Supreme Court Takes New Case Against Thaksin Over Myanmar Loan

[sriracha john]

Are you capable of posting without the inflammatory and derogatory language that you've repeatedly been reprimanded on? That's the only point I was addressing.

[younghusband]

Are you capable of posting without the inflammatory and derogatory language that you've repeatedly been reprimanded on? That's the only point I was addressing.

Who is initiating pointless abuse here?Again you insist on personalising and one can only assume it is because you resent any expression of a non-PAD line.If you have nothing substantive to offer may I suggest you think carefully before posting.In particular bear two matters in mind - 1.It's an open forum for all opinions 2.You are not a moderator.

[sriracha john]

Are you capable of posting without the inflammatory and derogatory language that you've repeatedly been reprimanded on? That's the only point I was addressing.

Who is initiating pointless abuse here?Again you insist on personalising and one can only assume it is because you resent any expression of a non-PAD line.If you have nothing substantive to offer may I suggest you think carefully before posting.In particular bear two matters in mind - 1.It's an open forum for all opinions 2.You are not a moderator.

You assume wrong. I resent seeing completely unnecessary terminology that only serves to inflame, irregardless of who the poster or their target is and irregardless of the topic being "discussed."

Edited July 31, 2008 by sriracha john

[sriracha john]

Judges on Thailand's Supreme Court sit in Bangkok July 30, 2008. Thailand's Supreme Court said on Wednesday it would hear a case against ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra relating to allegations he arranged soft loans to Myanmar while in office to benefit his family's telecoms business.

REUTERS

[PeaceBlondie]

So, if the Supreme Court, its division of Political Crimes, or whatever - convicts a Thaksin, is there further appeal? How many more levels of appeal?

[hammered]

So, if the Supreme Court, its division of Political Crimes, or whatever - convicts a Thaksin, is there further appeal? How many more levels of appeal?

There are no appeals beyond the supreme court. There are no appeals beyond teh supreme courts politcal post holders division or whatever it is called.

It may be possible to try and argue that the supreme court acted unconstitutionally and take that to the constitution court. A long shot but witness attempts to change the constitutional courts make up and politicains do have some say in that.

However, if found guilty by the supreme court it is pretty much the end.

Contolling the police, the attorney general and any investigation body such as the NCCC or DSI are the way governments protect themselves. Since the elction how many changes have we seen in the polie hierarchy, and the DSI and the NCCC is under attack right now.

[Artisi]

Funny thing is from an international perspective it is better the cases have come up after the return of democracy and when his party is in power. It would have looked right dodgy if it had all happened under the Junta. It may have still looked dogy if his politcal opponents were in power. Now it looks a lot better and will only look dodgy if the government interferes in the judicial procedure.

Whoever planned that timeframe was a bit of a genius if it was actually planned and didnt just happen by accident.

A very astute observation - whether it was luck or good management it certinly delivers a very powerful message.

[sriracha john]

Thai government in trouble as tables turn on Thaksin

BANGKOK, Aug 1 (Reuters) - It has been a week Thaksin Shinawatra will probably want to forget.

It started with the ousted Thai Prime Minister being charged, along with his entire former cabinet, with breaking gambling laws, and ended with his wife being sentenced to three years in jail for tax fraud.

In between, the Supreme Court agreed to hear charges that he arranged dodgy state loans to Myanmar's junta in order to benefit his family's telecoms empire.

But worse may be yet be in store for Thaksin, removed in a 2006 coup on the pretext of "rampant corruption", and a six-month-old coalition government elected in December but widely seen as his puppet.

More charges and graft trials against him and his inner circle are in the pipeline, and the judiciary -- if its form over the last five days is anything to go by -- is on a mission.

The contrast could not be greater than during Thaksin's time in power when the courts were reluctant to tackle Thaksin and his interests out of concern for their own skins, analysts say.

Next week, prosecutors are due to decide whether to ask the Supreme Court to seize 76 billion baht ($2.3 billion) in Thaksin bank accounts frozen by anti-graft investigators.

