Cabinet Shaken by Shares Scandal

[george]

ICT Minister officially announces resignation

BANGKOK: -- Information and Communication Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookai-yaudom Friday officially announced his resignation after he was found to have stakes in companies in excess of the five per cent allowed under the graft law of 2000.

Sitthichai said his resignation woud take effect on Novermber 1.

He said he wanted to set a political standard for other politicians.

He said he would not contest any election.

-- The Nation 2007-09-21

[Mid]

Mr. Prasong added that no one can stop the 3 Cabinet members from remaining in power

quite simply , <deleted> ?

[Jai Dee]

Krirk-krai: Oranuj needs not to resign

Commerce Minister Krirk-krai Jirapaet said on Friday that his deputy Oranuj Osathananda needs not to resign to comply with the graft law 2000.

He said if Oranuj sought his opinion, he would say that the resignation is unnecessary given that the interim government would be in office for only a few months.

"Once the term ends, both Oranuj and I would be relieved from the responsibility. Moreover, the Constitution has a provisional clause that allows the interim government not to comply with some laws. It is clear that ministers who were named by the National Counter Corruption Commission could continue with their work," he said.

Deputy Commerce Minister Oranuj Osathananda said on Friday that she is seeking advice from Krirk-krai before making a decision if she is to resign from the ministerial post.

The National Counter Corruption Commission found on Thursday that Oranuj, Interior Minister Aree Wongse-araya and Information and Communication Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookai-yaudom hold stakes in companies in excess of the five per cent allowed under the graft law of 2000.

Oranuj said that she has never abused power for personal gains and she has never wanted to be a fully-fledged politician.

"I serve the country in times of need. Right now, the Commerce Ministry has many issues at hands. Right now, taking this into account, I don't need to resign. However, I will discuss with Krirk-krai and consider other ministers' reactions on this issue. I will also take into account social responses," she said.

She said she has held stakes in a family business, which is a 20-room guest house of which registered capital is only Bt3 million. Oranuj holds a 66 per cent stake in the company.

She also held a 12.5 per cent stake in a hotel business, of which registered capital is Bt20 million. She also has a stake in a mall operating company which has been held for 40 years.

Source: The Nation - 21 September 2007

[baabaabobo]

Krirk-krai: Oranuj needs not to resign

Moreover, the Constitution has a provisional clause that allows the interim government not to comply with some laws. It is clear that ministers who were named by the National Counter Corruption Commission could continue with their work," he said.

Source: The Nation - 21 September 2007

As someone said earlier some are more equal than others.

[cclub75]

If the data was released then hundreds of journalists and others have failed their job too...

Only the total amounts of assets, per minister, were published in december... That's the trick.

My point is : why the NCCC waited 10 month... to disclose the shareholdings problem ?

3 solutions :

-total incompetence

-cover up

-or... the ministers didn't include their shareholdings in their assets declarations.

Easy.

[Plus]

Surayud had troubles with appointing the Cabinet because of restrictions the posts impose on people. You can't enter into any government contract for years, for example. One year stunt in interim Cabinet wasn't worth it.

Also they had no time to hide their shares under relatives and nominees names, there had only two weeks.

Suttichai is clearly guilty, and he has shown responsibility. Oranuj is a joke - some upcountry guesthouse and family business she held shares for forty years. She's ready to resign, too.

Aree is a stubborn ######. I haven't seen details on his shareholding but he can't go on with excuses he makes. Surayud is in a tight spot now - he needs Interior Minister to organise elections, but the Aree also has a big red bull's eye painted on his ass, and it doesn't look pretty.

[Old Man River]

Even though Sittichai's share ownerships were in technology stocks, given his track record, nobody can ever accuse him of actions which would have benefited technology stocks.

[pointofview]

Krirk-krai: Oranuj needs not to resign

Moreover, the Constitution has a provisional clause that allows the interim government not to comply with some laws. It is clear that ministers who were named by the National Counter Corruption Commission could continue with their work," he said.

Source: The Nation - 21 September 2007

As someone said earlier some are more equal than others.

"The only stable state is the one in which all men are equal before the law" ~ Aristotle

Edited September 21, 2007 by pointofview

[ThaiAdventure]

Mr. Prasong added that no one can stop the 3 Cabinet members from remaining in power

A tank can!

[IssanFarang]

Wasn't he the incxmpxtent mxrxn who though "email is not important" ?

Good thing he left, regardless of reason!

Yes, and he was quoted as saying that he didn't understand the internet or its value...

Head of ICT ... scary...

[Jai Dee]

Abhisit, Suthep praise ICT minister for showing spirit

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban Friday praised Information and Communication Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookai-yaudom for deciding to resign.

