Thai Court Should Have Seized All Thaksin Wealth: Finance Minister

[webfact]

Thai court should have seized all Thaksin wealth: minister

BANGKOK (AFP) -- Thailand's finance minister has said the country's Supreme Court should have seized all of fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra's fortune instead of only part of his wealth.

In comments on his Facebook page, Korn Chatikavanij took aim at Friday's decision confiscating 1.4 billion dollars of a total of 2.3 billion dollars in assets which were frozen after Thaksin was toppled in a 2006 coup.

"I increasingly feel that the court was really fair. But if it were me, I would have seized the entire 76 billion baht," wrote Korn, who helped investigate Thaksin's graft before taking up his current post.

The court's decision was widely perceived as a political compromise to mollify Thaksin's supporters, as it allowed him to hold on to the value of his company shares as it stood before he became prime minister in 2001.

"I simply think that if the court only seized the surplus wealth, that means although Thaksin is corrupt he still holds on to his initial money," Korn said in the post on Wednesday.

He said the damage done to state agencies through Thaksin's allegedly corrupt activities merited further legal action against him.

"Those agencies must legally pursue Thaksin," said Korn, a British-born, Oxford-educated former investment banker.

Thailand's anti-corruption body on Thursday said it would fast-track outstanding graft cases against Thaksin. The Supreme Court said in its ruling it was confiscating his money because he abused his power for personal gain.

Thailand's judiciary on Wednesday defended the verdict, saying that it had not been biased or subject to political influence.

Thaksin, who lives in exile to avoid a prior jail sentence for corruption, has vowed to fight the verdict and accused the judges of issuing a "very political" ruling which was a "joke for the world".

His supporters in the so-called "Red Shirt" movement have announced a series of protests around the country later this month in a bid to topple the current government.

-- ©Copyright AFP 2010-03-04

Published with written approval from AFP.

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[slapout]

There is a huge difference between "if it were me"," I think the court was fair" and the head lines to this article.

[givenall]

Don’t worry by the time they are finished with all other charges, nothing will be left for Mr. T. especially since e still don’t get it

[animatic]

...He said the damage done to state agencies through Thaksin's allegedly corrupt activities merited further legal action against him.

"Those agencies must legally pursue Thaksin," said Korn, a British-born, Oxford-educated former investment banker.

Thailand's anti-corruption body on Thursday said it would fast-track outstanding graft cases against Thaksin....

An opinion, a statement of fact and an anouncement from the NCCC.

All of which could have been avoided if Thaksins lust for power were ever satiated.

Retirement as an uber-riche elder statesman never appealed to him

and he will lose all because of his intransigence.

Sad little rich man.

[BSJ]

The Thai finance minister seems to have the luxury of criticizing the courts decision with impunity. A luxury we don't have! Funny that!

[ding]

"I simply think that if the court only seized the surplus wealth, that means although Thaksin is corrupt he still holds on to his initial money,"

I wonder if there is a translation issue with that sentence.

Like a previous poster said, the title had me expecting a different statement. I'd be interested to see if there's more to this. And I wonder if the court is not to be questioned too. Maybe it's not wise to say more anyway.

Edited March 4, 2010 by ding

[MyphuketLife]

talk about a sensational headline, that does not match what the person actually said.

[filingaccount]

Let me try an experiment here...

I increasingly feel that the court was really fair. But if it were me, I would have not taken the money at all.

Let's see if the rules are applied uniformly across the board.

[animatic]

Let me try an experiment here...

I increasingly feel that the court was really fair. But if it were me, I would have not taken the money at all.

Let's see if the rules are applied uniformly across the board.

Those four words are the difference between opinion and illegal critique.

[RKASA]

Should have?, they never gave any back ether and he is not getting any back.

You are getting sleepy, vary sleepy, when you awake you will think it was never planned that way from the start.

It does not matter which side of the lake you are on, that s just the way it is. Stick a fork in him, he is done.

[CLOD]

Have you ever heard anything like it.

It was his like, and his military junta cronies who appointed them.

Must have been a mix up in communications with the orders given.

broke his own rules?

It'll never happen

[mca]

Those four words are the difference between opinion and illegal critique.

I'd like to see that defense being used if the LM police came a knocking on someone's door.

Edited March 4, 2010 by mca

[Ricardo]

Should have?, they never gave any back ether and he is not getting any back.

Shurely that latter-comment remains to be seen ?

[petebkk]

The Thai finance minister seems to have the luxury of criticizing the courts decision with impunity. A luxury we don't have! Funny that!

If you want to know what it really means to criticize the courts, I would suggest you look at what Taksin and his people are saying for the past couple of days then you will understand the definition.

[Gonzo the Face]

Here is a question for TV's learned multitude......

Of the 76 Billion the govt shall keep 46Billion. the balance , is to be released to him or has it been released to him and is now GONE from thailand

With the great likleyhood of further charges and in light of the supreme court ruling, a further likely hood that there will be further fines and/or penalties, will not the courts hold on to any released to Thaksin funds to insure that there is money to pay for any fines if they are to come?

