Thaksin And His Wife Issued Arrest Warrants Over Ratchadapisek Land Case

[animatic]

"The distinguishing features of the (PAD) movement are its wealth, its explicit and implicit use of violence and its magical protection against threats, including police action, court orders and legal process."

All this and more in today's Nation.

Yeah i see so many Mercedes, gold plated latrines and file mignion

served at govnt. house these days.

Edited September 15, 2008 by animatic

[sriracha john]

Waiting for the verdict

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions may deliver its verdicts on the Ratchadapisek land deal when it meets on Wednesday without the defendants - former PM Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife Potjaman. Lead prosecutor Nanthasak Poolsuk said the court is scheduled to hand down the verdict about 10 am. If Thaksin and Potjaman, who are in Britain seeking asylum, do not turn up to hear their verdict in person, the court is likely to read the verdict in their absence, since the court earlier acknowledged they had jumped bail and issued arrest warrants for them. Thaksin and Potjaman both failed to report to the court on Aug 22 as required. The prosecution team has asked the court to seize the land from the couple if they are found guilty. Mr Nanthasak said if the court brings in a guilty verdict further arrest warrants will be issued. If the court finds them not guilty, the case will be over.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.net/topstories/tops...s.php?id=130729

[AlKing]

"The distinguishing features of the (PAD) movement are its wealth, its explicit and implicit use of violence and its magical protection against threats, including police action, court orders and legal process."

All this and more in today's Nation.

Yeah i see so many Mercedes, gold plated latrines and file mignion

served at govnt. house these days.

The Thai court is a useless bunch of monkeys. If they cannot even arrest Sohdhi et al who are in Bangkok, stop dreaming about taking Thaksin in who are miles away.

[sriracha john]

It's not up to the courts to arrest anyone, it's the police.

[jumnien]

It's not up to the courts to arrest anyone, it's the police.

True, which points out one of the basic disfunctionalities of the Thai judicial system. By not arresting some political figures on charges carrying the death sentence and arresting others at whim, the police function as the quasi-judicial system.

[ubonjoe]

No hard evidence against Thaksin leaves court in a quandry

By Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation

Published on September 17, 2008

The key issues that will likely be touched upon during the Ratchadaphisek case against Thaksin Shinawatra and Khunying Pojaman would be whether Thaksin exercised his influence as PM in 2003 to help his wife win the auction.

The case is being presided over by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.

So far, testimonies by virtually all witnesses from the state-controlled Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), who auctioned the land, suggest that there is no hard evidence showing that Thaksin had misused his authority because FIDF supposedly had a certain level of independence from the government.

Unless the court comes up with some concrete evidence today it will be difficult to pass a guilty verdict.

Another key issue on the table would be whether there's any proof that inside information about the minimum bidding price had been leaked to Pojaman. Again, testimonies by various witnesses appear to have failed to prove it beyond any doubt.

Now the court has to prove that it is fair - a task made even more difficult considering the deeply divided views held by opposing political groups. The fact that the Assets Examination Committee (AEC) was appointed by the junta also means that the court would have to try doubly hard to prove to sceptics that it is not part of a systematic attempt to purge Thaksin from the political landscape.

There's no doubt that people feel that it was a major political faux pas for Pojaman to have bought the land from FIDF for Bt772 million, an arguably low price, while her husband was prime minister.

But guilty or not, it is the convincing details and judgement passed by the court that will matter today.

[Plus]

There are two parts to this - the proof of corruption and the principle.

Pravit talks about the proof of corruption, collusion, rigged auction, damage to the state, etc etc. I have no idea how the court would rule on that.

The principle of the PM or his family being prohibited from participating in the auction is another story, and here Thaksin is most likely to lose, imo. After all he's been hiding and denying his involvement for a reason, that was his stratedy until his personal signature on the loan approval came out. Lots of water has passed since then, though, it might not be too bad for him with people testifying to FIDF independence.

