Information Could Threaten Existence Of Thai Government

[webfact]

Pheu Thai claims to have information that would destabilise govt

By THE NATION ON SUNDAY

Published on November 1, 2009

The opposition Pheu Thai Party yesterday claimed it has damaging information regarding extradited financier Rakesh Saxena that could threaten the existence of the government.

The party is taking advantage of the political sentiment surrounding the Bangkok Bank of Commerce (BBC) embezzlement case against Saxena by making a revelation that could link politicians in the government camp to the scandal.

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said politicians of great influence and clout - not part of the government but belonging to coalition parties - were believed to have been involved in the case.

The case will test the government's political courage and integrity on whether it will take action against the suspected politicians, he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban, who at the time of the bank's collapse was in the opposition during the Banharn Silapa-Archa government, played a leading role in exposing the scandal on the House floor that led to the police pressing embezzlement charges against those involved.

"The public and society will see if the government is sincere in bringing about the truth. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and Suthep must ensure the safety of Saxena. This case is under the media spotlight both locally and internationally. If anything happens to Saxena, the justice system will be affected,'' Prompong said.

The Pheu Thai Party is gathering information and will seek approval from its senior officials to reveal it to the public within the next week.

A source from the ruling Democrat Party yesterday described the opposition's move as an attempt to discredit the coalition, but with no real impact in terms of destabilising the government.

The source, who requested anonymity, said that even though there were certain cases that could be linked to some government figures, the statute of limitations on most of them had expired.

Meanwhile, Jatuporn Promphan, a Pheu Thai MP and leader of the red-shirt movement, yesterday called on police to use the tape that recorded Suthep's speech in Parliament that linked the "Group of 16" and some Democrats as having involvement in the BBC case as evidence in their investigation.

"This will make Suthep and the Democrats realise that they cannot change their stance to bring the culprits to justice, even though the politicians involved in the case are now on the government side,'' he said.

He accused the government of ordering the police not to let Saxena talk to the press.

When asked whether Saxena could give a press conference concerning the case, Abhisit said everyone had the right to do so. Asked why police did not let Saxena talk to the press, the PM said he would ask Saxena whether he had been prevented from doing so.

Abhisit said police would probe further into whether any politicians had any involvement in the case.

Democrat Party spokesman Buranat Samudharak, meanwhile, said his party would not interfere in the police investigation in the BBC case because it had vowed to uphold the legal and justice system.

"The party is willing to provide the police with any information, no matter who it involves, and they will be brought to justice in a straightforward manner,'' he said.

-- The Nation 2009/11/01

[givenall]

Claims and more claims. Never can trust these claims anyways

[dumball]

I believe the Thai justice system has chosen a very tough bone to chew on in this instance , Saxen , from what I have read about him , has far more actual intelligence than all who will appose him in this case , he is likely to make absolute dog meat of his opposition .

[Thailand]

I would think Saxena has information that will affect a number of high ranking officials past and present and across all parties.

[hammered]

Saxena has said he will only speak in court. That is going to have anumber across parties worried. Oddly enough the Dems probbaly have the least to worry about here. Two of their coalition partners and the opposition may be more nervous. Saxena is intelligent and he was part of the banking industry and will know about more skeletons than just the BBC ones.

[bunnaag]

The Oxford boy may have to distance himself from Newin.As far as I can remember he was ,as also in many other shady deals, involved quite a bit.In this case the coalition might become a bit shaky.

[Publicus]

I would think Saxena has information that will affect a number of high ranking officials past and present and across all parties.

Yeh, everyone around here has plenty of 'good' stuff on everyone else. It's the good old boy network. Saxena will use his knowledge of everyone else to leverge a deal for himself and that should be the end of that.

[webfact]

// one posts deleted

Reason:

Politicians, former politicians, convicted politicians and public figures we dislike have proper names.

Please use them.

[Master Chief]

That should go for all then, right? Saxena is called, "Scum, scumbag, ect" he is not even convicted?

[hardy1943]

I believe the Thai justice system has chosen a very tough bone to chew on in this instance , Saxen , from what I have read about him , has far more actual intelligence than all who will appose him in this case , he is likely to make absolute dog meat of his opposition .

Really nothing new. Same oh Same oh. According to Bloomber LOS is the most corrupt in South East Asia

and has helds the #1 or #2 spot the last 10 years.Is really anyone surprized here?

I am not 1 bit just the way of life here

[Johpa]

Yeh, everyone around here has plenty of 'good' stuff on everyone else. It's the good old boy network. Saxena will use his knowledge of everyone else to leverge a deal for himself and that should be the end of that.

