, head of the division of clinical obesity and metabolism at the Pennington biomedical research centre in Louisiana and co-author of the fructose paper, said he could see no rational reason for adding pure fructose to the diet.
"Assuming that it is correct that manufacturers can substitute up to 30% fructose for glucose or sucrose, it would be a very sad commentary on their review of the literature," he said.
"The quantity of fructose appearing in the diet is already excessive in my view. [Focusing on the fact that] fructose does not raise glucose as much ignores all of the detrimental effects of fructose from whatever source."
Michael Goran, director of childhood obesity research at the University of Southern California, said that although it had a lower GI, "in the long term, excess fructose is more damaging metabolically for the body than other sugars".
He added: "This opens the door for the beverage and food industry to start replacing sucrose with fructose, which is presumably cheaper."
More people in Europe will be consuming more fructose as a result, he said. "This is a dangerous and problematic issue. There is going to be a big increase in fructose exposure."
The European Heart Network raised concerns with DG Sanco, the European commission's health department, and asked it to share its views with member states. Its director, Susanne Logstrup, warned that replacing glucose and sucrose with "healthier" fructose might make people think a drink or food was less fattening.
"If the replacement of glucose/sucrose is not isocaloric, replacement could lead to a higher caloric content. In the EU, the intake of sugar-sweetened beverages is generally too high and it would not be in the interest of public health if intake were to increase," she said.
Professor Mike Rayner, director of the British Heart Foundation health promotion research group at Oxford University and an adviser to the European Heart Network, said it was important the EU looked at nutritional health claims – and that it had in recent years taken a tougher stance.
"But here is an example in fructose of a claim that is technically probably true but has no public health benefit," he said.
Industry is delighted by the EU ruling. Galam Group, an Israeli fructose manufacturer, called the move "a game-changing step" in comments to the trade journal Nutra Ingredients. It said it expected a surge in sales from 2 January, when the ruling takes effect.
”Lots of thunderstorms at Khao Sadao”
and only three flights in four days. Heavy wind and heavy
rain from time to time.
"Coups are only helping boost Thaksin's image"
Coups are only helping boost Thaksin's image
Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation
The May 22 military coup d'etat is not necessarily the last in Thai political history and it cannot be expected to end the conflicts.
BANGKOK: -- Firstly, the military is not really known for its ability to mend political divisions, and this intervention only appears to have helped the elite, the Democrat Party and their allies in the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) achieve their goal of toppling Yingluck Shinawatra's government.
This coup, like the one in 2006, seems to have become a tool of a group of conservative elites to get rid of what has been dubbed the "Thaksin regime".
The 2006 coup failed to rid the country of former PM Thaksin Shinawatra's influence. Is this another attempt to finish the job?
The elite, the Democrats, PDRC and their allies in the judicial and legislative branches began trying to cut away components of Thaksin's regime piece by piece six months ago. Thanks to the allegations of corruption and misconduct, Yingluck and other members of the Pheu Thai Party will most definitely be banned from politics for at least five years.
But will that be the end? The 2006 coup has already proved that military intervention is not actually the solution. Ousting him through a military coup has only left Thaksin standing strong on the podium of democracy, surrounded by his red-shirt supporters. The two rounds of military intervention in less than a decade have instead left Thaksin - who did not have a good reputation for democracy and human-rights practices while in power - now being considered a crusader of democratic principles.
Meanwhile, the military has no choice but to continue using force to suppress people they regard as elements of the Thaksin regime. Unfortunately, this can only be done at the expense of democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
Many of those rounded up due to their anti-coup sentiments are ordinary people who are trying to fight for the democratic rights and have absolutely nothing to do with Thaksin at all.
Sadly, officers have been led to believe that everybody on the streets protesting against the coup has been paid off.
Studies have indicated that the red-shirt movement was created due to grievances over inequality, not necessarily Thaksin's money. Hence, for them, an election is not just a symbol of democracy, but an effective way to access national resources and wealth.
Thaksin became popular because he knew how to funnel some of this national wealth to the poor.
Sadly, the intellectual elite put this down to "addictive populism", though for ordinary voters this "populism" translated to food on their table.
