Abhisit and Yingluck cleared of mishandling 2011 flood response

[rooster59]

Abhisit and Yingluck cleared of mishandling 2011 flood response

By The Nation

 

NACC RULES THERE WAS NO DERELICTION OF DUTY ON THEIR PART AND THEY COULD NOT HAVE PREVENTED DAMAGE TO MANY AREAS

 

THE NATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION Commission (NACC) yesterday dismissed the charges against officials including former prime ministers Abhisit Vejjajiva and Yingluck Shinawatra for alleged mismanagement which resulted in severe flooding in 2011.

 

The officials – including the then-director of the Flood Relief Operations Centre Pol General Pracha Promnok and the then-Bangkok governor Sukhumbhand Boripat – were found not guilty of malfeasance.

 

Abhisit had been accused of misconduct for having kept a huge amount of water in the Bhumibol and Sirikit Dams and failing to unload it. It was said that the action consequently resulted in the heavy flooding that hit many provinces in the northern and central parts of the country, including Bangkok.

 

The NACC ruled Abhisit was not guilty, saying that as prime minister he had no part in determining the water storage in the dams, which was the responsibility of the panel monitoring and analysing the water situation.

 

In addition, earlier that year the water level in the dams had been well below the minimum amount held by any other dam, the NACC said.

 

This implied that the officials had been prepared for the impact of tropical storms that would bring heavy rains and increase the water in the dams.

 

After an investigation, the NACC also cleared the panel monitoring the water situation, saying they had not been derelict or malfeasant.

 

Yingluck, who took office in August after Abhisit, was accused of dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to divert the water in the dams to the east and west of the country, according to the National Disaster Risk Reduction Plan, and which resulted in severe flooding.

The NACC ruled she was not guilty.

 

It said that the disaster risk reduction plan gave only broad management guidelines in tackling flood situations. It had no specifications on water diversion, it explained. The diversion of water from the north had to strictly take into consideration the immediate situation, it added.

 

The NACC found that the officials had dealt with the situation accordingly, and even if the water had been diverted to the east and west, it still would not have alleviated the issue.

 

Pracha, as director of the Flood Relief Operations Centre, had been accused of malfeasance for failing to notify the public about the flood.

 

The NACC, however, found that Pracha had ordered that several panels be set up to notify people as well as provide aid for flood victims, including setting up a 24-hour hotline before and after the flood. Therefore, the agency ruled, he was not negligent.

 

Former Bangkok governor Sukhumbhand, who was accused of mismanagement and causing the floods in Bangkok’s perimeter, was also cleared.

 

The NACC ruled his actions were in line with the policy passed down from the Flood Relief Operations Centre.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30326807

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-09-16

[Samui Bodoh]

Thailand has created an ugly monster in the NACC.

 

This case is a text book example of appointed bureaucrats judging whether the political leaders have done a "good enough' job, while at the same time being accountable to no one.

 

"Abhisit had been accused of misconduct for having kept a huge amount of water in the Bhumibol and Sirikit Dams and failing to unload it". Is this really the job of a counter-corruption organization to judge whether he was right in a decision to keep water in a dam? 

 

"Yingluck, who took office in August after Abhisit, was accused of dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to divert the water in the dams to the east and west of the country, according to the National Disaster Risk Reduction Plan, and which resulted in severe flooding." Again, is this really the job of a counter-corruption organization to judge whether she was right in her decision about water levels?

 

Who judges the NACC? My own view is that the NACC has been one of the primary reasons for a HUGE amount of discord in Thailand. Who will be judging that?

 

If political leaders have every decision second-guessed by an appointed body of bureaucrats with a spotty (at best!) reputation, what is the point of having political leaders?

 

Put strong limits on the monster before it is too late!

 

Edited September 15, 2017 by Samui Bodoh

[craigt3365]

The floods were caused by mismanagement.  No denying that.  Somebody should be held accountable.  But who?

 

http://web.stanford.edu/~meehan/floodthai2011/FloodNotes17.pdf

Quote

 

The Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut later acknowledged that the controversial decision to delay the release of water from the dams was made by the government.

...............

Knowledgeable water officials would later say privately that high political figures ordered the ministry to delay releasing water. These water officials appeared to accept the conclusion that the flood damage could be blamed on these politically motivated decisions.

 

 

[inThailand]

After the 2011 floods, they approved 50 billion baht to fund 240 flood management projects.

Where is the responsibility for this lost money? 

[halloween]

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Thailand has created an ugly monster in the NACC.

 

This case is a text book example of appointed bureaucrats judging whether the political leaders have done a "good enough' job, while at the same time being accountable to no one.

 

"Abhisit had been accused of misconduct for having kept a huge amount of water in the Bhumibol and Sirikit Dams and failing to unload it". Is this really the job of a counter-corruption organization to judge whether he was right in a decision to keep water in a dam? 

 

"Yingluck, who took office in August after Abhisit, was accused of dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to divert the water in the dams to the east and west of the country, according to the National Disaster Risk Reduction Plan, and which resulted in severe flooding." Again, is this really the job of a counter-corruption organization to judge whether she was right in her decision about water levels?

