Thaksin Petition Will Be Thrown Out: Pm

[webfact]

Thaksin petition will be thrown out: PM

By THE NATION ON SUNDAY

Published on August 16, 2009

Only he or his family may present one legally, premier is advised

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday that the petition by supporters of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra to seek Royal clemency for him would be rejected as it did not conform to legal criteria.

Abhisit said Thaksin himself or his family must be the petitioners. He said normally the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary would seek the government's opinion about the petition and if the government believed the petition did not conform to the criteria, it could dismiss it on the grounds of legality.

He said that if the red shirts filed a general-complaint petition, the government would look into the matter but a political petition was another matter.

The prime minister said he had instructed caretaker national police chief General Wichian Pojphosri to try to prevent clashes between two political rival groups with events expected to take place close to each other tomorrow.

One event is the verdict in the rubber-sapling case to be read at the Supreme Court's Political Division for Political Office Holders. One of the defendants is Newin Chidchob, a core leader of the Bhum Jai Thai Party.

Newin's supporters the blue shirts are expected to turn up at the court, which is located just across the road from Sanam Luang, where the red shirts plan to gather in a show of force before filing the petition for Thaksin.

The PM urged the red shirts to rally within the frame of the law after a report that they planned to stage a protest outside Government House. "The country is moving forward: do not let it trip,'' he said.

Meanwhile the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration will send 200 municipal police to check CCTVs installed at significant spots around Sanam Luang yesterday night to ensure that they work properly, and security officials will stand by at some spots to prevent anyone from damaging the CCTVs. Mobile medical units will also be sent to the area tomorrow morning.

Defence Ministry spokesman Colonel Thanathip Sawangsaeng said the military was ready to help police if they needed its support to keep the peace in the capital.

Veera Musikapong, a leader of the Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship, said the red-shirt rally would start in the morning at Sanam Luang with Thaksin phoning in to thank his supporters, who would move to the Bureau of the Royal Household at 1pm. They will sing the royal anthem before dispersing at 2pm, he said.

He said there would not be any clash even if the red shirts were provoked.

Special Branch Police Bureau commissioner Lt-General Theeradet Rodpothong said police expected about 20,000 red shirts from 50 provinces would come to Bangkok to attend the rally.

Meanwhile, Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Political Sciences dean Charat Suwanmala lectured yesterday on petitioning for clemency, saying laws in most countries opposes amnesty for politicians convicted of conflict of interest.

"If politicians are sentenced to jail and a government siding with them legislates to grant amnesty, the justice system is under the influence of lawmakers and the government, and the balance of power is disrupted,'' he said.

-- The Nation 2009/08/16

[Jingthing]

Those who are sympathetic with the outrageously improper petition will NEVER support Abhisit or the Thai DEMOCRATS, so politically Abhisit did the exactly correct thing to stamp this stunt down. Bridge to the red radicals who are focused on only one thing, the reinstatement of their criminal hero? That is not possible.

(BTW, the red shirts are not pro-democratic, they are pro-Thaksin.)

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=2944384

Edited August 16, 2009 by Jingthing

[britmaveric]

Bad move for the the anti-democratic lead and illegal Abhisit government!

[soundman]

Posts have been removed.

Please do not modify, change colour or font of other quoted posts.

Forum Netiquette. Here.

2. Please do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes or wording. Such posts will be deleted and the user warned.

[Insight]

Bad move for the the anti-democratic lead and illegal Abhisit government!

And why should that be?

I believe what Abhisit is doing is based on a concept introduced many years ago but has been allowed to slip somewhat, especially post 2001.

If I recall correctly the concept is called THE LAW.

[Plus]

Well, if the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary indeed needs governemnt's endorsement of this petition - what do you expect the govt will say?

[animatic]

The majority of clear thinking people have stated this petition is improper,

It would be foolish for Abhisit to not also state as such.

He need not actively kill it, it's very existence is based on

spurious premise and can't go far anyway.

[johncitizen]

As far as I am aware, not only is the petition in accordance with the highest law in the land, the Constitution, to which all other laws, protocols and traditions are subordinate- it also has historical precedence as well.

Thailand is, at least in theory if not practice, a Constitutional Monarchy, which means that even the highest institution is bound by and must respect the laws of the land. Admittedly, the present government and their benefactors in the military have proven themselves capable of ignoring or subverting law, tradition and the will of the majority of the people time and time again- but the fact of the matter is that this petition is perfectly legal, and the government cannot legitimately stand in the way of it reaching the King himself.