The same court is also churning through allegations that Thaksin used his influence as prime minister to help his wife win a state auction of a prime plot of land in central Bangkok. A verdict, expected by the end of the year, would probably involve jail time and has no avenue of appeal.

The turning of the legal tide so swiftly has intensified speculation that Thaksin, exiled after the coup, is trying to cut a deal with his foes to accept another stint in exile to escape jail.

"If Thaksin doesn't want to be jailed, he will have to seek asylum," political analyst Boonyakiat Karavekphan of Bangkok's Ramkhamhaeng University said.

"The ruling against his wife could have been the other way around if he genuinely quit politics, as he always claims. He may have won election battles, but he will not win these legal battles under the present unusual circumstances."

Hours after Thursday's stunning ruling against his wife, Thaksin left for Japan and then China after receiving court permission to give business lectures in Tokyo and attend the opening of the Olympic Games in Beijing. His lawyers denied he was fleeing justice and said he would be back in Thailand on Aug. 10, as demanded by the courts. "There is nothing suspicious about his overseas trip. He won't run away, but will certainly report himself at the court on Aug. 11," lawyer Anek Kamchoo told reporters.

As Thaksin struggles for his own survival, Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, a veteran right-winger who came to power on an avowedly pro-Thaksin ticket, is facing his own battles. His popularity is at rock bottom, inflation is at an 11-year high and his administration faces a relentless barrage of invective from anti-Thaksin street protesters who see it as nothing but a Thaksin proxy. To add to his woes, the Thai baht is being pressured by foreign investor sales due to the country's political roilings and the government is perceived at being at odds with Thailand's central bank.

Thailand's National Counter Corruption Commission is presently trying to decide whether the cabinet violated the constitution in supporting Cambodia's bid to list a disputed 900-year-old temple as a World Heritage site. If the anti-graft body decides it did, the entire cabinet would be suspended from duty while impeachment proceedings rumble through the Senate -- an eventuality created by a 2007 constitution that gives judges huge oversight in the political arena.

Any attempt by Samak to amend this constitution is only likely to stir up yet more opposition.

Edited August 1, 2008 by sriracha john

[stumonster]

an interesting part of the events

Questionable US role

In this particular case, and for unknown reasons, the US State Department and the US Ex-Im Bank stood by silently as the controversial iPStar transaction with Myanmar unfolded. This is much more than an awkward omission: the iPStar project was a high-profile affair from the start. Among other things the head of the US Ex-Im Bank traveled to London in 2003 to accept an award related to the project, which Shin Satellite executives at the time promised would revolutionize the global satellite business through greater transmission efficiency.

Powerful members of the US Congress had a heated exchange with the US Ex-IM Bank in 2002 over how the satellite project was taking shape, although not over the possibility that its mission would benefit Myanmar's junta. As the court case against Thaksin unfolds, the US Congress and even the White House, which in recent years has been strongly critical of Myanmar's military regime, including President George W Bush's own reference to the country as an "outpost of tyranny", will be left to answer how this transaction apparently slipped under their radar screens.

Days before the Thai Supreme Court announced its decision to hear the case, the US House of Representatives voted to freeze certain junta members' assets and ban the importation of all Myanmar-sourced jade and rubies to the US. American gem dealers had previously avoided trade sanctions by importing Myanmar gems from second countries which processed or in other ways added value to the raw stones.

full story here

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/JH02Ae01.html

[younghusband]

Thai government in trouble as tables turn on Thaksin

BANGKOK, Aug 1 (Reuters)

Any attempt by Samak to amend this constitution is only likely to stir up yet more opposition.

If you are going to post press articles for heavens sake show some honesty.This article for example is posted in full with the exception of one phrase in the quoted sentence above, specifically after "Any attempt by Samak to amend the constitution" the original Reuters report continues "designed by the military to prevent Thaksin making a comeback".

[Plus]

"The contrast could not be greater than during Thaksin's time in power when the courts were reluctant to tackle Thaksin and his interests out of concern for their own skins, analysts say."

