virtualtraveller

In a true democracy, Sae Daeng and K Thong would have been locked up long ago on treason charges, certainly in Cambodia and most other SE Asian countries, can you imagine them getting away with this in the UK or US.

The only reason I can think of that the Army haven't fired or arrested them is to avoid the backlash of red sympathy and possibility of turning them into full blown 'terrorists insurgents'. My guess, is these two - for all their talk and hubris - aren't really a threat and the Army have them very closely monitored.

Still, it must really irk them to see 'the suspended Army Specialist General' showing up at Red rallies in army fatigues.

If you want to see a million people on the streets in Bangkok here's how to do it;

1. Write out a cheque to Barharn for about 30 billion baht, convincing him to switch sides in the no confidence debate.

2. Puea Thai form the new govt after Abhisit is defeated in the censure

3. New government tells Anupong that THEY will decide who the next army chief should be

4. New Army chief arranges a 'soft coup' tears up the 2007 charter, re-introduces 1997 one, declares all 'political legal actions' since 2006 void

5. New elections held within 2 months, with newly appointed ECC, won 'convincingly' by PT, nominates Panthongtae Shinawatra as new PM

6. Thaksin flies into Suvarnabhumi airport to heroes welcome of red shirts 'protected' by police.

...I've got my 'yellow' e-tarn fueled up and ready to go

Much that I have little respect for the half-truths usually uttered by MP Surapong Tovichakchaikul (My local Chiang Mai MP I believe), he has a good point here.

By demanding tax on the sale of shares to the siblings the State is admitting they were the true owners of the shares. If the Supreme court has ruled that Thaksin remained the proxy owner then it's unfair to then rule that tax was payable on an ownership transfer which the highest court has ruled wasn't a genuine sale.

It's one or the other, a conundrum that will have to go to the Supreme Court in the case of a tax claim and dispute.

As to an appeal, I fully expect this to be lodged even if no new evidence appears, isn't this standard in Thailand. How often do you hear of big noodles losing cases, only to appeal and avoid any jail time or losses while the case gets quietly squashed and is never heard of again (remember the ECC execs sentenced to jail time? They're still out on appeal).

An appeal case would be the next strategy for Thaksin's defence team, even if the court refuse to accept it on 'new evidence' grounds, it will give them a chance to present to the public various inconsistencies of this complicated case (such as the tax dilemma mentioned above), and even if it gets chucked out they will score points of 'double standards' sympathy in the war for hearts and minds of the people.

And so it goes on and on, lots of energy wasted on the squabbling instead of uplifting the poor.

Blah, blah, blah, blah blah...does anyone listen to this guy anymore? He's seriously deluded. The 'end' for him is never-never land. No wonder a 'certain power' doesn't want him anywhere near the reins of leadership here again.

Could someone do him a favour and whisper a bit of reality into his ear (like the fact that he's probably wasting his time seeking 'international justice'.)

The reds are now a broken force with Thaksin. They cannot exist without him and they cannot continue with him. The legal cases against Thaksin will now come one after another. Thaksin will lose if he goes down the violence route (again + been there done that) and it is just as likely he will plead for reconciliation, not that the establishment are ever going to fall for that one. One thing is for sure is that no party associated with, or campaigning for criminal Thaksin will be allowed to run in 2011. The reds either go independent or go down with the master. In short no option for them as they have no alternative head. Finished.

I agree with this, and though the Red Shirts might prove otherwise for awhile and do some damage on March 14, I think this is a major turning point. The case has demonstrated to the majority fence sitting Thais the facts behind his premiership, and even if you had 9 Thaksin friendly judges ruling in his favour, everyone can see just what sort of unethical leader he was. Bringing this case to court was important for Thailand, and it will take some blatant whitewashing, pardoning or repealing for Thaksin to make a comeback on this (notwithstanding the raft of civil cases he might now be busy defending). He is finished, if he managed to make a complete comeback he would face an enormous wrath of discontent bigger than anything Abhisit has ever had to face.

The Reds have some legitimate complaints that MUST be dealt with in the long term, and there are lots of complications now - such as the 'double standards' claim, which is true and would mean going after lots of politicians past and present. At this stage however, they need to decide if they are in this to improve their lot, or in it to save Thaksin. It's getting to the point where it's one or the other.

