No need to reinvestigate 2010 crackdown-related cases: Prawit

[webfact]

No need to reinvestigate 2010 crackdown-related cases: Prawit

By Wasamon Audjarint 
The Nation

 

BANGKOK: -- There is no need to reinvestigate cases related to the 2010 crackdown against red-shirt protestors, which resulted in 99 people being killed, Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister General Prawit Wongsuwan said on Tuesday.
 

“The final verdict [by the Supreme Court] doesn’t affect the security forces. Everything has been proceeded with by law,” he said. “Why do they have to start it all again? Officers have worked themselves nearly to death on that.”

 

The United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) has started a campaign seeking one million signatures against the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), calling for the agency to review its investigation against former PM Abhisit Vejjajiva and his ex-deputy Suthep Thaugsuban, who were in overall charge of the security situation during the 2010 protests.

 

The NACC became the UDD’s target after the Supreme Court last Thursday acquitted Abhisit and Suthep on charges of murder and attempted murder in connection with an operation by security forces to disperse anti-government demonstrators in 2010. 

 

The court’s ruling pointed out that the NACC, which had turned down the case in 2015, should have been in charge of filing an indictment, not the Department of Special Investigation.

 

The 2010 crackdown caused 99 deaths and left at least 2,100 people injured.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30325877

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-09-06

[Samui Bodoh]

7 minutes ago, webfact said:

The final verdict [by the Supreme Court] doesn’t affect the security forces.

 

"99 deaths and at least 2,100 injured", but no accountability or responsibility.

 

It "doesn't affect the security forces".

 

Speaks volumes about the situation in Thailand today...

 

 

[canuckamuck]

What do you want us to do? Arrest ourselves?

Edited September 6, 2017 by canuckamuck

[rkidlad]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Everything has been proceeded with by law,” he said

Ehm.....whose law? 

[Thailand]

Great big brush and a bucket of whitewash should do the job.

[Artisi]

About a days road deaths and injuries, would suggest the same effort be put into this ongoing problem - certainly more beneficial long term. 

[shanesox]

All the red shirt lovers (and black ones) whining now! The mob were lucky more weren't taken out by the army in 2010! They had plenty of time to obey obey the "law" and stop their violence and obstruction!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

[YetAnother]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The court’s ruling pointed out that the NACC, which had turned down the case in 2015, should have been in charge of filing an indictment, not the Department of Special Investigation.

then they should never have accepted the case; and point out that issue at that time

[canuckamuck]

36 minutes ago, shanesox said:

All the red shirt lovers (and black ones) whining now! The mob were lucky more weren't taken out by the army in 2010! They had plenty of time to obey obey the "law" and stop their violence and obstruction!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

And when the yellows took over government house among other things, and protested for half a year? How is it that they weren't also taken out? They had way more time to obey the law.

[newcomer71]

50 minutes ago, shanesox said:

All the red shirt lovers (and black ones) whining now! The mob were lucky more weren't taken out by the army in 2010! They had plenty of time to obey obey the "law" and stop their violence and obstruction!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

Maybe you think someone want to see justice done disregard the color of the victim shirts? (There were photographers and nurses killed too...)

Oh no, I guess is too much of an effort for you other than label people at your convenience...

[Artisi]

20 minutes ago, canuckamuck said:

And when the yellows took over government house among other things, and protested for half a year? How is it that they weren't also taken out? They had way more time to obey the law.

Possibly because they weren't killing people who didn't agree their cause. 

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

"99 deaths and at least 2,100 injured", but no accountability or responsibility.

 

It "doesn't affect the security forces".

 

Speaks volumes about the situation in Thailand today...

 

 

 

It speaks volumes that those who instigated, financed, guided and controlled the 2010 insurrection and the ones who responded to it unreasonably, (some were trying to respond reasonably), won't be held accountable or responsible. 

 

Even with clear evidence! What was one verdict - someone couldn't be charged with inciting violent behavior because he was outside the country when he appeared in a screen link to deliver rhetoric. And that verdict wasn't appealed, so far.

[Baerboxer]

59 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

then they should never have accepted the case; and point out that issue at that time

 

The reason why Tharit via the DSI he controlled brought this case had absolutely nothing to do with justice is the slightest.

 

[Artisi]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

It speaks volumes that those who instigated, financed, guided and controlled the 2010 insurrection and the ones who responded to it unreasonably, (some were trying to respond reasonably), won't be held accountable or responsible. 

 

Even with clear evidence! What was one verdict - someone couldn't be charged with inciting violent behavior because he was outside the country when he appeared in a screen link to deliver rhetoric. And that verdict wasn't appealed, so far.

So easy to ignore these minor facts either though ignorance or design. 