What you are witnessing right now is the slippery fascists who are taking this nation for all its worth quaking in their boots over the imminence of their true nature being revealed. The Reds, for all their mistakes in the past, have well and truly gotten them into a corner with this brilliant piece of political manoeuvring, and there are only two options left available to them:

a ) Allow the petition to reach the King, and risk either their most hated enemy waltzing back into the country as a free man with a lot of "bones to pick", or an extremely difficult political situation

b ) Taking a page out of Hun Sen's little book of tricks.

Either way, tomorrow is going to be a big day. The question on my lips and the lips of many others I'm sure is: can five million people be charged with lese-majeste?

Edited August 16, 2009 by johncitizen

[hkt83100]

Please do not modify, change colour or font of other quoted posts.

It seems this includes cutting down quotes to a proper length. I see so many full quotes followed by a short sentence here, these should at least trigger warnings, too. About two or three lines of code in the forum software would be very helpful...

[scorecard]

Well, if the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary indeed needs governemnt's endorsement of this petition - what do you expect the govt will say?

Wow, the twisting of what's actually been said is unbelievable.

The government or anybody else has NOT said that the petition "needs the government's support"

The government in fact has no other option that to follow the appropriate laws on this matter which are very clear and very specific.

[Jingthing]

Please do not modify, change colour or font of other quoted posts.

It seems this includes cutting down quotes to a proper length. I see so many full quotes followed by a short sentence here, these should at least trigger warnings, too. About two or three lines of code in the forum software would be very helpful...

I cut down the size of quotes all the time. Otherwise, you get these ridiculous threads with posts a mile long, when you only wish to respond to one or two sentences of another post. I intend to continue to do so. In fact, I have seen mods scold people for including large bunches of quotes.

[animatic]

"The fact of the matter"... what a wonderful phrase.

Can be applied to anything to make it seem particularly correct

and the speaker to sound particularly authoritative.

As a political document this maybe alright as a plea to royal indulgences,

but as a plea to have HRM over-rule the courts extra-constitutionally and

using the premise that 'Only Thaksin Can Save The Country, so pardon him',

is not at all proper, and his family has not signed on so as not to be painted

with the same brush.

And so they have the option to actually do this properly at a later date.

This is a political ploy and not a proper action of the people.

Pressuring the highest chair is a very poor way to gain sympathy.

[geriatrickid]

Meanwhile, Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Political Sciences dean Charat Suwanmala lectured yesterday on petitioning for clemency, saying laws in most countries opposes amnesty for politicians convicted of conflict of interest.

"If politicians are sentenced to jail and a government siding with them legislates to grant amnesty, the justice system is under the influence of lawmakers and the government, and the balance of power is disrupted,'' he said.

Interesting statement. I wonder what his position is on the legality of a military coup?

What he fails to mention is that if the political process and the judicial process is corrupted then the outcome is tainted and invalid. that is the cornerstone of judicial process. It seems consistency isn't this fellows forte.

Bad move for the the anti-democratic lead and illegal Abhisit government!

And why should that be?

I believe what Abhisit is doing is based on a concept introduced many years ago but has been allowed to slip somewhat, especially post 2001.

If I recall correctly the concept is called THE LAW.

The law calls for impartiality. Maybe thaksin was guilty, but the manner in which he was tried and convicted was neither fair nor transparent, The end does not justify the means when it comes to a trial. The hypocrisy of people that cling to the court's verdicy and yet on the other hand bemoan the lack of integrity in the judiciary is incredible. Don't assume that because people recoil at the verdict that they have taken sides, What many people want is a fair trial.

[cougar52]

I am truly and totally confused , can someone please explain this to me. If the PM states;

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday that the petition by supporters of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra to seek Royal clemency for him would be rejected as it did not conform to legal criteria.

The the thing that I want to know, why so much government interference, why so much money has been spent to combat the thing, why all this waste of time and money from the Government if (it does not conform to legal criteria).

WHO IS RUNNING THIS COUNTRY?????????

[Jingthing]

The the thing that I want to know, why so much government interference, why so much money has been spent to combat the thing, why all this waste of time and money from the Government if (it does not conform to legal criteria).