Sitthichai announced his decision to resign starting on October 1 after he and two other ministers were found to have stakes in companies in excess of the five per cent allowed under the graft law of 2000.

Abhisit said Sitthichai had set a good example for other Cabinet members to follow suit and the political standard would become higher if all politicians followed Sitthichai's example.

Suthep said Sitthichai deserved praising for showing his spirit.

Source: The Nation - 22 September 2007

[hammered]

The three should just resign. Their resignations should be accepted. Period.

This government was meant to fight corruption. Even though these people may not have taken actions to imrove the lot of their shares, they still look tainted.

[Mid]

Aree, Oranuj face calls to resign

Saturday September 22, 2007

POST REPORTERS

Interior Minister Aree Wongarya and Deputy Commerce Minister Oranuj Osathananda are facing mounting calls to quit over the controversy about their shareholdings to uphold political ethics.

The National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) found that both ministers, along with Information and Communications Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom, held stakes in excess of 5% in private companies.

Both cabinet ministers have refused to step down while Mr Sitthichai promptly announced his resignation.

The ministers were appointed to their posts after the abrogation of the 1997 constitution. The 1997 charter barred cabinet ministers from holding stakes of more than 5% in a company.

However, the transitory provision of the 2007 constitution says the shareholding rule does not apply to the interim prime minister and his cabinet ministers.

Even though they are not ''legally'' required to leave their cabinet posts, critics are demanding that they show transparency and political integrity.

snip

bangkokpost.net

[Plus]

Even though Sittichai's share ownerships were in technology stocks, given his track record, nobody can ever accuse him of actions which would have benefited technology stocks.

That is true.

>>>

Also, legally, the current Cabinet members are covered by the Interim Constitution, and it doesn't require the ministers to sell their shares. Perhaps it isn't there for a reason, perhaps just an oversight.

Still, it's inappropriate.

[Old Man River]

The three should just resign. Their resignations should be accepted. Period.

This government was meant to fight corruption. Even though these people may not have taken actions to imrove the lot of their shares, they still look tainted.

I have never been in favor of bringing the spirit of the law into court decisions, as what does this mean? One judge's interpretations of the spirit of the law often is different from another's. The question is, is it legal or is it illegal? If their ownerships were illegal, then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, the same as Thaksin probably will be. Resignation will not be enough. If it is not illegal, then they should not have to resign if they don't wish. If voters don't agree with this, then they will have the ability to voice their opinions through their votes.

[Plus]

These people are never going to stand for elections. They are not politicians. They agreed to come in for a year and that's that.

In Suttichai's case he said he consulted with lawyers and they said that rules currently in place were for listed companies and managerial positions. Both Suttichais and Oranuj complied, I don't know about Aree.

However it is nice of them to voluntarily follow the usual rules set for public office holders.

[Mid]

Democrat call on Aree, Oranuj to resign

BREAKING NEWS

(BangkokPost.com) - Democrat deputy leader Alongkorn Ponlabutr called on Interior Minister Aree Wongarya and Deputy Commerce Minister Oranuj Osathananda to resign to take responsibility of their personal shareholdings in local companies.

The National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) found that the two and Information and Communications Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom hold shareholding of more than 5% in private companies and that deemed "inappropriate."

snip

bangkokpost.com

[Old Man River]

These people are never going to stand for elections. They are not politicians. They agreed to come in for a year and that's that.

In Suttichai's case he said he consulted with lawyers and they said that rules currently in place were for listed companies and managerial positions. Both Suttichais and Oranuj complied, I don't know about Aree.

However it is nice of them to voluntarily follow the usual rules set for public office holders.

I know their positions in every day life, but if people really believe these three are guilty and they are not prosecuted (as Thaksin will be), then voters should hold responsible those in power who do run (Gen. Sonthi etc.). However, under the law, it appears that they are not guilty. Hence, I do disagree with the Demo's call for the other two to resign. There should not be a middle of the road here. There will be no middle of the road in Thaksin's case. This point has been made elsewhere and I agree with it.

[Mid]

for the greater good comes to mind ........................

Edited September 22, 2007 by Mid

[John K]

Sorry for my late reply, I was away. My position on this is yes they should step down if there is someone suitable who can be appointed to replace them that wont be forced to reduce their personal wealth. However I also remember that it was not an office they ran for. It was more like, ‘We need you to be the ....’ With that thought in mind their mind set could have very well been ‘my country needs me.’ Conceivably they were appointed because at the moment they were the right/best person for the job.