The absense of hard eveidence of corruption would affect his sentence but he'd still be guilty. That's how I, personally, think the verdict would go.

[Old Man River]

There are two parts to this - the proof of corruption and the principle.

Pravit talks about the proof of corruption, collusion, rigged auction, damage to the state, etc etc. I have no idea how the court would rule on that.

The principle of the PM or his family being prohibited from participating in the auction is another story, and here Thaksin is most likely to lose, imo. After all he's been hiding and denying his involvement for a reason, that was his stratedy until his personal signature on the loan approval came out. Lots of water has passed since then, though, it might not be too bad for him with people testifying to FIDF independence.

The absense of hard eveidence of corruption would affect his sentence but he'd still be guilty. That's how I, personally, think the verdict would go.

I hope the courts are consistent and make a decision free from politics. They have done this before, but is becoming harder and harder and the judges are human.

On the first issue, there is no proof whatsoever of a rigged bid. I believe potential bidders were intimidated into not bidding since it was the PM's wife, but intimidation is not illegal and happens all the time. Certainly two other large companies bid against the PM's wife so they weren't intimidated. In addition, Pojamon's bid was well above the appraisal they had at that time.

The second issue comes down to an interpretation. On this, the court's decision should not be a political decision that could change with the next guy, depending on who he is. On this point, Chuan Leekpai (who openly dislikes Thaksin) testified under oath that a PM doesn't have direct control over the BOT, which directly controls the FIDF. Also, Pridyathorn (again definitely not a Thaksin supporter) testified under oath that Thaksin didn't have direct control over him and he was BOT governor at this time. Banharn, well, it doesn't matter what he testifies under oath as he is the slippery eel, but he also testified under oath similar to Chuan.

For the courts to opine against Thaksin on this one, they will have to come up with an interpretation of the laws that is different from what senior people not alligned with Thaksin understand it to be. I hope the courts make the right decision and explain it very, very well or they run the risk of having the majority of the country perceiving that their decision was more rigged than the bid.

[AlKing]

There are two parts to this - the proof of corruption and the principle.

Pravit talks about the proof of corruption, collusion, rigged auction, damage to the state, etc etc. I have no idea how the court would rule on that.

The principle of the PM or his family being prohibited from participating in the auction is another story, and here Thaksin is most likely to lose, imo. After all he's been hiding and denying his involvement for a reason, that was his stratedy until his personal signature on the loan approval came out. Lots of water has passed since then, though, it might not be too bad for him with people testifying to FIDF independence.

The absense of hard eveidence of corruption would affect his sentence but he'd still be guilty. That's how I, personally, think the verdict would go.

I hope the courts are consistent and make a decision free from politics. They have done this before, but is becoming harder and harder and the judges are human.

On the first issue, there is no proof whatsoever of a rigged bid. I believe potential bidders were intimidated into not bidding since it was the PM's wife, but intimidation is not illegal and happens all the time. Certainly two other large companies bid against the PM's wife so they weren't intimidated. In addition, Pojamon's bid was well above the appraisal they had at that time.

The second issue comes down to an interpretation. On this, the court's decision should not be a political decision that could change with the next guy, depending on who he is. On this point, Chuan Leekpai (who openly dislikes Thaksin) testified under oath that a PM doesn't have direct control over the BOT, which directly controls the FIDF. Also, Pridyathorn (again definitely not a Thaksin supporter) testified under oath that Thaksin didn't have direct control over him and he was BOT governor at this time. Banharn, well, it doesn't matter what he testifies under oath as he is the slippery eel, but he also testified under oath similar to Chuan.

For the courts to opine against Thaksin on this one, they will have to come up with an interpretation of the laws that is different from what senior people not alligned with Thaksin understand it to be. I hope the courts make the right decision and explain it very, very well or they run the risk of having the majority of the country perceiving that their decision was more rigged than the bid.