However, the latest intervention has once again cut the poor people's access to national wealth and deepened the division even further.
-- The Nation 2014-05-28
http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/729662-thailand-live-wednesday-28-may-2014/#entry7894031
Supalak Ganjanakhundee
The Nation
The May 22 military coup d'etat is not necessarily the last in Thai political history and it cannot be expected to end the conflicts.
BANGKOK: -- Firstly, the military is not really known for its ability to mend political divisions, and this intervention only appears to have helped the elite, the Democrat Party and their allies in the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) achieve their goal of toppling Yingluck Shinawatra's government.
This coup, like the one in 2006, seems to have become a tool of a group of conservative elites to get rid of what has been dubbed the "Thaksin regime".
The 2006 coup failed to rid the country of former PM Thaksin Shinawatra's influence. Is this another attempt to finish the job?
The elite, the Democrats, PDRC and their allies in the judicial and legislative branches began trying to cut away components of Thaksin's regime piece by piece six months ago. Thanks to the allegations of corruption and misconduct, Yingluck and other members of the Pheu Thai Party will most definitely be banned from politics for at least five years.
But will that be the end? The 2006 coup has already proved that military intervention is not actually the solution. Ousting him through a military coup has only left Thaksin standing strong on the podium of democracy, surrounded by his red-shirt supporters. The two rounds of military intervention in less than a decade have instead left Thaksin - who did not have a good reputation for democracy and human-rights practices while in power - now being considered a crusader of democratic principles.
Meanwhile, the military has no choice but to continue using force to suppress people they regard as elements of the Thaksin regime. Unfortunately, this can only be done at the expense of democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
Many of those rounded up due to their anti-coup sentiments are ordinary people who are trying to fight for the democratic rights and have absolutely nothing to do with Thaksin at all.
Sadly, officers have been led to believe that everybody on the streets protesting against the coup has been paid off.
Studies have indicated that the red-shirt movement was created due to grievances over inequality, not necessarily Thaksin's money. Hence, for them, an election is not just a symbol of democracy, but an effective way to access national resources and wealth.
Thaksin became popular because he knew how to funnel some of this national wealth to the poor.
Sadly, the intellectual elite put this down to "addictive populism", though for ordinary voters this "populism" translated to food on their table.
However, the latest intervention has once again cut the poor people's access to national wealth and deepened the division even further.
-- The Nation 2014-05-28
http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/729662-thailand-live-wednesday-28-may-2014/#entry7894031
torsdag 22. mai 2014
"Hæren i Thailand tar makten for 12. gang siden 1932"
Den aktuelle situasjonen i Thailand
Sist oppdatert: 22.05.2014
// Den thailandske hærsjefen erklærte torsdag
22. mai at de militære har overtatt makten i landet. Regjeringen er avsatt.
Militært personell er utplassert på sentrale steder og det er innført portforbud
mellom kl. 22.00 og 05.00. Situasjonen i Bangkok og landet for øvrig er
fortsatt rolig, og det har foreløpig ikke vært særlig dramatikk forbundet med
kuppet. Det er foreløpig ingen grunn til bekymring for norske borgere og
interesser. Ambassaden følger situasjonen nøye. BTS ("Skytrain"), MRT
(undergrunnsbanen) og Airport Rail Link fungerer fortsatt som normalt og
Bangkoks to internasjonale flyplasser, Suvarnabhumi og Don Mueang, er ikke
berørt. Nordmenn i Thailand anbefales å holde seg oppdatert gjennom f.eks.
lokale media som The Nation og Bangkok Post, vise generell aktsomhet og
etterkomme anvisninger fra lokale myndigheter og ikke minst overholde
portforbudet.
http://www.emb-norway.or.th/Norsk/Land--og-reiseinformasjon/thailand/reise/Den-aktuelle-situasjonen-i-ThailandKambodsja/
Thailand army chief announces military coup
General Prayuth Chan-ocha announces that military commission will take control of country's administration
Thailand's
army chief announced a military takeover of the government on Thursday,
saying the coup was necessary to restore stability and order after six
months of political deadlock and turmoil.
