Media Gag Order Sought For Thaksin's Asset Seizure Case

[andy1308]

Would you want the media to speculate about the outcome of a court verdict if you were the subject of the case? As a previous poster mentioned it's common in other parts of the world and comes under the subject of subjidice and, possibly, contempt of court.

I think the one important question here is what the term 'media' means? Does it only mean the traditional media? Will any court order that's granted also include websites, blogs, etc. Even Facebook and Twitter are forms of publishing.

[animatic]

I don't see how Thai Visa thinks it is the only news source.

I think they announced this and noted the probability that

the forum could easily be included into the media blackout,

since there IS precedent for that.

So far there isn't precedent for Twitter or Facebook to be blocked the same,

but yes it is publishing in some form, but a new form,

and maybe there is enough of an time lag before judges think

of what to do with it to allow it to continue there.

Either way it is Thaksin trying to manipulate the public sentiment.

True to his form.

[marshbags]

Patience, fellow members / debators, in 17 days ( or so ) when the sh*t hits the fan, you can really have a go, perhaps putting our TNC section on flood alert, along with breaking all records in doing so at the same time.

Sadly a lot of you will once again have already prematurely voiced your oppositions and approvals and many of us will be bored stiff once again at what seems to have been a never ending debate and constant repetition of going over the same ground, time after time and after initially responding to the now expected and predictable News emails ..........................................

Will find it all so and bugger off for a or whatever..............

Motivation is going to be seriously lacking for most of us, but there are always the die hards who need their daily fixes of repetative comment and input.

All for the purpose of opinionating / offering their opinion, against an opinionated selfish individual intent on causing mayhem, keeping himself in the limelight and leading everyone who believes his doctrinaire down the road to knowhere, apart that is for his family, renowned and infamouis ilk and chosen other cronies he can later utilise as and when or if the time comes around for him to walk back in with a clean slate.

Wether those who dislike him wish to admit it or not, indirectly, one way or another they are helping him fullfil his dishonourable objectives, time and time again.

IMHO as always

marshbags

Edited February 11, 2010 by marshbags

[brahmburgers]

It's like forbidding high school students from smoking pot or french kissing.

As soon as you forbid something - it makes it more enticing!

Edited February 11, 2010 by brahmburgers

[hammered]

A gag order would open the front pages of the media to other stuff. A gag order as requested would not stop Thaksin speaking on the issue and it would not stop the media reporting his words as they would not be speculating. That is two good reasons why Thaksin through his family is requesting that freedom of the media be curtailed. It would also stop the reporting again and again stuff about Ample Rich or the recent research project into Thaksin and business and poltics which are all quite damning against him.

Be interersting how the reds idebntify this. Do they believe in freedom of the media as in demcoracy or do they believe in only supporting Thsaksin whatever. Remember a true believer in democratic freedom of the media would always argue against any interference in what the media wanted to say even if it was abhorent to them. This is a test of the red especially those on the left of the red mobvements adherence ot ideals versus adherance to a person. Absolutely nobody who believes in freedom of speech would agree with this gag order.

[Chris Lawrence]

ThomChook

The gag order is being sought by two individuals who are defendants in a civil court law suit. The gag order is not about limiting information, it is about limiting speculation on the final verdict.

There is no reason that the media can not report on the case, maybe even give some interesting valuable information to the public.

Without speculating on the verdict, the press can inform the public on the possible verdicts and how they could have some effect, particularly on the telecommunications sector within the country.

A verdict which finds that Government policy was only introduced to benefit Shin Corp, will result in considerable pressure to have many, if not all Government resolutions on the telcom sector during the 2001 - 2006 period made void. After all you cannot say that a policy can be kept, when a court has decided that it was introduced without benefit to the general public, or even to the detriment of the state.

That could well result in considerable price increases, particularly in the pre-paid phone market, and roaming services between operators.

There is also real fears regarding the future viability of Thaicom (Thailands Satelite system). If a guilty verdict is made, then the Government may have no other option than to revoke the concession. (Thaicom is already attempting to sell the concession, but with it losing money and possible future penalties, even if the concession is not revoked, Thaicom may have no option than to forfeit the final 5 years. This will effect Thailands future Satelite program and in particular Thaicom 6.

This case is considerably more important than just Thaksin Shinawatra. There are a total of 22 defendants in this case.

