All Rubber Sapling Defendants Cleared

[Samuian]

Well, in hindisght, it was obvious really.

The AEC, albeit a tool of the junta, was not incompetent - especially Jaruvan and Kaewsan. If they prosecuted (and they did), then it was watertight, and if one was guilty they were all guilty

But... Newin is protected. So 40-odd probable criminals go free so that the Democrat government doesn't implode. And Newin (when asked for a comment) says his only job is to protect the monarchy until his last breath. Under the circs, that is pretty much what I would say too.

Now. What was it that Animatic was telling me about Newin being prosecuted meaning that Thailand can't be a failed state?

Perhaps they should have that poll about the judiciary being trusted more than the army and the police again. Here in Isaan, the mood among those I have spoken to is one of is one of stunned disbelief.

What nobosy has asked yet, is what does this say about the AEC? About the junta? About Thaksin's government? Even the chance to convict Thaksin . either in fact or in world opinion took second place t preserving Abhisit's pretty ass.

TiT

Which Junta, you're in the wrong country...

Why Abhisit's A_s ?

if there are 44 exactly involved.... and all people which belong to the class which is labeled "influential"..

well this verdict will cause many peoples eyebrows to raise - what the deal which was struck?

How about the "private Sector" highflyers like CP were involved in the bidding...

Will Pathongta, Pathongtae and Pojamarn walk off with the frozen money,

the former verdicts all be lifted and after all it will be called: "National Reconciliation",

because this country always went this way, if so..... there is a storm brewing and

this won't be over all too soon...!

[Plus]

Yes, he did well in mobile phones, but I'm not so sure about his satellite business. Also don't forget that before that he tried probably several dozens other ventures that weren't successful at all, and there are plenty of ideas that were flops after he made a fortune with AIS.

[caf]

I understand the points made by publicus and hammered but i think that kev's point has been ignored. he said he did not fully support thaksin but is the best choice now if restrained. i believe that if there are checks and balances to move forward as a democracy it could work. as a last resort the army could do that task instead of making coups which just get back to base zero. bringing up the past achieves nothing. where does thailand go from here.

[caf]

Yes, he did well in mobile phones, but I'm not so sure about his satellite business. Also don't forget that before that he tried probably several dozens other ventures that weren't successful at all, and there are plenty of ideas that were flops after he made a fortune with AIS.

so did richard branson but i would not accuse him of not being able to run a corner shop.

using well thought out metaphors to prove a valid point is a good way to influence the reader

the converse is that inappropriate metaphors only show you don't really have a point

[Plus]

..

Will Pathongta, Pathongtae and Pojamarn walk off with the frozen money,

the former verdicts all be lifted and after all it will be called: "National Reconciliation",

because this country always went this way, if so..... there is a storm brewing and

this won't be over all too soon...!

In rubber case there was apparently no hard evidence at all, only "suspect wrongdoing" in Klanarong's words. In the asset freeze case there's some paper trail, but it can go both ways, true.

I doubt it will have any effect on former verdicts and I don't believe in any deals struck with Thaksin behind people's backs.

Why deal with him now? He can't do any serious damage anymore and has not bargaining cards left.

Another aspect of this verdict is that not all decisions go against Thakin's camp and undermine his argument that the courts are biased. He himself welcomed this latest decision, but not the previous ones. How can he explain his double standards now?

[Plus]

Yes, he did well in mobile phones, but I'm not so sure about his satellite business. Also don't forget that before that he tried probably several dozens other ventures that weren't successful at all, and there are plenty of ideas that were flops after he made a fortune with AIS.

so did richard branson but i would not accuse him of not being able to run a corner shop.

using well thought out metaphors to prove a valid point is a good way to influence the reader

the converse is that inappropriate metaphors only show you don't really have a point

I'm not going to argue someone else's metaphors, but Thaksin had only ONE truly successful business, and it was not in a really free market place and since 2000 he used his PM position to quadruple its value.

Corner shops do not usually have that advantage (apart from being on the corner).

[stumonster]

but he did rather well in telecoms,

masterful of him to efficiently get all the permits and permissions to start a telecommunications venture - of course it was all skill.

[Publicus]

I understand the points made by publicus and hammered but i think that kev's point has been ignored. he said he did not fully support thaksin but is the best choice now if restrained. i believe that if there are checks and balances to move forward as a democracy it could work. as a last resort the army could do that task instead of making coups which just get back to base zero. bringing up the past achieves nothing. where does thailand go from here.