Well yes, Thai politics has never been about policy or ideology. It has always been about which group or coalition will get the biggest piece of the pie for themselves. Saxena's alleged misdeeds occurred long enough ago that his peers are now scattered about all the various political factions. A tell all expose by Saxena could indeed bring down the Thai government and not just the current ruling party, but it will never happen.

[h90]

The Oxford boy may have to distance himself from Newin.As far as I can remember he was ,as also in many other shady deals, involved quite a bit.In this case the coalition might become a bit shaky.

Newin is not in the government if there is a case against high ranking politician everything will need another 5-10 years due to the inefficient legal system.

So not much danger for the coalition at the moment.

[jayboy]

The Oxford boy may have to distance himself from Newin.As far as I can remember he was ,as also in many other shady deals, involved quite a bit.In this case the coalition might become a bit shaky.

Newin is not in the government if there is a case against high ranking politician everything will need another 5-10 years due to the inefficient legal system.

So not much danger for the coalition at the moment.

That is a slander against the efficiency, transparency and honesty of the Thai legal system.The judicial process can move at the speed at light to take an example at random, dismissing a Prime Minister who accepts an honararium for appearing on a television cooking show.

[petaling]

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Prompong Nopparit said politicians of great influence and clout - not part of the government but belonging to coalition parties - were believed to have been involved in the case.

Meanwhile, Jatuporn Promphan, a Pheu Thai MP and leader of the red-shirt movement, yesterday called on police to use the tape that recorded Suthep's speech in Parliament that linked the "Group of 16"

Prompong and Jatuporn missed mentioning that over half (10 of 16) of the Group of 16 are politicians associated with Thaksin and are banned from politics as Party Executives with either Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai Party (Chamlong Krutkhunthod, Thani Yisarn, Newin Chidchob, Suchart Tancharoen, Pairoj Suwannachawee, Sora-at Klinprathumor, and Sonthaya Khunpluem) or with their Pheu Thai Party's precursor, Thaksin's proxy People Power Party (Sompong Amornwiwat, Itthi Sirilatthayakorn, and Songsak Thongsri).

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

[jayboy]

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

Get real with the "forgery and perjury", as though they wouldn't have been brushed off if Samak's case hadn't been scripted from the beginning.We're not half witted children.In any case I didn't say Samak wasn't a typical Thai politician:his dreadful record is well known.My point was that the judicial system can move very rapidly when directed to do so.

[petaling]

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

Get real with the "forgery and perjury", as though they wouldn't have been brushed off if Samak's case hadn't been scripted from the beginning.We're not half witted children.In any case I didn't say Samak wasn't a typical Thai politician:his dreadful record is well known.My point was that the judicial system can move very rapidly when directed to do so.

I only put in the additional comment simply to set the record straight with the factual convictions involved, instead of the inaccurate "brushing it off" as an honorarium that you gave it.

I'll avoid the rest of your comments as they seem to contravene the forum rule that bar criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

[bunnaag]

The Oxford boy may have to distance himself from Newin.As far as I can remember he was ,as also in many other shady deals, involved quite a bit.In this case the coalition might become a bit shaky.

Newin is not in the government if there is a case against high ranking politician everything will need another 5-10 years due to the inefficient legal system.

So not much danger for the coalition at the moment.

Newins party is an important coalition member.

[LawnGnome]

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

Get real with the "forgery and perjury", as though they wouldn't have been brushed off if Samak's case hadn't been scripted from the beginning.We're not half witted children.In any case I didn't say Samak wasn't a typical Thai politician:his dreadful record is well known.My point was that the judicial system can move very rapidly when directed to do so.

Yes, I am sure you would love to have Samak back running the country.... He was such a bastion of purity, wisdom, wit, and compassion

Hasn't he been indicted on numerous counts of corruption? Just like your boss?

[jayboy]

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

Get real with the "forgery and perjury", as though they wouldn't have been brushed off if Samak's case hadn't been scripted from the beginning.We're not half witted children.In any case I didn't say Samak wasn't a typical Thai politician:his dreadful record is well known.My point was that the judicial system can move very rapidly when directed to do so.

I only put in the additional comment simply to set the record straight with the factual convictions involved, instead of the inaccurate "brushing it off" as an honorarium that you gave it.

I'll avoid the rest of your comments as they seem to contravene the forum rule that bar criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

But accepting the honararium was the offence in this case, and a judgement was made extraordinarily rapidly.I'm sure Samak and his defence team screwed up but the outcome was always pre-ordained.All this was widely discussed at the time in the Thai and English language press and on this forum.As I implied save your weasle words for the incurably naive.