[landofthefree]

...He said the damage done to state agencies through Thaksin's allegedly corrupt activities merited further legal action against him.

"Those agencies must legally pursue Thaksin," said Korn, a British-born, Oxford-educated former investment banker.

Thailand's anti-corruption body on Thursday said it would fast-track outstanding graft cases against Thaksin....

An opinion, a statement of fact and an anouncement from the NCCC.

All of which could have been avoided if Thaksins lust for power were ever satiated.

Retirement as an uber-riche elder statesman never appealed to him

and he will lose all because of his intransigence.

Sad little rich man.

I agree with everything you have said in this posting but is anyone else like I am really bored by this story? I wish people in Thailand could move on and leave this worn out story behind them after all if people devote all of their efforts just to hurt one person (even a bad one) can you imagine all of the bad vibes/ bad Karma that would circulate around? A good Buddhist would recognize that all that bad Karma will come back to hit them ... you have been warned Abhisit and assorted Elite cronies.

[mythBuster]

Good to see that there is NO separation of state and judiciary in Thailand.

[Mario2008]

The Thai finance minister seems to have the luxury of criticizing the courts decision with impunity. A luxury we don't have! Funny that!

If you read the statement you see he does respect the courts decision and is carefull in his wording.

[ballpoint]

Good to see that there is NO separation of state and judiciary in Thailand.

Eh? The finance minister says he would have taken it all, the court didn't. Ah yes, the court was clearly following the orders of the government.

[animatic]

An opinion, a statement of fact and an anouncement from the NCCC.

All of which could have been avoided if Thaksins lust for power were ever satiated.

Retirement as an uber-riche elder statesman never appealed to him

and he will lose all because of his intransigence.

Sad little rich man.

I agree with everything you have said in this posting but is anyone else like I am really bored by this story? I wish people in Thailand could move on and leave this worn out story behind them after all if people devote all of their efforts just to hurt one person (even a bad one) can you imagine all of the bad vibes/ bad Karma that would circulate around? A good Buddhist would recognize that all that bad Karma will come back to hit them ... you have been warned Abhisit and assorted Elite cronies.

I am also quite tired of feeling a need to counter his PR movements,

but he appears to have paid minions waiting to wear us down until he can change the argument and win the day.

In this case I would have to be a good rationalist since I am not Buddhist,

but I can see him trying to get the lies out endlessly. If he were to stop the Propaganda attacks,

I might find MANY more interesting things to do.... But I STILL find him too potentially dangerous to completely ignore.

[animatic]

Good to see that there is NO separation of state and judiciary in Thailand.

Eh? The finance minister says he would have taken it all, the court didn't. Ah yes, the court was clearly following the orders of the government.

Yeah right the followed the orders, except they didn't take it all, but the Finmin says he would have..

Oh yes precisely following orders... never given.

By the way "Separation of Church and State" is the phrase.

Not separation of state and judiciary, since the judiciary is ALSO the state.

Just a different branch.

There is separation of Executive and Judiciary and Legislative.

The PM / Cabinet includes the Attorney General or the governments Prosecutor

The Defendant gets their own lawyers,

and a different branch of the STATE makes the final arbitration between arguments.

[eggomaniac]

The Thai finance minister seems to have the luxury of criticizing the courts decision with impunity. A luxury we don't have! Funny that!

EGGsactly!

Also, OP can post clippings of criticism of the decision???

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I like it. Let me try: "I think the courts decision was fair, however if it were me then I wouldn't have grabbed personal assets under laws that came about during the junta government and after shredding the last legitimate constitution and then applied them retroactively."

[animatic]

I like it. Let me try: "I think the courts decision was fair, however if it were me then I wouldn't have grabbed personal assets under laws that came about during the junta government and after shredding the last legitimate constitution and then applied them retroactively."

Try again.

The laws he was prosecuted under WERE from the 1997 Constitution.

And the TWO prosecutors bodies that took him to court WERE from the 1997 Constitution.

And the people have voted in the 2007 constitution

and had not other choices besides the 1997 to choose between.

All fallacious arguments.

If it were me...

I would have made sure that enough was held in country,

to make amends to the nation for ALL the foreseeable loses

his actions in government created for the Thai people.

[ballpoint]

I like it. Let me try: "I think the courts decision was fair, however if it were me then I wouldn't have grabbed personal assets under laws that came about during the junta government and after shredding the last legitimate constitution and then applied them retroactively."

So the laws making it illegal to steal money from the Thai people were only made by the "junta" government? Seems they did at least one good thing then. What a load of tripe. Thaksin was found guilty on laws that exist in every democratic country. Conflict of interest, stealing from the state coffers, manipulating laws to make a profit. It really is unbelievable that his supporters come on here trying to make out he did nothing wrong, or the charges were trumped up. The man stole 150 billion baht from the same Thai people that you claim to support. The evidence is on public record. He did it. You're following a crook.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Sorry, I've quoted from the legal ruling in the past, paragraphs that mention specifically that the junta laws and institutions were considered to be equal to having been passed by parliament. Some of you should get your noses out of The Nation on occasion.

