rickirs

Yingluck's attorney makes two points, albeit presented in the article in a shody manner.

Point 1 - Civil case must wait for completion of the Criminal case

The attorney is wrong.

The civil case can run concurrently to the criminal case and its outcome does not necessarily depend on the criminal case. More than often civil cases are won than their corresponding criminal cases simply because the judicial threshholds are much lower in civil cases than criminal cases. The latter must overcome the "no shadow of a doubt" standard while the former need only prove "circumstantial" negligence. And negligence needn't be proven to be willful.

Point 2 - Civil case should not be filed by the Finance Ministry

The attorney is correct. But it won't matter.

The Finance Minsitry as well as all the other cabinet ministeries were selected and appointed by the NCPO. The cabinet ministers work under the authority of the prime minister who was also the NCPO Chief. It was the NCPO that overthrew Yingluck and her constitutionally elected government in violation of the constitution. Under Article 44 of the Interim Charter the NCPO has judicial authority on all Thai matters. Obviously, by even undemocratic standards ANY of Prayuth's government officials involvement in a civil suit against Yingluck is a CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

As witnessed with the trial of Thaksin in absentia, a conflict of interest by government officials is a serious criminal offense. Why would not then a conflict of interest in the Yingluck case be avoided by the Prayuth government? The impropiety of possible conflict of interest by government officials should invite the scrutiny and possible charges by the NACC. Unfortunately, "double standard" comes to mind that contravenes "equality" to all Thais even under the Interim Charter. The suit will be filed by the Finance Ministry.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Seems the new Thai constitution may well refer to a new Thai definition of 'democracy'. I believe that may entail democracy being defined as the inverse of Aristotle's polity, wherein a Thai democracy might provide for any tyrranical dictator with armed power to hold on to leadership by using any means possible. Of course, this is in complete contrast to Aristotle's polity, which describes a democracy as having a benevolent leader who is all for the good of the people and not himself, as generally thought to be represented by Western democracy {in part}.

The Junta poultry is entitled to its own definition.

“HRW and other rights bodies claimed the proposed amendment could allow detention of civilians by a military court for 84 days without judicial oversight.”

HRW clearly misunderstands this amendment. As the NCPO already has judicial authority under Article 44 of the Interim Charter, it will be providing any necessary oversight in detention of civilians. At worse the amendment is redundant.

It may be time for the HRW to be “invited” to an attitude adjustment meeting so that the Junta can “help” them better understand what no one else in the world can understand. But I am sure that within the next couple weeks there will be a NIDA or TRICHA survey whose results will prove that 95% of respondents agree with the having amendment

All these street vendors are part of Thailand's 99.9% employment rate.

At a time when the economy is in a tailspin towards potential deflation and increasing household debt, limiting employment opportunies for the lowest income class would seem a disaster in the making. Thailand has no formal "safety net" for the unemployed nor any strucured employment programs to help these people recover. The closest it comes are the occassional one-time cash handouts and limited subsidies.

It's not that the government is helpless. It could trigger an upswing in the economy and greater employment with massive government investment in the nation's infrastructure. But thus far it has refused to do so. It could take measures to provide vendors opportunities to continue their businesses as was done eventually with beach bed and umbrella vendors. Though it has to a very small extent made some allowances for street vendors, it usually imposes catch-22 provisions (ie., late night sales only) that actually kill vendor businesses that were formulated around customer patterns.

It's not a Junta-led government being insensitive to the survival of street vendors, it's a complete cluelessness of what it takes in Thailand for the low income class to survive.

Possibly because shaking hands is not a Thai custom. Nor is the current craze for fist-bumping. You never know where those sweaty hands have been! Some Thais view a handshake as merely the symbolic touching of hands.

The 'wai' is both hygienic and respectful.

Shaking hands?.......Disgusting habit............

That's why I always give a soft kiss on the cheek of whoever I meet......Thai or farang...........

Looking forward meeting you people.....................

But in Greece no kissing?

"Despite the police investigation, no one has been brought to justice for these murders,"

Hard to find Burmese immigrant workers in the area?

"no matter whether their sickness was caused by effects from the mining activities or not."

Will the government also extend such free medical treatment and care to the rest of the nation regardless of the cause of anyone's illness or is this just a political publicity stunt?

Because it's good business.

France has the best railway system in Europe (try taking a TGV - on time, fast, comfortable and cheap). They have the technology and need to recoup their R&D investment by selling it to other countries. Simples.

Fair point.

But I don't understand the word "investing".

"Selling" would make more sense...but why would France "invest" in Thailand railways?

