Yingluck may seek asylum

[rooster59]

Yingluck may seek asylum

By THE NATION

 

 

PRAWIT CANNOT CONFIRM REPORTS THAT EX-PM IS IN LONDON; POLICE SEEK REVOCATION OF PASSPORTS

 

POLICE HAVE begun the process of revoking convicted former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s passport as confusion continues to surround her whereabouts.

 

Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan said: “I don’t know [if Yingluck is in London].”

 

He added that the Foreign Ministry had not given him any updated reports of Yingluck’s whereabouts, although it has been reported in foreign media that she has left Dubai and is now in London. 

 

On Thursday, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha said that she was in Dubai.

 

Dubai is a convenient place for her since her brother, former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, is living there in self-exile. 

 

Junta leaders also said the United Arab Emirates had promised to prevent her from taking part in any political activities against the military government. 

 

However, while authorities acknowledged Yingluck’s location as Dubai, anonymous sources have consistently suggested that the former premier had left Dubai for London in early September. 

 

Yingluck was sentenced in absentia on Wednesday to five years’ imprisonment for her negligence in the government-to-government rice deal. She disappeared from public view in the days before August 25, when the verdict in her case was due to be read. 

 

Three police officers have been transferred to inactive posts for their involvement in transporting Yingluck to the Cambodia border. 

 

Police have also charged two Nakhon Pathom police officers who were found to have aided Yingluck’s flight on August 23. 

 

None of the police officers have been charged with malfeasance of duty. They are accused of importing a car without Customs approval, as an engine number of a Toyota Camry believed to have been used in transporting Yingluck, did not show in the Customs Department’s records.

 

One of the officers, Pol Colonel Chairit Anurit, has been charged with faking vehicle documents, as four false licence plates were found in the sedan. 

 

On Thursday, police searched Yingluck’s house in Soi Yothinpatthana 3 in Bangkok, and seized 17 of her personal belongings as evidence.

 

The evidence should help verify Yingluck’s escape if traces of her DNA found on the articles match those found in the sedan allegedly used for the escape. 

 

In order to prevent Yingluck from further travel, deputy police chief Pol General Srivara Ransibrahmanakul said yesterday that police have contacted the Foreign Ministry and asked it to revoke her passport and to confirm to them her whereabouts. Police have also contacted Interpol to locate her, Srivara said.

 

The Foreign Ministry yesterday declined to confirm Yingluck’s location or whether she had sought political asylum. 

 

The British Embassy in Thailand said “the [UK] Home Office does not comment on whether an individual is in the UK or not”.

 

Thaksin and his family are now in London where he has a Bt260-million house, but none of them indicated whether Yingluck is also in the UK capital. 

 

A legal source said that an individual has full rights to seek political asylum in a destination country that he or she has some connections with. 

 

The host country might take diplomatic relations into consideration, he said, noting that the country has the full authority to grant or reject an application. 

 

Yingluck’s case is not unique, the source said. “Like others, she may apply for asylum at any time and the destination country will have full authority to directly consider her request,” he said.

 

As asylum seeking is regarded as a personal matter, authorities of seekers’ home countries usually do not involve or oppose the procedure as it could risks diplomatic ties, he said.

 

The Office of the Attorney-General has no authority to get involved if Yingluck seeks asylum, but will focus on extradition. The extradition request would proceed once Yingluck’s exact whereabouts is known, he added.

 

The British Embassy says asylum seekers to the UK must have left their countries and be unable to go back because they fear persecution.

 

They should apply when they arrive in the UK as soon as they think it will be unsafe for them to return to their own countries. After applying, they will have meetings with immigration officers and have interviews with caseworkers. They should usually get a decision on their applications within six months. They will not usually be allowed to work while their asylum applications are under consideration.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30328060

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-09-30

[boomerangutang]

                     She is seeking asylum in UK and will likely get it.  She and her team are 10 steps ahead of the bumbling self-appointed gov't in Bkk.  

 

                 Thai diplomats are similar to US diplomats:  neither are good at their jobs.  Thais, because their self-appointed leaders are former top brass (1/4 of the Thai army is top brass), and know next to nothing about int'l affairs.  Americans, because their top boss is doing all he can to dismantle the US State Dept, and he himself is like a babe alone in the forest when it comes to int'l affairs.  

