Activist to petition NACC over ministers’ receipt of gifts from PM

By The Nation

 

File photo

 

Srisuwan Janya, secretary-general of the Association for the Protection of the Constitution, on Wednesday will petition the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to scrutinise Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, as well as two of his ministers, in connection with the alleged receipt of gifts worth more than Bt3,000 while in office.

 

During the mobile Cabinet meeting in Phitsanulok late last month, Prayut bought three of the province’s signature dog breed Bangkaew puppies for Bt6,000 each, and also paid Bt25,000 to the breeders as a reward for their help in preservation of the Thai breed.

 

Prayut then presented one the puppies to Interior Minister Gen Anupong Paochinda, and another to Deputy PM Gen Chatchai Sarikulya as gifts.

 

Srisuwan said on Tuesday that the NACC law stated that government officials could not receive gifts of more than Bt3,000 apiece.

 

The NACC should scrutinise the three generals and, if they were found guilty of wrongdoing, punish them in accordance with the law, he insisted.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30335219

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-1-2

Srisuwan is barking up the wrong tree.

 

Although I'll bet the NACC would be delighted to focus attention on ridiculing this for what it is (nothing) and avoid dealing with the real interesting  probe everyone is "watching"

The question is. .

Whose money did he spend to buy the dogs? 

He will keep hounding the government. That's what he does.

 

Reminds me of the time when the NACC lackeys found the then PM Samak Sundaravej guilty of receiving a few thousand baht for his cooking show and he had to quit. Let us see this time around how they spin this one.

Edited January 2, 20188 yr by saakura

15 minutes ago, saakura said:

Reminds me of the time when the NACC lackeys found the then PM Samak Sundaravej guilty of receiving a few thousand baht for his cooking show and he had to quit. Let us see this time around how they spin this one.

They will all say. 

That was different ??

 

30 minutes ago, ratcatcher said:

He will keep hounding the government. That's what he does.

 

 

 

That will be until he get an invitation for an attitude adjustment course

 

8 hours ago, saakura said:

Reminds me of the time when the NACC lackeys found the then PM Samak Sundaravej guilty of receiving a few thousand baht for his cooking show and he had to quit. Let us see this time around how they spin this one.

Perhaps you should refresh your memory with the facts of the case. He was being paid B80,000/m plus expenses, and then lied about the payments in a letter to the court, as well as falsely claiming he had ceased before becoming PM.

You might like to look at section 267 of the constitution of that time.

 

BTW he did not have to quit. He nominated for his own vacated position, and was rejected by his party in favour of a more compliant sycophant.

 

Edited January 2, 20188 yr by halloween

2 hours ago, halloween said:

He was being paid B80,000/m plus expenses

B80,000! One cannot buy a decent watch with this salary! 

Edited January 2, 20188 yr by candide

12 hours ago, coulson said:

Srisuwan is barking up the wrong tree.

 

Although I'll bet the NACC would be delighted to focus attention on ridiculing this for what it is (nothing) and avoid dealing with the real interesting  probe everyone is "watching"

Very punny.  Srisuwan is dogged in this case but risks a collar; time in the dog house for attitude adjustment; no more long walks as Prayuth takes the lead.

Srisuwan asks NACC to probe PM for giving two dogs to his ministers

By Thai PBS

 

 

Thai Constitution Protection Association secretary-general Srisuwan Janya wants the anti-graft commission to investigate Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha for giving two dogs worth more than 3,000 baht each to his two ministers.

 

Mr Srisuwan will submit a petition to the National Anti-Corruption Commission on Wednesday (Jan 3), asking them to investigate if the prime minister, Interior Minister Anupong Paojinda and Deputy Prime Minister Chatchai Sarikulya had violated the anti-corruption law and related regulations which prohibits cabinet ministers from accepting gifts worth more than 3,000 baht each from the other people.

 

The political activist claimed that, during the mobile cabinet meeting in Phitsanulok province on Dec 25-26, the prime minister paid 25,000 baht for three Bangkaeo dogs he bought from a dog breeder.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/srisuwan-asks-nacc-probe-pm-giving-two-dogs-ministers/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2018-01-03

6 hours ago, halloween said:

Perhaps you should refresh your memory with the facts of the case. He was being paid B80,000/m plus expenses, and then lied about the payments in a letter to the court, as well as falsely claiming he had ceased before becoming PM.

You might like to look at section 267 of the constitution of that time.

 

BTW he did not have to quit. He nominated for his own vacated position, and was rejected by his party in favour of a more compliant sycophant.

