Pad Leader Sondhi Limthongkul Shot

[Thai at Heart]

I don't know where Abhisit is going with this amnesty plan. Maybe it's a move to counteract Newin's resurgence, maybe it's a move to pacify reds. I don't know how it will play out in the long term - if he lets troublemakers who led the country to the brink of revolution to come out from behind the curtains and take charge of parliament - I don't see any reconciliation coming from that move at all. Those tigers don't change spots, it will take time to build up popular opposition, but another mass uprising against corrupt politicians is unavoidable. People will not accept parliament ala PPP days and PAD will be the first one on the streets, and the likes of Chalerm will again play the role of the nation's democratic conscience to furhter disgust of millions.

It might work if Abhisit plays it right and no controversial figures are resurrected, but how is he going to achieve that? It will be a scramble to get into his good books and no legal rules to weed the troublemakers out. I don't see how it could work, but maybe he has some extra tricks up his sleeve.

I think it has been decided that the option of a coup is completely off the table, for now, after the last mess that it caused. It would appear that it has been decided that any solution to this problem has to be political. Maybe he has decided that it is impossible to have elections that everyone honours if a large amount of people are banned and their supporters feel disenfranchised. The only long term hope for the country is elections. The issue is the perceived unbiased application of election law and cleanliness of the elections. The only effective hope for the future is that the PM and parties involved have a clean mandate, and whilst we agree Abhisit got where he did today through the law, do you think he feels he got the job because of the true mandate of the country? He knows this as well as we all do.

Clean elections can be achieved. I think he is trying to restart the election process and if he loses, so be it. Don't forget, he still has a majority which means he can write election law as he sees fit, and throw so much supervision onto it, that the results can be clean. He still has enough in his armoury with the constitution to make sure that wrong doers at the polls can be caught and punished. He can call in independent observers, they can continue to red and yellow card people until the process is deemed clean. The EC can get massive extra funding to do it's job so that corruption can be weeded out. Are we to believe that it is IMPOSSIBLE to hold a clean election in Thailand after 60 odd years of trying?

[Thai at Heart]

Interesting post, although I have a feeling Abhisit put forward the amnesty to try and save his political skin and I don't believe that it was his initiative.

Abhisit's role in this is far from clear.

I don't think he is doing it to solve his political skin at all. Turkeys don't vote for Xmas. It is a shot at trying to find a way to resolve the problems of the last few years and calm down the country for the medium term.

I think it may be his idea although it doesn't really matter if it is. All that matters is that he is front and centre pushing it and appearing to support it.

Edited April 22, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[sriracha john]

More information possibly leads to Sondhi's shooters

The police yesterday (April 21) received another piece of information which could lead to the shooters of PAD’s leader, Sondhi Limthongkul.

The police revealed yesterday (April 21) that a witness had called in to report that before the shooting took place, he was driving in front of the vehicle carrying Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul, and got suddenly cut in by 2 pick up trucks.

The witness stated he could remember a number plate and the province of registration of one of the trucks. Police was still investigating whether the suspected truck had anything to do with the shooting.

Furthermore, the investigation team has been closely monitoring behaviors of one member of a local administrative office in the central northern part of Thailand since the suspect has some followers who are known to be experts in grenade and war weapons usage.

- ThaiNews / 2009-04-22

[Plus]

From reading this page it might appear that SJ is posting news in the wrong thread, btw.

There's no way Abhisit can assure clean elections by letting the foxes back in the chicken house, it sends the opposite message - electoral fraud is not really a wrongdoing that needs to be punished. He can't give them amnesty today and expect to dissolve parties for the same fraud later.

If you say party dissolution is wrong, but it's an old argument, party change names all the time, proxies are everywhere, MPs jump sides every few months - there's no party institution in Thai politics, it's all just names.

Banning party execs is adequate punishment, imo. Otherwise they can just appoint VP for electoral fraud, a temporary position, just for the campaign time. He'd deliver the votes, get his benefit package, and then let EC decide if he should be banned from taking the same job for five years or not.

Basic premise - giving amnesty for electoral fraud is not going to clean up politics and would further erode people's trust in parliament and political system and we would be back to square one:

"There's one and only law in this country - rigged elections. There's only winners and losers, winners get complete immunity and losers will be completely ignored. You think I broke the law - let's go to voting booth and see if you win. Can't win - there's no crime in whatever I do. Corruption and fraud don't exist, those are outdated concept - the ruling party cannot be corrupt by definition (winners), and opposition cannot be corrupt because they are not allowed a chance."