All this talk of 'democracy' 'justice' 'Amartya elites' is nonsense, the arguments given could apply equally against the Thaksin administration. I urge Thaksin to take his case to any International Court that is interested, with a pledge to respect the verdict. His trouble is that he only respects his own wonky rules of justice, and until he finally comes out of a state of denial he's going to spend the rest of his living days inciting revolution from a video studio in Uganda, slowly becoming more and more isolated and embittered.

Forty six billion baht is a lot of money to anyone, Thai or American, so it’s not surprising Thaksin is fighting tooth and nail over it.

But putting it in context it amounts to just 5% of his estimated net worth. Prior to assuming the premiership, Thaksin and family declared net worth of 500 billion baht according to newspaper articles, by 2006 that might have been worth 700 billion (unless the newspaper misprinted and meant 50 billion).

Thaksin is a gambler, where a billion baht spent on a business venture or stock speculation or election campaign might go either way. The business of politics is the same, and he must have known the risks involved in his dishonest policy making, and now he’s lost some. To an ordinary Thai, 5% of your net worth is akin to losing a 500,000 baht vehicle that wasn’t properly insured, it hurts but you accept it and move on. Considering the man ran the risk of avoiding a 20% tax bill on the Shin sale, I can only assume it is sheer greed that keeps him snarled up in this national heartache.

I agree with the post above about smoke and mirrors. Even when you rule according to the letter of the law, the judgment is inclined to look at the 'real' intentions. Thaksin, and every big noodle subverts the letter of the law by simply going around it, in this case putting it all in the name of his wife and children. However, there is ample ways to show that the fortune was a collective family one, as is the case with most 'billionaires' in Asia, the ownership spread among many family members to protect it from very cases like this one. Regardless, it was Thaksin who mainly made the decisions, who has tacitly admitted over recent years that it is 'his' money (never once heard him say, he will fight for the justice of his ex wife's fortune), even the divorce is seen by some as a cynical stunt to distance her and the money from his persecution.

Turning the tables around, if Shin Inc. isn't exactly a family business run by Thaksin, then I guess it's sheer co-incidence that Wongsawat became PM, and Yingluk and other Shinawatras put in charge of key Puea Thai positions.

It's fairly obvious anyhow, how do two kids barely into their twenties with no business experience succeed in making their shares return such astronomical returns in a short space of time. Answer me that one 'defence lawyers'.

Sometimes, when it's obvious but difficult to prove then the onus is on the accused to justify their actions. You can't defeat the spirit of the law, even if your expensive clever lawyers can argue your way through the loopholes.

Actually I wish they would do something serious about this lot, have you ever tried walking down that promenade by night, it's near impossible without being forcibly accosted by someone every 10 meters refusing to let you pass (a real turn off if ever there was one), they practically manhandle you in the hope you'll be 'persuaded' to go home and make love with them. And when you get tough trying to escape it they react aggressively as if you're starting a bar fight. Ladyboys are the worst.

Is this a case of the kettle calling the pot black?

Getting back to the original topic, the reason we have no full 3G and probably won't have it on a proper scale for another 18 months is that the telecom concessions are such a mess, and various players in the industry, namely the ICT minister (who's actually a Nurse and hasn't a clue what's going on) are stalling on the licensing to protect TOT and CAT.

Alot of this stems from the original deal TOT was 'forced' to strike with AIS, giving them favourable terms, and resulting in many subsequently compensatory concession agreements with other telcos. It's all such a mess that introducing 3G under this unlevel playing field, will ultimately put someone at a disadvantage (since they will lose the remainder of their compensatory agreement).

It's probable Thaksin had a hand in 'forcing' the deal on TOT, establising a long tradition of interfering in the telecoms concession business by PMs, politicians and the state owned telcoms operator who try to protect a monopoly as a retailer rather than supplier.

If Thaksin was still in power it's likely 3G would have been 'forced' through ages ago, but benefitting certain parties. More of the same 'Business as usual in THailand'.

Even if there was an international court of arbitration for individuals (which there will never be since it challenges the 'sovereignty' of countries and so many would never be a willing party to its jurisdiction), it would be good for Thaksin to take his case there, and when they failed to rule in his favour would he finally shut up and stop talking about 'injustice'.