And don't forget, if the full 76 billion baht is seized, 19 billion baht is due to be paid out in rewards to individuals who made the seizure possible. This is covered by law (Section 30 of the NCCC act). A lot of people (not only the defendants) have a vested interest in the outcome of this case.

Just my thoughts....

Good thoughts Slimdog. A lot is at stake, not just the return of money but to look back and change laws?

Has anyone written on the Thai upper class and their role in politics, effects and ability to gain by being in power. Sounds more like a novel/book to put some insight into this process.

But again the Rise and Fall of a Prime Minister would be a good read!

[moskito]

????

[ianh68]

Don't be so flippant about a very serious issue.

The poster I quoted asked a question about freedom of speech in Thailand. My "flippant" reply summed it up in my humble opinion. I think locking somebody up for a decade for posting a video is slightly more of a "serious issue" of freedom of speech than Thaksin's brood whining about people speculating about a court verdict.

Sorry for the thread hijack folks.

Nothing wrong with your "hijack". We all need to be reminded just how undemocratic this place is sometimes. We have been warned!

[webfact]

UPDATE

Thaksin's children plead with Supreme Court

Thaksin Shinawatra's children, Panthongtae and Pinthongta, plead with the Supreme Court for a injunction to stop the Assets Examination Committee,

the media, and politicians from commenting on assets seizure case.

-- Tan Network 2010-02-11

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[dttk0009]

I don't see a valid reason for this information to be censored from the public.

[jdinasia]

***Regardless of the outcome of the court case, and regardless if Thaksin dies of a heart attack, or not, my research into the red movement reveals, in my opinion, it has reached 'critical mass' and is unstoppable under the present political set up in Thailand.

Remember thinking it will happen is not the same as hoping it will happen. It would just replace one family of crocodiles in the swamp with another set.

Remember --- thinking it (the red shirt movement) has reached critical mass, and it (the red shirt movement) actually having reached critical mass are not the same thing. If you are conducting your research via the web from Canada, I would suggest that your research is limited in scope. If you are conducting your research on the ground in Thailand and are not fluent in at least 3 of the 4 Thai dialects then I submit that your research is too limited in scope. If you are not known and trusted by the people with whom you are speaking (fluently and in their dialect) then I suggest your research is too limited in scope.

In many ways I hope that true democracy DOES reach a level of critical mass here in Thailand and I think both the Reds and the yellows have actually helped that process.

[george]

Update:

Thaksin's son, daughter file complaint with Supreme Court to order AEC to halt negative publicity on assets seizure case.

-- TNA 2010-02-11

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[phetaroi]

Gag order - well that's a shame. It's sad that governments (not just in Thailand) do not understand the importance of transparency..unless they have something to hide of course.. which again is a shame

totster

Looks to me like you're reading this wrong. It says, "The two adult children of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra plan on Thursday to petition the Supreme Court to issue a gag order..."

Edited February 11, 2010 by phetaroi

[snowflake]

I can understand why they want to put a gag order on the ruling... Who would want to get it all out there?

The Gov. should have put a gag order on it from day one... No talk about him in the press... Now that would have been clever!

I think it is sad if they take it all, I am sure that he was quite wealthy before he became the PM... Thus he should keep that money...

The money from the sale of AIS should also be given back to him, deduct the tax he should have paid and some penalty and there you go...

Right is right, wrong is wrong, he might have done both in the past (which politician in Thailand has a complete white background)?

I do have to say that I do not particularly like the man, BUT, after so many years abroad and still that many people like/love/support him means something.

He was sentence long before his trial began, the money is taken long before they started this... Someone here should look deep into themselves and ask why...

[hammered]

Gag order - well that's a shame. It's sad that governments (not just in Thailand) do not understand the importance of transparency..unless they have something to hide of course.. which again is a shame

totster

Looks to me like you're reading this wrong. It says, "The two adult children of ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra plan on Thursday to petition the Supreme Court to issue a gag order..."

Or to rephrase the guy who got it wrong. Its a shame that those connected with a movement that claims to be about democracy do not understand the importance of transparency. It still works...

[Thai at Heart]

If the gag order is to prevent "speculation" about the outcome of the trial, these are used very regularly for all sorts of ridiculous reasons in the UK. The most recent of course being John Terry trying to hide the fact that he had been shagging his mate's missus.