Investment by a nation is done to increase GDP and GDP growth rate. I expect France and Japan would do the same deal as China which is to loan the Thai government 80%+ of the total project costs that gives it 80% equity (aka investment) ownership in the project. That ownership is then bought back by Thailand over say 20 years with a return on capital in the form of debt service. China is asking 2-4% interest on debt that is higher than Thi treasury bonds. That debt service is paid through project revenues.

Thailand essentially gets no GDP growth from the project for the term of the payback. Good for the foreign countries, questionable for Thailand. whose economic has stagnated at best.

Maybe Thailand should pull out of the UN and start its own Hub of World Government.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The US, UN and now the EU interfering in Thai sovereignty - Our resident Juntanistas will be in apoplexy! Let the rest of the world bashing commence...

Don't forget Japan.

The Japane$e $eemed to get a free pa$$ for $ome rea$on I am un$ure about...

Maybe because they are, like allegedly Thailand, a constitutional monarchy and had a history as a kingdom, albeit under an emperor?

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Great Idea actually - you could probably think of it as a ship being captained by the government and an engineer (the reform body) who keeps the engines/systems running smooth and clean with maintenance and upgrades and a ships doctor (checks and balances) who can relieve them both if they go off the rails

If Thailand is a ship, it has been hijacked by pirates dressed as army soldiers, passengers robbed of their freedom, and ship driven into the shore of tyranny.

Let's be honesy: Agency will be given enough authority to work independently to ensure NCPO's ongoing efforts are not in vain.

Sovereignty empowered to Thais will be in name only while the NCPO/NCPO clones keeps a firm grip on its absolute power. In essence Thailand becomes a one-party system akin to communist countries no matter what democratic window-dressing Thais are allowed, such as elections. The Junta at least owes Thais the honesty to say that democracy cannot ever be allowed in the country so long as its elite holds power.

The question to the Thai people may become "how long is long enough?"

There was a period during the project review process that residents could have filed suit right up to the point the project was approved. They didn't for whatever reason. They were obviously aware of the project plans and the scope of the environmental surveys. If the opponents suspected official/investor collusion that was the time to take issue. At this point the opponents don't seem to claim such collusion backed by any evidence.

To wait until the project is 90% built to stop the project for an allegedly incomplete or inappropriate environmental review is unfair to the project investors and violates the principle of due process. I don't see the court accepting the lawsuit. As it is the substantial delay in completion of the project damages the investors for which they probably will receive no compensation. The court may take that into account in its decision to deny the lawsuit in addition to the award of compensation to the opponents.

The consequence of the court accepting the suit and finding for the plaintiffs to cancel the project will put a freeze on future projeccts in the country. No investor will have any certainty in completing a project and recouping their investment. Thailand will become the Hub of Loss.

Even while the Interim Charter under Article 3 provides that "Sovereignty power belongs to all Thais," it is clear that sovereignty power belongs solely and permanently with the military. This provision guarantees that Thailand will not be restored as a democracy but continues as a neo-feudal oligarchy.

This provision also makes it certain that the draft constitution will not be submitted to the Thais electorate for approval. Unlike the referendum that was allowed for the 2007 draft constitution that only gathered 51% approval. With the current draft constitution, 30% approval is more likely. What voter would agree to a constitution that essentially negates the sovereign power of the Thais in their right to determine their own affairs?

NCPO has repeatedly stated a referendum was unnecessary because the Thais were allowed to "participate" in the draft constitution, thereby having their tacit approval already. This provision closes what the NCPO considered a "loophole" in the 2007 Constitution that provided a legislative process to amend the constitution. Of course, the NCPO would retain the right to make any future changes to the constitution without consensus of the Thais.

Thais will not be allowed to decide their own form of government. What does that say about the future of democracy in Thailand? DOA.

Chaturon raises some challenging legal issues that traditionally seem to have been accepted fait accompli by Thai society, if only because it has over the decades become numb from military coups. The unilateral right of the military to assume sovereignty over the Thai people at a time of its choosing seems to be an ingrained concession by Thais. Chaturon is attempting in effect to put the NCPO coup on trial.

Chaturon's particular reference to conflict in the Interim Charter between Article 4 and Article 44 is notable, although he should have also cited Articles 2 and 3.

Article 2: Thailand is a democratic monarchy

Article 3: Sovereign power belongs to all Thais

Article 4: Recognizes human dignity, rights, liberties and equality of the Thais

Article 44: the NCPO Leader is empowered with absolute power to order any action regardless of the legislative, executive, or judicial sectors.

Thailand is not now a democracy. NCPO through armed force controls of all three branches of the government and operates with complete impunity from the Thais electorate for its actions. The NCPO is the law of the land.