[mtls2005]

The Thai "legal" Apparatchik is too busy investigating political opponents, uppity students, sandwich-eating book readers, Facebook posters and trying to figure out how Yingluck escaped, so no time to deal with friendlies.

 

All in the name of reconciliation of course.

 

Shame, irony and self-awareness, seem in short supply for the junta/amart.

 

 

[canopus1969]

They keep misspelling his name - there should be no W or I  

[YetAnother]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

which resulted in 99 people being killed,

curious exactly 99; i wonder what the real number is; in marketing 99 is called 'psychological pricing'

[joecoolfrog]

1 hour ago, shanesox said:

All the red shirt lovers (and black ones) whining now! The mob were lucky more weren't taken out by the army in 2010! They had plenty of time to obey obey the "law" and stop their violence and obstruction!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

Ah Fascism , so refreshing !

[JCauto]

"Officers have worked themselves nearly to death on that.”

 

Nice. So not only does he dismiss the concerns of the thousands of people directly affected, he trivializes the death of nearly 100 people. Reconciliation!

[Golgota]

2 hours ago, Artisi said:

Possibly because they weren't killing people who didn't agree their cause. 

Maybe you should learn the History of the events before saying nonsense

[Golgota]

1 hour ago, JCauto said:

"Officers have worked themselves nearly to death on that.”

 

Nice. So not only does he dismiss the concerns of the thousands of people directly affected, he trivializes the death of nearly 100 people. Reconciliation!

And the often forgotten 60 people who vanished...

[Ossy]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

to reinvestigate 2010 crackdown-related cases

2010 . . . that's a lot a' cases. And all crackdown-related . . . that should make it easier.

[sawadee1947]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

“Why do they have to start it all again? Officers have worked themselves nearly to death on that.”

Who expect justice in this case?

[dundee48]

51 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

Who expect justice in this case?

Just because you don`t like the verdict doesn`t mean justice was not done.

[tomta]

There are those on this forum such as Shanesox above who say that the redshirts were warned and should have dispersed and had they obeyed the law, they would not have been killed or wounded. This is an argument that the deaths and injuries caused by the army were justifiable. The terms of the argument put by Shanesox  implicitly admit that the army did kill and wound but with legal justification. It is an argument that could be justified.

 

It is an argument that could be sustained very easily if the army and the Committee for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) were to submit their evidence and records of what happened. Surely, a responsible military administration would have records of the shootings they did, the results of those shootings and the context in which they took place. It would be difficult for such records to be 100% accurate in "The fog of war" but patterns could emerge . For instance, we might have a record that states (and with accompanying evidence such as photos, films, records of units engaged, records of ammunition and weaponry distributed and used ) "A demonstrator was seen with a grenade launcher and on the orders of Captain XXX was neutralized. The demonstrator was later found to have died. The cause of death was an army issue bullet (and all the technical details would follow). OR vice versa - "a demonstrator was killed as a later autopsy demonstrated. The cause of death was attributed to a non-military bullet".

 

I have followed this matter since 2010 reasonably closely. The military has in no case I am aware of admitted responsibility for even one specific death that they caused. Not even for one specific injury. They have never said "Demonstrator X was killed or wounded by shots fired by Army unit Y in a legally justifiable manner. And here are the details and justification...". They have not, as far as I am aware, surrendered all their information for inspection and interrogation by the various bodies that have investigated these events.

 

OF course, they have never blankly stated this: "The army did not kill or injure anyone in the events of 2010". This would be too absurd. They just have never matched up one dead or wounded demonstrator (rioter, man in black, redshirt - whatever you like) with one specific military bullet.

 

So Shanesox and others. Clearly you think the army's actions were justified. That is certainly a possible argument. Do you think that no demonstrator was killed or wounded by an army bullet shot by the army? Yes, I'm aware of the idea that the men in black were shooting redshirts with stolen army ammunition but my question still stands. Did the army kill or wound anyone, with justification as you argue or without as others argue?

[sawadee1947]

3 hours ago, dundee48 said:

Just because you don`t like the verdict doesn`t mean justice was not done.

B.S. If one party is not willing to open investigations and shut the books instead....that is ok for you??

[thaiguzzi]

A mil signatures needed...

Where do I sign?

Lets gets this show on the road!

[Jonmarleesco]

18 hours ago, webfact said:

“... Officers have worked themselves nearly to death on that.”

Did he really say that? Dear, oh dear, well past time for him to taste the grass.

[Jonmarleesco]

11 hours ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

He is an evil little toad, just look at his face. 

I must say evil is not the word that comes to mind - though the little and the toad elements do, and there are there are plenty of others.

[candide]

This statement is misleading. In order to "reinvestigate", there must have been a first investigation before! The DSI has been forbidden to investigate and the NACC has refused to investigate.

It should be "no need to investigate"