On the basis that emergency decrees get passed at the drop of the hat should the reds want to stroll anywhere around Bangkok, I can see there being an extremely good reason for there to be a gagging order on this case. If for no other reason than to INCREASE the apparent fairness of the trial.

There was the ridiculous situation the other day where someone (Attorney General?) stated how hard it is going to be to arrive at a "fair" judgement that kept all sides happy. It is precisely this kind of ridiculous statement that should be kept well out of the press on the run up to the decision being announced.

Secondly, simply by keeping the pundits on the TV, in the papers and on the radio from discussing this case quite so much, there is a chance that the "public sentiment" can be kept under control a little better, and the chances for the situation to boil over may actually be reduced. In terms of public order, I would say that "speculating" about this type of thing in the media doesn't do anything to insure public order.

That said, once the case has been judged, everything should come out, warts and all.

[RKASA]

Update:

Thaksin's son, daughter file complaint with Supreme Court to order AEC to halt negative publicity on assets seizure case.

-- TNA 2010-02-11

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

You see the gag has nothing to do with you, me or TV. They want persons directly involved in the case to stop spinning in the press. Not an un common request in a court case. Nothing to do with US.

again from the first post:

"The gag order, if approved, will also prohibit members of the defunct Asset Examination Committee from commenting on the asset seizure."

No need to even mention it if the gag would have applied to everyone in the country now would it.

[hammered]

You either believe in free speech or dont.

[way2muchcoffee]

You either believe in free speech or dont.

That's not really true Hammered. Shades of gray most certainly exist. Please don't stoop to disingenuous one-liners that smack of a PR gimmick. You are smarter and better than that.

Edited February 11, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[mca]

If you are conducting your research via the web from Canada, I would suggest that your research is limited in scope. If you are conducting your research on the ground in Thailand and are not fluent in at least 3 of the 4 Thai dialects then I submit that your research is too limited in scope. If you are not known and trusted by the people with whom you are speaking (fluently and in their dialect) then I suggest your research is too limited in scope.

It'd be nice for some posters on here to follow your advice jdinasia mate rather than the constant barrage of "uneducated/sell the vote/peasants/ignorant/easily fooled" condescending type wanke_ry by people who've most probably come closest to Isaan by trying some fish sauce once.

[TAWP]

You either believe in free speech or dont.

That's not really true Hammered. Shades of gray most certainly exist. Please don't stoop to disingenuous one-liners that smack of a PR gimmick. You are smarter and better than that.

Actually, no, it has not. 'Pre-approved speech' or 'managed free speech' is not free speech. No matter how much some would try to pretend it is.

But that is besides the point.

In my home country everyone involved in a case can be subject to a gag order. It is often done in sensitive cases both to protect the alleged perpetrator and the victim, i.e. underage sex-offenses etc etc. However, the media can never be put under a gag order. Even if those things happen in some countries that aren't afraid of curtailing freedom for its citizens. (Yes, UK would be one of those nations.)

[Publicus]

UPDATE

Thaksin's children plead with Supreme Court

Thaksin Shinawatra's children, Panthongtae and Pinthongta, plead with the Supreme Court for a injunction to stop the Assets Examination Committee,

the media, and politicians from commenting on assets seizure case.

-- Tan Network 2010-02-11

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

Presuming the accuracy of the news report, which we safely can do, the petitoners are pleading with the Supreme Court to issue a restraining order, an injunction, against any public statement(s) by any person(s) to include any organization(s) relative to the case. That's you, I, employees of the judiciary, or of the media - anyone. It doesn't matter whether you or I or the other guy is knowledgable or ignorant - we can't discuss it via any public media (save perhaps a telephone).

Such a prohibition is tuff but not impossible to do involving Facebook or Twitter and other such "personal' and "individual" social media, and easily enforcable against Thai Visa. Any statements in or by mass media would constitute a direct contempt of court violation against anyone and everyone involved.

That's why free speech types call such a restraining order a 'gag' order. A gag order is prior restraint, i.e., censorship. A government reserves the right to exercise such censorship but only properly and in extreme circumstances (public safety, order, national security etc).

The only question is whether the adult childrens' petition should be granted by the court. Methinks discussion of the pending case is not a problem. If there might be a problem, it would be in any possible/probable reaction to the 76b answer (decision by the court). The petition should be denied.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Publicus

[thailandfaq]

I suppose this is their usual expert way of good public relations.