That's a fair question. The Thai government's reaction to this hot potato of a petition has been less than stellar or coherent overall. I think the tough talk we are hearing now (it will be ignored because it is illegal) should have been the first, middle, and last response. If the Abhisit government has made a mistake on this, I think that is it, to dignify the petition with any kind of response other than complete rejection.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Jingthing

[animatic]

I am truly and totally confused , can someone please explain this to me. If the PM states;

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday that the petition by supporters of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra to seek Royal clemency for him would be rejected as it did not conform to legal criteria.

The the thing that I want to know, why so much government interference, why so much money has been spent to combat the thing, why all this waste of time and money from the Government if (it does not conform to legal criteria).

WHO IS RUNNING THIS COUNTRY?????????

Many people are running the government, what they do depends on their positions.

Why counter act this petition?

Legal or not, depending on wording.

It is an attempt at making a biased public referendum on Thaksin,

and foist it off as an actual referendum,

and pressuring HRM to take sides, against constitutional rules.

It is an attempt to raise Thaksin above his station in the eyes of his target base.

It is an attempt to alienate great swaths of the public from the government and each other.

Divide and conquer.

And a false wedge issue to stir up passions as the clock ticks down on his money on court oct Nov.

Thaksin has few options that money can buy and he is spending it where he can.

[Plus]

Well, if the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary indeed needs governemnt's endorsement of this petition - what do you expect the govt will say?

Wow, the twisting of what's actually been said is unbelievable.

The government or anybody else has NOT said that the petition "needs the government's support"

The government in fact has no other option that to follow the appropriate laws on this matter which are very clear and very specific.

Here's a quote from the OP again:

"Abhisit said Thaksin himself or his family must be the petitioners. He said normally the Office of His Majesty's Principal Private Secretary would seek the government's opinion about the petition and if the government believed the petition did not conform to the criteria, it could dismiss it on the grounds of legality."

What exactly have I twisted? I said "if indeed it needs govt endorsement". Abhisit says "normally" the Office "would seek" govt opinion, and he said what the govt would do in this particular case.

What do you think would be the outcome of govt following appropriate laws other than dismissal?

>>>

Another poster said the petition is perfectly legal without any support for this claim. Consitution says "The King can grant a pardon" but it does not give people the right to petition the King directly and if the petition does not reach the King, there's nothing they can do. It would be perfectly legal for any of the responsible agencies to turn it down on any of the procedural steps.

There's a chance that it would be passed straight through. That would also be legal, I suppose, but I don't think it would really happen. That would be a real "coup", a real big surprise.

We shall see tomorrow.

[animatic]

The manner of Thaksin's conviction was wide open and seen by the public.

The logic of the decisions by the judges was explained publicly

and the counts and their reasonings also made public.

He signed the paper allowing his wife to buy the property,

he was PM at that time,

and 'the boss of that financial departments boss' to put it colloquially.

This is cut and dried, he had no right in his position to sing that paper.

It was demonstrably a sweetheart deal WAY below market value.

The ONLY 2 other bidders were TRT party supporters who had put

large sums behind Thaksin's election bids and his party activities.

I know it's popular in redden thought to repeat over and over,

he was illegally convicted,

but the facts made public peak for themselves.

He broke the law in office and got caught boo hoo.

He was convicted and got a rather short sentence.

But hasn't got the stones to stand the sentence.

[cougar52]

The manner of Thaksin's conviction was wide open and seen by the public.

The logic of the decisions by the judges was explained publicly

and the counts and their reasonings also made public.

He signed the paper allowing his wife to buy the property,

he was PM at that time,

and 'the boss of that financial departments boss' to put it colloquially.

This is cut and dried, he had no right in his position to sing that paper.

It was demonstrably a sweetheart deal WAY below market value.

The ONLY 2 other bidders were TRT party supporters who had put

large sums behind Thaksin's election bids and his party activities.

I know it's popular in redden thought to repeat over and over,

he was illegally convicted,

but the facts made public peak for themselves.

He broke the law in office and got caught boo hoo.

He was convicted and got a rather short sentence.

But hasn't got the stones to stand the sentence.

In regards to his signing, it is required by law, as the husband in a land transaction!!!!!

[way2muchcoffee]

In regards to his signing, it is required by law, as the husband in a land transaction!!!!!

Indeed. However, given his status as PM it was also illegal under anti-corruption laws that were in existence at the time.

[Scott]

Why has the gov't been so slow to respond to everything and so disorganized? First it was just inappropriate, then it was something else, and now it's illegal?