General Prayuth Chan-ocha announced in a statement broadcast on national television that the commission which imposed martial law on Tuesday would now take control of the country's administration.
"It is necessary for the Peace and Order Maintaining Command – which includes army, navy, armed forces and police – to take control of governing the country," he said.
The development followed two days of army-mediated meetings between the country's rival political leaders that failed to break the impasse. The meetings were held at an army facility in Bangkok.
Shortly before the announcement was made, armed soldiers in military vehicles surrounded the building, apparently to block those inside from leaving.
Thailand has been gripped by bouts of political instability for more than seven years.
The latest round of unrest started in November, when demonstrators took to the streets to try to force the prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra, to step down. They accused her of being a proxy for her popular billionaire brother, former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted in a 2006 military coup and now lives in self-imposed exile to avoid a jail sentence on a corruption conviction.
The coup announced on Thursday was the 12th since the country's absolute monarchy ended in 1932.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/22/thailand-army-chief-announces-military-coup
General Prayuth Chan-ocha announced in a statement broadcast on national television that the commission which imposed martial law on Tuesday would now take control of the country's administration.
"It is necessary for the Peace and Order Maintaining Command – which includes army, navy, armed forces and police – to take control of governing the country," he said.
The development followed two days of army-mediated meetings between the country's rival political leaders that failed to break the impasse. The meetings were held at an army facility in Bangkok.
Shortly before the announcement was made, armed soldiers in military vehicles surrounded the building, apparently to block those inside from leaving.
Thailand has been gripped by bouts of political instability for more than seven years.
The latest round of unrest started in November, when demonstrators took to the streets to try to force the prime minister, Yingluck Shinawatra, to step down. They accused her of being a proxy for her popular billionaire brother, former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who was ousted in a 2006 military coup and now lives in self-imposed exile to avoid a jail sentence on a corruption conviction.
The coup announced on Thursday was the 12th since the country's absolute monarchy ended in 1932.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/22/thailand-army-chief-announces-military-coup
”The weather forecast for Khao Sadao looks promising”
for
the weekend. If some necessary works at home are finished I think I want to go
there. Some bushes and grass on takeoff need trimming. There might even be some
flying. More and more I have the impression that you have to start from Khao Sadao if the wind
is favourable. If you wait for better conditons you very often get no flights.
It
is very different from Northern Europe where in a ”normal” day the thermals
increase till they gradually stop in the evening some time.
”Militært kupp med et smil?”
I det såkalte ”Smilets land” har Hæren tatt over styre og
stell, men de vil ikke kalle det et militærkupp.
Landet har fremdeles et forretningsministerium i påvente av
nytt valg fordi Konstitusjonsdomstolen underkjente valget for en tid siden. Dersom
det er behov for det, burde det ikke være noe problem at dette
forretningsministeriet fortsetter, om mulig med større fullmakter enn i dag på
grunn av den spesielle situasjonen som opposisjonen og Hæren har skapt.
Dersom ”noen” (og ”noen” arbeider veldig hardt i disse dager)
sørger for at en utpekt (ikke folkevalgt) regjering får makten inntil et
mulig(?) valg en gang i fremtiden, har det i realiteten skjedd et militærkupp.
Uansett hva ”noen” sier.
Selvsagt er det hyggelig at noen smiler. Men det er viktig å
forstå at smilet også har en annen hensikt enn å være døråpner. Når folk fra
Øst-Asia smiler, er det også for å unngå konflikter. Selv om konfliktene er ”feid
under teppet”, er de der like fullt. Uansett hvor mye det smiles.
tirsdag 20. mai 2014
”Four flights from Khao Sadao”
There was no wind, not too much wind, and very much wind,
sun, rain, and thunderstorms. At least I got a flight or two every day. On
Friday I sprayed bushes with glyfosat hoping to make it easier to keep some of
the vegetation down in the rainy season.
onsdag 14. mai 2014
Maybe a good idea to solve the crisis in Thailand?
