Amnesty Possible For Peaceful Red-Shirts Protesters

[webfact]

Amnesty possible for peaceful protesters

By The Nation

The government will be lenient and not prosecute people who violated the emergency decree, but the authorities would check pertinent legal measures for those involved in terrorism.

The government may issue an amnesty, in order to avoid legal wrangling, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said yesterday.

"Those protesters who rallied in peace and were not armed will not be prosecuted - just like what happened at the rally in April last year," he said, extending an olive branch to the red shirts.

Abhisit said the leniency would not cover core leaders, agitators and those charged for terrorism or linked to criminal cases under the jurisdiction of the Department of Special Investigation (DSI).

Under the state of emergency imposed since April 7, tens of thousands involved in the rally would automatically become suspects for offences against the emergency rule.

Three law enforcement and security agencies - the DSI, National Security Council and the Council of State - will meet today to debate options and decide whether to draft an amnesty bill for people who broke the emergency decree.

DSI director-general Tharit Pengdit said an amnesty might be needed to clear the records of red shirts who returned to their villages and had no involvement in recent unrest.

Should it be deemed necessary to grant an amnesty, the government could choose either to issue an executive decree or sponsor legislation, both of which would be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, he said.

Commenting on the killing of a red-shirt guard in Nakhon Ratchasima, he said the case was classified as a homicide under the jurisdiction of the provincial police.

He said he doubted whether the case would warrant an upgrade for the DSI to be involved since there was no evidence to suggest the killing was linked to the red-shirt rally.

Red-shirt leaders, including Jatuporn Promphan, have voiced suspicion that the government may be behind what they call "reprisal killings" against the reds. But they had provided no evidence to substantiate their remarks.

-- The Nation 2010-06-14

[Pib]

I've got mixed feeling about this. Seems amnesty is basically a get out of/avoid jail free card...and avoid even a fine when the law was broken, whether a person considers the emergency decree law valid/needed or not. The govt sure was stressing to the protesters during the final week of the protests that if they don't leave now they will be subject to two years in jail. And not even a small fine to help pay for the damage directly or "indirectly" caused by the protesters. Yes, I know, you can't throw thousands into jail as it would be politically unacceptable and a good many of the protesters were basically a captive audience of the red shirt leaders.

I guess this all boils down to forgive and forget (at least until the next protest or after elections). Hopefully, it will help the country heal.

[Maestro]

DSI: Natl Security Council and Council of State Agrees with Amnesty Plan

UPDATE : 14 June 2010

ASTV news reports that the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) revealed both the National Security Council and the Council of State have agreed on the proposal to grant amnesty to red-shirt protesters who've only been charged with minor crimes. Related parties are preparing to draft up a new amnesty bill be to reviewed by the Center for the Resolution of Emergency Situations (CRES), headed by DPM Suthep Thaugsuban.

-- Tan Network 2010-06-14

[mazeltov]

wow AMNESTY for minor crimes, a olive branch to the red shirts.

that government is really lenient and liberal.

don't forget, the 'crime' most of the red shirts could be charged with is "violation of the emergency decree by political assembly of more than five people." and probably also jaywalking.

the leaders will be probably don't get an Amnesty for "instigation of others to take part in an assembly of more than 5 people, to violate the emergency and jaywalking" and "operating an electric amplified sound system on a public street without proper licence."

[Rucharee]

I've got mixed feeling about this. Seems amnesty is basically a get out of/avoid jail free card...and avoid even a fine when the law was broken, whether a person considers the emergency decree law valid/needed or not. The govt sure was stressing to the protesters during the final week of the protests that if they don't leave now they will be subject to two years in jail. And not even a small fine to help pay for the damage directly or "indirectly" caused by the protesters. Yes, I know, you can't throw thousands into jail as it would be politically unacceptable and a good many of the protesters were basically a captive audience of the red shirt leaders.

I guess this all boils down to forgive and forget (at least until the next protest or after elections). Hopefully, it will help the country heal.

It is a get out of jail card for the YELLOW, and the MULTI COLORS. The red were used as an excuse. Believe me.