Thaksin does NOT accept limits to his power or authority NOR does Thaksin allow critiques or criticisms of his position in government and his decisions and actions. Thaksin has demonstrated he does not accept checks and balances, that he rejects in the absolute such reasonable and rationally limiting factors.

'kev's point' has been directly addressed. The "last resort" military coup has been ineffective in "constraining" Thaksin or in "keeping him honest."

It is humanly impossible to "restrain" Thaksin or to "keep him honest" in any sense or by any meaning of the statements.

Thaksin is above and beyond law, rules or reason.

[jasreeve17]

Hijacked by the usual suspects... Time to read another thread...

[hammered]

I do. At least as much now as then. Nothing has changed for the better.

Apart from since the demise of Thaksin 2500+ innocent people havent been extra-judicially put to the sword remembering that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. It could be argued that is an improvement. Not everything under Thaksin was better whatever perspective. Sometimes in life the choices are equally bad and it is best to look for something better than either rather than to be drawn into a two tainted horses contest. imho.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

Which Junta, you're in the wrong country...

The military junta that created a coup and governed for a year afterwards. Don't you remember that? It was in all the papers

Why Abhisit's A_s ?

Because when I last checked, Abhisit is the current head of government. has something happened today that I donlt know about?

if there are 44 exactly involved.... and all people which belong to the class which is labeled "influential"..

well this verdict will cause many peoples eyebrows to raise - what the deal which was struck?

How about the "private Sector" highflyers like CP were involved in the bidding...

As I said, 40-odd. The deal was struck. if I say what the prevailing belief is in this forum, the post will be deleted - rightly, but we all know what it is. The deal was done, the fix was put in. I believe it, a lot of people out there certainly believe it. You probably don't. Which is OK... we all choose what to believe.

As for CP, right. Have you had a look at the CP shareholder's list? You should do. But the bottom line is this. It was unacceptable that Newin should be convicted. They were all in that same boat and so all of them had to be acquitted. This is the only scenario whch makes any sense at all of what is known.

As for Thaksins odious children, I don't know what will happen (and I don't care much - they are truly awful) - but I suspect a civil war is closer than most people think. Even a Thai-style civil war. The pressure is building.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

I do. At least as much now as then. Nothing has changed for the better.

Apart from since the demise of Thaksin 2500+ innocent people havent been extra-judicially put to the sword remembering that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. It could be argued that is an improvement. Not everything under Thaksin was better whatever perspective. Sometimes in life the choices are equally bad and it is best to look for something better than either rather than to be drawn into a two tainted horses contest. imho.

Yep, you're right, although a few Rohingyans may not agree the situation has improved very much in that regard, and I suspect the red shirts believe they are being treated one way while the yellows can run riot wherever and whenever they choose, with impunity. They are also protected, even if Sondhi has apparently outlived his usefulness (and we haven't heard the last of him just yet ether).

As I said, nothing has changed for the better, Some things have changed but it is only the names and the faces. Everything else is the same same. But not for very much longer I suspect.

[hammered]

Which Junta, you're in the wrong country...

The military junta that created a coup and governed for a year afterwards. Don't you remember that? It was in all the papers

Why Abhisit's A_s ?

Because when I last checked, Abhisit is the current head of government. has something happened today that I donlt know about?

if there are 44 exactly involved.... and all people which belong to the class which is labeled "influential"..

well this verdict will cause many peoples eyebrows to raise - what the deal which was struck?

How about the "private Sector" highflyers like CP were involved in the bidding...

As I said, 40-odd. The deal was struck. if I say what the prevailing belief is in this forum, the post will be deleted - rightly, but we all know what it is. The deal was done, the fix was put in. I believe it, a lot of people out there certainly believe it. You probably don't. Which is OK... we all choose what to believe.

As for CP, right. Have you had a look at the CP shareholder's list? You should do. But the bottom line is this. It was unacceptable that Newin should be convicted. They were all in that same boat and so all of them had to be acquitted. This is the only scenario whch makes any sense at all of what is known.

As for Thaksins odious children, I don't know what will happen (and I don't care much - they are truly awful) - but I suspect a civil war is closer than most people think. Even a Thai-style civil war. The pressure is building.