 

I don't think that case is as simple as you try to make out . I will not derail the topic by arguing about the details. However, the person that referred to the case used it to show a comparison of how strictly past politicians have been forced to follow every minut detail of the law and the present government ability to bypass a few here and there. Nowadays if it is considered a small transgression the public are told never mind. It's just a small thing. 

34 minutes ago, greenchair said:

I don't think that case is as simple as you try to make out . I will not derail the topic by arguing about the details. However, the person that referred to the case used it to show a comparison of how strictly past politicians have been forced to follow every minut detail of the law and the present government ability to bypass a few here and there. Nowadays if it is considered a small transgression the public are told never mind. It's just a small thing. 

".. how strictly past politicians have been forced to follow every minut detail of the law"

 

you are not serious, are you?

3 hours ago, greenchair said:

I don't think that case is as simple as you try to make out . I will not derail the topic by arguing about the details. However, the person that referred to the case used it to show a comparison of how strictly past politicians have been forced to follow every minut detail of the law and the present government ability to bypass a few here and there. Nowadays if it is considered a small transgression the public are told never mind. It's just a small thing. 

Actually, he managed to find one politician called to account for a major flagrant breach. Can you come up with any others of the trivial nature of these gifts, because I can nominate many breaches of the law that were ignored, starting with DPM Chalerm's untaxed car.

Prayuth Willing To Resell Controversial Puppies

By Pravit Rojanaphruk, Senior Staff Writer

  

Interior Minister Gen. Anupong Paochinda speaks to the press Wednesday in Bangkok. Photo: Matichon

 

BANGKOK — Junta leader Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha said Wednesday morning that he had yet to receive three controversial puppies for which he allegedly overpaid, leading an activist to accuse him of breaching anti-corruption laws.

 

Activist Srisuwan Janya on Tuesday accused Prayuth of breaching Article 103 of the Anti-Corruption Act – a law prohibiting government officials from giving or receiving gifts in excess of 3,000 baht – when he allegedly paid 7,000 baht above market price for three Bang Kaew puppies last December during a trip to Sukhothai.

 

Full story:  http://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2018/01/03/prayuth-willing-resell-controversial-puppies/

 

-- © Copyright Khaosod English 2018-01-03

31 minutes ago, halloween said:

Actually, he managed to find one politician called to account for a major flagrant breach. Can you come up with any others of the trivial nature of these gifts, because I can nominate many breaches of the law that were ignored, starting with DPM Chalerm's untaxed car.

I could come with dozens of breaches of the law over the last four years, unfortunately you are in the enviable position of being able to discuss your argument freely and I am in the uncomfortable position of having to disguise anything that I want to say. 

So since you have a substantial advantage it is a pointless exercise to banter with you. 

I do have to be careful of people like you that sneakily try to draw unwitting people into saying things that could well have them end up in prison or deported. Luckily I am well on to your tactic. 

As Suthep and Prayuth and apihisit have said over the years. 

The law is the law.

If they don't follow it the public will complain. 

Prayut offers to sell Bangkaew puppies after anti-graft row

By The Nation

 

 

Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha has offered to sell pricey pedigree puppies that he bought from local breeders during his Cabinet’s recent retreat in Phitsanulok.

The move came after Srisuwan Janya, secretary-general of the Association for the Protection of the Thai Constitution, petitioned the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), seeking an investigation to determine whether the prime minister had condoned a violation of the anti-graft law that prohibits public officials from accepting any gifts valued at more than Bt3,000.

 

 

Prayut reportedly had said he would give a puppy to both Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda and Deputy Prime Minister Chatchai Sarikalya.

 

The prime minister bought three young dogs belonging to the famous Bangkaew breed for Bt25,000, although the market price was Bt6,000 for each puppy. He said the extra money was meant to encourage the local breeders.

 

 

Purebred Thai Bangkaew dogs are known for their loyalty and fierceness as watchdogs.

 

Prayut on Wednesday was asked to comment on the possibility that his gifts to fellow Cabinet members could constitute a violation of the anti-corruption law. He responded: “I do not have any of the puppies I paid for. Anyone interested may buy them from me.”

 

Meanwhile, Anupong said he was aware that it was against the law for public office holders to accept gifts worth more than Bt3,000 and he would not accept a Bangkaew puppy from the prime minister because he knew that its price exceeded Bt3,000.

 

“Also, I do not want more dogs. I have some already at home,” the minister said.

