BBC says Thailand asks UK to extradite Yingluck

By Thai PBS

 

 

The Thai Embassy in London has submitted a request to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the British government for the extradition of fugitive former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra to serve her five-year jail term handed down by the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political Positions in connection with her government’s rice-pledging scheme, BBC Thai-language website reported today.

 

The letter of request, dated July 5, 2018, cited the treaty between the United Kingdom and Siam on the extradition of fugitive criminals, signed in Bangkok on March 4, 1911.

 

The letter said Ms Yingluck is a person wanted by Thai authorities to serve a five-year jail term handed down on her by the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political Positions which found her guilty of violating Section 157 of the Criminal Code and Section 123/1 of the Corruption Prevention and Suppression Act of B.E. 2442 (1999).

 

 

The letter said Ms Yingluck is a person wanted by Thai authorities to serve a five-year jail term handed down on her by the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political Positions which found her guilty of violating Section 157 of the Criminal Code and Section 123/1 of the Corruption Prevention and Suppression Act of B.E. 2442 (1999).

 

A warrant has been issued for her arrest since Sept 27, 2017, when the court issued its ruling, the letter said.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/bbc-says-thailand-asks-uk-to-extradite-yingluck/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2018-07-31

 

----------------------------------------------------------

 

Thailand urges UK to return Yingluck to face prosecution

By THE NATION

 

File photo

 

GOVERNMENT SAYS CASE AGAINST FORMER PM INVOLVES CORRUPTION AND IS NOT POLITICAL
 

THE GOVERNMENT has asked the United Kingdom to extradite fugitive former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra for prosecution in Thailand.

 

The Thai Embassy in London sent a letter dated July 5 to the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, with attached copies of the Supreme Court verdict in the case against Yingluck, along with her arrest warrant.

 

The letter cited a 1911 treaty between the United Kingdom and Siam – as Thailand was formerly known – on the extradition of fugitive criminals.

 

A copy of the Thai Embassy’s letter was published on the BBC Thai news website yesterday.

 

The Thai mission said it acted on instructions from the Thai government.

 

However, Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai said yesterday the embassy’s action was part of “normal procedures, and not a policy matter, so they didn’t need to inform me”. The process had started with requests from police and public prosecutors, he said.

 

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha said yesterday that the decision on whether Yingluck will be extradited lies with the British government.

 

Thai law enforcers have no authority to make any arrest in a foreign country, he said.

 

“The government has done everything we can under the legal framework. The foreign country involved will decide whether to send back [Yingluck] as requested,” Prayut said at Government House.

 

Don said yesterday he did not recall seeing any document seeking his approval on the matter. He also dismissed suggestions that the action stemmed from Prayut’s meeting with UK Prime Minister Theresa May during his recent visit.

 

When asked if he was confident the UK authorities would extradite Yingluck, Don just smiled and walked away.

 

When approached by The Nation yesterday, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Busadee Santipitaks |said she had no comment on the matter.

 

Amnart Chotchai, director of the Office of the Attorney-General's International Affairs Department, said his office coordinated with the Foreign Ministry for the extradition of Yingluck in accordance with the protocol.

 

“We made it clear that this is a corruption case, not a political case, and hope the British authorities consider the request,” he said.

The current treaty prohibits extradition for political offences.

 

Amnart said his office made similar requests for the extradition of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, Yingluck’s brother, but failed to receive a response.

 

In its letter to the UK foreign ministry, the Thai Embassy gave assurances that the case against Yingluck was not of a political or a military nature. “She has not been given a pardon or amnesty. And the arrest warrant for the defendant to serve her sentence is not affected by a statute of limitations,” the letter said.

 

The embassy also asked that its request be “kept strictly confidential and executed as a matter of urgency”.

 

The Thai mission also maintained that Yingluck’s extradition could be granted under the treaty even if the British government considered that her offence was not included in the list of extraditable offences.

 

The embassy cited a clause in the treaty stating: “Extradition may also be granted at the discretion of the State applied to in respect of any other crime for which, according to the law of both the Contracting Parties for the time being in force, the grant can be made.”

 

Yingluck is believed to be residing in the UK. Photos and video clips of her in different locations around London have been distributed on social media. One video clip shows Yingluck with her older brother ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra celebrating his birthday last week.

