On Friday June 1,Can I be fired for wearing a tattoo?,outlet prada, the Constitution Court??a petition to review amendments to the constitution on the grounds that?the amendments have (or will?) breach Section 68 of the Constitution which provides that “No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution”,longchamp.?There has been widespread criticism of the court by legal experts – BP has summarised some of the criticisms?. BP has??on the defence of?the Constitution Court provided by noted Thaksin opponent,jordan, Kaewsan.?BP has on the Constitution Court’s defence of the acceptance of the petition and also ?on the Attorney-General stating that the amendments are legal. Kaewmala in her post on issue :

*In fact, who has the right to file a petition to the Constitution Court under Sec 68 is a matter that has a precedent,prada borse, and the position of the Constitution Court was once very different. In May 2006, the Constitution Court??by a former MP submitted under the same section in the previous constitution on the basis that Section 63 (which became Section 68 in the current constitution, containing the same text) did not allow,air jordan femme?the complainant to directly submit the petition to the Constitution Court. The Court then ruled that the petition must first be considered by the Attorney General.?The rejected petition in 2006,air jordan pas cher??to request the Court to disband the Democrat Party. Politics by its nature is always shifting,sacs longchamp pliage. It would appear that in the six years of separation between the 2006 case and the 2012 case, either the law or the judges have shifted along with politics.

Independent legal academic Verapat Pariyawong has a copy of the Court’s letter rejecting the petition in May 2006 and BP has posted a screenshot below:

<img src="alt="" />

It is Order No. 12/2549.

Translation of subject is:?Surapong Tovichakchaikul [BP: Yes, the current Foreign Minister] asking the Constitution Court to order the dissolution of the Democrats under Section 63 due to their acts to acquire power through means not under the constitution.

For the underlined text in red,polo lacoste, BP has translated it below:

The Constitution Court considered and views that Section 63 of the Constitution does not provide that the petitioner has the right to directly petition the Constitution Court to dissolve a political party,'Show me your papers' is now legal - National Community Issues Examin,gucci borse, but must proceed in accordance with Section 63, paragraph 2 [and] submit the matter to the Attorney-General to investigate the facts and file the petition to the Constitution Court.

Below is?Section 63 of the 1997 Constitution:

No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

In the case where a person or a political party has committed the act under paragraph one,polo ralph lauren, the person knowing of such act [,sac longchamp pas cher??????????????????????????]?shall have the right to request the Prosecutor General to investigate its facts and submit a motion to the Constitutional Court for ordering cessation of such act without, however,ralph lauren Beijing Xinhua International Engineering Managemen,sac longchamp pliage,prada occhiali,air jordan pas cher, prejudice to the institution of a criminal action against such person.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes a decision compelling the political party to cease to commit the act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order the dissolution of such political party.

Below is Section 68 of the 2007 Constitution:

No person shall exercise the rights and liberties prescribed in the Constitution to overthrow the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of State under this Constitution or to acquire the power to rule the country by any means which is not in accordance with the modes provided in this Constitution.

In the case where a person or a political party has committed the act under paragraph one,Dating by bicycle - Atlanta Green Living Examiner.com, the person who knows [????????????????????????]?of such act shall have the right to request the Prosecutor General to investigate its facts and submit a motion to the Constitutional Court for ordering cessation of such act without,prada borse Project name General Hospital of Tianjin Medical U,ralph lauren pas cher, however,prada,jordan pas cher, prejudice to the institution of a criminal action against such person.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes a decision compelling the political party to cease to commit the act under paragraph two, the Constitutional Court may order the dissolution of such political party.

In the case where the Constitutional Court makes the dissolution order under paragraph three, the right to vote of the President and the executive board of directors of the dissolved political party at the time the act under paragraph one has been committed shall be suspended for the period of five years as from the date the Constitutional Court makes such order.

BP: Between Section 63 of the 1997 Constitution and Section 68 of the 2007 Constitution, there is a slight difference in paragraph 2 ?and there is the addition of paragraph 4 although this doesn&#8217,jordan femme;t affect the process for filing a motion/petition.?The Court clearly states that they won’t accept petitions directly in 2006, but they do now when the procedure set out is the same. So far BP has seen no explanation on why the change of interpretation by the Court…

There is still one out for the Court. The Court may order the cessation of the constitutional amendments in?their current form,polo homme, but state that?the actions were not done by a party and were done by parliament so there is no need to dissolve any party. Hence,polo lacoste I love the news - Young Financial Group,borse prada, it is only when a matter requires the dissolving of a political party that the Attorney-General needs to investigate first so the court can argue there is no contradiction.*

*Although, the Court a new petition today seemingly nullifies this……