It took a year for judiciary to rule on fate of both TRT and then PPP later. A year of people patiently waiting for justice, time that PAD thought they couldn't afford so they took to the streets. During that time PPP tried to change the laws to excuse themselves and if not for PAD they would have succeeded.

How can Abhisit say "let's forget all this, let's welcome Yongyuth and Thammarak and a bunch of other fraudsters back"?

Edited April 22, 2009 by Plus

[Thai at Heart]

I meant to say, it appears as though Abhisit is a turkey voting for Xmas

[Plus]

I meant to say, it appears as though Abhisit is a turkey voting for Xmas

It certainly appears that way. Two birds with the same stone - alienating his own supporters and strengthening the opposition.

[sriracha john]

From reading this page it might appear that SJ is posting news in the wrong thread, btw.

yes, it is a trying experience to post on-topic news into some of these threads after reading though the preceding posts prompting me to have to recheck the thread title a couple of times just to be sure the news and threads do match.

Edited April 22, 2009 by sriracha john

[hammered]

Inviting banned ex-politcos who havent been convicted of crimes back into the parliamentary process does give them options. It could be argued to leave them on the outside cuts their options to indulging in street poltics and look where that has us.

It certainly divides Abhisit from those assumed to be his backers although that assumption may always have been false. Threats of coups if he does an amnesty/ammendment have already been made. However, at the end of the day the Dems are a parliamentary party with a fairly large electoral base. If being cynical it is easy to argue that as their power is and will always be based in parliament that they will try to always find a parliamentary way through things. That though creates divides with those who may have up to now backed them but who dont derive their power from parliament. That all of those banned were also once parliamentarians and want to be so again may just break the deadlock creating a palriamentary solution. That however would upset wings on both sides as compromise is compromise and means giving things up, so thr chances may not be as high as some think. Right now the role of Abhisit is under intense scrutiny and he does seem to be the fron round which it will coalesce or fall apart. Whether he is actually the prime move or even a part mover is moot but there must be some powerful group either backing him or pushing him or he wouldnt have succesfully come this far. He is a player or a face of a player.

[Samuian]

....................edited........

How can Abhisit say "let's forget all this, let's welcome Yongyuth and Thammarak and a bunch of other fraudsters back"?

That won't happen!

This is why I mentioned the often simply overlooked point

he made: "Not for those who have broken any laws!"

However interesting development in the shooting-case:

Now there is a witness who can remember the license plates

of one of the pick ups!

And things are pointing up north to a certain district officer....

Edited April 22, 2009 by Samuian

[Thai at Heart]

Inviting banned ex-politcos who havent been convicted of crimes back into the parliamentary process does give them options. It could be argued to leave them on the outside cuts their options to indulging in street poltics and look where that has us.

It certainly divides Abhisit from those assumed to be his backers although that assumption may always have been false. Threats of coups if he does an amnesty/ammendment have already been made. However, at the end of the day the Dems are a parliamentary party with a fairly large electoral base. If being cynical it is easy to argue that as their power is and will always be based in parliament that they will try to always find a parliamentary way through things. That though creates divides with those who may have up to now backed them but who dont derive their power from parliament. That all of those banned were also once parliamentarians and want to be so again may just break the deadlock creating a palriamentary solution. That however would upset wings on both sides as compromise is compromise and means giving things up, so thr chances may not be as high as some think. Right now the role of Abhisit is under intense scrutiny and he does seem to be the fron round which it will coalesce or fall apart. Whether he is actually the prime move or even a part mover is moot but there must be some powerful group either backing him or pushing him or he wouldnt have succesfully come this far. He is a player or a face of a player.

It depends what his backers consider what the outcome may be if this situation is allowed to ferment for too much longer. By that I don't mean PAD. At the end of the day, if they consider that there is a real threat to the foundations of the country in the medium term, then a solution has to be found one way or another.

I would expect Abhisit to willingly fall on his sword to do whatever needs to be done to prevent the country from splitting.

[Old Man River]

You are not Thai at heart. If you were, you would see things the way they really are.