 

Thaksin also has been living in self-exile overseas, escaping imprisonment after also having been convicted at home.

 

Yingluck fled the country in August last year, a few days before the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division on Political Office Holders was scheduled to deliver a verdict in the case against her.

 

In September, the court sentenced Yingluck to five years in jail for malfeasance in connection with her government’s corruption-plagued rice-pledging scheme.

 

During his visit to the UK in June, Prayut said Thai nationals should not live as “second-class citizens” overseas while escaping Thai law. He did not identify Thaksin or Yingluck by name.

 

“They should come back and fight under the law,” he said.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30351176

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-08-01

This is going to be interesting .

 

Shouid UK refuse, then Thailand would be refusing in the future.

 

Shoud UK refuse on political grounds , UK will need to issue her with asylum visa and for her to prove her position. 

 

 

How long they got .? 

UK will never extradite her because they don't believe in thai justice system. The so called justice by the people who did a bigger crime: Coup d'état. 

I was going to laugh and then I remembered that the U.K. is really into political prisoners at the moment so maybe they might comply. 

If this the case what the red bull clown.

13 minutes ago, BestB said:

This is going to be interesting .

 

Shouid UK refuse, then Thailand would be refusing in the future.

 

Shoud UK refuse on political grounds , UK will need to issue her with asylum visa and for her to prove her position. 

 

 

What passport is she currently using & why not bag ol' square head too?

Not withstanding she was granted a 10 yr visa by UK only in May .. And how much are they prepared to put out , legal fee's in Brit' land are withering for this sort of scrap ..

5 minutes ago, evadgib said:

What passport is she currently using & why not bag ol' square head too?

I am guessing Thai , letter states Thai citizen 

Window dressing, Thailand doesn't want to create a martyr. Better to stay outta sight outta mind.

4 minutes ago, BestB said:

I am guessing Thai , letter states Thai citizen 

If she's on another countries passport she becomes their problem consular-wise.

I guess the case is clear cut. 

Julian Assange committed an offence by publishing secure government documents. Even he pleaded guilty to the publishing. UK will arrest him. 

Yingluck has no hard evidence against her for an offence so UK will not arrest her  or extradite. 

Predictable outcomes.

 

 

 

 

The UK will (correctly) consider it a "political crime", and will refuse to extradite.  Thailand knows this, but has to put on the show.  
In all seriousness, the LAST thing this illegal government was is her in jail.  They seriously hope they never see her again.  

 

The letter appears to concede or at least to anticipate that Yingluck's offense is unlikely to qualify as an extraditable offense under the 1911 Treaty.It therefore invokes a discretionary clause which gives the British government (in this instance) power to extradite for an offense not otherwise covered.The actual wording of the provision is a little obscure but the ultimate meaning is, I think, quite clear.The letter concludes that if the British avail themselves of this provision, the Thais will reciprocate when receiving a British request that doesn't meet the stated criteria of the Treaty.

 

Does anyone read it differently? I'm not so much concerned - for now - at the underlying politics of this.Rather,I'm trying to understand exactly what the Thais are saying in this letter.

I can hear Steve Bannon shouting "Lock Her Up!" from here.

37 minutes ago, BestB said:

Shouid UK refuse, then Thailand would be refusing in the future.

Who says Thailand isn't refusing now ....  and refused ten years ago and twenty years ago and ............ 

Thailand has a bad, no a very bad, reputation for not extraditing wanted individuals to other countries. 

You would certainly have to ask yourself, even though Ms Yingluck has been tried in absence,  would any further trials held in Thailand be transparent and  unbiased, everyone knows the answer to that.

I have no idea how one country places an extradition request to another country. I would expect there to be a fairly well-defined legal process. Something about this makes me think this is not a bona fide extradition request. Usually legal documents are not posted into press headlines.

 

It strikes me that it is possible that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been instructed to do something by ?? Prime Minister's Office ?? and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is now pretending to follow its instructions but without any real intent. This could be because they know there is no chance of success, they don't want to waste hundreds of thousands on pricey UK barristers, they know their superiors change their mind on a daily basis, they don't want to make powerful enemies, etc. It seems like a show for the public rather than reality.

