NACC passes on ministers’ alleged share violations to PM

By The Nation

 

File photo

 

The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) will refrain from scrutinising two government ministers over claims about their shares due its stated lack of authority in the matter.

 

Instead, the agency has the matter on to Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha.

 

Industry Minister Uttama Sawanayon and Deputy Commerce Minister Sonthirat Sonthijirawong have been accused by the head of the Pheu Thai Party legal team, Ruangkrai Leekitwatana, of having more shares in private companies than the law allows.

 

By law, ministers are not allowed to hold more than 5 per cent of shares in a private firm. If anybody wishes to hold a larger stake, their shareholding must be transferred to a legal body that manages personal funds.

 

Worawit Sukboon, acting secretary-general of the NACC, said yesterday after receiving the complaint that the agency had looked into it and found that it was not within its jurisdiction.

 

The NACC had transferred the case to Prayut and his secretary-general Vilas Aroonsri for further consideration, he said, adding that all ministers were under the prime minister’s supervision.

 

The matter had also been sent to the Election Commission, Worawit said.

 

A source close to the NACC said that although the NACC could not review the case and had to pass it on, the matter could affect the Cabinet reshuffle expected to take place soon.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30331802

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-11-16

7 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

The NACC had transferred the case to Prayut and his secretary-general Vilas Aroonsri for further consideration, he said, adding that all ministers were under the prime minister’s supervision.

Ah, it's absolutely flawless. No need for an independent body to look at it. Let's just hope these minsters aren't owed any favours from the PM or have any dirt on him. Apart from those minor details - it's flawless. 

1 hour ago, snoop1130 said:

The NACC had transferred the case to Prayut and his secretary-general Vilas Aroonsri for further consideration, he said, adding that all ministers were under the prime minister’s supervision.

If the 'Reds' were in power, would it have been passed to Thaksin? To Yingluck?

 

No, it would not have.

 

They are not even pretending that the laws apply to them. The sooner that they leave and Thailand returns to the rule of law, the better. We simply have to hope that the damage isn't already irreversible.

 

Additionally, it would be interesting to know from which company they have shares! 

No balls then, have to pass on this as the man at the top might get upset

There will be a full NCPO investigation. Can anyone guess the result?

7 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

If the 'Reds' were in power, would it have been passed to Thaksin? To Yingluck?

 

No, it would not have.

 

They are not even pretending that the laws apply to them. The sooner that they leave and Thailand returns to the rule of law, the better. We simply have to hope that the damage isn't already irreversible.

 

Why would the NACC pass it to fugitive criminals?

28 minutes ago, halloween said:

7 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

If the 'Reds' were in power, would it have been passed to Thaksin? To Yingluck?

 

No, it would not have.

 

They are not even pretending that the laws apply to them. The sooner that they leave and Thailand returns to the rule of law, the better. We simply have to hope that the damage isn't already irreversible.

 

Why would the NACC pass it to fugitive criminals?

 

Fair play to you. You don't even pretend to have any semblance of balance, do you?

8 hours ago, rkidlad said:

9 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

The NACC had transferred the case to Prayut and his secretary-general Vilas Aroonsri for further consideration, he said, adding that all ministers were under the prime minister’s supervision.

Ah, it's absolutely flawless. No need for an independent body to look at it. Let's just hope these minsters aren't owed any favours from the PM or have any dirt on him. Apart from those minor details - it's flawless. 

 

So now we have it officially confirmed that the NACC isn't an independent body: it has to run complaints past other people .

Edited November 16, 20178 yr by Khun Han

1 hour ago, halloween said:

Why would the NACC pass it to fugitive criminals?

Both Yingluck and Thaksin are former Prime Ministers so, to the non Junta hugging anti-Shinawatra obsessives, it's quite clear that Samui Bodo is referring to the actions of the NACC whilst each of the above were Prime Minister i.e. before they were each hauled before the corrupted courts and slapped with trumped up charges to derail democracy.

 

Have you anything to say about the situation with Prayuth and the NACC or are you content to just chime in with a dig at Thaksin and Yingluck and leave the misdeeds of the current "government" unmentioned.

18 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

If the 'Reds' were in power, would it have been passed to Thaksin? To Yingluck?

 

No, it would not have.

 

They are not even pretending that the laws apply to them. The sooner that they leave and Thailand returns to the rule of law, the better. We simply have to hope that the damage isn't already irreversible.