 

Who judges the NACC? My own view is that the NACC has been one of the primary reasons for a HUGE amount of discord in Thailand. Who will be judging that?

 

If political leaders have every decision second-guessed by an appointed body of bureaucrats with a spotty (at best!) reputation, what is the point of having political leaders?

 

Put strong limits on the monster before it is too late!

 

If the bureaucrats are spotty, what are the politicians - blacker than sin? Let's lift poor farmers out of poverty - B500 billion spent and how many farmers are no longer poor? Let's buy billions of baht worth of 3rd rate Chinese tablets to educate out children - that worked well didn't it?

More on topic, let's hold back the dam releases so we can get some rice in storage. Our pals are waiting for their storage fees and sales commissions.

With decisions like these, why would politicians need someone looking over their shoulder?

[Samui Bodoh]

29 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

The floods were caused by mismanagement.  No denying that.  Somebody should be held accountable.  But who?

 

http://web.stanford.edu/~meehan/floodthai2011/FloodNotes17.pdf

 

 

"The floods were caused by mismanagement. No denying that. Somebody should be held accountable."

 

Respectfully, are you saying that, after studying the issue for SIX years, the NACC got it wrong by clearing everyone? Perhaps the NACC was 'criminally negligent' in their duties by not assigning blame? Wouldn't it be nice if the NACC were... accountable?

 

Kinda makes you wonder about other decisions made by the NACC, doesn't it?

 

[craigt3365]

8 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

"The floods were caused by mismanagement. No denying that. Somebody should be held accountable."

 

Respectfully, are you saying that, after studying the issue for SIX years, the NACC got it wrong by clearing everyone? Perhaps the NACC was 'criminally negligent' in their duties by not assigning blame? Wouldn't it be nice if the NACC were... accountable?

 

Kinda makes you wonder about other decisions made by the NACC, doesn't it?

 

Not saying that at all.  Read the report I provided.  There are some 30 departments responsible for water management in Thailand.  None with ultimate authority on what to do.  And none willing to step up and be in charge.  The floods were caused by a politician (not the PMs) telling the water management authorities not to release water. 

 

Who's fault is it for allowing that to happen? 

[halloween]

8 minutes ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

"The floods were caused by mismanagement. No denying that. Somebody should be held accountable."

 

Respectfully, are you saying that, after studying the issue for SIX years, the NACC got it wrong by clearing everyone? Perhaps the NACC was 'criminally negligent' in their duties by not assigning blame? Wouldn't it be nice if the NACC were... accountable?

 

Kinda makes you wonder about other decisions made by the NACC, doesn't it?

 

555555. You wonder about decisions made by the NACC, and think they should be accountable, but supervision and accountability of politicians is wrong. So whose decisions have done the most damage to the country, politician's or the NACC's? When has the NACC blown hundreds of billions of baht on corrupt policies?

[JLCrab]

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

<snip>

Put strong limits on the monster before it is too late!

 

Maybe it's already too late and you should leave.

[ubonjoe]

A off topic post and a reply to it has been removed.

[Eric Loh]

Stroke of good fortune that this case involved Ahbisit. Same as the exPM Somchai's case that involved a Wongsuwan. Verdict will turned out quite different if those unpunishables not complicits in both cases. 

[halloween]

6 minutes ago, jayboy said:

Politicians are a mixed bag but are more accountable if they know they can be voted out of power.The current collection of generals who seized power illegally cannot.Subservient bodies like the NACC composed of appointed stooges have no accountability at all, and its lack of integrity is a matter of record.Your question as who has done the most harm doesn't make any sense.It just reflects the common but inane belief that all politicians are "corrupt", the people are deluded and that rule of self appointed "good people" is best.Still when in doubt just resort to another cloud of "whataboutery".Anything than face up to reality.

 

I wonder what causes that common belief that you consider inane. Perhaps its watching the governing party line up to take handouts from a criminal and vote to his orders? Or could it be the revelation that billions of baht were spent on truly inane policies, and much of that has ended up in minister's pockets and commissions for the criminal's mates?

[craigt3365]

7 minutes ago, halloween said:

Oh right, it was the "elite" who spent billions on 3rd rate tablets. No, it was PTP with their great leap forward in education. Are you under the impression that worked out well? Are farmer's children sitting at their desks working electronically?

PTP whose ranks include many from the military. LOL

[jayboy]

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

 

I wonder what causes that common belief that you consider inane. Perhaps its watching the governing party line up to take handouts from a criminal and vote to his orders? Or could it be the revelation that billions of baht were spent on truly inane policies, and much of that has ended up in minister's pockets and commissions for the criminal's mates?

It's a common belief among large numbers of the Sino Thai urban middle class that politicians are "corrupt" and that democracy is inefficient.In practice what they really mean is that resources should not be shared more equitably and that the views of the Thai majority should be muffled.Why they take this unenlightened position is a matter for speculation which is beyond the scope of this thread but I would submit they are not acting in their long term interests.Why the Thai ruling class hates politicians and democracy, for all the lip service involved, is plainly obvious and does not require further comment.

