Should The UK Extradite Thaksin To Face The Thai Courts?

[Jingthing]

So, what do you think about Thaksin? Luxuriate in the UK or face "justice" back in Thailand where he is now a wanted criminal?

[poshthai]

I voted,and he is not a criminal until he is found guilty.sitting on the fence hear after a 7 day ban and i dont think we can discuss bargirls so we certainly cant comment on a powerful figure like thaksin,we have to be polite,non judgemental and non committed or use pms lol.

[Jingthing]

I voted,and he is not a criminal until he is found guilty.sitting on the fence hear after a 7 day ban and i dont think we can discuss bargirls so we certainly cant comment on a powerful figure like thaksin,we have to be polite,non judgemental and non committed or use pms lol.

No, I think someone who skips the country to avoid a required court appearance is a criminal by any definition. That part is not ambiguous. I think there is a good argument for letting him stay in a disgraced exile because it may contribute to more stability in Thailand to have him out of the picture.

[boiledegg]

Surely being life'd off to spent the rest of his days in the UK is punishment enough.

[poshthai]

Good point boiled egg lol.

[JimmyTheMook]

He is making an absolute mockery of the Thai justice system.

[Gaccha]

"I think someone who skips the country to avoid a required court appearance is a criminal by any definition. "

oh dear. Not by my definition. Obviously by Thai law, if without lawful excuse, he does not attend the trial that he must attend (i.e. breaches bail) then that is a crime in Thailand. But simply because it is illegal does not mean the Thai legal system is legitimate. And crucially, me thinks you are concerned with the latter(--"by any definition").

He has apparently not applied for asylum in the UK. I am not sure he will need to. Whether the UK will extradite him depends on the terms of the extradition treaty with the UK. The treaty requires that the UK judge should decline to extradite if he is unlikely to gain a fair trial. I can see a UK judge making that finding of fact. Thailand is a non-functioning democracy with a weak legal system.

Without any doubt, having to spend the rest of your life in the UK is punishment enough.

[Jingthing]

oh dear. Not by my definition.

But simply because it is illegal does not mean the Thai legal system is legitimate.

This is Thailand. It has an elected government. Thaksin is Thai. Where should be tried? Brussels? Good idea that, because they might nail him for the extra-judicial murders that he ordered.

Why the special sympathy for this man? Because he is rich? Some poor farang overstays his visa and people here scream throw the book at him.

Edited August 11, 2008 by Jingthing

[monkfish]

I voted yes but don't think they will extradite him. He has very very powerful friends in the UK and the crime isn't exactly murderer.

But I do agree a life in exile in the UK is probably worse than prison in Thailand especially in one of those Asylum camps! or even worse Manchester!

[Jingthing]

I voted yes but don't think they will extradite him. He has very very powerful friends in the UK and the crime isn't exactly murderer.

But I do agree a life in exile in the UK is probably worse than prison in Thailand especially in one of those Asylum camps! or even worse Manchester!

You are correct in the sense that he has not been formally charged with ordering the extra-judicial killings. That always bothered me alot more than selling Thai assets to Singapore, but I guess that is a "Thai thing".

Edited August 11, 2008 by Jingthing

[Gaccha]

oh dear. Not by my definition.

But simply because it is illegal does not mean the Thai legal system is legitimate.

This is Thailand. It has an elected government. Thaksin is Thai. Where should be tried? Brussels? Good idea that, because they might nail him for the extra-judicial murders that he ordered.

Why the special sympathy for this man? Because he is rich? Some poor farang overstays his visa and people here scream throw the book at him.

I have no special sympathy . If the facts are true, he manipulated his position in power to enrich his family. He also damaged democracy by mixing special favours with principles of good governance: he acted like an opposition leader while he was the governing leader. As an example, he provided large subsidies to regions that voted for him, and "punished" regions that voted against him . I merely wanted to question your decision to call him a criminal. States have a virtual monopoly on the imposition of this term (the ICC which you raise above is an interesting exception), and if the state is rotten, it can lead to rotten decisions.

As for: "where to try him", I think we should wait for Thailand to regain some stability (the present government has not passed a single piece of legislation since coming to power...). The ICC could bring a prosecution against him but he would be very hard to pin on the matters you are talking about. They have, of course, no jurisdiction over the current charges that are arraigned against him.