Interestingly, Ramkhamhaeng Univeristy anaysts says:

"..but he will not win these legal battles under the present unusual circumstances."

Is there any hope that these unusual circumstances become the norm?

[A_Traveller]

Thai government in trouble as tables turn on Thaksin

BANGKOK, Aug 1 (Reuters)

Any attempt by Samak to amend this constitution is only likely to stir up yet more opposition.

If you are going to post press articles for heavens sake show some honesty.This article for example is posted in full with the exception of one phrase in the quoted sentence above, specifically after "Any attempt by Samak to amend the constitution" the original Reuters report continues "designed by the military to prevent Thaksin making a comeback".

Though the full sentence is

Any attempt by Samak to amend this constitution, designed by the military to prevent Thaksin making a comeback, according to most analysts, is only likely to stir up yet more opposition.

so let's all be honest.

Regards

[younghusband]

"The contrast could not be greater than during Thaksin's time in power when the courts were reluctant to tackle Thaksin and his interests out of concern for their own skins, analysts say."

Interestingly, Ramkhamhaeng Univeristy anaysts says:

"..but he will not win these legal battles under the present unusual circumstances."

Is there any hope that these unusual circumstances become the norm?

In answer to your last question it would be an unexpected benefit if this turned out to be the case, but very much worth aiming for.I always thought the Potjaman case was one of the most difficult ones for the Thaksin clan, and I don't think any reasonable person could deny the trial was fair and the verdict the right one.Let's see how the other cases go.

So what should we be looking for to ensure that Thailand retains a proper judicial system providing checks and balances on the government? Off the top of my head.

1.Real independence, ie not seen as agents of or excessively deferential to any of the various constitutional elements of Government.To be frank this would mean departing from historical precedent, but why not?

2.Know its place, ie not to be involved in any kind of political power struggle.Recognise Thailand is a democratic and constitutional monarchy.

3.Honest and competent, obviously

4.Show discretion in terms of cases it takes on - avoiding frivolous or politically motivated ones (unless prima facie evidence of wrongdoing) for example.

5.Recognise justice is blindfolded - ie when the Thaksin story is completed to show the same rigorous approach to other powerful people in Thailand.For example are the richest people in the land all paying the tax they should?

[younghusband]

Thai government in trouble as tables turn on Thaksin

BANGKOK, Aug 1 (Reuters)

Any attempt by Samak to amend this constitution is only likely to stir up yet more opposition.

If you are going to post press articles for heavens sake show some honesty.This article for example is posted in full with the exception of one phrase in the quoted sentence above, specifically after "Any attempt by Samak to amend the constitution" the original Reuters report continues "designed by the military to prevent Thaksin making a comeback".

Though the full sentence is

Any attempt by Samak to amend this constitution, designed by the military to prevent Thaksin making a comeback, according to most analysts, is only likely to stir up yet more opposition.

so let's all be honest.

Regards

Sorry this was just carelessness on my part but you are quite right to point it out.I wasn't intending to mislead.

[A_Traveller]

^ No problem, if only we could find clarity over all things.

Regards

[NanaFoods]

I am glad they are finally charging him with this blatant case of conflict of interest and corruption.

Thaksin essentially robbed Thai Taxpayer's of their revenues, "loaned" it to the Junta in Myanmar, who took a cut, and then passed a cut back to Thaksin via his comm company.

So sly.... NOT.

This was such an obvious case of corruption from the get-go, I was rather surprised when bells and whistles weren't ringing from day one.

I think the real charge here is that Thaksin illegally or improperly intervened to insist the export credit package went through bypassing cabinet and other procedures.This will have to be proved in court of course.Silly really because it would have almost certainly have been approved witout his intervention

The rest of the post above is just ignorant nonsense and the fellow clearly doesn't understand why and how Thai Exim Bank (and every other export credit institution) works.If memory serves the Shin interests were a relatively minor part of the package supporting Thai industry, and the loan has been serviced on time by the Burmese.

I may be off about the tax part... fine.

