Sondhi Convicted For Libel

[bunuel]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

Insane?

Double those sentences, no triple, tenfold even!!

Thai politicians might even start thinking about what to say before opening their mouth. ;-P

come on, get serious... thinking is not a Thai option... there was an article in the paper recently, about a visiting professor giving a talk, (a Thai professor) who was shunned by the university for actually stating, that Thai people and especially Thai students are not allowed or required to think... and after living here for 3 1/2 years, I would have to agree with him... Thinking, wow, it must be a farang concept....

This is spot on - I would only add that my experience teaching at a Thai university taught me that the restrictions on cerebral activity also applied to other professors and especially university administrators, who are obsessed with sartorial values rather than anything ressembling education - and yes, I quit rather than perpetuate the fraud!

[Richard W]

btw, is the Party which rule Thailand in the moment demoratically elected?

Although the system is muddied a bit by having a partial party list system, its MPs and not parties that are elected. (I'm hazy about the rules on crossing the floor.) The MPs who chose Abhisit as prime minister are presumed to have been democratically elected, though there may well have been electoral irregularities. I'm particularly inclined to suspect former TRT members.

You are aware, are you not, that no single party secured a majorty in the last election, nor has one now. Thailand has a tradition of shifting coalitions, and this is not the first time a Democrat prime minister has taken over from an incompetent government without a general election being called (the previous occasion was the Asian financial crisis).

[Ricardo]

This seems like the minimum sentence that should have been imposed on the man primarily responsible for the airport fiasco.

He served to blacken Thailand's image around the world. He disrupted Thai society, and he showed a tremendous lack of

loyalty to the King and the government.

This libel case, and indeed the thread discussing it, are of course about a completely different subject, so you could hardly expect this sentence to cover other alleged crimes, for example his role in the brief occupation of parts of the airport years later.

Or should the case and sentence against Thaksin, regarding his wife's purchase of land from a government-agency while he was PM, also have reflected punishment for Tak Bai or the rubber-tree scandal and other unrelated incidents ? Of course not.

Each crime is investigated and prosecuted and heard in court and determined separately. As you would expect.

[ThNiner]

^

[George4]

1) Jail for libel is insane (no-matter who it is)

2) Atleast now some posters lose their ammo that no yellow has any prison sentence set against them.

1) agree

2) he did not get jail time for the airport or government house... I think that most posters calling for Yellow's to serve time is in regards to their actions NOT words...

I fully agree!

I would assume the penalty is severe here due to Thai Culture. "One does not lose face" and if you humiliate someone of high standing in public you should expect the worst.

I'm no expert in political affairs but would have to agree

Edited September 15, 2009 by George4

[Plus]

..

In fact some of the judges at the top of the judiciary were appointed by the coup appointed government and were openly opposed to Thasin before and after the coup.\Even the committee that brought charges against Thaksin were set up by coup leaders and were leaders in the hate campaign against him.

That was an investigative committee, they can appoint anyone they like to investigate Thaksin's crimes, just as Thaksin can appoint anyone as his defense lawyer.

[animatic]

..

In fact some of the judges at the top of the judiciary were appointed by the coup appointed government and were openly opposed to Thasin before and after the coup.\Even the committee that brought charges against Thaksin were set up by coup leaders and were leaders in the hate campaign against him.

That was an investigative committee, they can appoint anyone they like to investigate Thaksin's crimes, just as Thaksin can appoint anyone as his defense lawyer.

The Assets Examination Committee was not for Thaksin.

Assigning his cronies would have served no purpose of course.

The simplest cover up is to put your friends into examining your deeds

replacing those that actually will search out FACTS.

But the AEC didn't BRING ANY CHARGES, they collected evidence

of alleged crimes by Thaksin and his cronies, and others.

When there was deemed sufficent evidence to believe a crime was

committed this evidence was then sent to the Attorney General.

The AG then decided to press charges or not.

In most cases enough evidence was found.

In some not enough and charges were not filed.

People who tried to investigate Thaksin's malfeasances while he was in office,

got put on the equivalent of a Nixon Enemies list, and were harassed, sued,

and often attempts were made to hound them from office. Like Jaruvan Mantika.