 

 

You seriously think that under PTP Thailand was under the rule of law  - Pull the other one!

 

It's PTP who have complained btw. Such bastions of law and order.

10 hours ago, pornprong said:

Both Yingluck and Thaksin are former Prime Ministers so, to the non Junta hugging anti-Shinawatra obsessives, it's quite clear that Samui Bodo is referring to the actions of the NACC whilst each of the above were Prime Minister i.e. before they were each hauled before the corrupted courts and slapped with trumped up charges to derail democracy.

 

Have you anything to say about the situation with Prayuth and the NACC or are you content to just chime in with a dig at Thaksin and Yingluck and leave the misdeeds of the current "government" unmentioned.

 

Shall we see what the current PM does with the information and case first? Then we can comment appropriately.

 

It seems though that neither of the two in this case, put shares into the names of children, gardeners, maids, drivers, as seemed to happen before.

11 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

So now we have it officially confirmed that the NACC isn't an independent body: it has to run complaints past other people .

 

Yep, just like the DSI under Tarit used to with Thaksin. Seems they all have masters. So much for checks and balances.

11 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Shall we see what the current PM does with the information and case first? Then we can comment appropriately.

 

It seems though that neither of the two in this case, put shares into the names of children, gardeners, maids, drivers, as seemed to happen before.

The problem is the way that the NACC is behaving differently when it is an unelected Junta member under scrutiny as opposed to an elected government member.

 

Where exactly has Prayuth parked is 600 million???

1 hour ago, pornprong said:

The problem is the way that the NACC is behaving differently when it is an unelected Junta member under scrutiny as opposed to an elected government member.

 

Where exactly has Prayuth parked is 600 million???

 

Unfortunately selectivity in behavior is the norm here. As is the application of the law. 

 

Always has been and doesn't look like changing anytime soon.

17 hours ago, candide said:

Additionally, it would be interesting to know from which company they have shares! 

Yes and see if there is a conflict of interest. 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

You seriously think that under PTP Thailand was under the rule of law  - Pull the other one!

 

It's PTP who have complained btw. Such bastions of law and order.

PTP did the same and worse.. but its bad no matter who did it. Now this could be bad or not.. depends on what companies and if there is a conflict of interest.. if so... hang them high. Will it happen.. not so sure. 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Unfortunately selectivity in behavior is the norm here. As is the application of the law. 

 

Always has been and doesn't look like changing anytime soon.

There will be change and it will be relatively soon.....your Junta mates are in for the mother of all ass kickings.

Thailand's future is democratic.....you'd best pack your bags and head for North Korea, military rule is over here.

On 16/11/2017 at 12:33 PM, snoop1130 said:

By law, ministers are not allowed to hold more than 5 per cent of shares in a private firm. If anybody wishes to hold a larger stake, their shareholding must be transferred to a legal body that manages personal funds.

Why bother with the "legal body" did not Thaksin put them in the name of the gardener and maid?

23 hours ago, pornprong said:

Both Yingluck and Thaksin are former Prime Ministers so, to the non Junta hugging anti-Shinawatra obsessives, it's quite clear that Samui Bodo is referring to the actions of the NACC whilst each of the above were Prime Minister i.e. before they were each hauled before the corrupted courts and slapped with trumped up charges to derail democracy.

 

Have you anything to say about the situation with Prayuth and the NACC or are you content to just chime in with a dig at Thaksin and Yingluck and leave the misdeeds of the current "government" unmentioned.

Being busy at the time, that was the short version. Just for you, what do you think either Shinawatra would have done? Looking at the ekder's criminal activity and asset duplicity, and the other's total negligence of even heinous crimes, the answer is prett clear, isn't it.

On 11/17/2017 at 8:33 AM, Khun Han said:

 

Fair play to you. You don't even pretend to have any semblance of balance, do you?

What sort of "semblance of balance" is required to recognise the Shinawatras as parasitic scum and name them as such? What sort of moral flexibility is required to ignore their crimes because they have manipulated the poor excuse for democracy to get themselves elected?

4 hours ago, halloween said:

What sort of "semblance of balance" is required to recognise the Shinawatras as parasitic scum and name them as such? What sort of moral flexibility is required to ignore their crimes because they have manipulated the poor excuse for democracy to get themselves elected?

 

The semblance of balance that acknowledges the nature of this thread topic .