[Jeremy50]

Running away to England. Tells us so much about her worth, couldn't even do a year or so in jail, and stand up defiantly and  proudly to the military junta. Pathetic woman.

[YetAnother]

39 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan said: “I don’t know [if Yingluck is in London].”

legal concept: 'should have known'

[Samui Bodoh]

 

I hope Yingluck will apply for political asylum in the UK, and I hope the UK will grant it; I believe that her case meets the threshold for protection.

 

There are enough questions regarding her trial, including whether it should have ever taken place and whether it met the standard of fairness, to justify granting her protection.

 

Good luck and enjoy the rain!

 

[YetAnother]

50 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

Dubai is a convenient place for her since her brother, former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, is living there in self-exile. 

dont see what all the hubbub is about asylum; she can just live like her brother does; likely better in those places than here;

extradition is an idle threat; junta doesnt want her back here

[mercman24]

yes it that were the case in the UK the LABOUR  chancellor of the exchequer would have been in jail, remember the memo he left, basically saying he had spent all the money there is non left, on his own admittance. 

[mikebell]

She could buy Manchester City to keep it in the family.

[wgdanson]

3 minutes ago, mikebell said:

She could buy Manchester City to keep it in the family.

She's better looking than the Abu Dhabi owner !

[LannaGuy]

29 minutes ago, Jeremy50 said:

Running away to England. Tells us so much about her worth, couldn't even do a year or so in jail, and stand up defiantly and  proudly to the military junta. Pathetic woman.

 

Thais I know believe if she had 'stood up' as you bravely suggest the CCTV would have been under 'maintenance' after a period of quiet and an accident would have followed or some unknown illness would have been discovered.  I heard from another Thai friend that there is a 'special' deep  state jail she would have been sent to, not your 'normal' place. I think she was very brave and courageous to fight as long as she did, as long as she could have. Fleeing to avoid the Junta Jail brings her no disgrace and history will treat her well but not those who head the Junta.

[ezzra]

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

The British Embassy says asylum seekers to the UK must have left their countries and be unable to go back because they fear persecution.

The operative word here is Persecution and prosecution that she's

facing, what is going to say in her defense? i screwd up by neglegence

and derelict of duty causing many bilions in damage to the country

and did a runner so i not to be held accountable according to the laws

of the land?....

[LannaGuy]

Just now, ezzra said:

The operative word here is Persecution and prosecution that she's

facing, what is going to say in her defense? i screwd up by neglegence

and derelict of duty causing many bilions in damage to the country

and did a runner so i not to be held accountable according to the laws

of the land?....

 

No at all... "I was the last elected PM of Thailand, which is now ruled by an unelected Army, and do you consider any conviction arising there from SAFE"?

[JamJar]

58 minutes ago, mercman24 said:

yes it that were the case in the UK the LABOUR  chancellor of the exchequer would have been in jail, remember the memo he left, basically saying he had spent all the money there is non left, on his own admittance. 

 

Only it wasn't the Chancellor, but Liam Byrne, chief secretary to the Treasury . 

But why let the truth get in the way of a good story?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/liam-byrne-apology-letter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election

 

 

[tracker1]

Yingluck’s case is not unique, Not wrong there ! anyone with money or influence or both seem to depart Thailand first class ! To destinations unknown now was it Dubai or was it UK Hmmm depends who you ask !

[Orton Rd]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

I hope Yingluck will apply for political asylum in the UK, and I hope the UK will grant it; I believe that her case meets the threshold for protection.

 

There are enough questions regarding her trial, including whether it should have ever taken place and whether it met the standard of fairness, to justify granting her protection.

 

Good luck and enjoy the rain!

 

Victim of a political witch hunt. The great leader is paying for rice not much less per tonne than her government did, but he will not be getting jail time will he, and none of his ministers will get 42 years for doing pretty much the same as the previous legitimate government. Hope she gets asylum in the UK,

[robblok]

29 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Victim of a political witch hunt. The great leader is paying for rice not much less per tonne than her government did, but he will not be getting jail time will he, and none of his ministers will get 42 years for doing pretty much the same as the previous legitimate government. Hope she gets asylum in the UK,

Guess your one of those people who could not bother to read the verdict.. she is not convicted for the rice program. She is convicted because her top minister Boonsong did fake G2G deals (costing 30 billion).. She replaced the minister in 2013 when those allegations came out but did not stop the fake trades. That is negligence in stopping corruption you know about. 