Clearly we have a man here who believes a court can and should be 'favourable' to influential people, that he's special and deserves special attention. He probably also thinks that if Thailand's courts are no longer 'friendly to him', perhaps an international court will be.

The fact that he's pre-empting a guilty verdict before it's out shows that he has no respect for court rulings that might not favour him. Isn't this the crux of the matter here in Thailand?

Scary to think someone who thinks like this wants to return as PM.

If you look at this case from the point of view that it's 'all about keeping Thaksin out of power' then it will never been seen as justice served correctly by at least half the country, whichever way the verdict comes out.

If you look at this case from the point of view that it's 'about setting a precedent for the future integrity of governance of this crooked country' then we should place our trust in the judges verdict and accept the consequences for better or worse.

I think there is enormous pressure on the Supreme Court to make a ruling based on careful deliberation and scrutiny - both locally and internationally. It might end up being a knife edge decision (ie 4-5 just like the previous major assets case that Thaksin won), in which case the best thing Thailand can do is accept the verdict and move on. The poor might not realise it, but a verdict that sends a message to future politicians to be more accountable (and not believe they can ultimately get away with it in the courts) will benefit them most in the long run.

Investors that may be dismayed because the law in Thailand is no longer as favourable to unaccountable governance, have no place in Thailand's future.

The article paints the scenarios in a clear cut unemotional, legal perspective. But this case is about a Prime Minister who had poor judgement regarding interests of the country he was elected to lead, and his own selfish interests. Selfish interests is a natural Thai trait, and the country has come to a sticky milestone where it needs to pass a judgement on whether this practice is acceptable when you are at the very top of the leadership. No amount of legal loopholes and influence or 'interpretation of the law' can mask the public perception and circumstantial evidence that Thaksin became unusually rich in tandem with certain policies he directed/forced.

Yes, there are so many similarly questionable individuals and alleged corrupt politicians in Thailand and a judgement day is now looming. The verdict will have far reaching consequences. It's a good thing Thailand has the courage to confront this decades long trend, wait and see which way the wind blows.

Simple, Jutumas was an executive with the Puea Pandin party, with no prior political experience you can bet alot of the 60 million she received went into their coffers to land her such a high profile. Aren't the Puea Pandin in the current coalition govt, wouldn't they threaten to walk out if the Dems pressed charges.

Same old Thailand, whoever is in power, dodgy minor parties get to call the corruption shots.

All the same, isn't it great when someone who is in charge of billions of baht annually to promote Thailand (and on a fat salary herself) simply couldn't see how damaging it would be and counter productive to her efforts if something like this came out. You really have to wonder sometimes if these people in charge are complete idiots.

Of course they're taking their time, the whole petition was a pointless waste of time in the first place since no one, not even the King, has the power to grant a pardon until certain conditions are met (ie serving jail time and admitting remorse). The Reds went ahead anyway to show just how popular Thaksin is, so the govt are responding with the equally pointless symbolic act of checking every single signature.

It really gets my goat that this lot believe the King can somehow overrule the rules to suit one person because he has the support of 3 million. They know the rules, so I'm not quite sure what they are expecting from a speedy verification process, other than to force the King to disappoint a lot of people - which is a really dirty tactic.

OMG! I can already picture the threat to the region's shark population (that's a lot of shark's fin soup) :-)

I think you've all missed the point here...

It was just business as usual for the police who were probably having a 'slow income' week.

Good way to scare away tourists though, keep up the good work men in grey.

Reminds me of getting a fine in Patong for riding a bike without a helmet (my passenger was wearing it), they were catching everyone as they turned onto beach road, it was only 200 baht and they could have set up a desk right there to write out the receipts and collect the money but they impounded our bikes and made the lot of us walk 5 blocks to police station and pay it, funnily they didn't stop bikes in which the passenger wasn't wearing a helmet. Keystone Cops!

Payap Thaksin makes sense here. Yes, I think the correct thing to do if they rule that he enriched his company unlawfully is to apportion the seized assets. And I'm pretty sure they will given the stakes and sensitivity.

The money he earned before becoming PM ought to be immediately returned (though I'm sure in the current political situation there would be some excuse to delay this given what Thaksin would likely do with the money).