I wonder if they realise the detrimental factors involved in the way they deprecate the Public Image of Thailand's Governmental system through taking such actions?

Perhaps though it can also be considered that they may be afraid of Mr. Thaksin using his great influence to bombard the media with opinionated content which would cause things to sway in his favour?

If this is not the case then it can be assumed that the government is either unaware of the fact that such gags would only serve to decrease their credibility, or that they are ignorant of these factors, or perhaps don't care in the least. Which is like cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

Edited February 11, 2010 by thailandfaq

[jdinasia]

I suppose this is their usual expert way of good public relations.

I wonder if they realise the detrimental factors involved in the way they deprecate the Public Image of Thailand's Governmental system through taking such actions?

Perhaps though it can also be considered that they may be afraid of Mr. Thaksin using his great influence to bombard the media with opinionated content which would cause things to sway in his favour?

If this is not the case then it can be assumed that the government is either unaware of the fact that such gags would only serve to decrease their credibility, or that they are ignorant of these factors, or perhaps don't care in the least. Which is like cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

I guess you are missing that it is NOT the government asking for the gag order and in no way is the 'government' as standardly discussed in Thailand that has any control over if the gag order request is or is not granted.

[sinplyred]

I bet Thaksin wishes he never got involved in Thai Politics, did he not realize that your business enemies become so much more powerful when you are a polititian, you become a target of all thier hatred through so many more channels.

This is from Forbes Magazine in 2007

Thaksin's Troubles

Chaniga Vorasarun

When telecom billionaire Thaksin Shinawatra was elected Thailand's prime minister in 2001, he was the country's richest-ever elected official. Now he's been pushed out of office and is trying to hold on to his fortune.

[Siripon]

I bet Thaksin wishes he never got involved in Thai Politics, did he not realize that your business enemies become so much more powerful when you are a polititian, you become a target of all thier hatred through so many more channels.

This is from Forbes Magazine in 2007

Thaksin's Troubles

Chaniga Vorasarun

When telecom billionaire Thaksin Shinawatra was elected Thailand's prime minister in 2001, he was the country's richest-ever elected official. Now he's been pushed out of office and is trying to hold on to his fortune.

Thaksin boasted many times before he was PM that he had enough money for life so there was no need for him to be corrupt.

So what did he do?

Change the laws to benefit his companies!

[selftaopath]

Gag order - well that's a shame. It's sad that governments (not just in Thailand) do not understand the importance of transparency..unless they have something to hide of course.. which again is a shame

totster

Well that would mean that anything previously on this forum and any future remarks until the court case will have to be removed.

What happened to the freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

In Thailand? LOL good one.

[coconutmonkey]

Gag order - well that's a shame. It's sad that governments (not just in Thailand) do not understand the importance of transparency..unless they have something to hide of course.. which again is a shame

totster

Transparency. Democracy. The right to know what is going on. The right to have information and think about it. It can all be LEGALLY controlled with a 'gag?'

Terrible concept.

[jdinasia]

Gag order - well that's a shame. It's sad that governments (not just in Thailand) do not understand the importance of transparency..unless they have something to hide of course.. which again is a shame

totster

Transparency. Democracy. The right to know what is going on. The right to have information and think about it. It can all be LEGALLY controlled with a 'gag?'

Terrible concept.

Your right to a fair trial supersedes someone who is not involved with the trials right to speculate about a verdict.

[brahmburgers]

Strange as it sounds, I feel some sympathy for the Shinawat 'adult children.'

They started out as pawns in the big money shell game perpetrated by their parents. If daddy or mommy puts bazillion baht in your bank account, what are you going to do? The parents might not have even told their kids prior to making such transfers, but that's beside the point. However, it's worth noting that the parents, in their zeal to hide their riches, wound up endangering their children, though it's doubtful any of the brood will see a day behind bars.

The Shinawatres gained a lot of their notoriety (and fortunes) by making big ripples in the limelight over many years, so it's a bit ironic that now they want the limelight turned off.

However, the judges and jurists involved should know about and adhere to the prudence of not speculating in public about an upcoming major decision. Furthermore, to publically lament about being uncomfortable doing the right thing, because they're worried about threats from raucus factions - is unbecoming of a jurist.