Thais are not the type to "give" or "reconcile" unless they are driven by greed or fear. Imagine a Westerner's dark side and magnify by 3-4 times minimum.

Abhisit is stating the possibility of amnesty because he knows his time is near. You think this is a fight for "Western opinions"! Seriously, did the PAD give a flip about your thoughts? Did the army before or during or after the coup for over a year?

The only opinion that counts are Thai opinions...and the Thais are disloyal...show weakness and they will blame whoever is in office with the mess of violence, demonstrations, etc. Right now, that is the Democrats....that is the ONLY REASON the present/current PM is talking about potential reconciliation....remember those on his side had nothing to say about reconciliation when they thought they had it won....

What none of these maroons realize is that neither side will ever win....it's a stand down and it's apparent whoever is in control of the hill is easy to push off...too easy....

Thaksin is playing the card he has held off on due to fear or the need to have a final defense/offense....he's pushing it as hard as the army and the yellows did...full protests, full force, full statements to the press...win or lose, it's Russian stylle "scorched land" policy warfare....when it's over, both sides will have destroyed the country quite well....

...And if you are Thai at heart, you should know who will end up back on top when it is over....shouldn't you?

If we were looking at this completely from a Thai perspective, do you think that Abhisit would dare to suggest an amnesty? I don't for one second believe this idea is coming from his personal political fear at all. It may be his idea, but the reason behind it must be of greater importance than his immediate political future. He could quit tomorrow and go back to his previous life and would he be any worse off for it?

An amnesty should anyone else be in the PM's shoes would be absolutely unthinkable. I am sure there is massive opposition to this idea among some of the more strident members of his party and others in the army. But it would appear that the time has come for people to put up and shut up and let him get on with it and save the country from the very distinct possibility of splitting completely. There are much bigger players on this field than Abhisit, Newin who care more for their country in the long term than just the next election.

Do you think Abhisit has anything economically to gain from doing this? I just don't see it. There is a saying often used in Thailand about not forgetting where you come from. Well Abhisit may be Thai, but his entire formative years were spent learning Western concepts and understanding. I don't think it is possible to say that he is a typical Thai politician at all. What he is doing with this amnesty idea would in normal Thai politics be considered political suicide. People believed Thaksin wouldn't be corrupt because he was rich already. What we have here is possibly a politician falling on his own sword for the good of the country. Unheard of, but it may be true.

It is I believe a distinctly western concept to float the idea of an amnesty for so called "wrong doers" from the TRT days. What real political benefit does Abhisit gain from an amnesty when this will probably make it harder for him to win elections in the future? There is much more at stake for the long term future of Thailand than this governments immediate future. I don't think a typically Thai politician would dare to use the idea of an amnesty. It would be considered weakness, and go against the idea of smashing one's opponents to solidify one's position which is typical of how most normal political thinking goes not only in Thailand.

He said something like 'political mistakes have to treated differently from criminal activity', that is my quote not his. That sounds lawyer speak to me more than the previous type of bravado we may have got from any other Thai politician. Don't you think that a lot of very important people (unelected) got extremely worried about what they saw with the reds running amok in Bangkok, or do you think they just took it as part and parcel of daily life in Thailand? Do you think he is doing this out of his own political fear, or his and others greater fear for the long term future of the country? News stories were talking about the country being on the verge of civil war. This is not a trivial matter.

This has more to do with it than just uniting the country politically. It was on the verge of possibly polarising over a much greater issue. Thaksin has been accused of being a republican, the yellows have openly used images during their fight to show their loyalty. The amnesty is a huge gamble, but it may work and short of another coup (the traditional Thai way of calming things down), this idea may succeed in stopping the country splitting over a far more serious issue which could really pit Thai against Thai. Only a couple of weeks ago, Abhisit could have been battered to death in Pattaya in his car and then where would we be now?

As for knowing who will come out on top, well none of us has a crystal ball, and if you had tried to predict the events of the last few years, et alone the last few weeks, no-one would have got it right and predicted the level of polarisation that exists today in Thailand. As to who really comes out on top, there are more important people with a lot more to lose than just a Prime Ministership if the reds continue on their quest. He may have found a very clever way to calm most of them down.