So please don't confuse things. 

[JAG]

57 minutes ago, JamJar said:

 

Only it wasn't the Chancellor, but Liam Byrne, chief secretary to the Treasury . 

But why let the truth get in the way of a good story?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/09/liam-byrne-apology-letter-there-is-no-money-labour-general-election

 

 

You are right of course - but he did leave the letter - and there was no money.....

[JAG]

2 hours ago, YetAnother said:

dont see what all the hubbub is about asylum; she can just live like her brother does; likely better in those places than here;

extradition is an idle threat; junta doesnt want her back here

Speculation I know, but if she is granted asylum it will give her son rather more stability. 

If she has asylum in the UK it would not look good if the junta refuses to let him leave and join her in the UK. A sort of positioning move?

 

There is a flaw in this train of thought - since when have the junta been remotely sensitive about what the international community think about them?

[boomerangutang]

She will likely gain asylum.  The self-appointed Thai gov't will say "blah blah blah", but the Brit jurists will respond with something like;  "you don't represent an elected government, so your bleatings carry no credence."

[LannaGuy]

30 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

She will likely gain asylum.  The self-appointed Thai gov't will say "blah blah blah", but the Brit jurists will respond with something like;  "you don't represent an elected government, so your bleatings carry no credence."

 

Exactly. It's not about this or that it's about does a Military Junta (any Military Junta) have credibility to convict a former democratically elected PM for undertaking a policy in Parliament?   NO

[Mango Bob]

Is the police looking for DNA or sperm in her underwear?

[anon789561]

not sure where the whole asylum thing came from. I am pretty sure she will end up in the UK long term and have thought she was there since she left here to be honest. why would she need to claim asylum? she's absolutely minted. she can  just live where she likes. she doesn't need asylum in the UK. she can prove she has the money to live there paying her own way. buy houses, probably already has some. she can join the hoards of other expat rich thai communities already living between here and there whilst their kids go to private schools or uni there, many of which are probably already close friends. she's set there, if that's where she chooses to settle down

[smutcakes]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

Guess your one of those people who could not bother to read the verdict.. she is not convicted for the rice program. She is convicted because her top minister Boonsong did fake G2G deals (costing 30 billion).. She replaced the minister in 2013 when those allegations came out but did not stop the fake trades. That is negligence in stopping corruption you know about. 

So please don't confuse things. 

Rob if not stopping corruption was negligence and resulted in 5 year terms in jail and was legitimate then nearly every head of every Government agency including the current PM would be banged up or being investigated.

 

The fact they are not, and there will never be any attempt to repeat these charges shows that while yes she was negligent in not stopping things, the fact that she is the only one its happening to shows without doubt that whilst the negligence may be genuine the fact they are there at all shows the charges are political.

 

No doubt far more knowledgeable people than us on the inner workings of Governments will be assessing these issues when deciding whether to give her political asylum.

[robblok]

1 minute ago, smutcakes said:

Rob if not stopping corruption was negligence and resulted in 5 year terms in jail and was legitimate then nearly every head of every Government agency including the current PM would be banged up or being investigated.

 

The fact they are not, and there will never be any attempt to repeat these charges shows that while yes she was negligent in not stopping things, the fact that she is the only one its happening to shows without doubt that whilst the negligence may be genuine the fact they are there at all shows the charges are political.

 

No doubt far more knowledgeable people than us on the inner workings of Governments will be assessing these issues when deciding whether to give her political asylum.

Oh dear an other deflection... 

 

Yes she did it but its unfair that she gets prosecuted for it. When you can't deny the charges .. go for the political angle..  well done. I mean 30 billion is nothing and she should have been let go with a slap on the fingers.

 

I am so bored with people like you always acting like its political when one on your side gets caught. 

 

If you and I drive the same road and I get stopped for speeding and you are not (assuming we both speed) is it then political too. and should it mean that I should not have gotten that ticket because you got away with it.

 

Or if we both murder someone and you get away with it and I don't should that mean i should go free too.

Because that is what your saying. 

[smutcakes]

Just now, robblok said:

Oh dear an other deflection... 

 

Yes she did it but its unfair that she gets prosecuted for it. When you can't deny the charges .. go for the political angle..  well done. I mean 30 billion is nothing and she should have been let go with a slap on the fingers.