"In principle, PM or his family are prohibited from participating in the auction". This will get him. Same reason how they get Samak on the Cooking show.

Say one day Thaksin step into a hospital and get a minor treatment. The bill comes out to be 30 Baht, and he paid it. Now there is evidence (the 30 Baht receipt) that the PM has abuse his power to lower the health care fee, so that he and his family can benefits it. Does he has control? Yes. The cashier work under the guideline laid by the Hospital, which is run by the Hospital director, who has to report to the Health Minister, who has to report to Parliment, who is headed by PM, who happen to be Thaksin. GUILTY AS CHARGED.

Edited September 17, 2008 by AlKing

[Jai Dee]

Supreme Court postpones verdict reading in Ratchadapisek land case to Oct 21

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office Wednesday postponed the reading of its verdict of the Ratchadapisek land case against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife to next month.

The court also issued arrest warrants against the couple.

The court scheduled October 21 for the verdict reading, saying the accused - Thaksin and Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra - are required to be present during the verdict.

Source: The Nation - 17 Septemeber 2008

[Jai Dee]

Thai Court Delays Verdict Against Thaksin In Graft Case

Thailand's Supreme Court Wednesday delayed its verdict in a corruption case against ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra and issued a new arrest warrant ordering him to appear before the judges to hear their ruling.

The judges delayed their verdict against Thaksin and his wife Pojaman until Oct. 21, saying the couple needed to be present in the courtroom for the reading.

"These defendants have to appear before the court. According to the legal process, the court has issued an arrest warrant to bring them back to listen to the verdict," chief judge Tonglor Chomngarm said.

Pojaman was accused of using her billionaire husband's political influence to buy a plot of prime Bangkok real estate from a government agency at a third of its estimated value.

The case is among a raft of legal charges against Thaksin, who has fled with his family to the U.K. He says he is innocent, claiming the charges are politically motivated.

Source: AFP - 17 September 2008

[Plus]

The second issue comes down to an interpretation. On this, the court's decision should not be a political decision that could change with the next guy, depending on who he is. On this point, Chuan Leekpai (who openly dislikes Thaksin) testified under oath that a PM doesn't have direct control over the BOT, which directly controls the FIDF. Also, Pridyathorn (again definitely not a Thaksin supporter) testified under oath that Thaksin didn't have direct control over him and he was BOT governor at this time.

Actually there are very few agencies the PM has direct control of. There's chain of command with the PM at the top.

FIDF has Finance Ministry representatives on the board, and I suspect the FM has a veto power, too. That's the main link between them and the government that the court would have to consider.

Now it's been postponed for a month and there's this demand for accused to be present.

Let's go back into waiting mode again, shall we?

[hammered]

Thai Court Delays Verdict Against Thaksin In Graft Case

Thailand's Supreme Court Wednesday delayed its verdict in a corruption case against ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra and issued a new arrest warrant ordering him to appear before the judges to hear their ruling.

The judges delayed their verdict against Thaksin and his wife Pojaman until Oct. 21, saying the couple needed to be present in the courtroom for the reading.

"These defendants have to appear before the court. According to the legal process, the court has issued an arrest warrant to bring them back to listen to the verdict," chief judge Tonglor Chomngarm said.

Pojaman was accused of using her billionaire husband's political influence to buy a plot of prime Bangkok real estate from a government agency at a third of its estimated value.

The case is among a raft of legal charges against Thaksin, who has fled with his family to the U.K. He says he is innocent, claiming the charges are politically motivated.

Source: AFP - 17 September 2008

If anyone had planned this, which of course they havent it would be a truly masterful piece of politcal planning. Nothing like keeping your opponents completley off balance with uncertainty and worry. Of course it is actually down to court procedure. Just saying like.

