Jump to content

Former Thai Judge Refuses To Comment On Video Clip


webfact
 Share

Recommended Posts

CONTROVERSIAL COURT CLIPS

Former judge refuses to comment on video clip

By Atthayut Butrsripoom

Satien Wiriyapanpongsa

The Nation

A former Constitution Court judge who was linked to the latest development in the video-clip scandal yesterday declined to comment on the matter, saying he had nothing to do with it.

The judge was called on the phone and asked for comment on whether he was one of the Constitution Court judges accused of preferential treatment involving examinations for court officials in the latest clips posted on YouTube.

“This is a matter for the Constitution Court. I can’t give you an interview,” the former judge said, refusing to confirm if one of the judges mentioned in the clip might be him. “I don’t know,” he said.

A junior court official, who shares the same family name as the former judge, passed an exam early last year to become a Constitution Court official.

On Monday, Constitution Court judge Jaran Pukditanakul rejected doubts he was one of the judges mentioned in the video, adding that none of his four children had taken any exams to become court officials either.

Meanwhile, a source close to another current Constitution Court judge said yesterday he did not condone favouritism in the court exam. “He believes the clip was doctored in a bid to smear the judges. He will not resign and wants to prove his innocence,” the source said.

A Constitution Court source said yesterday that two nicknames mentioned in the latest video clip belonged to actual court officials, one of whom is close to a former judge and the other is the relative of a current judge.

In a related development, the court’s secretary-general Chaowana Traimas on Monday night filed a complaint with the Crime Suppression Division against whoever was responsible for putting three video clips online under the title “Behaviours of the Thai Constitution Court”. The police have been told to charge the culprits with offences against the Computer Crime Act, according to a statement released by court yesterday.

The law covers posting online false information that is deemed defamatory, is a threat to national security or can cause widespread panic. It also applies to pornographic content. Those found guilty face a maximum five years in jail and a fine of up to Bt100,000 or both.

nationlogo.jpg

-- The Nation 2010-11-03

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law covers posting online false information that is deemed defamatory, is a threat to national security or can cause widespread panic

I always love that last bit.

I've got a mental image of somebody posting that Abhisit is the secret love child of Lert Shinawatra and Surat Sundaravej and the entire Thai population start running round screaming and shouting like extras from the film "Cloverfield" when the monster goes amok.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and also at the instruction of one of the tainted judges a counter charge is immediately made.

At least it helps to explain why judges are so ready to accept bribes [ Thanks Frank] when reaching decisions.

Furthermore, it's Thailand and when we talk of corruption this sways the argument. If those that uphold the law by applying it are corrupt then the country is without hope.

They must be banging their heads against the wall. How to remove corruption? Start at the top or the bottom? Why not the middle? Actually, why bother and just start saving for when it's your turn in court in front of an unqualified, cheating, corrupt, 4th grader who has been favoured all his priviledged life and having read nothing other that road signs now sits in judgement over you.

Paid? OK can go free. Offered how much? No way! Life!

But it's only a parking offence.

My court - my choice. Do we still have hanging?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They must be banging their heads against the wall. How to remove corruption? Start at the top or the bottom? Why not the middle? Actually, why bother and just start saving for when it's your turn in court in front of an unqualified, cheating, corrupt, 4th grader who has been favoured all his priviledged life and having read nothing other that road signs now sits in judgement over you.

Paid? OK can go free. Offered how much? No way! Life!

But it's only a parking offence.

My court - my choice. Do we still have hanging?

"Prisoner at the bar. You have been found guilty of a heinous crime by a jury of your peers. You will be taken from this court to a place of execution and .................

Oh. I understand that you have been found guilty of riding a bicycle at night without lights. You are fined 5 shillings - and may God have mercy on your soul." 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...