A civil war will only occur if those commanding the various elite groups competing for power and there are more than two want it and allow it. As though they all stand to lose as they all have businesses etc if a live civil war comes along it remains moot unless they really lose control of their underlings. To date the demos even when pumped with a bunch of extra pay for play dudes have only reached a maximum of 100K or so for any side. That is still negligible compared to rallies in similalrly populated couintries and comes nowhere near the 500K Hezbollah turn out at every rally they hold in Beiruit (and provide the high angle access for the media to verify) or the 1 million the BBC estimated turned out for a concert in Havana last weekend. Even some football matches achieve over 100K.

Having said that getting a few tens of thousands on the street and then letting them kick off with improvised weaponry after a few rousing talks sometimes has an effect beyond its size although around Songkhran it failed in Thailand. Maybe next time......

Thailand has a lot of problems over division between rich and poor, regional division, urban-rural division, etc but that doesnt mean a civil war is coming. The recent Asia Foundation survey would suggets the opposite. Even trips into the rural heartlands reveal a lack of outright hatred even if one colour or another is favoured or symathised with. The zealots arent huge in number and the effects of all propaganda are limited. It is easy to find PTP and Dem voters getting along fine especially in villages where people rely on one another and other things often transcend politics. Sure some peole miss Thaksin but then again in some areas people revile him. However, they arent likely to come out fighting from what I see.

From a red perspective Jakrapob probably has it closer to reality in assessing only a long game can do it for them if any game can at all

Myabe if he wants to push it Thaksin should try a Zelaya manouver.Then again that takes some cojones and even red soft analysts doubt he has big enough ones to do that. We will see.

[KevinBloodyWilson]

A civil war will only occur if those commanding the various elite groups competing for power and there are more than two want it and allow it. As though they all stand to lose as they all have businesses etc if a live civil war comes along it remains moot unless they really lose control of their underlings. To date the demos even when pumped with a bunch of extra pay for play dudes have only reached a maximum of 100K or so for any side. That is still negligible compared to rallies in similalrly populated couintries and comes nowhere near the 500K Hezbollah turn out at every rally they hold in Beiruit (and provide the high angle access for the media to verify) or the 1 million the BBC estimated turned out for a concert in Havana last weekend. Even some football matches achieve over 100K.

Having said that getting a few tens of thousands on the street and then letting them kick off with improvised weaponry after a few rousing talks sometimes has an effect beyond its size although around Songkhran it failed in Thailand. Maybe next time......

Thailand has a lot of problems over division between rich and poor, regional division, urban-rural division, etc but that doesnt mean a civil war is coming. The recent Asia Foundation survey would suggets the opposite. Even trips into the rural heartlands reveal a lack of outright hatred even if one colour or another is favoured or symathised with. The zealots arent huge in number and the effects of all propaganda are limited. It is easy to find PTP and Dem voters getting along fine especially in villages where people rely on one another and other things often transcend politics. Sure some peole miss Thaksin but then again in some areas people revile him. However, they arent likely to come out fighting from what I see.

From a red perspective Jakrapob probably has it closer to reality in assessing only a long game can do it for them if any game can at all

Myabe if he wants to push it Thaksin should try a Zelaya manouver.Then again that takes some cojones and even red soft analysts doubt he has big enough ones to do that. We will see.

I don't think the numbers we have seen will do the job either. According to some, China is quite keen to resolve the Thailand geo-political anomaly and have been quietly white-anting for a year or two so the numbers may increase, but I think the view of most is that the protests are there to keep the flame burning rather than set Thailand ablaze just yet. Most of the people necessary for the ignition phase of the process will not step up to the plate unless there is a seismic shift in the prevailing circumstances.

What will happen at some stage is a collapse in the Thai morale and psyche, followed by a huge upsurge in resentment and the hatred you rightly say does not exist at the moment. At that point, the long game will become a short game and the man himself will come marching home. Until that time a waiting game is being played with just enough activity to keep the memories fresh and the resentment alive.

I believe you are generally right in what you say, my own experience in the provinces (at least the ones I go to), is that there is quite a lot of anger but not hatred. But I think that will change, though I don't know when. I would have predicted this year for the kick-off but it looks as if I would have been wrong.

But yes, you are right, he doesn't have the cojones for a camp-out in a foreign embassy. If he did it would be interesting.