Edited to add: the court have also said the defendent should be there in person to hear the decision. This places pressure on the relevent government agency to try and secure the person's return. Of course maybe the PM as part of the constitutional system of Thailand as are the judiciary should try to convince a member of hios own family to return as no doubt the PM in his positon accepts the impartiality and role of the courts in the country of whihc he is PM

Edited September 17, 2008 by hammered

[Jai Dee]

Supreme Court reschedules verdict declaration of Ratchada land case while issuing 4th arrest warrant for Dr. Thaksin

The Supreme Court Division for Crimes of Individuals in Political Positions met today to reveal a verdict concerning former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife Khunying Potjaman Shinawatra and their involvement as defendants in the Ratchada land purchase case. The two are being tried for using Dr. Thaksin's political position to conduct real-estate affairs for personal gain.

The court however has rescheduled the verdict declaration for the 21st of October as both the defendants failed to travel to receive the verdict. The court has issued arrest warrants for both Dr. Thaksin and his wife. This warrant is the 4th issued for Dr. Thaksin.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 17 September 2008

[grimmbro]

Why these charges instead of more serious ones to go after Thaksin? That's a simple one...these charges implicate very few other people besides Thaksin and family. Some of the other charges would upset really big apple carts and then there would be a mess in aisle 5.

[Old Man River]

The second issue comes down to an interpretation. On this, the court's decision should not be a political decision that could change with the next guy, depending on who he is. On this point, Chuan Leekpai (who openly dislikes Thaksin) testified under oath that a PM doesn't have direct control over the BOT, which directly controls the FIDF. Also, Pridyathorn (again definitely not a Thaksin supporter) testified under oath that Thaksin didn't have direct control over him and he was BOT governor at this time.

Actually there are very few agencies the PM has direct control of. There's chain of command with the PM at the top.

FIDF has Finance Ministry representatives on the board, and I suspect the FM has a veto power, too. That's the main link between them and the government that the court would have to consider.

Now it's been postponed for a month and there's this demand for accused to be present.

Let's go back into waiting mode again, shall we?

This one will take much longer than a month since he and his wife have to be present and from what we read, they like the English weather.

[hammered]

The second issue comes down to an interpretation. On this, the court's decision should not be a political decision that could change with the next guy, depending on who he is. On this point, Chuan Leekpai (who openly dislikes Thaksin) testified under oath that a PM doesn't have direct control over the BOT, which directly controls the FIDF. Also, Pridyathorn (again definitely not a Thaksin supporter) testified under oath that Thaksin didn't have direct control over him and he was BOT governor at this time.

Actually there are very few agencies the PM has direct control of. There's chain of command with the PM at the top.

FIDF has Finance Ministry representatives on the board, and I suspect the FM has a veto power, too. That's the main link between them and the government that the court would have to consider.

Now it's been postponed for a month and there's this demand for accused to be present.

Let's go back into waiting mode again, shall we?

This one will take much longer than a month since he and his wife have to be present and from what we read, they like the English weather.

If they have to be physically there to hear the verdict then we are never going to get a verdict and Thaksin and Potjaman are never going to come back unless of course they can get the constitution all ammended.

That will put pressure on the government from Thaksin to ammend the constitution or issue an amnesty or something. But the court decision puts pressure on the government to explore extradition. It also means new PM man has to dodge the questions related to this. It takes all pressure off of the court until they return.

[tomo22]

Say one day Thaksin step into a hospital and get a minor treatment. The bill comes out to be 30 Baht, and he paid it. Now there is evidence (the 30 Baht receipt) that the PM has abuse his power to lower the health care fee, so that he and his family can benefits it. Does he has control? Yes. The cashier work under the guideline laid by the Hospital, which is run by the Hospital director, who has to report to the Health Minister, who has to report to Parliment, who is headed by PM, who happen to be Thaksin. GUILTY AS CHARGED.

With the Billions he has got still can’t prove were they have come from unless you can enlighten us all.

You tell me where as the PM he has the right Moral or otherwise to feather his nest.