Good post, but IMHO, no matter what Abhisit does, the Reds will still throw eggs at him or worse. They don't understand and even more dangerous, their leaders do understand and democracy is not in their leader's best interests. Thaksin, Jakropob, Jaturporn etc. want control and democracy means elections and changing governments, hardly the desired form of government when you want to maintain control of parliament indefinitely.

Given comments made by Sukhumphand in his interview (Spiegel Online), it explains why maintaining control of parliament or being able to quickly do so is paramount. It also explains why the military won't ever let control of parliament out of their sight and opens up the possibility to any number of deals being done as long as the military is party to them. In Abhisit's plan, given recent comments, it doesn't appear that the military is party to this.

[Plus]

Thisis why I mentioned the often simply overlooked point

he made: "Not for those who have broken any laws!"

That's the confusing part, I agree. Was Thammarak convicted personally at all? Yongyuth certainly was, his was a separate case from party dissolution.

As the current law stands - they all have broken them one way or another, at least by condoning electoral fraud commited by their fellow executives. Don't forget that executives, as party list MPs themselves, stood a lot to gain from Yongyuths successful bribing of state officials. Don't forget that there is still a loophole in the constitution where disquilying one vote buyer simply replaces him with the next in line on his party list and the vote buying party is not punished in any way, they don't lose even one MP seat.

I'm not against amnesty for least guilty, I just can't see how are they going to determine who deserves what, how are they going to retry the cases in parliament, with politicians voting for their bosses.

It could be argued to leave them on the outside cuts their options to indulging in street poltics and look where that has us.

Could be - but those who took the matter to the streets will be disqualified by Abhisit's own standards - no criminals.

[hammered]

Thisis why I mentioned the often simply overlooked point

he made: "Not for those who have broken any laws!"

That's the confusing part, I agree. Was Thammarak convicted personally at all? Yongyuth certainly was, his was a separate case from party dissolution.

As the current law stands - they all have broken them one way or another, at least by condoning electoral fraud commited by their fellow executives. Don't forget that executives, as party list MPs themselves, stood a lot to gain from Yongyuths successful bribing of state officials. Don't forget that there is still a loophole in the constitution where disquilying one vote buyer simply replaces him with the next in line on his party list and the vote buying party is not punished in any way, they don't lose even one MP seat.

I'm not against amnesty for least guilty, I just can't see how are they going to determine who deserves what, how are they going to retry the cases in parliament, with politicians voting for their bosses.

It could be argued to leave them on the outside cuts their options to indulging in street poltics and look where that has us.

Could be - but those who took the matter to the streets will be disqualified by Abhisit's own standards - no criminals.

One thing I read or heard the other day was a proposal that the EC and/or supreme court would look into each individual case to determine whether they had committed crimes or "made poltical mistakes" with all deemed to have only made "politcal mistakes" to be cleared. The legislation would either have to have a process liek that or be a blanket amnesty or be one that excluded those found guilty under the criminal code excluding poltical crimes. The EC/court idea may be the most straightforward.

[Plus]

I can't see how over a hundred cases can be properly investigated and tried (evidence, witnesses, prosecution, defence) in any reasonable period of time, not to mention the legality of it.

[hammered]

I can't see how over a hundred cases can be properly investigated and tried (evidence, witnesses, prosecution, defence) in any reasonable period of time, not to mention the legality of it.

I dont think the idea is to try them as such but to just have a judge or at least non-parlaimentary bias person clarify the status of each individual. It shouldnt take too long as most were just under the catch all as exectuives and these will be cleared. Thaksin, Thammarak, Yongyuth etc will not. Basically most will be amenstied and invited back very quickly.

[Thai at Heart]

I can't see how over a hundred cases can be properly investigated and tried (evidence, witnesses, prosecution, defence) in any reasonable period of time, not to mention the legality of it.

Where there is a will there is a way.

All it may take is an evidence review, since they were banned as a blanket ban, there are some that would be very simple.

[Plus]

So, basically it means having someone to compile an arbitrary list and then parliament vote on it.

Judges won't have anything to do with, it's outside justuce system.

It's up to a deal between politicians themselves, who to resurrect and who to bury. Shameless, no doubt, but what do they care.

What if they can't agree on who should be included?

It's a hornet nest, even if they ignore public protests.