[Jingthing]

You know, Garccha, that is really rich, considering the current messed up political state can largely be put in Thaksin's personal lap. So now the country isn't stable enough to try him? Whose fault is that?

[Nignoy]

I voted yes, but the british govt will let him stay, the worst thing they could do is make him live in Wigan,or if they want to be really nasty make him move to Treforest and live among the grey people.

[Gaccha]

You know, Garccha, that is really rich, considering the current messed up political state can largely be put in Thaksin's personal lap. So now the country isn't stable enough to try him? Whose fault is that?

I think that is a fair point. This is a trillemma. Thailand can either have democracy (hold elections), have a rule of law or be stable, but only two at any one time.

If they try him, his trial will (continue to) destabilise the country, but it would return the rule of law. Thailand has had more coups than I have had girlfriends (albeit only just) so any glorious return by him is perhaps not what Thailand needs right now...

I will ask my friend, an ICC prosecutor, whether they would ever consider this matter. I suspect not, because they are too Africa-orientated and so hilariously understaffed they don't have enough gate security, let alone lawyers.

[boiledegg]

Thing is they can put him away but corruption in Thailand will not change one iota, even though he is more then likely guilty and is a nasty piece of work (drug killings) this trial is politically motivated as no one with his wealth has been on trial before (think im right in saying that) and if my theory that 99.9% of all the worlds politicians are lying, thieving, corrupt, up their ass, deluded with power, nasty, evil, self centred individuals then the ones who are opposing him arent any better.

[dee123]

the "West" regard the military coup illegal, of a Democratic elected govt,....saying that it was also regarded in West as an internal affair,...if he has British citizenship or right of abode in UK ,well then that is just about that and I don't think he will ever be deported unless his human rights record comes before the scrutiny of the international community.. UP THE SPURS

Edited August 11, 2008 by dee123

[IAmMarchHare]

Yes, I think they "should" extradite him. Somehow, I doubt it will happen, though.

[Gaccha]

\99.9% of all the worlds politicians are lying, thieving, corrupt, up their ass, deluded with power, nasty, evil, self centred individuals then the ones who are opposing him arent any better.

I think this is unfair if you are referring to democratic politicians. Many politicians genuinely go into politics with a sense of wanting to help others, to do good, to do their bit, to do their share of doing right. The process of politics is messy but they are often looking at the broader picture.

Let me ask you to look at it another way: you are presumably saying politicians standout with having these characteristics, that they are an especially abhorent group. I think not.

self centred

We are all self-centered. Even the most altruistic or kind-hearted of us has a "gain" to be had by behaving the way we do. If you are "charitable"(for this example, take it literally) then you will gain a reputation as being charitable and so acquire power (albeit "soft power"), in that people will be willing to help you in the future.

lying

We on average tell a lie once a paragraph in our daily conversations. Do not underestimate the virtue of insincerity. Lying can help ease social tensions, enhance cooperation, generate happiness. Motives for doing things when you are a politician often do seem cynical (doing something to gain the support of someone else) but again, look at the broader picture.

deluded with power

By this, you mean the power makes them feel they are more than they are. This applies to all of us. Those who succeed underestimate the luck involved and overestimate their skills. Those who fail overestimate the bad luck. Winning an election convinces you that you have a mission. See Obama and Blair.

nasty, evil

Well, certainly a lot of dictators fall into these areas, but democratic politicians... But then "what evil must we do in order to do good". In such positions with such enormous powers, you simply must sometimes make the decision to kill people or risk being killed.

lying, thieving, corrupt

This is structural. If you place a jam doughnut in front of a human they will take it. Make the system virtually corruption proof (e.g. the UK) and see what happens. And for anyone who thinks the UK is sytemically corrupt, it is you who are deluded.

[Tafia]

No, I think someone who skips the country to avoid a required court appearance is a criminal by any definition. That part is not ambiguous. I think there is a good argument for letting him stay in a disgraced exile because it may contribute to more stability in Thailand to have him out of the picture.

I voted No for the same reason as above. With him out of the way they may, just may be, a chance for some political stability since the election...and all said and done most of us are trying to get out of the UK!!

[cloudhopper]

He is making an absolute mockery of the Thai justice system.

Not to mention the English one, should they go along.

He has very very powerful friends in the UK and the crime isn't exactly murderer.

You mean the charge.

Without any doubt, having to spend the rest of your life in the UK is punishment enough.

Justice will somehow be served either way.