How can you talk such total crap you astound me never mind.

Time everyone who actually cares about Thailand spend some time supporting it.

[jumnien]

This "Supreme Court Division for Crimes of Individuals in Political Positions" is a ragtag kangaroo court whisked together by the military junta. The Thai people won't stand for this nonsense. If the military want to take off their uniforms and run for office, they are welcome, as are their lapdogs like Sondhi L. and Chamlong.

[Siripon]

This "Supreme Court Division for Crimes of Individuals in Political Positions" is a ragtag kangaroo court whisked together by the military junta. The Thai people won't stand for this nonsense. If the military want to take off their uniforms and run for office, they are welcome, as are their lapdogs like Sondhi L. and Chamlong.

This court was set up following the passing of the 1997 constitution. When will you stop writing lies?

[jumnien]

This "Supreme Court Division for Crimes of Individuals in Political Positions" is a ragtag kangaroo court whisked together by the military junta. The Thai people won't stand for this nonsense. If the military want to take off their uniforms and run for office, they are welcome, as are their lapdogs like Sondhi L. and Chamlong.

This court was set up following the passing of the 1997 constitution. When will you stop writing lies?

Sorry General, you're right, sir! Could I top up your PAD koolaid, sir?

[rixalex]

This "Supreme Court Division for Crimes of Individuals in Political Positions" is a ragtag kangaroo court whisked together by the military junta. The Thai people won't stand for this nonsense. If the military want to take off their uniforms and run for office, they are welcome, as are their lapdogs like Sondhi L. and Chamlong.

This court was set up following the passing of the 1997 constitution. When will you stop writing lies?

Considering the group of people sunrise07 affiliates himself with, it's hardly a surprise that he lies. A prerequisite i would suggest of being in such company.

[jumnien]

This "Supreme Court Division for Crimes of Individuals in Political Positions" is a ragtag kangaroo court whisked together by the military junta. The Thai people won't stand for this nonsense. If the military want to take off their uniforms and run for office, they are welcome, as are their lapdogs like Sondhi L. and Chamlong.

This court was set up following the passing of the 1997 constitution. When will you stop writing lies?

Considering the group of people sunrise07 affiliates himself with, it's hardly a surprise that he lies. A prerequisite i would suggest of being in such company.

...if our lips are moving...! Cheers! See ya on Saturday!

[Plus]

See ya on Saturday!

Good news.

Why not make it next Saturday?

[Tony Clifton]

Without a legitimate judicial system in place it's going to be rather hard to convict anyone of anything. Nonetheless, it won't be surprising if the PAD find him guilty.

What a pity you don't know anything about the study of law. Or much else.

Don't...feed...the...troll.

Looks like the legitimacy of the Thai judicial system really hits a raw nerve amongst PAD cheerleaders! Bought and paid for; the best money can buy!

If it could be bought and paid for as you say, Thaksin would forever be the highest bidder.

Pastries anyone?

[jumnien]

Without a legitimate judicial system in place it's going to be rather hard to convict anyone of anything. Nonetheless, it won't be surprising if the PAD find him guilty.

What a pity you don't know anything about the study of law. Or much else.

Don't...feed...the...troll.

Looks like the legitimacy of the Thai judicial system really hits a raw nerve amongst PAD cheerleaders! Bought and paid for; the best money can buy!

If it could be bought and paid for as you say, Thaksin would forever be the highest bidder.

Pastries anyone?

Only if served in a non-smoking bakery!

[jayjayjayjay]

  [quote]  [quote name='tomo22' date='2008-09-17 15:24:46' post='2220440']

With the Billions he has got still can't prove were they have come from unless you can enlighten us all.

You tell me where as the PM he has the right Moral or otherwise to feather his nest.

How can you talk such total crap you astound me never mind.

Time everyone who actually cares about Thailand spend some time supporting it.