[LawnGnome]

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

Get real with the "forgery and perjury", as though they wouldn't have been brushed off if Samak's case hadn't been scripted from the beginning.We're not half witted children.In any case I didn't say Samak wasn't a typical Thai politician:his dreadful record is well known.My point was that the judicial system can move very rapidly when directed to do so.

I only put in the additional comment simply to set the record straight with the factual convictions involved, instead of the inaccurate "brushing it off" as an honorarium that you gave it.

I'll avoid the rest of your comments as they seem to contravene the forum rule that bar criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

But accepting the honararium was the offence in this case, and a judgement was made extraordinarily rapidly.I'm sure Samak and his defence team screwed up but the outcome was always pre-ordained.All this was widely discussed at the time in the Thai and English language press and on this forum.As I implied save your weasle words for the incurably naive.

Anyone who wants Samak as PM, raise your hand!

[petaling]

Additionally, the ex-PM mentioned in the previous post who was removed from office for forgery and perjury is also banned from politics from his involvement as a Party Executive with Thaksin's proxy People Power Party. He awaits the final appeal on his previous conviction and prison sentence on another case as well as still facing a littany of other criminal cases in the process of adjudication.

Get real with the "forgery and perjury", as though they wouldn't have been brushed off if Samak's case hadn't been scripted from the beginning.We're not half witted children.In any case I didn't say Samak wasn't a typical Thai politician:his dreadful record is well known.My point was that the judicial system can move very rapidly when directed to do so.

I only put in the additional comment simply to set the record straight with the factual convictions involved, instead of the inaccurate "brushing it off" as an honorarium that you gave it.

I'll avoid the rest of your comments as they seem to contravene the forum rule that bar criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

But accepting the honararium was the offence in this case, and a judgement was made extraordinarily rapidly.I'm sure Samak and his defence team screwed up but the outcome was always pre-ordained.All this was widely discussed at the time in the Thai and English language press and on this forum.As I implied save your weasle words for the incurably naive.

"your weasle words" ?

"case... scripted from the beginning"

the courts "move very rapidly when directed to do so"

"outcome was pre-ordained"

------------------------

You do have a way with words, eh? Sorry to have interjected. Have at it.

Edited November 3, 2009 by petaling

[h90]

The Oxford boy may have to distance himself from Newin.As far as I can remember he was ,as also in many other shady deals, involved quite a bit.In this case the coalition might become a bit shaky.

Newin is not in the government if there is a case against high ranking politician everything will need another 5-10 years due to the inefficient legal system.

So not much danger for the coalition at the moment.

That is a slander against the efficiency, transparency and honesty of the Thai legal system.The judicial process can move at the speed at light to take an example at random, dismissing a Prime Minister who accepts an honararium for appearing on a television cooking show.

a) Another court

you can't appeal and

c) it is possible to verify the evidence in one second.

d) At difficult bank things the story is much more difficult.

e) it is very clear in the constitution

f) Newin is not in the government

[hammered]

Yes the critical thing on speed is that it is a specialist technical court with no appeal (unless yo uwant to appeal on grounds of constitutionality or administration in which case a technical arguement needs to be taken to the admin or consty court). It is more like a tribunal. Any case going through the three court system with appeals takes around 10 years according to my legal friends. Could be longer if it isnt an "important" one too. Rakesh Saxena could well see his case last another bunch of years with appeals.

[animatic]

The Oxford boy may have to distance himself from Newin.As far as I can remember he was ,as also in many other shady deals, involved quite a bit.In this case the coalition might become a bit shaky.

Newin is not in the government if there is a case against high ranking politician everything will need another 5-10 years due to the inefficient legal system.

So not much danger for the coalition at the moment.

That is a slander against the efficiency, transparency and honesty of the Thai legal system.The judicial process can move at the speed at light to take an example at random, dismissing a Prime Minister who accepts an honararium for appearing on a television cooking show.

Samak's case took 8+ months to get in gear,

but he then lied in court and paper trail evidence proved it.

That "Honorarium" was by itself illegal, and his own lawyers told him that.

He ignored them. The TV production company had reason to fear his displeasure

if not letting him continue to do the show, and that could have meant getting delisted

from broadcast schedules, so a CLEAR confilct of interest to keep him happy

and blathering politics while cooking

He hung himself with his own ego, in record time.