I'm no fan of Thaksin, but this clearly is politically motivated BS.

[ballpoint]

Sorry, I've quoted from the legal ruling in the past, paragraphs that mention specifically that the junta laws and institutions were considered to be equal to having been passed by parliament. Some of you should get your noses out of The Nation on occasion.

I'm no fan of Thaksin, but this clearly is politically motivated BS.

Of course the case against him was politically motivated. He commited crimes as the PM, refused to take responsibility for his own actions, refused to call elections or resign when his mandate was up. It is a political case. In no way does any of that lessen the severity of the charges he was found guilty of. The only judgement the asset trial made about the "junta" laws was that the AEC had the authority to freeze his assets. As the "junta" government had been sworn in by HM the King it was, at the time, the legal Thai government, despite what you or I may feel about the way it was installed. The asset trial then ruled that he stole from the people using common Thai law, nothing to do with the "junta" government. He will face criminal charges because of that, as he should given the very real evidence against him that is freely available for anyone to peruse.

The attempts to wheedle out of the fact that it is proven that he stole around 150 billion baht from the Thai people, by someone who is no fan of his, are pathetic to say the least. You can spout all you like about how much he did for the country, how he was unfairly dismissed, how legal the current government is, what the PAD did in the airport, ad infinitum, they don't matter to this case. He stole from the Thai people. He abused the trust they put in him. He is a cowardly criminal who doesn't have the guts to face up to his own responsibilities. "I am no chicken" he said; it's ironic that the PAD adopted the yellow colour for themselves as he is one of the yellowist of chickens ever to scratch around the Thai farmyard.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Sorry, I've quoted from the legal ruling in the past, paragraphs that mention specifically that the junta laws and institutions were considered to be equal to having been passed by parliament. Some of you should get your noses out of The Nation on occasion.

I'm no fan of Thaksin, but this clearly is politically motivated BS.

Of course the case against him was politically motivated. He commited crimes as the PM, refused to take responsibility for his own actions, refused to call elections or resign when his mandate was up.

!!!!? Were you at all around when Thaksin called elections which then ground the entire politcial system to a halt due to a boycott from the Democrat party, causing the stalemate that directly led to the coup?

It is a political case. In no way does any of that lessen the severity of the charges he was found guilty of. The only judgement the asset trial made about the "junta" laws was that the AEC had the authority to freeze his assets. As the "junta" government had been sworn in by HM the King it was, at the time, the legal Thai government, despite what you or I may feel about the way it was installed.

That's a very creative way to say that military coups are a legal feature of the poliical landscape in this country. I'd even agree with that assessment.

And that's pretty much the topic I find interesting, not so much to what extent Thaksin was a bigger crook than every PM before and after him.

[ronz28]

Of course all ministers including the Finance Minister should have half or more of their entire family assets seized because all of what they have must only have come from ill gotten gains. None of it could have been because of the hard work they put into a family business, putting their family wealth at risk in a new technology business and their smart investment business decisions and timing. Take it all from each and every member of the family and give it all to the bureaucrats... surely they will spend it wisely and make sure none of the populace benefits from any new technologies.

[ballpoint]

!!!!? Were you at all around when Thaksin called elections which then ground the entire politcial system to a halt due to a boycott from the Democrat party, causing the stalemate that directly led to the coup?

He called elections in 2006 as a way of trying to get a mandate to excuse his AIS sale to Temasek. The elections were boycotted not only by the Democrats, but also by his largest coalition partner, the CTP, clearly because they felt he should have resigned due to irregularities in the sale - the offshore money movements, the inter family transfer of shares at 1baht prior to the sale, where they reached around 30baht, the way the law was changed to allow foreign ownership and the sale went ahead the following day, mighty fast due diligence by Temasek, unless they knew that the law was to be changed in advance? The lack of a single satang in tax paid on the deal. Yes, some will spout about how technically no laws were broken, but it's hardly ethical behaviour from the PM of a country, and would have brought down any western leader. So he called an election, hoping to buy his way to another mandate. The opposition, and his main partner, boycotted it, as was their right. It could have backfired horribly on them, he could have won a 100% share of the house, but he didn't. The man the people love so much couldn't even win an election with no opposition. Even despite his cheating by paying people to run against him so as to satisfy the voting percentages, and by arranging the polling booths so voters could be monitored as to who they were voting for. He still didn't win. He resigned, mysteriously came back as caretaker, had a certain timeframe in which to call new elections, or really resign by going to the King, refused to do so, and so was not the legally elected PM of Thailand at the time of the coup, whatever you may think of the way he was "ousted". He was then banned from politics, along with the other TRT executives, for five years, for cheating in the election. Yes, I was here. I've been here since Prem was PM. That's what happened.

Edited March 4, 2010 by ballpoint