”Group
comes up with plan for interim govt leader
Academics call on both sides to agree upon impartial leader
during 'reforms'
BANGKOK: -- A group of academics and peace advocates yesterday urged rival political camps to forget about appointing a "neutral" prime minister through Article 7 of the Constitution and jointly select an interim non-partisan deputy PM to act as head of government temporarily so that the country can move forward with reform and a general election.
The group includes Surichai Wungaeo and Chantana Banpasirichote, Chulalongkorn University political scientists; Chaiwat Satha-Anand, founder and director of the Peace Information Centre at Thammasat University; and General Ekkachai Srivilas, director of the Office of Peace and Governance at King Prajadhipok's Institute.
For sustainable democracy and a victory for all Thais, both sides should establish a common ground and step over conflicts that could plunge the country into civil strife, the group said.
Both movements should agree upon three objectives - seek a way out of the stalemate that stays within the scope of the charter, find a "non-partisan" person who can manage the country at this critical juncture, and draft a pact to ensure that all sides will join forces to "reform" the country.
Then both camps should agree not to take recourse to Article 7 to get a non-partisan prime minister, because critics harbour doubts that this would be legitimate.
Under the group's proposal, both the pro- and anti-government camps would agree on putting in place a "non-partisan" PM who does not have the full authority normally held by a sitting prime minister. Both then should agree on coming up with clear reform proposals that will be legally binding on the next government. The reform proposals must be drafted before the general election is held.
Both political camps must decide how they would select such a non-partisan leader. Once they come up with a candidate, the present acting prime minister would nominate him as a deputy PM for royal endorsement.
The caretaker Cabinet then must resolve to have that deputy PM serve as acting PM, replacing the current one.
The Pheu Thai Party, Democrat Party, United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship and People's Democratic Reform Committee would nominate three candidates each, who have demonstrated that they are "neutral" in behaviour and actions, possess a clean track record and are widely accepted as having the ability to manage a crisis.
The non-partisan acting PM would then appoint a non-partisan minister to coordinate reform efforts. Not more than 35 ministers would be appointed by the opposition or neutral bodies to resolve the political crisis.
Reform proposals would be submitted to the Election Commission, which would hold an election and a referendum on the same day to save costs and time. The referendum results would be legally binding on the next government.
Both camps should sign an agreement that whoever wins the next election will be in power for one year and the House of Representatives will be dissolved and a snap election called again.”
-- The Nation 2014-05-14
BANGKOK: -- A group of academics and peace advocates yesterday urged rival political camps to forget about appointing a "neutral" prime minister through Article 7 of the Constitution and jointly select an interim non-partisan deputy PM to act as head of government temporarily so that the country can move forward with reform and a general election.
The group includes Surichai Wungaeo and Chantana Banpasirichote, Chulalongkorn University political scientists; Chaiwat Satha-Anand, founder and director of the Peace Information Centre at Thammasat University; and General Ekkachai Srivilas, director of the Office of Peace and Governance at King Prajadhipok's Institute.
For sustainable democracy and a victory for all Thais, both sides should establish a common ground and step over conflicts that could plunge the country into civil strife, the group said.
Both movements should agree upon three objectives - seek a way out of the stalemate that stays within the scope of the charter, find a "non-partisan" person who can manage the country at this critical juncture, and draft a pact to ensure that all sides will join forces to "reform" the country.
Then both camps should agree not to take recourse to Article 7 to get a non-partisan prime minister, because critics harbour doubts that this would be legitimate.
Under the group's proposal, both the pro- and anti-government camps would agree on putting in place a "non-partisan" PM who does not have the full authority normally held by a sitting prime minister. Both then should agree on coming up with clear reform proposals that will be legally binding on the next government. The reform proposals must be drafted before the general election is held.
Both political camps must decide how they would select such a non-partisan leader. Once they come up with a candidate, the present acting prime minister would nominate him as a deputy PM for royal endorsement.
The caretaker Cabinet then must resolve to have that deputy PM serve as acting PM, replacing the current one.
The Pheu Thai Party, Democrat Party, United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship and People's Democratic Reform Committee would nominate three candidates each, who have demonstrated that they are "neutral" in behaviour and actions, possess a clean track record and are widely accepted as having the ability to manage a crisis.