The value of money earned through improper policy decisions (ie 'unusually rich/profitable), ought to be seized and returned to the state.

The rest of the money (ie what Shin would have nominally earned during average growth over the Thaksin administration era) should be temporarily seized until it is determined what a fair fine would be abusing his position as PM.

Taking it all away, especially that amount earned before 1999 is sure to rankle a lot of Thaksin's wealthier supports and give the UDD plenty of ammunition.

Promising to give some back, but after lengthy consideration will be a good motivation for Thaksin and the UDD to behave themselves and become more conciliatory, pending the outcome.

Of course, Thaksin will have none of this. He probably wants it ALL back and will fight politically to get an eventual repeal of the whole trial some time down the line.

The comment from Payap that assets should be returned and then the state sue Thaksin for the amount that they were allegedly deprived of is nonsense. Thaksin was PM and therefore should be held accountable.

This is what the whole crisis is about really isn't it. You have large group of people in this country who are contemptuous about law and order. They really believe that court verdicts are things that can and should be influenced by large scale protest. You can't blame them I suppose since historically this has been 'the order of things in Thailand'.

But they just don't get it, the whole stand against Thaksin is related to the general public's insistence on justice being upheld for a change. Sure there's double standards all across Thailand but it should not be used as an excuse to let these people off the hook. Courts shouldn't influenced by a large mob coming to aid of one man's guilt, if the protests were a large group demonstrating their dissatisfaction about, say, a verdict on environmental issue in their neighbourhood then it would be appropriate for the judges to taken into consideration the impact on their lives.

It seems that the Thaksin/UDD strategy is to demonstrate the anarchy that is possible as a result of this case, in the hope the judges will be lenient or favourable, which is patently wrong and has no part in the future of Thailand.

Alternatively, some might argue that the judges will err on the side of caution and favour a ruling that seizes part of the assets, while indefinitely impounding the portion that should be rightfully returned to him - they might be influenced into believing that any immediate return of any money to Thaksin would be dangerous - given what he could achieve politically with it.

And it's the fault of boys allowed into girls dormitories and teenagers wearing sexy clothing, it's got nothing to do with the fact the sex education in schools here is still a taboo subject (and probably in the home as well).

How often do you meet a young girl working in a bar or massage shop because she now has an unplanned bambino to support.

Pity this speculating editorial doesn't spell out exactly what is technically/legally possible with the assets case. If the govt were to change tomorrow would they have enough power/influence to have the case verdict a) delayed re-tried c) subject to a new Thaksin-friendly judiciary. A and B maybe, C would take quite a bit longer. In meddling as such what would be the reaction on the street from the PAD etc.

If Barnharn and Newin were to bolt they would need to be offered a lot of money, and it would need to top any counter offers from the 'Mandarins' to stay put. For Newin there is the possibility his party will take a beating at the next election since many Thaksin sympathisers in his part of Isarn resent what he did. An election will also be costly for both. I'm guessing Thaksin hasn't got enough money to lure them away, because they will want to see CASH, before the assets seizure verdict (and are guessing the result is a foregone conclusion). Considering what Newin did to Thaksin in the first place, it will be a bitter pill to swallow, giving him oodles of money to come back.

If it is clear that a sudden change of govt won't immediately influence the pending verdict, I think Thaksin would rather agitate for a house dissolution and wait for an election, hoping he can win an outright majority and not have to pander to all the minor parties. He might then try to go the route of having the 1997 charter restored in a referendum, thus eliminating all his woes in one fell swoop. On the other hand, if he really was broke, he would need his assets unseized to win the next election but if that was the case I think alot of people around him would be deserting by now since the money has stopped flowing.

Anyway, who knows he's a big liar prone to deception and creating speculation.

Also, if the power of govt changed hands in a no confidence vote then the PAD could quite rightfully take to the streets demanding an election, accusing the new govt of not holding a mandate from the people (stop me if you've heard this story before!)

Sad thing is, he really believes Democracy is negotiable. Like, we'll all sit down round a table and bargain over the country's future and justice. How do you bargain with a crook? He'd be better off becoming a Somali pirate - take the whole dam_n country hostage and demand your money back.

And so many people love and respect this guy?

Same thing that killed singer Kirsty McColl in Cancun a few years back.