But let's see who else is ignorant, smart guy.

In the fourth case, the ASC sub-panel found Mr Thaksin allegedly ordered the Export and Import Bank to lend a 900-million-baht soft loan, out of a total of four billion baht, to the Burmese government to improve its infrastructure and telecom sector in 2004. This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

http://thaipoliticlog.blogspot.com/2007/11...rs-in-jail.html

A major supplier for 2/3 of the entire telecom part of the loan... not what I would consider a "relatively minor part" of the package.

Apparently, memory doesn't serve you.... nor do research skills.

Edited August 2, 2008 by ChefHeat

[NanaFoods]

I am glad they are finally charging him with this blatant case of conflict of interest and corruption.

Thaksin essentially robbed Thai Taxpayer's of their revenues, "loaned" it to the Junta in Myanmar, who took a cut, and then passed a cut back to Thaksin via his comm company.

So sly.... NOT.

This was such an obvious case of corruption from the get-go, I was rather surprised when bells and whistles weren't ringing from day one.

I think the real charge here is that Thaksin illegally or improperly intervened to insist the export credit package went through bypassing cabinet and other procedures.This will have to be proved in court of course.Silly really because it would have almost certainly have been approved witout his intervention

The rest of the post above is just ignorant nonsense and the fellow clearly doesn't understand why and how Thai Exim Bank (and every other export credit institution) works.If memory serves the Shin interests were a relatively minor part of the package supporting Thai industry, and the loan has been serviced on time by the Burmese.

I may be off about the tax part... fine.

But let's see who else is ignorant, smart guy.

In the fourth case, the ASC sub-panel found Mr Thaksin allegedly ordered the Export and Import Bank to lend a 900-million-baht soft loan, out of a total of four billion baht, to the Burmese government to improve its infrastructure and telecom sector in 2004. This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

http://thaipoliticlog.blogspot.com/2007/11...rs-in-jail.html

A major supplier for 2/3 of the entire telecom part of the loan... not what I would consider a "relatively minor part" of the package.

Apparently, memory doesn't serve you.... nor do research skills.

a little more research...

and maybe I wasn't so off about the tax revenue, wiseguy.

I knew there was a link of sorts... but not being a banker... well, it just took a little research to find it.

The Export Import Bank of Thailand was established in 1994. Its basic function is to provide medium-term credit for agricultural export, long-term credit for capital goods export, export insurance service, investment guarantee for overseas investment of Thai investors and financing small and new exporters without access to commercial bank lending. The bank also finances import of machinery and equipment used for export production and import of goods beneficial to environment. Its source of funding is from the Bank of Thailand and financial institutions, local and overseas.

As banker to the government, the Bank of Thailand holds the main accounts of the Government as well as those of government enterprises.

http://sunsite.au.ac.th/thailand/economy/fin.html

...and government main accounts and enterprises come from where?

And we know a bank's ability to issue loans depends on its capital deposits, right?

I think we can conclude that the government's main account deposits are quite significant.

Edited August 2, 2008 by ChefHeat

[Bill97]

Thai government in trouble as tables turn on Thaksin

BANGKOK, Aug 1 (Reuters)

Next week, prosecutors are due to decide whether to ask the Supreme Court to seize 76 billion baht ($2.3 billion) in Thaksin bank accounts frozen by anti-graft investigators.

Sorry if I missed it but:

Is there any update about whether or not those funds are really still there and frozen?

I recall that some of the funds, perhaps interest, were illegally released by bank(s). Then silence. Some family members have also requested partial releases of funds. Were those requests granted? Or have some other clever events taken place which have effectively released funds to the family?

[younghusband]

I am glad they are finally charging him with this blatant case of conflict of interest and corruption.

Thaksin essentially robbed Thai Taxpayer's of their revenues, "loaned" it to the Junta in Myanmar, who took a cut, and then passed a cut back to Thaksin via his comm company.

So sly.... NOT.

This was such an obvious case of corruption from the get-go, I was rather surprised when bells and whistles weren't ringing from day one.