Surely if it's illegal then there is a law that they can cite. And why wait until a couple of days before the petition is filed to bring this up?

A day late and a dollar short!

[cougar52]

In regards to his signing, it is required by law, as the husband in a land transaction!!!!!

Indeed. However, given his status as PM it was also illegal under anti-corruption laws that were in existence at the time.

I will leave this for you to ponder??????

The FIDF is an entity set up to solve financial crises in the country many years before Thaksin arrived on the political scene. This office first put this land on public auction in July 2003. There were three development companies that were interested. However, the minimum bid was too high (B870 Mil) and FIDF cancelled the auction.

In November 2003, FIDF again announced sale of this land to the public via its website. Khunying Pajamarn was interested in the land for residential purposes and appointed her attorney submit a bid.

The FIDF appointed two committees to supervise the bidding process, the bid acceptance committee and the price opening committee. There were 4 potential bidders. But before each potential bidder can submit a bid, their qualification must be approved by these committees. One of the potential bidders was disqualified because their attorney who submitted the bid was not properly authorized. Khunying Pajamarn (offered B772 Mil) and two others are found to be qualified. The other two were publicly listed real estate developers, Noble Development Public Co. LTD. (offered B750 Mil), and House Public Co. LTD. (offered B730 Mil).

In December 2003, after the opening of the bidding price, the committee held a meeting to approve the sale to the highest bidder and the Land Sale and Purchased Agreement was signed with Khunyin Pajamarn.

Also in December 2003, Thaksin, as a husband, signed the consent form required to effect the registration of the land transfer. As part of the formality of any registration of real estate requiring spousal consent, he used his official identity card. It shows his official title as Prime Minister.

And this is important… Prior to putting down his signature, it was confirmed that the office of the Prime Minister is neither the office in charge of, nor has the authority to direct or supervise the FIDF. This is supported by the Supreme Court decision No. 4655/2533 which ruled that the FIDF is a separate and distinct juristic body independent from the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Thailand. It has its own rights and duty in accordance with laws and regulations within the boundary of its objectives.

[Insight]

Meanwhile, Chulalongkorn University's Faculty of Political Sciences dean Charat Suwanmala lectured yesterday on petitioning for clemency, saying laws in most countries opposes amnesty for politicians convicted of conflict of interest.

"If politicians are sentenced to jail and a government siding with them legislates to grant amnesty, the justice system is under the influence of lawmakers and the government, and the balance of power is disrupted,'' he said.

Interesting statement. I wonder what his position is on the legality of a military coup?

What he fails to mention is that if the political process and the judicial process is corrupted then the outcome is tainted and invalid. that is the cornerstone of judicial process. It seems consistency isn't this fellows forte.

Bad move for the the anti-democratic lead and illegal Abhisit government!

And why should that be?

I believe what Abhisit is doing is based on a concept introduced many years ago but has been allowed to slip somewhat, especially post 2001.

If I recall correctly the concept is called THE LAW.

The law calls for impartiality. Maybe thaksin was guilty, but the manner in which he was tried and convicted was neither fair nor transparent, The end does not justify the means when it comes to a trial. The hypocrisy of people that cling to the court's verdicy and yet on the other hand bemoan the lack of integrity in the judiciary is incredible. Don't assume that because people recoil at the verdict that they have taken sides, What many people want is a fair trial.

The man ran away. With all his cash and media attention he is so familiar with commanding that could put an international spotlight on any regularities in any of the cases against him, thus helping to ensure something pretty close to a fair trial, he chose instead to run away (and then attempt a remote controlled revolution).

Coup was illegal? Is that the best his PR teams can do? So what? History will soon dictate (if it doesn't already) it had as much legality as the way he personally run the country, and now he needs a "petition" (I can't go to jail because these people love me - in a really manufactured way) to get him off the hook.

[geriatrickid]

The man ran away. With all his cash and media attention he is so familiar with commanding that could put an international spotlight on any regularities in any of the cases against him, thus helping to ensure something pretty close to a fair trial, he chose instead to run away (and then attempt a remote controlled revolution).

Coup was illegal? Is that the best his PR teams can do? So what? History will soon dictate (if it doesn't already) it had as much legality as the way he personally run the country, and now he needs a "petition" (I can't go to jail because these people love me - in a really manufactured way) to get him off the hook.

So if I understand you correctly, your position is that when a totalitarian regime interferes with the judicial process and acts to preclude a fair trial, the accused should just accept his or her fate? Maybe that work's for you, but most rational people would hightail it out of there.