[LevelHead]

Absolutely there must be NO AMNESTY.

None at all.

Its already been clearly said that as part of the deal proposed to amnesty some reds that ALL CRES, Army, officials will be given amnesty (as well as by precedent all Yellow and Multi-Colour Shirts).

This is purely a ploy by those in power to whitewash everything.

There must be no amnesty for anybody, not for reds and not for any soldier, any official, any politician, anyone at all.

Everyone must be tried and face courts (be it now or in 10 years time) for everything they have done.

[way2muchcoffee]

Absolutely there must be NO AMNESTY.

None at all.

Its already been clearly said that as part of the deal proposed to amnesty some reds that ALL CRES, Army, officials will be given amnesty (as well as by precedent all Yellow and Multi-Colour Shirts).

This is purely a ploy by those in power to whitewash everything.

There must be no amnesty for anybody, not for reds and not for any soldier, any official, any politician, anyone at all.

Everyone must be tried and face courts (be it now or in 10 years time) for everything they have done.

Where has this been said?

[LevelHead]

Absolutely there must be NO AMNESTY.

None at all.

Its already been clearly said that as part of the deal proposed to amnesty some reds that ALL CRES, Army, officials will be given amnesty (as well as by precedent all Yellow and Multi-Colour Shirts).

This is purely a ploy by those in power to whitewash everything.

There must be no amnesty for anybody, not for reds and not for any soldier, any official, any politician, anyone at all.

Everyone must be tried and face courts (be it now or in 10 years time) for everything they have done.

Where has this been said?

Certainly if you take your news from ASTV or the Nation or TAN you will not hear that. Simply open your mind to other news sources, who are capable of reporting freely and fairly, and you will find the answers you desire.

Clearly reported that as part of the proposed amnesty all officials and army and CRES will all be given amnesty too.

Why do you think Reds are saying they do not want the amnesty ?????

Acceptance of it will allow the CRES to whitewash everyone involved...... on their side.

No amnesty !! for anyone !!

[way2muchcoffee]

Absolutely there must be NO AMNESTY.

None at all.

Its already been clearly said that as part of the deal proposed to amnesty some reds that ALL CRES, Army, officials will be given amnesty (as well as by precedent all Yellow and Multi-Colour Shirts).

This is purely a ploy by those in power to whitewash everything.

There must be no amnesty for anybody, not for reds and not for any soldier, any official, any politician, anyone at all.

Everyone must be tried and face courts (be it now or in 10 years time) for everything they have done.

Where has this been said?

Certainly if you take your news from ASTV or the Nation or TAN you will not hear that. Simply open your mind to other news sources, who are capable of reporting freely and fairly, and you will find the answers you desire.

Clearly reported that as part of the proposed amnesty all officials and army and CRES will all be given amnesty too.

Why do you think Reds are saying they do not want the amnesty ?????

Acceptance of it will allow the CRES to whitewash everyone involved...... on their side.

No amnesty !! for anyone !!

You have not answered the question. Simply because you say so does not mean it is true. You must provide a link to back up your claim. If you cannot do so then it can be assumed that you are prevaricating.

[LevelHead]

BP - a report from a few days ago.

Sorry, not allowed to link BP reports on here, against the rules of TV.

So why do you think that the Red shirts do not want the amnesty but the government is trying to force it to happen.

Its all about the CRES/Officials/Army being granted amnesty, along with a few token reds and the reason for the justification of it.

[TAWP]

Give us the article name so we can google it...

[way2muchcoffee]

BP - a report from a few days ago.

Sorry, not allowed to link BP reports on here, against the rules of TV.

So why do you think that the Red shirts do not want the amnesty but the government is trying to force it to happen.

Its all about the CRES/Officials/Army being granted amnesty, along with a few token reds and the reason for the justification of it.

Please PM me the link then. Or, as TAWP suggested, you could simply write the article title.

We are awaiting the evidence that you now categorically state exists that proves that the CRES is offering amnesty to low level redshirt demonstrators with the quid pro quo that all military personnel will also receive the same amnesty.