I think the real charge here is that Thaksin illegally or improperly intervened to insist the export credit package went through bypassing cabinet and other procedures.This will have to be proved in court of course.Silly really because it would have almost certainly have been approved witout his intervention

The rest of the post above is just ignorant nonsense and the fellow clearly doesn't understand why and how Thai Exim Bank (and every other export credit institution) works.If memory serves the Shin interests were a relatively minor part of the package supporting Thai industry, and the loan has been serviced on time by the Burmese.

I may be off about the tax part... fine.

But let's see who else is ignorant, smart guy.

In the fourth case, the ASC sub-panel found Mr Thaksin allegedly ordered the Export and Import Bank to lend a 900-million-baht soft loan, out of a total of four billion baht, to the Burmese government to improve its infrastructure and telecom sector in 2004. This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

http://thaipoliticlog.blogspot.com/2007/11...rs-in-jail.html

A major supplier for 2/3 of the entire telecom part of the loan... not what I would consider a "relatively minor part" of the package.

Apparently, memory doesn't serve you.... nor do research skills.

Read the quote re the ASC sub-panel more carefully and you will see that my comments are in fact supported, ie the Exim bank credit package was Baht 4 billion of which the Shin Corp element was Baht 900 million -a relatively minor part of the package.The whole point of export credits is that they are tied to procurement in the country of origin, and the rate of interest is always concessional.Part of the rationale is always follow up orders which in this instance Shin Sattelite. was able to procure.So my memory does serve me well and as, for research, I didn't do any!

[younghusband]

^ No problem, if only we could find clarity over all things.

Regards

Well at least we can I agree, I think, on the very revealing piece of dishonest censorship in the post under discussion - ie removing from what appears to be a third part new piece anything which doesn't accord with his agenda.

[NanaFoods]

I am glad they are finally charging him with this blatant case of conflict of interest and corruption.

Thaksin essentially robbed Thai Taxpayer's of their revenues, "loaned" it to the Junta in Myanmar, who took a cut, and then passed a cut back to Thaksin via his comm company.

So sly.... NOT.

This was such an obvious case of corruption from the get-go, I was rather surprised when bells and whistles weren't ringing from day one.

I think the real charge here is that Thaksin illegally or improperly intervened to insist the export credit package went through bypassing cabinet and other procedures.This will have to be proved in court of course.Silly really because it would have almost certainly have been approved witout his intervention

The rest of the post above is just ignorant nonsense and the fellow clearly doesn't understand why and how Thai Exim Bank (and every other export credit institution) works.If memory serves the Shin interests were a relatively minor part of the package supporting Thai industry, and the loan has been serviced on time by the Burmese.

I may be off about the tax part... fine.

But let's see who else is ignorant, smart guy.

In the fourth case, the ASC sub-panel found Mr Thaksin allegedly ordered the Export and Import Bank to lend a 900-million-baht soft loan, out of a total of four billion baht, to the Burmese government to improve its infrastructure and telecom sector in 2004. This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

This came with the condition that the Burmese government purchase materials from Shin Corp, said Mr Kaewsan.

After the loan agreement, Burma reportedly contracted Shin Corp's subsidiary, Shin Satellite, to be a major supplier to its 600-million-baht broadband satellite telecoms project.

http://thaipoliticlog.blogspot.com/2007/11...rs-in-jail.html

A major supplier for 2/3 of the entire telecom part of the loan... not what I would consider a "relatively minor part" of the package.

Apparently, memory doesn't serve you.... nor do research skills.

Read the quote re the ASC sub-panel more carefully and you will see that my comments are in fact supported, ie the Exim bank credit package was Baht 4 billion of which the Shin Corp element was Baht 900 million -a relatively minor part of the package.The whole point of export credits is that they are tied to procurement in the country of origin, and the rate of interest is always concessional.Part of the rationale is always follow up orders which in this instance Shin Sattelite. was able to procure.So my memory does serve me well and as, for research, I didn't do any!