Edited September 23, 2009 by KevinBloodyWilson

[Plus]

The deal was struck. if I say what the prevailing belief is in this forum, the post will be deleted - rightly, but we all know what it is. The deal was done, the fix was put in. I believe it, a lot of people out there certainly believe it. You probably don't. Which is OK... we all choose what to believe.

It's not a matter of belief.

Do you have any evidence that there was a deal? I've said several times here that they case was lacking strong evidence, and Klanarong, speaking on behalf of AEC, said it was about suspected wrongdoing.

Attorney General refused to back up the case, for the lack of evidence, and AEC went ahead on its own.

Now you ignore all of that and insist that it was a "deal".

Any proof?

... According to some, China is quite keen to resolve the Thailand geo-political anomaly and have been quietly white-anting for a year or two so the numbers may increase, but I think the view of most is that the protests are there to keep the flame burning rather than set Thailand ablaze just yet. Most of the people necessary for the ignition phase of the process will not step up to the plate unless there is a seismic shift in the prevailing circumstances....

What are you on about?

Now it's not just Thai elite conspiracy, but a Chinese one as well?

What next?

[webfact]

Former AEC members hit back at prosecutors

By Budsarakham Sinlapalavan

The Nation

Published on September 24, 2009

Former AEC members hit back at prosecutors

Members of the now-defunct Assets Examination Committee (AEC) hit back yesterday at a claim by public prosecutors that it acted in haste over the rubber sapling case, which ended with all 44 defendants acquitted.

They called a press conference to rebut the allegation by Thanapit Moonlaphruek, spokesman of the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), who said the AEC went ahead to try the case without heeding the prosecutors' advice to gather additional evidence.

Former AEC member Sak Korsaengruang, who also served as its spokesman, noted that there were cases brought to court by state prosecutors that also saw defendants acquitted.

"We insist that the AEC prepared the case completely and legally.

The [OAG spokesman] said that public prosecutors made sure they had sufficient evidence before suing anyone. My question is whether all of the cases filed by prosecutors have never been rejected by court," Sak said.

He said that former AEC members did not seek to challenge the verdict or the OAG and public prosecutors in general. Sak believed the OAG spokesman had aired personal opinions instead of the Office's official stand.

Sak said the points raised by public prosecutors for the AEC to investigate further before taking the case to court were not major reasons for the court acquittal.

In response to the claim the AEC caused damage to the country by hiring lawyers to pursue the case instead of relying on prosecutors, Sak said the lawyers involved were from the Lawyers Council of Thailand and that they were not paid a wage.

He also countered the claim that the AEC took the case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders due to pressure from the public and the media.

He said the AEC acted in accordance with its mandate on the rubber sapling case, and said the legal proceedings were not tainted by prejudice or sentiment.

"In the past the AEC was accused and sued by people we investigated. We faced both criminal and civil cases. Now we face a similar attack by state officials in the justice system," Sak said.

The former AEC spokesman said it was time for Thai society to consider having a private independent organisation to take corruption cases to court when relevant state officials do not perform their duty. He said similar organisations existed in the US, Taiwan and South Korea.

Nam Yimyaem, another former member of the AEC, also questioned why the OAG made a fuss over the acquittal verdict on the rubber sapling case.

"Public prosecutors have also lost a number of cases," he said.

The AEC, set up after the 2006 coup to investigate corruption allegations against members of the Thaksin Shinawatra government, ceased to exist in June last year.

Its inquiries led to several lawsuits against former politicians in power, one of which led to a two years jail sentence for ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

-- The Nation 2009/09/24

[caf]

It's so interesting that plus is always right and knows so much.

Not so good at responding to other points of view though.

As another poster said the usual suspects are highjacking.

[Plus]

It's so interesting that plus is always right and knows so much.

Not so good at responding to other points of view though.

As another poster said the usual suspects are highjacking.

You seem to know so much about me,

How about that alleged "deal"?

I'm not discounting the possibility, just pointing out that there are several things that justify the acquittal without any "deals".

Btw, what is that hijacking you refer to? Is it hijacked by "knowledge" and being "right"?

Is it really such a bad thing - people might stop waddling in their own ignorance.

[caf]

It's so interesting that plus is always right and knows so much.

Not so good at responding to other points of view though.

As another poster said the usual suspects are highjacking.

You seem to know so much about me,

How about that alleged "deal"?

I'm not discounting the possibility, just pointing out that there are several things that justify the acquittal without any "deals".

Btw, what is that hijacking you refer to? Is it hijacked by "knowledge" and being "right"?