The non-partisan acting PM would then appoint a non-partisan minister to coordinate reform efforts. Not more than 35 ministers would be appointed by the opposition or neutral bodies to resolve the political crisis.
Reform proposals would be submitted to the Election Commission, which would hold an election and a referendum on the same day to save costs and time. The referendum results would be legally binding on the next government.
Both camps should sign an agreement that whoever wins the next election will be in power for one year and the House of Representatives will be dissolved and a snap election called again.”
-- The Nation 2014-05-14
http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/725968-group-comes-up-with-plan-for-interim-thai-govt-leader/?utm_source=newsletter-20140514-0758&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news
tirsdag 13. mai 2014
"Is this a judicial coup?"
Quite confusing/amazing what is going on in Thailand these days...
"Is
this a judicial coup?
Nirmal Ghosh
The Straits Times
Asia News Network
BANGKOK: -- Enraged pro-government red shirts, in their strongholds in North and Northeast, burned coffins symbolising Constitutional Court judges on Friday, two days after the court disqualified Yingluck Shinawatra as prime minister.
The Thai judiciary has come under increasing scrutiny since 2006, when the courts annulled the April 2 election that the opposition Democrat Party had boycotted. Five months later, a military coup ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra on grounds of corruption and disrespecting the monarchy.
In May 2007, the Constitutional Court dissolved Thaksin's party, Thai Rak Thai, for electoral fraud during the 2006 election.
The People Power Party (PPP), which succeeded Thai Rak Thai, also did not last long. The first PPP prime minister, the truculent Samak Sundaravej, was disqualified for receiving a small payment as expenses for taking part in a television cooking show.
In December 2008, amid anti-Thaksin protests by royalist yellow shirts, who also seized Suvarnabhumi Airport, the PPP was dissolved.
That pulled the rug from under then prime minister and Thaksin's brother-in-law Somchai Wongsawat and paved the way for Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva to become premier through a parliamentary vote.
Yingluck's disqualification was thus the third time since 2008 that a prime minister of Thailand has lost the position through a court order. And since 2006, two elections have been annulled and two of Thaksin's parties have been dissolved by court orders.
To independent legal analyst Verapat Pariyawong, the May 7 judgement that dislodged Yingluck was not a surprise.
In an e-mail to media, he wrote: "The court today made a reference to the infamous 2008 case in which the court (which comprised almost the exact same members as today), decided to remove the late prime minister Samak who went on a TV cooking show, deeming such an act as constitutional conflict of interest".
That was a "most serious encroachment by judicial power on the executive branch", he said. And as for current developments, he added: "This is a full-blown version of judicial coup with long-lasting impact on the balance of powers."
And Dr Ekachai Chainuvati, deputy head of the law faculty at Siam University in Bangkok, was quoted by the New York Times on Thursday as saying: "This is what I would call a juristocracy - a system of government governed by judges."
Benjamin Zawacki, an independent analyst, told the Straits Times: "The question is not so much the law; it is not as if people are taking issue with actual cases. It is about the consistent and almost predictable nature of these decisions."
Thaksin supporters, like those who were burning coffins in the streets on Friday, see the judiciary as an arm of the conservative royalist elites.
Said Zawacki: "People have been reluctant to criticise the judiciary. It is seen as a redoubt of the elites."
But that hesitation is fading.
Songkran Grachangnetara, a London School of Economics and Columbia University graduate who is now an entrepreneur, said: "The Constitutional Court in order to be the last resort in a conflict has to act with total - and perceived - responsibility."
He added: "But I must say the evidence is really stacking up to what a lot of academics are calling a judicial coup.""
-- The Nation 2014-05-13
Nirmal Ghosh
The Straits Times
Asia News Network
BANGKOK: -- Enraged pro-government red shirts, in their strongholds in North and Northeast, burned coffins symbolising Constitutional Court judges on Friday, two days after the court disqualified Yingluck Shinawatra as prime minister.
The Thai judiciary has come under increasing scrutiny since 2006, when the courts annulled the April 2 election that the opposition Democrat Party had boycotted. Five months later, a military coup ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra on grounds of corruption and disrespecting the monarchy.