 

I am so bored with people like you always acting like its political when one on your side gets caught. 

 

If you and I drive the same road and I get stopped for speeding and you are not (assuming we both speed) is it then political too. and should it mean that I should not have gotten that ticket because you got away with it.

 

Or if we both murder someone and you get away with it and I don't should that mean i should go free too.

Because that is what your saying. 

Umm Rob, the thread title is 'Yingluck may seek asylum'. I presume on political grounds. You examples are ridiculous and quite desperate in the context of this situation, which you are well aware of.

[robblok]

6 minutes ago, smutcakes said:

Umm Rob, the thread title is 'Yingluck may seek asylum'. I presume on political grounds. You examples are ridiculous and quite desperate in the context of this situation, which you are well aware of.

No they are not desperate.. you and your political angle is desperate. You just can't accept that she is guilty and allowed the 30 billion baht corruption go on willingly. Its the same tune you and others are always singing.. once you can't deny guilt you go for political. 

[smutcakes]

Just now, robblok said:

No they are not desperate.. you and your political angle is desperate. You just can't accept that she is guilty and allowed the 30 billion baht corruption go on willingly. Its the same tune you and others are always singing.. once you can't deny guilt you go for political. 

 

You can go back 15 years to when this whole stuff started, see things like leaked cable documents from US Ambassadors meeting the great and good in the political, military and higher spheres. Not even they deny that trying to get rid of Thaksin and his parties is anything other than political. (but i am sure Rob knows better)

 

I know you support law breaking if it works to your favour, but most people recognise the punishment of only one political side, and selective application/maniuplation of laws makes it very clear that there are political elements in play with her case.

 

[robblok]

1 hour ago, smutcakes said:

 

You can go back 15 years to when this whole stuff started, see things like leaked cable documents from US Ambassadors meeting the great and good in the political, military and higher spheres. Not even they deny that trying to get rid of Thaksin and his parties is anything other than political. (but i am sure Rob knows better)

 

I know you support law breaking if it works to your favour, but most people recognise the punishment of only one political side, and selective application/maniuplation of laws makes it very clear that there are political elements in play with her case.

 

You just feel like she should get a free pas even though she knowingly let 30billion of corruption go on. Your only reason for this is because you like her. Face it she is a criminal, she just had to cancel those trades (but big brother would not be happy then) and then they had nothing on her. 

 

Your like.. she should get a free pass because others are not always convicted ... lets never ever convict anybody of crimes and watch how it turns out... She made her choices to not stop the trades as friends of her brother benefitted  and now she pays the price. Its pathetic to try to clear her. I had not expected any different from your side its always like this clear evidence... cant refute the charges.. oh lets go for the political angle. While the whole case would not be there if she had followed the law. 

 

That others get away with some crimes is a bad thing.. but that does not make her any less guilty. 

 

I am not denying that they are trying to get rid of her.. but its political when you make up evidence.. when you fabricate things. This is not the case her this is by her own (or her brothers) doing. 

 

When you know they want to get rid of you.. do you load a gun for them and hand it over to those that want to get rid of you or do you make sure they have nothing to to go after you for ?

[sjaak327]

6 hours ago, ezzra said:

The operative word here is Persecution and prosecution that she's

facing, what is going to say in her defense? i screwd up by neglegence

and derelict of duty causing many bilions in damage to the country

and did a runner so i not to be held accountable according to the laws

of the land?....

Considering the lack of accountability and amnesty of the current rulers, yep, grandslam.

[sjaak327]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

Oh dear an other deflection... 

 

Yes she did it but its unfair that she gets prosecuted for it. When you can't deny the charges .. go for the political angle..  well done. I mean 30 billion is nothing and she should have been let go with a slap on the fingers.

 

I am so bored with people like you always acting like its political when one on your side gets caught. 

 

If you and I drive the same road and I get stopped for speeding and you are not (assuming we both speed) is it then political too. and should it mean that I should not have gotten that ticket because you got away with it.

 

Or if we both murder someone and you get away with it and I don't should that mean i should go free too.

Because that is what your saying. 

Hmm interesting analogy. The current reality in Thailand is such that if Prayuth and Yingluck both murder someone, Yingluck will be prosecuted and Prayuth will not. Now that little fact indeed means both should go free. Justice can only work if all people are subjected to it.