Well, if your memory works that way, then your judgment is off.

67% of the telecom package looks like 15% of 4 billion... so what? Its still not what I would consider "minor". So, while we're at it, let's compare it to Thailand's 2004 GDP of 12.3 trillion baht, then it would look really insignificant. So let's just let Thaksin slide on this one, right?

Dude, it's still 600M baht. No matter how much we obfuscate with comparisons.

That's 600,000,000 baht, not what I would consider "minor" or discountable.

Your so caught up in trying to be a know-it-all, your are missing the point: Thaksin was lining his pockets, by helping his company, via the loan. This is a conflict of interest.

[sriracha john]

What is obvious to most, chefheat, can not be seen by the blind.

Edited August 2, 2008 by sriracha john

[NanaFoods]

What is obvious to most, chefheat, can not be seen by the blind.

...nor the arrogant, it seems.

The rest of the post above is just ignorant nonsense and the fellow clearly doesn't understand why and how Thai Exim Bank (and every other export credit institution) works.

The Export Import Bank of Thailand was established in 1994. Its basic function is to provide medium-term credit for agricultural export, long-term credit for capital goods export, export insurance service, investment guarantee for overseas investment of Thai investors and financing small and new exporters without access to commercial bank lending. The bank also finances import of machinery and equipment used for export production and import of goods beneficial to environment. Its source of funding is from the Bank of Thailand and financial institutions, local and overseas.

As banker to the government, the Bank of Thailand holds the main accounts of the Government as well as those of government enterprises.

http://sunsite.au.ac.th/thailand/economy/fin.html

...and government main accounts and enterprises come from where?

he still hasn't admitted any of his own ignorance, while calling others ignorant.

[younghusband]

[quote name='ChefHeat' date='2008-08-03 05:34:51' post='2123432'

Your so caught up in trying to be a know-it-all, your are missing the point: Thaksin was lining his pockets, by helping his company, via the loan. This is a conflict of interest.

I have addressed all the ill informed points you made and proven them wrong.You subsequently raised some other points, some of which are valid.In particular I never said the Shin element was "minor", just a minor part of the package.I never denied that there was a conflict of interest and indeed went out of my way to demonstrate Thaksin had bypassed procedures and acted in an arbitrary way.Nevertheless it is evident that you don't really understand what an export import bank does (same goes for your supporter no doubt smarting from having his dishonesty exposed on this thread).One of the main purposes of Thai Exim is to promote Thai exports and of course this benefits shareholders of Thai companies, nor was there any reason why Shin interests should not have qualified.The problem was the Thaksin stranglehold on the bureaucracy and the absence of any kind of "blind trust" arrangement.

[NanaFoods]

Your so caught up in trying to be a know-it-all, your are missing the point: Thaksin was lining his pockets, by helping his company, via the loan. This is a conflict of interest.

I have addressed all the ill informed points you made and proven them wrong.You subsequently raised some other points, some of which are valid.In particular I never said the Shin element was "minor", just a minor part of the package.I never denied that there was a conflict of interest and indeed went out of my way to demonstrate Thaksin had bypassed procedures and acted in an arbitrary way.Nevertheless it is evident that you don't really understand what an export import bank does (same goes for your supporter no doubt smarting from having his dishonesty exposed on this thread).One of the main purposes of Thai Exim is to promote Thai exports and of course this benefits shareholders of Thai companies, nor was there any reason why Shin interests should not have qualified.The problem was the Thaksin stranglehold on the bureaucracy and the absence of any kind of "blind trust" arrangement.

Thanks for proving my final point.