 

When asked to comment on Srisuwan’s petition with the NACC, the interior minister said the whistle-blower had the right file it.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30335286

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-01-03

11 hours ago, halloween said:

Perhaps you should refresh your memory with the facts of the case. He was being paid B80,000/m plus expenses, and then lied about the payments in a letter to the court, as well as falsely claiming he had ceased before becoming PM.

You might like to look at section 267 of the constitution of that time.

 

BTW he did not have to quit. He nominated for his own vacated position, and was rejected by his party in favour of a more compliant sycophant.

 

Geez, there's not much you get right is there?

 

There was no monthly payment - ever, the full quote:

-and then Sakchai Khaewwaneesakul, the managing director of the company that produced the cooking show, testified in support of Samak, saying it paid him 80,000 baht (US$2,300) for the four shows.
“The presenters of our shows are not our employees, but we pay them honorariums,” he told the court.

 

Section 267 - hardly applicable here

Section 267. The provisions of section 265 shall apply to the Prime Minister and Ministers, except for the holding of position or an act to be done under the provisions of law. The Prime Minister and Ministers shall neither hold any position in a partnership, a company or an organisation carrying out business with a view to sharing profits or incomes nor being an employee of any person.

 

As for not having to resign:

Thailand’s Constitutional Court ruled Tuesday that the country’s prime minister, Samak Sundaravej, should resign from his post for violating the constitution by hosting a TV cooking show while in office.

 

Must be getting awfully lonesome on that near empty junta bandwagon huh?

 

22 minutes ago, pornprong said:

Geez, there's not much you get right is there?

 

There was no monthly payment - ever, the full quote:

-and then Sakchai Khaewwaneesakul, the managing director of the company that produced the cooking show, testified in support of Samak, saying it paid him 80,000 baht (US$2,300) for the four shows.
“The presenters of our shows are not our employees, but we pay them honorariums,” he told the court.

 

Section 267 - hardly applicable here

Section 267. The provisions of section 265 shall apply to the Prime Minister and Ministers, except for the holding of position or an act to be done under the provisions of law. The Prime Minister and Ministers shall neither hold any position in a partnership, a company or an organisation carrying out business with a view to sharing profits or incomes nor being an employee of any person.

 

As for not having to resign:

Thailand’s Constitutional Court ruled Tuesday that the country’s prime minister, Samak Sundaravej, should resign from his post for violating the constitution by hosting a TV cooking show while in office.

 

Must be getting awfully lonesome on that near empty junta bandwagon huh?

 

I suppose it depends on whose BS you are prepared to believe - yours is obvious. Try reading his wiki page instead of red rubbish, you will see the facts of his self-confessed employment, his lies to the court, and the fact that his resignation could have been rescinded by his party by re-electing him as leader.

 

 

33 minutes ago, halloween said:

I suppose it depends on whose BS you are prepared to believe - yours is obvious. Try reading his wiki page instead of red rubbish, you will see the facts of his self-confessed employment, his lies to the court, and the fact that his resignation could have been rescinded by his party by re-electing him as leader.

 

 

Do you even read the links you cite?

 

1. On 9 September of the year, the Constitutional Court of Thailand delivered a decision disqualifying Sundaravej from the premiership in accordance with the complaints lodged by the Senators and the Election Commission of Thailand. However, Samak's People's Power Party vowed to vote him back to the premiership,

 

2. Embattled Samak abandoned his bid to regain his Thailand Prime Minister post, and Teerapon Noprampa said Samak would also give up the ruling People's Power Party (PPP) leadership.

 

3. Samak, after having received a quo warranto, represented to the accusation through submitting the letters dated 30 June 14 and 25 August 2008 to the ConCourt, stated that:

 

• 3.1) he received no remuneration for being the emcee of both cookery TV programmes, but only 5,000 Baht as travelling costs.
• 3.2) he held no interests, shares or positions in the Face Media Co., Ltd. as well as received no salaries or other benefits from the said company.
• 3.3) as being the emcee of both programmes, he has been invited, not employed. This meant he was not an employee under the definition prescribed in the Labour Protection Act, BE 2541 (1998) and the Announcement of the Ministry of Interior Re: Labour Protection (No. 111).
• 3.4) as he has been seen on the said programmes after having assumed the premiership, those shows were pre-recorded for months and he has already ceased from being the emcee prior to having been in office.

 

You are wrong on Samak, wrong on the Junta and wrong on Thailand's future......

6000 Baht for a puppy when untold thousands of underfed and wretched dogs languish in temples? It's a sick world...