In May 2007, the Constitutional Court dissolved Thaksin's party, Thai Rak Thai, for electoral fraud during the 2006 election.
The People Power Party (PPP), which succeeded Thai Rak Thai, also did not last long. The first PPP prime minister, the truculent Samak Sundaravej, was disqualified for receiving a small payment as expenses for taking part in a television cooking show.
In December 2008, amid anti-Thaksin protests by royalist yellow shirts, who also seized Suvarnabhumi Airport, the PPP was dissolved.
That pulled the rug from under then prime minister and Thaksin's brother-in-law Somchai Wongsawat and paved the way for Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva to become premier through a parliamentary vote.
Yingluck's disqualification was thus the third time since 2008 that a prime minister of Thailand has lost the position through a court order. And since 2006, two elections have been annulled and two of Thaksin's parties have been dissolved by court orders.
To independent legal analyst Verapat Pariyawong, the May 7 judgement that dislodged Yingluck was not a surprise.
In an e-mail to media, he wrote: "The court today made a reference to the infamous 2008 case in which the court (which comprised almost the exact same members as today), decided to remove the late prime minister Samak who went on a TV cooking show, deeming such an act as constitutional conflict of interest".
That was a "most serious encroachment by judicial power on the executive branch", he said. And as for current developments, he added: "This is a full-blown version of judicial coup with long-lasting impact on the balance of powers."
And Dr Ekachai Chainuvati, deputy head of the law faculty at Siam University in Bangkok, was quoted by the New York Times on Thursday as saying: "This is what I would call a juristocracy - a system of government governed by judges."
Benjamin Zawacki, an independent analyst, told the Straits Times: "The question is not so much the law; it is not as if people are taking issue with actual cases. It is about the consistent and almost predictable nature of these decisions."
Thaksin supporters, like those who were burning coffins in the streets on Friday, see the judiciary as an arm of the conservative royalist elites.
Said Zawacki: "People have been reluctant to criticise the judiciary. It is seen as a redoubt of the elites."
But that hesitation is fading.
Songkran Grachangnetara, a London School of Economics and Columbia University graduate who is now an entrepreneur, said: "The Constitutional Court in order to be the last resort in a conflict has to act with total - and perceived - responsibility."
He added: "But I must say the evidence is really stacking up to what a lot of academics are calling a judicial coup.""
-- The Nation 2014-05-13
”Windy at Khao Sadao”
mandag 5. mai 2014
”Spotlanding i konkurranser – en farlig aktivitet”
Etter
å ha deltatt i en asiatisk World Cup-konkurranse er det konklusjonen min.
En pilot trakk for mye brems, vingen kollapset og han gikk i bakken med ryggen først, spratt i været og blødde fra nese og munn (halvhjelm). Han ble kjørt til sykehus, men ble trolig ikke alvorlig skadet.
Vi
startet med 90 sekunders intervaller fra en smal åsrygg hvor vind og termikk
skiftet fra side til side rett som det var. Vi fløy ut på høyre side av ryggen;
når den ustadige vinden kom fra venstre, ble det mye synk for mange og en del
trelandinger. Selv startet jeg kun i to av seks omganger.
I forgårs var jeg klar til å legge ut skjermen. Flere piloter hadde dårlige starter
og noen landet i trærne før jeg var klar. Det var i og for seg ikke noe problem
for meg.; jeg ventet på startvind med riktig retning og styrke. Da det var min tur til å legge ut skjermen, begynte vinden å skifte
til venstre. Jeg sa til startleder at jeg ikke ville starte og gikk tilbake. Mange gjorde ikke det; når startleder sa "start", startet de uten å sjekke vinden selv. Ikke bra!
Så
ventet jeg til konkurransen var ferdig for å frifly. Termikken var ganske god,
og det var mulig å klatre til skybas. Like før jeg skulle fly spurte jeg om
høydebegrensningen: 200 meter. Jeg la PG-en på en bil og kjørte ned.
Etter
min oppfatning er mange av pilotene så ivrige etter å treffe spoten at de
setter seg selv i fare.
Abonner på:
Innlegg (Atom)