What a lot of rot! His money came from the sale of AIS! Obviously you've been on another planet for the last 20 yrs. I 1991 I got my first mobile phone with AIS, it cost me 4000 baht to call out and another 5000 baht to recieve incomming calls. These guys were making money hand over fist, that's how they got rich. It also made business a hel_l of a lot more convenient in those days when a land line from TOT took years to get in Bangkok, let alone the wait you had in country areas. He printed money with a monopolistic concession, corrupt or not it was his idea and being in the right place at the right time was his luck.......... so I don't know where you can come up with the idiotic statement of "where his billions came from without proving it"!!!!!!!!!!

[sriracha john]

Court delays ruling on Ratchadaphisek land to next month

The verdict in the Ratchadaphisek land auction trial has been deferred to October 21 instead of yesterday after former premier Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife Pojaman Shinawatra failed to appear.

The court ordered arrest warrants to be issued against Thaksin and Pojaman who skipped bailed and fled to London in the middle of August.

Defence lawyers were not sitting in the court yesterday as they earlier informed the court that Thaksin and Pojaman no longer wished to have legal representation.

Sources from the Office of the Attorney-General said the office would seek ways to extradite the two from England.

Some have already speculated on whether the two will be found guilty or not.

Anti-corruption activist Veera Somkwamkid, who was amongst those who testified in the trial, said he believed defence lawyers had failed to prove that Thaksin and his wife were innocent. Pojaman won the Ratchadapisek land auction in 2003 from the state-owned Financial Institutions Development Fund while Thaksin was prime minister.

One observer at the court yesterday said he hoped the rural poor would change their attitude about supporting Thaksin if the former premier was found guilty.

- The Nation / 2008-09-18

======================================================

Three arrest warrants against Thaksin

1. Issued on August 11 by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders against Thaksin and his wife Pojaman Shinawatra for skipping bail in the Ratchadaphisek land auction case. The couple fled to London instead of returning to Bangkok from Beijing.

2. Issued yesterday against Thaksin and Pojaman after the couple failed to show up to hear the verdict in the Ratchadaphisek case. The no show also caused the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders to defer the verdict until October 21.

3. Issued on September 16 against Thaksin for failing to show up for the beginning of his trial on the alleged irregularity in the 4-Billion-Baht loan given by state-controlled Export and Import Bank to the military government of Burma while Thaksin was premier.

- The Nation / 2008-09-18

[Plus]

Some have already speculated on whether the two will be found guilty or not.

Yeah, he was he first one to speculate - the very first post on this page.

"No hard evidence bla bla bla".

[tomo22]

  [quote]  [quote name='tomo22' date='2008-09-17 15:24:46' post='2220440']

With the Billions he has got still can't prove were they have come from unless you can enlighten us all.

You tell me where as the PM he has the right Moral or otherwise to feather his nest.

How can you talk such total crap you astound me never mind.

Time everyone who actually cares about Thailand spend some time supporting it.

What a lot of rot! His money came from the sale of AIS! Obviously you've been on another planet for the last 20 yrs. I 1991 I got my first mobile phone with AIS, it cost me 4000 baht to call out and another 5000 baht to recieve incomming calls. These guys were making money hand over fist, that's how they got rich. It also made business a hel_l of a lot more convenient in those days when a land line from TOT took years to get in Bangkok, let alone the wait you had in country areas. He printed money with a monopolistic concession, corrupt or not it was his idea and being in the right place at the right time was his luck.......... so I don't know where you can come up with the idiotic statement of "where his billions came from without proving it"!!!!!!!!!!

Put it this way The FA in the UK were carrying out an investigation on where his money came from.

Yes he has to prove it.

1991 to 2008 is 17 years sorry maybe I need to go back to school.

If you are going to quote please quote correctly.

As you feel it is an idiotic statment as you put it then as I said bring forward the proof.

The talking crap was directed at the post I quoted.

Please reed this.

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=3190&id2=3912