Sovereign power belongs to the NCPO and not to any democratic constituency. NCPO alone decides without regard to consistency and balance the extent of any Thais’ rights, liberties and equality. There is no redress or appeal to NCPO decisions and actions.

Chaturon actually is borrowing on similar issues raised by Abhisit last July. Abhisit “believed that Article 44 violates the intention of Article 3. Abhisit warned that “an interim charter that restricts basic rights might have adverse political ramifications.” The Nation 2014-07-09/24.

Just as a wild card Chaturon should add the contradiction between Articles 3 and 48. Article 48 gives the NCPO, its subordinates, and sub-subordinates amnesty for the coup. If the Thai people objected to the Yingluck amnesty bill because of the manner in which it bypassed political opposition, they should find fault with the NCPO’s self-declared amnesty.

Ultimately, Chaturon’s complaint will be tabled indefinitely if not rejected outright. Why? It’s called "playing against a stacked deck.”

Srisuwan Janya filed a complaint in August 2014 with the Office of the Ombudsman against the appointment of the NLA, saying it was unconstitutional. If approved by the Ombudsman it would be forwarded to the Constitutional Court. What happened to that complaint? Coincidentally in September 2014, former Deputy permanent Secretary for Defense General Wittawat Ratchatanan was selected by General Prayuth and approved by the NLA as a new Ombudsman.

"Other interesting activities during the Chinese New Year festival include the sale of local Thai products and food"

Interesting in what way - sale of Thai products and food in Thailand? Sale of Chinese products and food would be more "interesting."

"But many of them still did not gain enough understanding, he said, adding that it is the responsibility of the NCPO to try to make them to adjuist their attitudes."

Prayuth, "I am not a dictator. ... It's not like I can order people."

Since sovereignty belongs to the Thai people and not to the NCPO, and no one can dictate Thai people, the UDD leaders should refuse to accept NCPO's "invitation" for attitude adjustment as their right under the 2007 Constitution and Articles 1-4 of the Interim Charter. It is not their obligation to listen to the NCPO, unless of course the Interm Charter is a sham and Thailand is not as the charter states - a constitutional monarchy - but an anarchy.

Now that's one place where you wont see an American Ambassador telling the Military government what it should do............. alt=coffee1.gif width=32 height=24>

.

All American Allies are equal---- just some are more equal then others.

------------------------

Congress is preparing to allow the Obama administration to give more than $1 billion dollars to the Egyptian government and military, despite the fact the generals perpetrated a coup last summer and are suppressing opposition ahead of a nation-wide constitutional referendum. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/13/congress-to-give-egypt-1-5-billion-in-aid.html

Thailand is not the equal of Egypt.

US aid comes after the Junta submitted a new constitution to the Eqyptian people in a referendum who approved it by 98%; and after the coup leader resigned his military position to run for and become elected President in an open and free election.

In Thailand after 8 months you still have the self-appointed coup leader as PM; no new constitution and no promise of any public referendum for approval; elections are promised at year-end or 2016.

Egypt has returned to democratic governance. Thailand has not.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Sounds good...Where does the money come from ?

Private industry. The Junta doesn't invest in Thailand's economy. And that's a major complaint of the business sector - lack of capital for GDP growth:

2015-02-11

“The military has promised to unleash billions of dollars on much-needed infrastructure projects.

But the money is yet to kick into the economy. As Barclays Capital put it in a note last month: ‘The main impediment to growth at present is the slow pace of fiscal [government] spending, which is also delaying investment and consumption decisions."

And it’s not going to change:

2015-02-07

“Deputy Prime Minister M.R. Pridiyathorn Devakula stated Friday that the government will not be implementing a second round of economic stimulus package in light of indications that previous budgetary injections have made a significant impact on the country’s economy.”

There was never a first round.

"The survey founded that only 76.8 per cent of the respondents know how to use the condoms properly to protect themselves, compared to 86.2 per cent of respondents surveyed last year."

Looks like the Junta's Happiness to the Thai People comes with a price.

"preserve the Thai way of life"

So that meant the foods sold were subjected to price controls and the amount of profit limited to what the government thought best?

"authorities have been instructed to closely watch the places on the “day of love”.

Since prostitution is officially illegal, shouldn't the authorities shut down the love motels instead of just watching them one day out of the year?

"an amendment to the 1955 Act on the Organisation of Military Courts would affect civilians were unfounded"

I think it would be more accurate to say that -

"an amendment to the 1955 Act on the Organisation of Military Courts would affect civilians were irrelevant"

NCPO doesn't need any amendments to exercise its absolute power of the sovereignty of the Thai Peoples.