Edited June 20, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[sbk]

Lets play nice gentlemen, Its possible to debate with resorting to baiting or flaming. It really is.

[way2muchcoffee]

Lets play nice gentlemen, Its possible to debate with resorting to baiting or flaming. It really is.

Yes. Thanks for pointing that out SBK. Helps me to reduce my emotional level of engagement.

Edited June 20, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[philw]

Give us the article name so we can google it...

Go and read the other newspaper.

[way2muchcoffee]

Give us the article name so we can google it...

Go and read the other newspaper.

I do. Every day. There is no such article that provides proof for LevelHead's claims.

[LevelHead]

Give us the article name so we can google it...

Go and read the other newspaper.

I do. Every day. There is no such article that provides proof for LevelHead's claims.

As I cannot link to BP articles, try this :

Limited amnesty | Asian Correspondent

.

[LevelHead]

Edit.

Edited June 20, 2010 by LevelHead

[LevelHead]

Wow.... even in The Nation ! it says the CRES wants amnesty for all officials as part of the deal.

Amnesty likely for red shirts on minor offences

Do you see why the reds do not want any amnesty for them or anyone ??????? Its all a whitewash.......... the government and army trying to hide what it has done - again.

[way2muchcoffee]

Give us the article name so we can google it...

Go and read the other newspaper.

I do. Every day. There is no such article that provides proof for LevelHead's claims.

As I cannot link to BP articles, try this :

Limited amnesty | Asian Correspondent

.

That link is not proof. It is from an unnamed source on Bangkok Pundit. Nevertheless, I now understand where you get the idea. According to Bangkok Pundit it is from a Nation article and the claim is attributed to an unnamed source. So for that I thank you and publicly issue an apology. It is in print.

I would urge you to recognize that unnamed sources are not credible, or are barely credible in the scale of things. If this is what you are hinging your argument on then you should be aware that an unnamed source is not any kind of proof that would substantiate your claim.

Edited June 20, 2010 by way2muchcoffee

[TAWP]

The articles does not mention yellow or multi-shirts nor that the red oppose the amnesty on the grounds that the military would be granted a blanket immunity.

[philw]

That link is not proof. It is from an unnamed source on Bangkok Pundit. Nevertheless, I now understand where you get the idea. According to Bangkok Pundit it is from a Nation article and the claim is attributed to an unnamed source. So for that I thank you and publicly issue an apology. It is in print.

I would urge you to recognize that unnamed sources are not credible, or are barely credible in the scale of things. If this is what you are hinging your argument on then you should be aware that an unnamed source is not any kind of proof that would substantiate your claim.

Bkk pundit not credible ???

The Nation ???

Please............

I would think ( but I cannot prove it to your satisfaction ........) that there are two motives for a seemingly merciful and parentally understanding amnesty for low level reds.

1: Makes it easier to impose far harsher sentences on the leaders, when these sentences are handed down, which I guess will be sometime within the next couple of years.

Some are looking at life imprisonment or perhaps death and that will certainly enrage some of their supporters, so good tactic to try and look a little benign now.

2: To apply the same principle of amnesty to Gov't and Army and keep them on song.

Makes sense.

ph

[way2muchcoffee]

Bkk pundit not credible ???

The Nation ???

Please............

I would think ( but I cannot prove it to your satisfaction ........) that there are two motives for a seemingly merciful and parentally understanding amnesty for low level reds.

1: Makes it easier to impose far harsher sentences on the leaders, when these sentences are handed down, which I guess will be sometime within the next couple of years.

Some are looking at life imprisonment or perhaps death and that will certainly enrage some of their supporters, so good tactic to try and look a little benign now.

2: To apply the same principle of amnesty to Gov't and Army and keep them on song.

Makes sense.

ph

Where did I say that either BK Pundit or The Nation are not credible? Though in fact I think they both must be taken with a grain of salt. BK Pundit is biased toward the red side. The Nation is biased toward the government side. What I said was that 'unnamed sources' are not credible. I believe you will see that if you re-read my post.

Edited June 20, 2010 by way2muchcoffee