So basically you are in agreement with the military coup. The rest of your statement means nothing since the act in question was an illegal overthrow of a legitimate government. The issue for me wasn't how Thaksin ran his government, but the way in which it was overthrown. Many people didn't like Thathcher, Bush etc, but they the military did not over throw those leaders. In India and Korea where there have been street riots, the military and the police do not overthrow the government. Why is a military coup justified in Thailand when the level of corruption certainly was no worse than that seen in some other countries or even some US states or the London city council at one time?

I think Moonraker has explained the situation best. Succint and to the point.

[animatic]

In regards to his signing, it is required by law, as the husband in a land transaction!!!!!

Indeed. However, given his status as PM it was also illegal under anti-corruption laws that were in existence at the time.

I will leave this for you to ponder??????

The FIDF is an entity set up to solve financial crises in the country many years before Thaksin arrived on the political scene. This office first put this land on public auction in July 2003. There were three development companies that were interested. However, the minimum bid was too high (B870 Mil) and FIDF cancelled the auction.

In November 2003, FIDF again announced sale of this land to the public via its website. Khunying Pajamarn was interested in the land for residential purposes and appointed her attorney submit a bid.

The FIDF appointed two committees to supervise the bidding process, the bid acceptance committee and the price opening committee. There were 4 potential bidders. But before each potential bidder can submit a bid, their qualification must be approved by these committees. One of the potential bidders was disqualified because their attorney who submitted the bid was not properly authorized. Khunying Pajamarn (offered B772 Mil) and two others are found to be qualified. The other two were publicly listed real estate developers, Noble Development Public Co. LTD. (offered B750 Mil), and House Public Co. LTD. (offered B730 Mil).

In December 2003, after the opening of the bidding price, the committee held a meeting to approve the sale to the highest bidder and the Land Sale and Purchased Agreement was signed with Khunyin Pajamarn.

Also in December 2003, Thaksin, as a husband, signed the consent form required to effect the registration of the land transfer. As part of the formality of any registration of real estate requiring spousal consent, he used his official identity card. It shows his official title as Prime Minister.

And this is important… Prior to putting down his signature, it was confirmed that the office of the Prime Minister is neither the office in charge of, nor has the authority to direct or supervise the FIDF. This is supported by the Supreme Court decision No. 4655/2533 which ruled that the FIDF is a separate and distinct juristic body independent from the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Thailand. It has its own rights and duty in accordance with laws and regulations within the boundary of its objectives.

Would that be the same Supreme court he bought off to get by the assets concealment case...

Why yes, it would be.

It was later determined he actually was the boss of the department that controls that office.

He had abilities to sway that department from his position, and so that was enough.

~~FDIF means what again?

FDIF set up by whom...? Government under whom?

Not that it makes much difference.

Thaksin was totally thick with the government and bureaucracies coming up to and through the Asian Tiger mauling,

and specifically harried the guys who were taking the country back to solvency until his coalition TRT

finally came in and took credit for a booming WORLD economy.

[Insight]

So if I understand you correctly, your position is that when a totalitarian regime interferes with the judicial process and acts to preclude a fair trial, the accused should just accept his or her fate? Maybe that work's for you, but most rational people would hightail it out of there.

Well hang on while I try and understand you correctly here before I confirm. By "totalitarian regime interferes" do you mean the bribery attempt with the pastry boxes?

As far as I'm aware the rest of the trial was pretty open to the point of the finer issues surrounding the case being discussed on this thread.

[Lite Beer]

Speculative posts referring to the Monarchy have been deleted.

[cougar52]

In regards to his signing, it is required by law, as the husband in a land transaction!!!!!

Indeed. However, given his status as PM it was also illegal under anti-corruption laws that were in existence at the time.

I will leave this for you to ponder??????

The FIDF is an entity set up to solve financial crises in the country many years before Thaksin arrived on the political scene. This office first put this land on public auction in July 2003. There were three development companies that were interested. However, the minimum bid was too high (B870 Mil) and FIDF cancelled the auction.

In November 2003, FIDF again announced sale of this land to the public via its website. Khunying Pajamarn was interested in the land for residential purposes and appointed her attorney submit a bid.