[nitecm]

Interesting post, although I have a feeling Abhisit put forward the amnesty to try and save his political skin and I don't believe that it was his initiative.

Abhisit's role in this is far from clear.

He has the courage to start the ball rolling.But he difinately can not solve the problem but can reduce the problem.It may take many years to solve it because if you against corruption ,you are against the whole system.

Edited April 22, 2009 by nitecm

[hammered]

Remember the first person to propose a blanket amnesty was Gen Sonthi leader of the coup a few hours after the court decision. The amnesty itself wont be as contentious as the constitutional ammendments which Prasong has warned Abhisit about already. There will be some PAD opposition to an amnesty but if it seems to calm things down the silent majority will like it. Whether the really powerful will allow it is another question although maybe Abhisit is gambling on them being too worried about recent events right now to oppose it.

[Thai at Heart]

So, basically it means having someone to compile an arbitrary list and then parliament vote on it.

Judges won't have anything to do with, it's outside justuce system.

It's up to a deal between politicians themselves, who to resurrect and who to bury. Shameless, no doubt, but what do they care.

What if they can't agree on who should be included?

It's a hornet nest, even if they ignore public protests.

I don't think Abhisit is so stupid as to create a completely arbitrary system. There is no point in pursuing the idea if it doesn't stand up to some sort of scrutiny. Hey, it is a possible way out of this mess since obviously not all of the banned were complicit, so it is a way of sorting the chaff from the wheat.

Just as banning all has created problems, obviously reinstating all or some without some kind of scrutiny wouldn't solve the issue either.

[Losangels]

It also explains why the military won't ever let control of parliament out of their sight and opens up the possibility to any number of deals being done as long as the military is party to them. In Abhisit's plan, given recent comments, it doesn't appear that the military is party to this.

Agree with you. From the look of General Anupong's face when Abhisit had them gathered for the announcement of the state of emergency. The general looked dejected and wasn't in uniform-not that it mattered but it seemed odd to me.

[Thai at Heart]

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/topstory/3...Sondhi--witness

Two men in pickup fired at Sondhi : witness

By The Nation

Published on April 22, 2009

In the first and only account so far of the attempt on Sondhi Limthongkul's life last Friday, a petrol-station attendant revealed that two gunmen stood up on the bed of a black pickup and sprayed the media mogul's vehicle with bullets.

The unidentified witness said the gunmen were not hooded, and that one was tall with a crew cut, while the other was shorter and bulkier. The witness said Sondhi walked out of his van after the gunmen had fled and helped his driver, who was seriously injured, out of the vehicle. Pedestrians later came to their rescue and took them both to hospital.

A statement from Chulalongkorn Hospital, where Sondhi and his two aides are being treated, said yesterday that the PAD leader was recuperating well and that his gunshot wound was healing. Sondhi's driver, Adul Daengpradab, is also doing well and has regained full consciousness

Meanwhile, Pol General Thanee Somboonsab, the investigator charged with solving the case, admitted that police had no first-hand evidence about the murder attempt and were relying mainly on intelligence reports linking people likely to benefit from Sondhi's death.

"We don't know whether the masterminds are connected to the men in uniform, and if they are also behind the grenade attack on the Constitution Court," he added.

In a related development, Sondhi's son, Jittanart, blasted Channel 11 for citing unconfirmed reports that the fourth passenger in the van was a woman and suggesting she may be romantically linked to Sondhi, who is married.

Speaking on ASTV, a cable channel founded by his father, Jittanart repeated his theory that certain groups of officials may have been involved in the murder attempt.

Jittanart had earlier linked a politician, said to have been behind the blue shirts, as being involved in the attack, prompting the spokesman of Bhum Jai Thai Party, led by Newin Chidchob, to hold a press conference about the matter.

Meanwhile, People's Alliance for Democracy member Weera Somkwamkid quoted Sondhi as saying yesterday that while his life was hanging by a thread, his thoughts immediately went to His Majesty the King.

Weera said Sondhi recounted the attack as happening very quickly, but that it was still very clear in his mind. He also dismissed reports of ducking under the driver's seat to escape the hail of bullets.

"He was only thinking about His Majesty during the ambush," Weera said, adding that Sondhi may be discharged from hospital in the next day or two. This is the first time that Sondhi has spoken since the gangland-style shooting.