Is it really such a bad thing - people might stop waddling in their own ignorance.

I only know you from your posts, as do others. As another poster said "the usual suspects are hijacking"

Your reference to "waddling in your own ignorance" rather gives me my point that you think you are always right, doesnt it.

I accept there could be several things that justify the acquittal. You have your views on that and I and others take a different view. No problem with that.

[Plus]

I accept there could be several things that justify the acquittal. You have your views on that and I and others take a different view. No problem with that.

I think it becomes a problem when one particular view is baseless, ie. not based on facts or commonly agreed ideas.

Like if I say - it's now midnight in Bangkok, I have my view, you might have a different view - no problem.

So, I'd like to see the reasoning behind this "deal" allegation, and any facts or reports to support it.

"Because they couldn't convict Newin" is not enough - they could have convicted 10-20 other people but they didn't. And seeing Newin creating all sorts of problems for Abhisit, wouldn't it be great to get rid of him and leave BJT toothless - the coalition relationships would be better off and the govt would be stronger.

[webfact]

RUBBER SAPLING VERDICT

Leaking of verdict groundless : Suthep

By The Nation

Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thuagsuban on Friday ruled out speculation that the decision for acquittal in the rubber sapling case was leaked ahead of the September 21 verdict session.

"I have complete confidence in the judiciary and do not believe anyone can access the verdict ahead of time," he said.

Supreme Court judge Boonrawd Tanprasert, who led the nine-judge panel on the case, said he had no worries about such speculation.

"I have anticipated the verdict to please one side and displease the other, hence I brace for the reactions," he said.

Boonrawd reminded parties concerned to abide by the legal limits on criticising the verdict, otherwise they might face charge for contempt.

The nine judges in the case will not rebut the groundless allegations in order to avoid triggering a war of words nor allow the verbal abuse to interfere with their job, he said.

In an effort to dispel lingering doubts on the alleged leak, the Supreme Court president instructed the Office of the Judiciary to form a fact-finding panel to look into the issue.

The move is seen as a response to a petition lodged by the Law Review of Thailand, an advocacy group.

Citing as evidence to back up the petition, law advocate Picha Wijitsilp said People's Alliance for Democracy leader Sondhi Limthongkul predicted the eight-to-one decision for an acquittal.

Picha also filed a complaint with the National Anti Corruption Commission demanding a graft investigation to check into the assets of the nine judges and all 44 defendants in the rubber sapling cases.

-- The Nation 2009/09/25

[Old Man River]

I have been sitting here thinking about all these cases and am starting to see a trend.

In my view, if a case cannot catch Thaksin either directly or indirectly (via abuse of power), then there will be no inclination to push forward with meaningful charges supported by hard evidence (eg. in this rubber sapling case the OAG's accusation against the AEC that they didn't have enough evidence to convict).

The BMA/Fire Truck scandal is another one which has not been linked to Thaksin and no corruption charges have been filed. If there is no direct or indirect link to Thaksin, I doubt any of the pending cases will include corruption charges supported by hard evidence against anyone else. The CTX Scanner case, like the fire truck case, involves gross overpayment. If Thaksin is not linked to this (and if involved he certainly would have had enough time to cover his tracks since he was still PM when this one surfaced), let's see if corruption charges are filed against anyone. I doubt it.

The case against Jutamas is another one to watch. The US courts have handed the Thai authorities hard proof that funds were paid by the Greens to family members of Jutamas in offshore accounts. The money has already been followed and all the proof is there. However, right now the Thai authorities have held things up as they say they are seeking additional info. I suspect they are looking for a link to Thaksin and if no link then again, I suspect the charges against Jutamas will not include corruption charges. Perhaps tax evasion on the offshore payments or something similar.

All of these cases will be interesting to watch to see if corruption charges are filed against any others when there is no direct or indirect link to Thaksin. It will be interesting.

[Plus]

There aren't that many non-Thaksin court verdicts to spot a trend. Rubber sapplings is the only one so far.

Firetrucks started long time ago, when Thaksin was still in charge, and they managed to indict a lot of people, including Apirak. Last week there was some internal punishment to one of the BMA officials involved.

Jutamas and CTX are also oldies, and Thaksin has accused the judiciary for applying double standards in those already. I remember discussing this very idea here on TV long long time ago, but no details. Would be interesting to dig them up and see how things have developed.