The FIDF appointed two committees to supervise the bidding process, the bid acceptance committee and the price opening committee. There were 4 potential bidders. But before each potential bidder can submit a bid, their qualification must be approved by these committees. One of the potential bidders was disqualified because their attorney who submitted the bid was not properly authorized. Khunying Pajamarn (offered B772 Mil) and two others are found to be qualified. The other two were publicly listed real estate developers, Noble Development Public Co. LTD. (offered B750 Mil), and House Public Co. LTD. (offered B730 Mil).

In December 2003, after the opening of the bidding price, the committee held a meeting to approve the sale to the highest bidder and the Land Sale and Purchased Agreement was signed with Khunyin Pajamarn.

Also in December 2003, Thaksin, as a husband, signed the consent form required to effect the registration of the land transfer. As part of the formality of any registration of real estate requiring spousal consent, he used his official identity card. It shows his official title as Prime Minister.

And this is important… Prior to putting down his signature, it was confirmed that the office of the Prime Minister is neither the office in charge of, nor has the authority to direct or supervise the FIDF. This is supported by the Supreme Court decision No. 4655/2533 which ruled that the FIDF is a separate and distinct juristic body independent from the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Thailand. It has its own rights and duty in accordance with laws and regulations within the boundary of its objectives.

Would that be the same Supreme court he bought off to get by the assets concealment case...

Why yes, it would be.

It was later determined he actually was the boss of the department that controls that office.

He had abilities to sway that department from his position, and so that was enough.

~~FDIF means what again?

FDIF set up by whom...? Government under whom?

Not that it makes much difference.

Thaksin was totally thick with the government and bureaucracies coming up to and through the Asian Tiger mauling,

and specifically harried the guys who were taking the country back to solvency until his coalition TRT

finally came in and took credit for a booming WORLD economy.

In January 2007, the Financial Institutions Development Fund complied with the Assets Examination Committee request to file a charge against Thaksin and his wife over their purchase of four 772 million baht plots of land from the FIDF in 2003. The charge was based on alleged violation of Section 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act, which specifies that government officials and their spouses are prohibited from entering into or having interests in contracts made with state agencies under their authorisation. However, Section 4 of the Act indicates that persons committing malfeasance must be direct supervisors of the damaged party - in this case, the FIDF. At the time, Bank of Thailand Governor Pridiyathorn Devakula directly supervised the FIDF, not Thaksin.Section 29 of the Bank of Thailand Act of 1942 stated that the Prime Minister did not have jurisdiction to oversee the FIDF, because those managing the fund had sole authority for policies, control, oversight and regulations governing the agency. Pridiyathorn's testimony to the court occurred in secret - Thaksin's legal team was not allowed in the room. The FIDF later noted that the land was sold to the Shinawatras at a price greater than its appraised value. The case went to the Supreme Court 10 July 2007.

To answer you FDIF was set up by the Bank of Thailand in 1985(Not Thaksin) and was governed by Director of the Bank of Thailand. The charges against them were filed after a request from the AEC after the Coup and the change of the constitution.

So lets be totally fair when we put the wisdom in public, OK?

[animatic]

In regards to his signing, it is required by law, as the husband in a land transaction!!!!!

Indeed. However, given his status as PM it was also illegal under anti-corruption laws that were in existence at the time.

I will leave this for you to ponder??????

The FIDF is an entity set up to solve financial crises in the country many years before Thaksin arrived on the political scene. This office first put this land on public auction in July 2003. There were three development companies that were interested. However, the minimum bid was too high (B870 Mil) and FIDF cancelled the auction.

In November 2003, FIDF again announced sale of this land to the public via its website. Khunying Pajamarn was interested in the land for residential purposes and appointed her attorney submit a bid.

The FIDF appointed two committees to supervise the bidding process, the bid acceptance committee and the price opening committee. There were 4 potential bidders. But before each potential bidder can submit a bid, their qualification must be approved by these committees. One of the potential bidders was disqualified because their attorney who submitted the bid was not properly authorized. Khunying Pajamarn (offered B772 Mil) and two others are found to be qualified. The other two were publicly listed real estate developers, Noble Development Public Co. LTD. (offered B750 Mil), and House Public Co. LTD. (offered B730 Mil).

In December 2003, after the opening of the bidding price, the committee held a meeting to approve the sale to the highest bidder and the Land Sale and Purchased Agreement was signed with Khunyin Pajamarn.

Also in December 2003, Thaksin, as a husband, signed the consent form required to effect the registration of the land transfer. As part of the formality of any registration of real estate requiring spousal consent, he used his official identity card. It shows his official title as Prime Minister.