[roygsd]

So, what do you think about Thaksin? Luxuriate in the UK or face "justice" back in Thailand where he is now a wanted criminal?

Firstly Thaksin ( Mr) HAS NOT YET BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY CRIME, consequetly as yet he is not a wanted criminal.

A more relevant question is " Will the Thai Authorities ever ask the uk for MR OR MRS T to be extradited back to Thailand"?

I think that is very unlikely, sad to think that the only one going to jail is the poor servant T.I.T. for sure, a royal pardon would be in order fo rthe servant I think, would the king be prepared to intervene ? I would like to think so but I doubt it.

roy gsd

[PeaceBlondie]

Even when justice is just, its wheels grind slowly. Has Mr. Taksin been convicted of jaywalking or overcooking samtam? His wife has been convicted, and has jumped bail. How long does it take to extradite her?

At the beginning of the day, this is about who gets to keep control of Thailand. PAD may discover they have all just been tools in the hands of the elite. If only that box had contained chocolates....

[bdenner]

No - Even if it is just for the sake of political and civil stability.

[PhilHarries]

I voted for the third option not because I don't know/care but because the stark yes/no choice does not apply to Thailand.

If Thailand were a stable democracy with a free and independant judiciary where the guilty go to jail and the innocent walk free the answer would be a resounding YES.

But Thailand is not stable and we all know about it's judiciary so the answer should be NO, despite how much we may find Thaksin abhorrent he is entitled to a fair trial (glossing over his interpretation of fair trials in the war on drugs as that is not the current issue).

Actually the UK could be doing Thailand a favour if they refuse extradition as he is a threat to what fragile stability exists. But in any case I don't believe the PPP want him back as they have enough problems on their plate as it is and have proved themselves incompetant in solving even the minor issues they have tackled. Besides which the PPP engineered/allowed his departure as being the easy way out at least in the short term.

[JimShortz]

I really think they should extradite him back to Thailand - for his own safety. If he goes ahead with his plans to change the Manchester City FC crest his life will be in real danger in Manchester ;-)

[timekeeper]

i have already written to the Home Office in UK to urge his deportation.

i feel its not good practise for the UK to be seen to be harbouring wanted criminals.

Brits living here may even suffer a backlash from Thais or Thai authorities if its allowed to continue.

however aside from any repercussions in my view it sends the wrong message to the rest of the world.

[sference]

Good to know that you can be charged with stealing millions of dollars (convicted of tax evasion in his wife's case) and move to England, set up shop and buy a Soccer team with out having to face justice. Pretty good deal. I'm heading down to my local bank with a stickup note and catching the next flight to the UK. Do you think I can get political asylum? GW Bush is president after all. Surely I wont be treated fairly by the US justice system. I guess that sends a message to any criminals in the UK. Just take off to Thailand, maybe the Thai justice system will return the favour.

[sference]

So, what do you think about Thaksin? Luxuriate in the UK or face "justice" back in Thailand where he is now a wanted criminal?

Firstly Thaksin ( Mr) HAS NOT YET BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY CRIME, consequetly as yet he is not a wanted criminal.

A more relevant question is " Will the Thai Authorities ever ask the uk for MR OR MRS T to be extradited back to Thailand"?

I think that is very unlikely, sad to think that the only one going to jail is the poor servant T.I.T. for sure, a royal pardon would be in order fo rthe servant I think, would the king be prepared to intervene ? I would like to think so but I doubt it.

roy gsd

Wanted Fugitive then.

[Prakanong]

He is making an absolute mockery of the Thai justice system.

It wasn't a joke already?

[Prakanong]

I voted for the third option not because I don't know/care but because the stark yes/no choice does not apply to Thailand.

If Thailand were a stable democracy with a free and independant judiciary where the guilty go to jail and the innocent walk free the answer would be a resounding YES.

But Thailand is not stable and we all know about it's judiciary so the answer should be NO, despite how much we may find Thaksin abhorrent he is entitled to a fair trial (glossing over his interpretation of fair trials in the war on drugs as that is not the current issue).

Actually the UK could be doing Thailand a favour if they refuse extradition as he is a threat to what fragile stability exists. But in any case I don't believe the PPP want him back as they have enough problems on their plate as it is and have proved themselves incompetant in solving even the minor issues they have tackled. Besides which the PPP engineered/allowed his departure as being the easy way out at least in the short term.

That about mirrors my thoughts on the matter actually.