Another thing - anti-Thaksin cases were all brought by AEC while non-Thaksin cases are in the hands of police and Attorney General's Office, maybe the trend is just an acknowledgement that AEC people were very determined comparing to the other two agencies.

[Old Man River]

There aren't that many non-Thaksin court verdicts to spot a trend. Rubber sapplings is the only one so far.

Firetrucks started long time ago, when Thaksin was still in charge, and they managed to indict a lot of people, including Apirak. Last week there was some internal punishment to one of the BMA officials involved.

Jutamas and CTX are also oldies, and Thaksin has accused the judiciary for applying double standards in those already. I remember discussing this very idea here on TV long long time ago, but no details. Would be interesting to dig them up and see how things have developed.

Another thing - anti-Thaksin cases were all brought by AEC while non-Thaksin cases are in the hands of police and Attorney General's Office, maybe the trend is just an acknowledgement that AEC people were very determined comparing to the other two agencies.

Let's wait and see until all is said and done. It all seems to be on the same road map despite each one's differences. I could be wrong, but I think the Juthamas case will be the most interesting in that the entire corruption case is being handed to them gift wrapped. Does she get charged and convicted for corruption? If Thaksin isn't involved, I doubt it.

[Siripon]

What puzzles me and many others about the verdict is the 3 companies bidding to supply the rubber saplings all belonged to CP, so how can they avoid the charge of price collusion, fixed bids?

[Old Man River]

What puzzles me and many others about the verdict is the 3 companies bidding to supply the rubber saplings all belonged to CP, so how can they avoid the charge of price collusion, fixed bids?

There are a lot of things about many of these cases that cannot be understood. Price collusion is evident and this is one of the reasons why I am starting to see a road map as to how these cases are being handled. It is looking like if it can't be tied to Thaksin, directly or indirectly, then pretty much these are throw away cases. Yeh, there are some charges and deals will be made, but unless Thaksin is involved I don't think corruption is the main interest. I am not a Thaksin supporter at all, but some things seem to be getting obvious.

For me, I wait and watch on the Juthamas case. The Thai authorities have been given payment amounts, dates, names, etc. It is all there. Juthamas' attorneys have to argue that the payments were used for valid reasons to support the film festival, and if they can't then corruption will be evident. However, if Thaksin is not involved, I wait to see how much interest there is in pursuing this case.

[Publicus]

I have been sitting here thinking about all these cases and am starting to see a trend.

In my view, if a case cannot catch Thaksin either directly or indirectly (via abuse of power), then there will be no inclination to push forward with meaningful charges supported by hard evidence (eg. in this rubber sapling case the OAG's accusation against the AEC that they didn't have enough evidence to convict).

The BMA/Fire Truck scandal is another one which has not been linked to Thaksin and no corruption charges have been filed. If there is no direct or indirect link to Thaksin, I doubt any of the pending cases will include corruption charges supported by hard evidence against anyone else. The CTX Scanner case, like the fire truck case, involves gross overpayment. If Thaksin is not linked to this (and if involved he certainly would have had enough time to cover his tracks since he was still PM when this one surfaced), let's see if corruption charges are filed against anyone. I doubt it.

The case against Jutamas is another one to watch. The US courts have handed the Thai authorities hard proof that funds were paid by the Greens to family members of Jutamas in offshore accounts. The money has already been followed and all the proof is there. However, right now the Thai authorities have held things up as they say they are seeking additional info. I suspect they are looking for a link to Thaksin and if no link then again, I suspect the charges against Jutamas will not include corruption charges. Perhaps tax evasion on the offshore payments or something similar.

All of these cases will be interesting to watch to see if corruption charges are filed against any others when there is no direct or indirect link to Thaksin. It will be interesting.

An interesting an impelling thesis.

However, I'd rather not wait until time proves the thesis correct or otherwise. With unusual exception, time often is too far into the future to be presented as the promise of the proof of anything. If I may say so, Plus makes his usual excellent points and so do you. I always read each of your postings attentively and carefully and seldom if ever fail to be impressed or to think and consider.

Notions and a sense of the situation can be valid and often are, but I'd want actively to explore any actual evidence to support the thesis. I reiterate that waiting for time to prove observations, insights and analysis seldom is satisfactory because wating for time to do the work and the job is too passive (altho sometimes necessary). You've presented your analysis and Plus has presented his. Each is reasonabe, rational and based on real events.