[sriracha john]

Just one trial

Only one of the criminal cases against former PM Thaksin Shinawatra will proceed in his absence while he is a fugitive abroad, a source at the Supreme Court said Wednesday. Under the rules governing the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions, defendants must be present at the first hearing, where they must formally acknowledge the proceedings after hearing the court read out the charges. Of the cases against Thaksin, who on Monday skipped bail and announced he was staying in London, only the Ratchadaphisek land case will proceed, and a verdict be issued, if Thaksin does not return to Thailand, the source said. "So if he does not appear in court at the first hearing after the court accepts a lawsuit against him, that case would be suspended. The court may also issue a warrant for his arrest," said the source. Deputy Attorney-General Waiyawut Lortrakul said yesterday a planned civil lawsuit to seek the confiscation of 76 billion baht of Thaksin's assets will not be halted. The case can proceed in their absence and they can appoint lawyers to attend the trial on their behalf. Mr Waiyawut said the lawsuit will be filed as soon as it is approved by Attorney-General Chaikasem Nitisiri. The House Committee on Finance, Banking and Financial Institutes has been informed the Attorney-General is considering seizing Thaksin's assets. The only way for Thaksin to have the assets returned is to attend court.

Continued here:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/tops...s.php?id=129594

[Samuian]

.... the Exim bank credit package was Baht 4 billion of which the Shin Corp element was Baht 900 million -a relatively minor part of the package....

A Quarter or nearly 25% (900 Million) "relatively small" as a deal for his company, in a credit line released and brokered by him/his government?

How much in hidden deals?

At his defense?

[Samuian]

.... the Exim bank credit package was Baht 4 billion of which the Shin Corp element was Baht 900 million -a relatively minor part of the package....

A Quarter or nearly 25% (900 Million) "relatively small" as a deal for his company, in a credit line released and brokered by him/his government?

How much in hidden deals?

At his defense?

[steveromagnino]

One of the main purposes of Thai Exim is to promote Thai exports and of course this benefits shareholders of Thai companies, nor was there any reason why Shin interests should not have qualified.The problem was the Thaksin stranglehold on the bureaucracy and the absence of any kind of "blind trust" arrangement.

Shinsat was a basket case prior to this anyhow; I remember a person alledgedly talking to Don the IT reporter at the BKK post about censorship, and he once wrote of Shin (when Thaksin was busy running aruond to India on state visits coincidetnally at the same time as SHinsat was trying to land a deal there, and also negotiating the FTA with Australia with HUGE concessions/telco benefits) that Shin sattelite systems were 'too little too late'

Of course, the board contacted him directly (they never contact journalists personally) and he was carefully told never to write something like that again.

And of course we all know the size of the AIS marketing budget and how many ads are in BKK Post!

Exim Bank loan clearly was going to be a problem the moment the major shareholder of a company and also the PM were one and the same person, and not many people truly believe he wasn't doing the visits to India, Australia, FTAs etc with any objective other than personal gain for himself or his party.

BUt ah well, we are stuck with the lousy agreements and while we may have ultra cheap garlic from China...well at least we can feel better knowing that most of the TRT families have made more skim as a result than generations of hardworking Thai farmers ever did.

Shinsat would be dead long ago without the personal intervention from the then PM. Whether you can prove most of this, I really don't know; obviously ethically it is completely wrong (also the trips to India paid for to work as PM, but actually working as Shinman) but it isn't much different to say the BecTel President in USA, the Halliburton President now or the various other pay for play schemes other politicians in the world run. Or to say that is it all a bit too Italian?

THe difference is the rest ofthe world, you see Berlusconi and people call him out. Here the same intelligent people from the Economist seem to immediately see the Thai flag and their knowledge of basic economics and sustainable economic development goes straight out the window.

Maybe it is all the CP funded Tom Yum Goong that is doing it ?!

[sriracha john]

Supreme Court issues arrest warrant against Thaksin in Ex-Im bank case

Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders Tuesday issued an arrest warrant against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra for failing to attend a trial in the case he allegedly abused his duty to grant a soft loan to Burma.

The court also decided to suspend the trial until Thaksin is arrested and brought the court.

Thaksin is accused of abusing his authority as the prime minister to have Bank for Exports and Imports to grant Bt4 billion soft loan to Burma so that the Burmese government could spend the money to buy telecom equipment and services of firms of Thaksin's family.

- The Nation / 2008-09-16

Edited September 16, 2008 by sriracha john