It tends to remind me of flight attendants asking passengers on a commercial flight if anyone knows how to fly. Your not to concerned if the person who says yes only flew a Cessna at that particular moment. After it’s over and your safely back on the ground can look at the fine print if you want. However I don’t think anyone on that flight would care if that person only flew a flight simulator on their home computer. I suspect they would be more likely be treated as a hero.

Tough call here to say the least.

[Old Man River]

for the greater good comes to mind ........................

Believe me, I want to agree with you because this whole thing stinks. However, if Thaksin is going to be adjudged on an ownership concealment case (Ample Rich/Win Mark) according to the law, then these people should be similarly judged. In this case, while there are similarities (and differences), under the law they are not guilty whether any of us agree with it or not.

In my view, there can't be a middle of the road here as there won't be a middle of the road in Thaksin's case. Anyone who thinks they should resign should be pushing for full prosecution, because seeking a resignation is the same as saying they are guilty.

[Gary A]

The first question that comes to my mind is how much their wealth has increased since they were put in their public office. The whole coup was based on Thaksin being corrupt. Is the pot calling the kettle black? AMAZING Thailand.

IF, and a BIG if their wealth has not increased due to their holding office, I'd say forget about it and let's get on with the democratic process. The sooner the army is out of the government the sooner things will improve.

UNTIL the next coup!!

[Plus]

I'm sure that 20 room guesthouse in Khon Kaen hasn't become a five star hotel.

As these companies are not listed, the only way is to look into their business activities during past year and if any of them had benefitted from any specific contracts. Meaning you need to find a case of corruption first. The 5% requirement is a blanket rule for all politicians, you don't need to prove or find anything.

Listed compnies might increase in value simply by assossiation.

[samran]

The first question that comes to my mind is how much their wealth has increased since they were put in their public office. The whole coup was based on Thaksin being corrupt. Is the pot calling the kettle black? AMAZING Thailand.

IF, and a BIG if their wealth has not increased due to their holding office, I'd say forget about it and let's get on with the democratic process. The sooner the army is out of the government the sooner things will improve.

UNTIL the next coup!!

Doubt they would have become rich(er) through it all. Many were already independently well off, eg the Energy Minister, quit his job at Kasirkorn bank to come back and be a minister after a career in the energy sector.

Commerce minister gave up a number of directorships which would have paid him much, much more.

Dep. Min of Finance gave up a bunch of board directorships as well to come back to an 100K per month salary.

[JetsetBkk]

Conceivably they were appointed because at the moment they were the right/best person for the job.

Hard to believe in the case of Sittichai.

[TAWP]

On another note, I think the 5%-rule is absurb.

Surely it's better to to talk about value in money and amount of influence (i.e. positions on the board of directors) than if a person owns 10% of their own small family-biz, selling lemonade in the market...

[John K]

On another note, I think the 5%-rule is absurb.

Surely it's better to to talk about value in money and amount of influence (i.e. positions on the board of directors) than if a person owns 10% of their own small family-biz, selling lemonade in the market...

Is there a copy of the rule that can be posted? That should clarify what is covered.

[Old Man River]

IF, and a BIG if their wealth has not increased due to their holding office, I'd say forget about it and let's get on with the democratic process.

So, what you are saying is that the issue isn't about ownership, but rather about whether the value of the shares increased while in office. Would you judge an increase in value in THB terms or by a % increase? Would you you take into account real value? What if the shares increased by only THB 10 or 1%? Would you put a threshold on the increase?

Can Thaksin expect this kind of leniency when his cases go to court?

In other words, isn't it really best to simply use the existing law that was already in place and let that be the standard used to judge whether they are guilty or not? Using the law as it stands, they are not guilty. As such, since under the law they are not guilty, there should be no calls for resignations, nor excuses needed that they were appointed in haste. They are not guilty. Now, for the right reasons, let's move on to the election.

[Gary A]

Since there is no longer a constitution and these people were NOT elected, what's the problem? The army can do as it likes and there is no one who can do anything about it. The coup was wrong. The country needs to have elections and pick up the pieces. I would hope that eventually the army will keep its nose out of politics and allow the people to regulate those they elect. As it is, laws are very selectively enforced or ignored as to whatever fits the situation. For the military government to write a new constitution and then try to apply it AFTER the fact is absurd.

[jackspratt]

While I agree these people should resign, I can also see a large distinction between what they have done, and the actions of the Plunderer-in-Chief.

Before people get to excited about the 3 being prosecuted, does the relevant statute create an offence for what they have done, or does it only require that they must step down?

And the distinction that I refer to, is that we have seen no evidence thus far that the 3 took any steps to conceal their shareholdings/company positions, whereas the P-i-C took very active steps to do so right from the beginning of his tenure, perverted the system along the way to maintain the concealment, and continued his corrupt conduct right up to the time he was booted out.