Interesting,

most probably it's just a glitch in the Great Firewall of Thailand, and incompetence.

Recently I've been having problems retrieving and sending emails from Mac mail, I use two different ISPs in my home and both seem to fail to download any emails for hours (have to read them via online server access like web2mail), the smtp for sending them out often fails too (usually on the maxnet one), but when querying with others they don't have this problem at the time.

At times I also experience down time in accessing websites, while the radio streaming and skype chatting works fine, so there's nothing wrong with my connection but most likely the 'spy content filter' goes down, so no website data can pass through.

Who knows. Likely things will sort out in day or two, we should all be patient because it's FOR THE GOOD OF NATIONAL SECURITY (whatever that means ;-)

Patong central to Kalim takes a wee bit longer than 1 minute, sure 150 seems expensive relative to, say, Bangkok, but what's £1 difference when you're on holiday. I've never managed to get a taxi or tuktuk to take me anywhere in Phuket, even one end of Patong to the other for less than 150 baht, here in Chiang Mai a tuktuk wouldn't dream of charging more than 150 baht to take you all the way across town.

Phuket deserves this kind of negative publicity because they simply can't get to the bottom of their taxi mafia.

Sure the tuktuk deserves to be banged up for assault, but he's trying to make a living on the streets where there's too many taxis licenced so they sit around all day and when they get a client who then wants to cheat him out of 50 baht of course he's going to get irate. They agreed on 150 baht, no tuk tuk would have taken Anwar anywhere for 100 baht.

Having said that, the moment I step out of the airport in Phuket or Samui, I instinctively go on the defensive with taxi drivers, I was appalled that no one would take me to Patong for under 400 baht (a similar journey in Bangkok is about 250 baht), I got all irate with them but when you see how far it is and the amount of traffic I can understand, all the same I can't help feeling ripped off every time I use a taxi in Phuket, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

This taxi drivers don't realise that most people arrive in Phuket fresh from a 45 minute, 200 baht ride to Suvarnabhumi from Bangkok central, no wonder people like Anwar object.

I wish it was that simple that they could just seize all his assets and that would be the final nail in the coffin, but it won't be. For Thaksin it's all about the money, and if he has his life savings (or the largest chunk) taken away he will fight to the death to get it back, and seems the sort of guy willing to drag this country through the mud to get it. Besides which there are thousands, nay millions, out there who depend on this money for handouts and gravy trains, so they will also be peeved off.

Given what he can buy if he gets it back, I doubt they would rule in his favour, even if it was marginal, and there certainly is a justifiable case that some of it was ill gotten. Up until now the money has not been available to him, so it's not like they will be turning off the money supply, and he admits to still having about 100 million at his disposal. Since timing and publicity are everything to him, he'll use the verdict as a catalyst for all out push to turf this govt out, on the basis that there is no justice in this country because the powers that be can take away all your wealth even if you earned much of it before the so called 'wrong doing'.

There's more to this than that however, I believe he will eventually succeed in overturning the ruling and getting most of it back, it's not about the money ill-gotten, it's about applying the pressure to weaken him. This has happened before in a coup, where they seized the assets but a court eventually ruled that they should be returned (can't remember exactly which coup and which ex-supremo it was).

The courts would be wise to rule that some of the assets should be permanently seized and the rest fairly returned, and then take a couple of years to determine exactly how much he should get back, this would force him to co-operate or risk having it tied up for years and years. Ultimately I fear 2010 is going to be very eventful, the way things are going the poor Democrats are going to be struggling to hold together an increasingly greedy and unreasonable coalition, they probably won't make it to the Army reshuffle in Sept which means one less obstacle for Thaksin to make a comeback. They're going to be less polite and patient about it this time, and ultimately they are going to invite massive civil disobedience.

I'm predicting another coup, possible an 'own goal' coup engineered by a Puea Thai govt as an excuse to tear up the 2008 charter, and I don't think it's going to accepted by the public nor certain factions of the army. Whatever the outcome it does mean instant freedom for Thaksin and is money, then he exits the stage and leaves the politicians to fight over the mess it leaves behind - he'll blame it all on the 'Mandarins'. Sorry to say, but I fear the worst for this country, only when there's been a massive fatal event will everyone step back and decide to be peaceful (with full forgiveness from both sides of course).