And in the end.... His own party didn't want him back,

he could have been PM in another day after his conviction,

but Thaksin/PPP said no, and went with Somchai.

There seem to be only 4 cases reedy implicating Saxena,

and nothing has said Newin is involved in any of those.

We await developments, but this shouldn't do any more harm to the government.

In fact #2 in the government started the whole ball rolling back in '96...

Edited November 3, 2009 by animatic

[loganberry]

That should go for all then, right? Saxena is called, "Scum, scumbag, ect" he is not even convicted?

You seem to forget something... "guilty until proven innocent." What... is he supposed to have REAL rights?! lol

[Publicus]

That should go for all then, right? Saxena is called, "Scum, scumbag, ect" he is not even convicted?

You seem to forget something... "guilty until proven innocent." What... is he supposed to have REAL rights?! lol

Indeed, any Thai politician or corporate sleazebag is presumed guilty until proven otherwise. TiT so that's all there is to that.

Those who want to cite the US Constitution or Western law should take a look out their window right now.

Got it? I hope so because you're not looking at the House of Lords or the US Supreme Court.

Edited November 4, 2009 by Publicus

[Master Chief]

That should go for all then, right? Saxena is called, "Scum, scumbag, ect" he is not even convicted?

You seem to forget something... "guilty until proven innocent." What... is he supposed to have REAL rights?! lol

Indeed, any Thai politician or corporate sleazebag is presumed guilty until proven otherwise. TiT so that's all there is to that.

Those who want to cite the US Constitution or Western law should take a look out their window right now.

Got it? I hope so because you're not looking at the House of Lords or the US Supreme Court.

I this case, all we hear are alleged cases abroad and rumors, he has done this and that!

-Never any case charged or convicted abroad.

Someone here at this forum even said that he just got convicted for not paying +16k for services rendered!

-He was deported before the case was in court.

And in Thailand, he was deported to Thailand from Canada, the prosecutors do not even have a case built up, no concrete charges. Only allegations, how did they even get him deported on allegations?

Thai press and forum member are jumping around with only allegations, where are the court presentations?

How many years they have had to present facts and charges from the prosecutors, still nothing?

[Rumfoord]

That "Honorarium" was by itself illegal, and his own lawyers told him that.

He ignored them. The TV production company had reason to fear his displeasure

if not letting him continue to do the show, and that could have meant getting delisted

from broadcast schedules, so a CLEAR confilct of interest to keep him happy

and blathering politics while cooking

the court found other things evident and had other laws by the hand to declare Samak guilty. not even close to that what you are talking about.

i always thought that Samaks cooking show was popular, people enjoyed watching it. viewing figures good.

now you are telling here that he put pressure on the production company, so that he can appear on TV screen at all. and that while cooking chicken with cola he send some hidden spooky psychic political messages to the audience?

can you back up that somehow, substantiate your claim or is just fiction, animatique?

like samak or not, i like him not, but there is no reason to fabricate some nonsense stories and conspiration theories here. that way you will fail to see some other problems too.

and your ego might take further damages and your feelings get hurt every time someone takes his time and expose your hoaxes. but that is maybe also an intention, to get some attention. trolls usually fabricate their stories to provoke some responses.

[Steve2UK]

EDITORIAL

Politics not law will decide Saxena case

By The Nation

Published on November 8, 2009

Extradition of ex-BBC adviser will unleash web of intrigue that could abort the cause of justice

Political influence is bad news in almost all legal cases, and the looming trial of Rakesh Saxena, who has been extradited to Thailand after more than a decade of relative peace as far as the Bangkok Bank of Commerce (BBC) scandal was concerned, ensures full-blown politicisation. If the web of intrigue was amazing when Saxena fled Thailand, it must be doubly so now. This means the outcome of the case may not depend as much on what the lawyers and prosecutors say as on what the politicians want.

A lot of things have changed since BBC crumbled and Saxena was sent fleeing. The Democrats, who exposed the scandal when they were in the opposition bloc, are now in power. And they have allied themselves with the very people they deemed the worst crooks 13 years ago. Thaksin Shinawatra, who was a virtual nobody politically when the Democrats chopped the Group of 16 to pieces at that time, took the notorious faction under his wing in the early 2000s. But its leader, Newin Chidchob, betrayed him late last year. Now Thaksin is said to be gleefully following the Saxena developments and has reportedly instructed his troops to make the biggest political ammunition out of them.