As I haven't had the time or occasion to consider the propositions you present in detail and at some length, I'd be interested in hearing more arguments in this respect as the arguments presented thus far are engaging. Especially yours.

[jayjayjayjay]

Seriously, I hope your not holding our for a clean politician to be found in Thailand............ let me laugh a thousand laughs for you.

I don't fully understand what you mean.

This is the first "policy corruption" case, when the govt legally initiated policies for the benefit of certain companies or individuals, and the dismissal doesn't look good for the future. Either the legislation is not suitable or the there are impossible demands for the burden of proof.

In individual politicians cases they don't need to prove that he benefited from corruption, simply hiding shares is enough, for example. When it comes to cabinet resolutions or let alone parliament approved bills, it's a lot more difficult.

There are great many ways in which CP could have shown its gratitude for rigging this bid - they were so deeply involved with the government work. Perhaps they need to put greater legal distance between private companies and govt business, or greater distance between the govt and bureaucracy. I don't know, it's a big topic.

Well it appears your assumptions have not been proven. After the fact, we have an outcome of innocent. What now, should we not be accusing judges of being on the "take" in finding the "guilty" parties "innocent". This is what bores me Plus! Run for public office and I'll get my gf, and her extended family to back you, that's 20 votes and it would cost a cent for the votes, then see if you can be more than an armchair critic (which is the easiest occupation in the world)

[jayjayjayjay]

Former AEC members hit back at prosecutors

By Budsarakham Sinlapalavan

The Nation

Published on September 24, 2009

Former AEC members hit back at prosecutors

Members of the now-defunct Assets Examination Committee (AEC) hit back yesterday at a claim by public prosecutors that it acted in haste over the rubber sapling case, which ended with all 44 defendants acquitted.

They called a press conference to rebut the allegation by Thanapit Moonlaphruek, spokesman of the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), who said the AEC went ahead to try the case without heeding the prosecutors' advice to gather additional evidence.

Former AEC member Sak Korsaengruang, who also served as its spokesman, noted that there were cases brought to court by state prosecutors that also saw defendants acquitted.

"We insist that the AEC prepared the case completely and legally.

The [OAG spokesman] said that public prosecutors made sure they had sufficient evidence before suing anyone. My question is whether all of the cases filed by prosecutors have never been rejected by court," Sak said.

He said that former AEC members did not seek to challenge the verdict or the OAG and public prosecutors in general. Sak believed the OAG spokesman had aired personal opinions instead of the Office's official stand.

Sak said the points raised by public prosecutors for the AEC to investigate further before taking the case to court were not major reasons for the court acquittal.

In response to the claim the AEC caused damage to the country by hiring lawyers to pursue the case instead of relying on prosecutors, Sak said the lawyers involved were from the Lawyers Council of Thailand and that they were not paid a wage.

He also countered the claim that the AEC took the case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders due to pressure from the public and the media.

He said the AEC acted in accordance with its mandate on the rubber sapling case, and said the legal proceedings were not tainted by prejudice or sentiment.

"In the past the AEC was accused and sued by people we investigated. We faced both criminal and civil cases. Now we face a similar attack by state officials in the justice system," Sak said.

The former AEC spokesman said it was time for Thai society to consider having a private independent organisation to take corruption cases to court when relevant state officials do not perform their duty. He said similar organisations existed in the US, Taiwan and South Korea.

Nam Yimyaem, another former member of the AEC, also questioned why the OAG made a fuss over the acquittal verdict on the rubber sapling case.

"Public prosecutors have also lost a number of cases," he said.

The AEC, set up after the 2006 coup to investigate corruption allegations against members of the Thaksin Shinawatra government, ceased to exist in June last year.

Its inquiries led to several lawsuits against former politicians in power, one of which led to a two years jail sentence for ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

-- The Nation 2009/09/24

________________________________ Kangaroo Court _______________________________

Everything remotely political since 19th September 2006 has been a ridiculous joke including the normal suspects that try to justify all done by the Junta, ASC and AEC. If the people had been able to vote out Thaksin in future elections Thailand would have eventually sorted out a successor to the 2007 constitution and be better off today.......

[Plus]

Any reply to the previous two posts would be going way off topic and into familiar territory of why Thaksin had to be removed by a coup. Third anniversary of the same old discussion. Count me out.

This is a rubber sapling case, not "let's have another go and the coup" thread.