 

As to your other remarks which predictably touch on your lack of enthusiasm for Thaksin these are clearly miles off topic which is about the 2011 floods.If you cannot control the urge to rant about Thaksin may I suggest two options.Firstly find a relevant topic where you can discharge your load.Secondly and more preferable try and be more reflective so that even those who don't share your opinions may take them more seriously than is presently possible.

[Golden Triangle]

At the end of the day it can still be construed as an act of God or Buddha if that suits you better, now lets rewind a few years when we had the massive floods in the UK ? When at least half of mainland Europe was under water ? And more recently Hurricanes Harvey and Irma in the good old US of A ? Should the ruling politicians of the time (and unfortunately I can't be arsed to get dates and times) be held responsible and accountable for how Mother Nature acts, sure no one was prepared for the unusually high rainfall and all attributed to Climate Change or even once in a 200 year event, take your pick.

 

For Heavens sake, stop trying to score political points over one another for what was an act of nature. 

[halloween]

2 minutes ago, jayboy said:

It's a common belief among large numbers of the Sino Thai urban middle class that politicians are "corrupt" and that democracy is inefficient.In practice what they really mean is that resources should not be shared more equitably and that the views of the Thai majority should be muffled.Why they take this unenlightened position is a matter for speculation which is beyond the scope of this thread but I would submit they are not acting in their long term interests.Why the Thai ruling class hates politicians and democracy, for all the lip service involved, is plainly obvious and does not require further comment.

 

As to your other remarks which predictably touch on your lack of enthusiasm for Thaksin these are clearly miles off topic which is about the 2011 floods.If you cannot control the urge to rant about Thaksin may I suggest two options.Firstly find a relevant topic where you can discharge your load.Secondly and more preferable try and be more reflective so that even those who don't share your opinions may take them more seriously than is presently possible.

I speak to quite a few Thais who are not Sino-, urban or middle class who believe many politicians are corrupt, and what they mean by corrupt is conniving, bent, lying mongrels only out to fill their pockets with other people's money. That belief is instilled and re-inforced by press and court reports of politicians defrauding banks, evading tax, nepotism, cronyism, secret deals, unnecessary commissions, 3rd party payments and incentives, laws written for personal benefit, and outright theft of government funds and assets. Of course, Sino Thai urban middle class probably can't see those things happening, in your opinion at least.

My initial reply was to a post suggesting politician's don't need supervision. Personally, I would like to see about 1/3 of them shot, another 1/3 jailed for long terms and maybe the remaining 1/3 might try responsible government for a change. That won't happen, so I will have to settle for oversight and prosecution.

[jayboy]

45 minutes ago, halloween said:

I speak to quite a few Thais who are not Sino-, urban or middle class who believe many politicians are corrupt, and what they mean by corrupt is conniving, bent, lying mongrels only out to fill their pockets with other people's money. That belief is instilled and re-inforced by press and court reports of politicians defrauding banks, evading tax, nepotism, cronyism, secret deals, unnecessary commissions, 3rd party payments and incentives, laws written for personal benefit, and outright theft of government funds and assets. Of course, Sino Thai urban middle class probably can't see those things happening, in your opinion at least.

My initial reply was to a post suggesting politician's don't need supervision. Personally, I would like to see about 1/3 of them shot, another 1/3 jailed for long terms and maybe the remaining 1/3 might try responsible government for a change. That won't happen, so I will have to settle for oversight and prosecution.

I know nothing of your circle but it is a fact that the Junta and all it stands for is buttressed by a fearful and self centred urban middle class.I don't want to get hung up on ethnicity but the demographics are what they are.There is much of what you say on corruption with which I would agree.I am paying you the favour of accepting your sincerity on corruption.Nevertheless there are many in the Thai elite for which "corruption" is in effect code language, an acceptable way of excusing the repression of popular democracy.By all means let focus on eradicating or at least minimising corruption and not feel we have to denigrate democracy.Elected politicians are an integral part of democracy and realistically there will always be a corrupt element, a price to pay in a world that is never just black or white.Remember also recent elections in Thailand have been found to be free and fair by non partisan observers.Remember also corruption is not confined to politicians.Businessmen, bureaucrats, policemen and by no means least the military are just as culpable.In summary a war on corruption is justified not a war on the rights and liberties of the Thai people.

[jayboy]

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Give me a better link than altthainews. There not exactly a non partisan media. Surely you know that before linking. 

Probably that's why he linked it.Like the curate's egg, it's good in parts.To be fair the Economist's diagnosis of Thailand's middle income issues summarised in the article is very credible and I think most fair minded observers would show scepticism on the effectiveness of Thaksin government's attempt to improve educational standards.But the bias and bile of the article can be easily discerned, ruining what might have been an interesting discussion.

[halloween]

15 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Give me a better link than altthainews. There not exactly a non partisan media. Surely you know that before linking. 

There was another article giving 6 steps that need to be taken to make it work, none of which were taken. It is written by Suranand Vejjajiva (I suppose you will call him biased as well), but is a BP article so no link. However google "thailand computer tablet scheme failure" and it is first up.

Like most things PTP promised, another expensive failure.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.