Theories have varied as to why Saxena was "suddenly" sent back. Some said Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva wanted to get him in order to tame the restless Group of 16, who have not been ideal allies. Others went further, saying Saxena's return was part of a conspiracy to not tame but annihilate the troublesome element before it became a bigger threat. Last, but not least, there are people who looked at Thaksin's over-eagerness about turning Saxena into a lethal political weapon and wondered if the ousted leader had anything to do with Canada's "abrupt' decision to extradite him.

Some observers believe the truth may be less exciting. Canada's Supreme Court decided late last year to send him home. At that time, Thai politics was in turmoil, with a pro-Thaksin government collapsing, the yellow shirts making headlines with the Suvarnabhumi Airport seizure and the Newin group on the verge of abandoning Thaksin for the Democrats. Abhisit could not have plotted or influenced Saxena's return at that time, whereas the pro-Thaksin camp must have been too busy fighting a rearguard battle to look beyond what was happening in front of it.

A tell-tale piece of information was a report in the Canadian media saying there was growing concern last year that the more the extradition saga dragged on, the more it would mock the Canadian justice system. If the BBC case expired and the suspect walked free, someone in the Canadian judiciary was quoted as saying, it could give Canada a really black eye.

If we are to believe that Saxena was sent back simply because Canada was feeling ashamed, we may assume that nobody here really wanted him back. Old wounds had better be left untouched, and Democrat Suthep Thaugsuban must be a leading advocate of this school of thought.

Saxena's return must have unnerved the Group of 16, but politically speaking they have less to lose than Suthep. His censure speech against the Group of 16 all those years ago has been republished in newspapers and it exposes hypocrisy as big as what anyone can expect from our politics. In many other countries, Suthep would have been forced to resign on the spot.

But this is Thailand and the Saxena case will have to continue to tread the murky waters. "I've done my job [in the censure debate 13 years ago] and it will now be up to the justice system," is the best Suthep has had to offer. Translation: I'm not going to go after Newin and Co, who are now my closest allies, and Banharn Silapa-archa, who I called the most untrustworthy prime minister back then, doesn't have to worry, either.

Some may say the circumstances benefit Abhisit, as the Newin group will now be kept at bay and the embarrassment serves Suthep right. But we can't analyse Abhisit based on his satisfaction alone. He came to power thanks to Suthep and Newin and, like it or not, he still needs them to remain in power. Friendship, loyalty and allegiance may change, but not the fact that it is extremely difficult for Abhisit to survive without his reluctant allies.

Thaksin has far less to lose, obviously. It wouldn't mean much even if Saxena dropped a bombshell accusation linking anyone close to the former prime minister with the BBC scam. This is an opportunity to embarrass the Democrats more than at any time in the past. Of course, there was a photo of Newin tearfully hugging Thaksin at the beginning of the latter's downfall, but there has been, arguably, a more famous picture since - the one showing THAT embrace between Newin and Abhisit when the Democrat leader became prime minister.

In Thailand, politics dominates law. Seemingly solid evidence in Thaksin's share-concealment case in 2001 gave way to political factors. His party's violation of electoral laws, which was intended to fix a constitutional deadlock resulting from a Democrat-boycotted election, was dealt with only after he was out of power. In other words, when it comes to the really big cases affecting the status quo, it doesn't quite matter what the laws say or how strong the evidence is. The decisive force is what the politics says.

Like it or not, the case is more likely to be driven by political intrigue than legal standpoints. The "opposite sides" when Saxena fled Thailand have rolled into each other, creating a new landscape that the smart and tricky brain of the extradited man has to figure out how to make the make the best use of. Of course, everyone must be hoping they can use him, but, knowing that fact, he can use them, too.

What began as manipulation in the stock market and in bank lending over a decade ago is set to become full-scale political manipulation. The BBC scandal started off as, in Suthep's own words, a financial rip-off, but it may end up being something worse - betrayal.

-- The Nation 8 November 2009

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[Steve2UK]

Apologies for posting the above Nation editorial twice (previously on http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Thaksins-Lan...25#entry3127904 in the General sub-forum) - but it is plainly directly relevant to the Saxena case(s).

More than that, the paragraph third from the end

"In Thailand, politics dominates law. Seemingly solid evidence in Thaksin's share-concealment case in 2001 gave way to political factors. His party's violation of electoral laws, which was intended to fix a constitutional deadlock resulting from a Democrat-boycotted election, was dealt with only after he was out of power. In other words, when it comes to the really big cases affecting the status quo, it doesn't quite matter what the laws say or how strong the evidence is. The decisive force is what the politics says." [my bold emphasis]

is IMO relevant to a proper consideration of all cases that can be seen to have a political dimension/context (however you choose to define that).