And this is important… Prior to putting down his signature, it was confirmed that the office of the Prime Minister is neither the office in charge of, nor has the authority to direct or supervise the FIDF. This is supported by the Supreme Court decision No. 4655/2533 which ruled that the FIDF is a separate and distinct juristic body independent from the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Thailand. It has its own rights and duty in accordance with laws and regulations within the boundary of its objectives.

Would that be the same Supreme court he bought off to get by the assets concealment case...

Why yes, it would be.

It was later determined he actually was the boss of the department that controls that office.

He had abilities to sway that department from his position, and so that was enough.

~~FDIF means what again?

FDIF set up by whom...? Government under whom?

Not that it makes much difference.

Thaksin was totally thick with the government and bureaucracies coming up to and through the Asian Tiger mauling,

and specifically harried the guys who were taking the country back to solvency until his coalition TRT

finally came in and took credit for a booming WORLD economy.

In January 2007, the Financial Institutions Development Fund complied with the Assets Examination Committee request to file a charge against Thaksin and his wife over their purchase of four 772 million baht plots of land from the FIDF in 2003. The charge was based on alleged violation of Section 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act, which specifies that government officials and their spouses are prohibited from entering into or having interests in contracts made with state agencies under their authorisation. However, Section 4 of the Act indicates that persons committing malfeasance must be direct supervisors of the damaged party - in this case, the FIDF. At the time, Bank of Thailand Governor Pridiyathorn Devakula directly supervised the FIDF, not Thaksin.Section 29 of the Bank of Thailand Act of 1942 stated that the Prime Minister did not have jurisdiction to oversee the FIDF, because those managing the fund had sole authority for policies, control, oversight and regulations governing the agency. Pridiyathorn's testimony to the court occurred in secret - Thaksin's legal team was not allowed in the room. The FIDF later noted that the land was sold to the Shinawatras at a price greater than its appraised value. The case went to the Supreme Court 10 July 2007.

To answer you FDIF was set up by the Bank of Thailand in 1985(Not Thaksin) and was governed by Director of the Bank of Thailand. The charges against them were filed after a request from the AEC after the Coup and the change of the constitution.

So lets be totally fair when we put the wisdom in public, OK?

And who does Bank of Thailand Governor Pridiyathorn Devakula answer to? Or Tarisa etc.

Never said Thaksin started the TDIF.

Part of this question is defining the translations of ;

"state agencies under their authorisation" and "direct supervisors of the damaged party"

Doesn't it?

Even if he didn't make FDIF POLICY, control, oversight, regs.

he could exert influence and make life difficult from his position. As was so like him.

This is the first time I've seen that it's been said the price was GREATER than appraised value.

And who's appraisal is saying this?

Since case and precedent law is not typically used in Thailand, but each instance decided on it's own,

then reaching a decision different than another courts verdict is not unusual.

[Samuian]

I am truly and totally confused , can someone please explain this to me. If the PM states;

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday that the petition by supporters of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra to seek Royal clemency for him would be rejected as it did not conform to legal criteria.

The the thing that I want to know, why so much government interference, why so much money has been spent to combat the thing, why all this waste of time and money from the Government if (it does not conform to legal criteria).

WHO IS RUNNING THIS COUNTRY?????????

Goooooooood question sir..... "Who is running this country?"

Well, well, well, your question is reflecting your bias and it's intentional too,

and it suggests that there is only one answer!

If the "answer" would have run the country in way's, acceptable

everybody he probably still would, behind the curtains, he

still tries hard and and has his advocates and associates out to

watch out for any possibility to make any smooth sailing

of the current government impossible and to derail any initiative!

If not circumstances are simply fabricated out of thin air like the

"petition, it' has straight forward target, hidden in it, as we all know,

but those involved in this move deny it - it tells a lot about the real attention

and the hidden agenda which is off limits to discuss!

Your suggested answer is but no answer - and I am not really sorry about this fact, sir!

Otherwise Mr.Newin und 44 other Members out of the Thaksin Cabinet

and the "Grand Master" himself wouldn't be indicted for financial "irregularities"

which may amount to something like a 20 billion Baht fraud, maybe way higher,

which was peoples money siphoned off with state initiatives and schemes

like the rubber sapling scheme!

are you aware how much one rubber sampling may cost in this country?

Edited August 17, 2009 by Samuian