If Thaksin was hated by committee members, it was from his own malicious actions

aimed at maintaining cover-ups or removing investigators. He had no qualms about

ruining a person's life or family welfare to protect his own a$$'et$.

Edited September 15, 2009 by animatic

[slimdog]

But the AEC didn't BRING ANY CHARGES, they collected evidence

of alleged crimes by Thaksin and his cronies, and others.

When there was deemed sufficent evidence to believe a crime was

committed this evidence was then sent to the Attorney General.

The AG then decided to press charges or not.

In most cases enough evidence was found.

In some not enough and charges were not filed.

This is incorrect.

The AEC was setup under CDRM announcement 23 and later announcement 30. This gave the AEC the following powers:

• NCCC Act
  
• AMLO Act
  
• Revenue Act
  

In the case of the Rubber Sappling complaint, a case was made and submitted to the OAG. When the OAG declined to prosecute the case, the AEC used it's powers under Article 97 of the NCCC act to prosecute the case directly with the supreme court with no involvement from the Attorney General.

[animatic]

But the AEC didn't BRING ANY CHARGES, they collected evidence

of alleged crimes by Thaksin and his cronies, and others.

When there was deemed sufficient evidence to believe a crime was

committed this evidence was then sent to the Attorney General.

The AG then decided to press charges or not.

In most cases enough evidence was found.

In some not enough and charges were not filed.

This is incorrect.

The AEC was setup under CDRM announcement 23 and later announcement 30. This gave the AEC the following powers:

• NCCC Act
  
• AMLO Act
  
• Revenue Act
  

In the case of the Rubber Sappling complaint, a case was made and submitted to the OAG. When the OAG declined to prosecute the case, the AEC used it's powers under Article 97 of the NCCC act to prosecute the case directly with the supreme court with no involvement from the Attorney General.

Yes, I stand corrected. But this was the isolated example I believe.

But they never did this vs Thaksin per se.

If I NOW remember more correctly the AOG didn't act, and was thought to be

co-opted by Thakisn, or someone with clout.

And after reading the NCCC rules again they realized they could 'file a suit' directly.

I think 'prosecute' is not the right word for this though.

It would be nice to see article 97 in plain English of course.

So many legal actions, so many details to remember...

[slimdog]

Yes, I stand corrected. But this was the isolated example I believe.

But they never did this vs Thaksin per se.

No, The AEC filed a separate charges in relation to the 2-3 digit lottery involving 44 individuals including former cabinet members and board members of the GLO. A decission is expected later this month. The case is being prosecuted by members of the law society

And after reading the NCCC rules again they realized they could 'file a suit' directly.

I think 'prosecute' is not the right word for this though.

It would be nice to see article 97 in plain English of course.

Section 97.

In the case where the N.C.C. Commission passes a resolution that any matter put in the allegation amounts to a criminal offence, the President shall furnish the report, documents and opinion to the Prosecutor- General or, in the case where the alleged culprit is the Prosecutor-General, proceed with the prosecution, for the purpose of criminal proceedings before the Court having competence to try and adjudicate the case. In this instance, the report of the N.C.C. Commission shall be deemed the inquiry file under the Criminal Procedure Code and the Court shall accept the case without conducting a preliminary examination.

When the Prosecutor-General has received the report and documents together with the opinion from the N.C.C. Commission under paragraph one and considers that the report, documents and opinion furnished by the N.C.C. Commission are not so complete as to justify the institution of the prosecution, the Prosecutor-General shall inform the N.C.C. Commission thereof for further proceeding. In this instance, the incomplete items shall, at the same time, fully be specified. In this case, the N.C.C. Commission and the Prosecutor-General shall appoint a working committee consisting of representatives of each side in an equal number, for the purpose of collecting full evidence and furnish it to the Prosecutor-General for instituting the prosecution.

In the case where such working committee fails to arrive at a conclusion as to the prosecution, the N.C.C. Commission shall have the power to initiate the prosecution of its own motion or appoint an attorney to institute the prosecution on its behalf.