Well now, a lot of us, myself included, have always maintained that the UK will not extradite her. I still believe that to be the case, but of course I may be proved wrong. 

 

Certainly, if I am wrong, and she is returned to, and imprisoned in, Thailand, that will add an element of spice to politics here... 

Won't happen, as the UK does not extradite democratically elected leaders who are toppled in a coup to the instigators of said coup...especially a military junta. The junta are just asking to make it look good so they can claim they have tried and that it's not their fault, case closed...move along. The UK can't even get round to extraditing ISIS fighters, murderers etc. out of the country.

Edited July 31, 20187 yr by Sir Dude

2 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

they don't want to waste hundreds of thousands on pricey UK barristers, 

Politicians say that there is limit to cash and they don't want to waste money but in actuality if they wanted something for sure that cost whatever amount they would do it. Luckily politicians don't need money to breathe otherwise they would just create it as they needed too. It's more used as an excuse to say we are bored and would rather sit at our desks and play Angry birds.

5 minutes ago, Sir Dude said:

Won't happen, as the UK does not extradite democratically elected leaders who are toppled in a coup to the instigators of said coup...especially a military junta. The junta are just asking to make it look good so they can claim they have tried and that it's not their fault, case closed...move along. The UK can't even get round to extraditing ISIS fighters, murderers etc. out of the country.

I think you are right, almost certainly so; but one can never be certain what the courts may do, and the current atmosphere surrounding foreigners residing in the UK is certainly somewhat febrile... 

They do like a laugh, this lot.

And have no idea how silly they make themselves look on the world stage. 

 

When the UK authority hear the charges are for policy negligence, they must be scratching their heads. Tony Blair will be bemused. 

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

The letter concludes that if the British avail themselves of this provision, the Thais will reciprocate when receiving a British request that doesn't meet the stated criteria of the Treaty.

Yes, I too read it as "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours". It's just right now, I don't see any high-profile British ne'erdowells camping out publicly in Thailand while jet-setting around the world, upsetting the (democratically elected) British government.

13 minutes ago, JAG said:

I think you are right, almost certainly so; but one can never be certain what the courts may do, and the current atmosphere surrounding foreigners residing in the UK is certainly somewhat febrile... 

 

Here's the missing second page.I'm not sure - in the event of the request not being immediately dismissed (not really clear whether she has committed a "crime" at all - what scope there would be for legal representation.The penultimate paragraph it seems to me ill advised given what a rapier sharp British QC would make of the representation the pursuit of Yingluck is not politically inspired.In fact I feel rather sorry for the chimps but I don't think it will come to this.

Edited July 31, 20187 yr by jayboy

1 hour ago, Justgrazing said:

Not withstanding she was granted a 10 yr visa by UK only in May .. And how much are they prepared to put out , legal fee's in Brit' land are withering for this sort of scrap ..

Thailand's record in international and foreign legal proceedings is pathetic.  Thailand not only lost a major WTO case with the Philippines, but the WTO's decision against Thailand was scathing.  Thailand lost tremendous credibility on trade issues.  Thailand lost the Preah Vihear Temple case not once, but twice.  The second attempt was doomed to failure from the outset.  Thailand lost the Walter Bau international arbitration and then refused to honor the award. In other words, Thailand does not honor arbitration agreements.  And then when a jet was seized outside of Munich because Thailand refused to comply with the award, its Attorney General not only demanded that the claimant's lawyer come to Thailand to re-litigate a case that had already been won in a fair and unbiased international proceedings, but suggested he might not leave alive (the case was quietly settled with payment of the claim amount and substantial interest).  Thailand international reputation on legal matters is awful.

Here is a question.

 

In order to begin the process of extradition from the UK, does a foreign country ...

a) have its embassy send a request letter to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office?

b) engage a legal team to begin court proceedings?

 

My point being, is this a real attempt at extradition? Or some zany non-attempt?

Maybe a buy one get one free deal. Get Yingluck for 3 billion and we'll throw in Julian.

 

But in all seriousness,  I'm not sure how Julian Assange must be feeling?  I'm sure I would rather be dead in his situation .  Maybe he regrets his actions. They still want to torture him.

As for Yingluck, her only crime being rich and pretty.