Reason for edit - Add the headline

Edited April 22, 2009 by Thai at Heart

[brahmburgers]

Meanwhile, little or no governing is going on. Thailand is rudderless.

It's like the US, during Nixon's final months. The only thing the executive branch could focus on was conspiracies, real and imagined. No legislation took place during those months, only hunkering down with a siege mentality - while cross-checking their 'enemies list' and conspiring to bring down opponents by any means.

Some of the priorities for Thailand should be:

>>> cleaning up the environment, including waterways, beaches, and how to instill a general sense, among Thais, of not littering and despoiling their country.

>>> rooting out corruption (never ending endeavor)

>>> making education free. Currently, the poorest people still have to pay about Bt.5000/year for each kid (new books, new clothes, new shoes, backpacks, etc). A very large sum for dirt poor folks on the fringes.

>>> finding ways to conserve energy

>>> designing sensible plans for future energy production (suggest: solar, not nuclear)

>>> dealing with farang residents as associates, rather than perpetual 'other people' who's only worth is how much money they bring in and spend in Thailand.

bb

[Plus]

Perhaps Abhisit is simply buying time - all talk and no action.

Amnesty will not have a life of its own, it's tied up with const amendments and Abhisit gave a two week deadline for proposals without actually committing to anything. He might throw most of them out of the window and set some sort of a committee that would take forever to achieve anyting, and then there's public input and so on.

Watching the joint parliament-senate debate might give some clues as to where all the factions stand and the kind of timeframe we are looking at.

Actually it feels like Abhisit must do something for Reconciliation TM but he has no idea what, so he sent out feelers. This indeciveness was immediately capitalised on by PTP who are all over the media with their own ideas and they excude a lot of confidence that they will get what they want.

Personally Abhisit did very well with the riots, but he also probably realised that he was betrayed by Anupong and possibly even Suthep. He sidelined them, and the police, but once the upcountry troops leave Bangkok - who's going to watch his back? He still works out of a bunker somewhere. He has full public support but that doesn't immediately translate into security.

[LawnGnome]

Perhaps Abhisit is simply buying time - all talk and no action.

Amnesty will not have a life of its own, it's tied up with const amendments and Abhisit gave a two week deadline for proposals without actually committing to anything. He might throw most of them out of the window and set some sort of a committee that would take forever to achieve anyting, and then there's public input and so on.

Watching the joint parliament-senate debate might give some clues as to where all the factions stand and the kind of timeframe we are looking at.

Actually it feels like Abhisit must do something for Reconciliation TM but he has no idea what, so he sent out feelers. This indeciveness was immediately capitalised on by PTP who are all over the media with their own ideas and they excude a lot of confidence that they will get what they want.

Personally Abhisit did very well with the riots, but he also probably realised that he was betrayed by Anupong and possibly even Suthep. He sidelined them, and the police, but once the upcountry troops leave Bangkok - who's going to watch his back? He still works out of a bunker somewhere. He has full public support but that doesn't immediately translate into security.

Betrayed? Can you elaborate?

[Plus]

I can only speculate, there are precious few hints as to what was going on after Pattaya fiasco.

Reportedly he was furious with Suthep who was in charge of the security that simply evaporated, blue shirts he helped to set up didn't help Abhisist either. Then ABhisit was practically lynched in Bangkok and the army and the police didn't do anything. Then he set up operation center with support of some generals that didn't include Anupong, then there was public appearance where Anupong was demoted to sit far away from him. Then, after the riots, Anupong went on TV to talk about crackdown as if he was fully in charge, or as he feels fully in charge again.

[samgrowth]

Democracy is something worth dying for.

It is unfortunate that Sondhi is not dead yet.

[LawnGnome]

Democracy is something worth dying for.

It is unfortunate that Sondhi is not dead yet.

Yes, wishing death on someone is always the right way to go.

[Plus]

At least Sonthi is trying. Reds are not as determined.

[Ricardo]

Democracy is something worth dying for.

It is unfortunate that Sondhi is not dead yet.

Yes, wishing death on someone is always the right way to go.

It displays real tolerance of alternative views, and a deep understanding of democracy, to wish your opponents dead, rather than just defeated.

Just think how much better-off Thailand might be, if Sondhi had kept quiet about all the cases of corruption, under Thaksin's TRT-governments !