Yingluck: Amnesty Will Restore Peace In Thailand

[jdinasia]

awarded themselves an ex post facto pardon for an offence far worse than any committed by Thaksin and with more lasting and disastrous consequences

That must be one of the singularly most subjective statements I have seen on TVF.

I would think that the "widely popular" at the time, and well accepted coup in 2006 was far less damaging than Thaksin's War on Drugs --- with 2700 killed ... at least for the families involved. Particularly the families of the 1400+ innocents killed .....

That the coup removed an extra-constitutional caretaker PM, that was the center of so much divisiveness with one single death ---- (self-inflicted)... pales in comparison. It can be argued that the consequences of the coup are still being felt. I would disagree. I would say that the consequences of Thaksin (which led to the coup) are still being felt.

I honestly don't see the more extreme elements of the PAD accepting an amnesty for Thaksin, if it includes wiping away Thaksin's court mandated jail time. Which would mean that an amnesty that allowed Thaksin back into politics would land Thailand right back into the protests of 2005-2006.

If I am wrong about this it wouldn't be the first time I have been wrong about things in Thailand

[Crushdepth]

I honestly don't see the more extreme elements of the PAD accepting an amnesty for Thaksin, if it includes wiping away Thaksin's court mandated jail time. Which would mean that an amnesty that allowed Thaksin back into politics would land Thailand right back into the protests of 2005-2006.

The LAST thing Thailand needs is to allow politicians found guilty of electoral fraud to run for office again. A much better idea would be to introduce some actual punishments for same (eg. extensive jail time).

"You cheated in the election, thereby seeking to place 60 million people under your authority? Naughty naughty! You aren't allowed to play for five years".

[janverbeem]

EC: Yingluck still qualified despite perjury allegation

On the other hand, he noted that it would be a different story if the candidate was given a jail sentence as the EC would need to reconsider her qualifications. Moreover, any complaints received over the perjury case would also be taken into account.

-- NNT 2011-05-20

I have such a strange feeling that there will be a sentencing close to the poll date.

[rubl]

EC: Yingluck still qualified despite perjury allegation

On the other hand, he noted that it would be a different story if the candidate was given a jail sentence as the EC would need to reconsider her qualifications. Moreover, any complaints received over the perjury case would also be taken into account.

-- NNT 2011-05-20

I have such a strange feeling that there will be a sentencing close to the poll date.

I think the case will not progress as long as one of the main accused is not available. Mind you k. Thaksin has gone on record to return before the end of the year

Edited May 20, 2011 by rubl

[mrtoad]

I think the case will not progress as long as one of the main accused is not available. Mind you k. Thaksin has gone on record to return before the end of the year

Thaksin has more purported comebacks than The Messiah.

[Crushdepth]

I have such a strange feeling that there will be a sentencing close to the poll date.

Did it ever cross your mind that she might actually be guilty?

[mrtoad]

I'm sure I saw yesterday that an Amnesty was not a priority? Or am I mistaken? I bet "The Dear Leader" was straight on the phone when he heard that statement yesterday.

[jayboy]

I would think that the "widely popular" at the time, and well accepted coup in 2006 was far less damaging than Thaksin's War on Drugs --- with 2700 killed ... at least for the families involved. Particularly the families of the 1400+ innocents killed .....

The mind begins to spin at the illogical drift of this post.(I will ignore the suggestion that the drugs war caused more harm to Thailand than the coup because it's such patent nonsense)

I don't actually accept the 2006 coup was widely popular, but hypothetically let's assume it was.Nobody disputes the coup leaders were guilty of a criminal act which had adverse effects on the country.The fact that the coup was "popular" has no relevance to the treasonable and criminal nature of the act.

We are always being told that the drugs war cannot be excused on the grounds it was popular with the Thai people.I agree.

You cannot have it both ways.Either you condemn the coup and the drugs war, or you can shrug your shoulders and say both ,while reprehensible, were popular with the Thai people.

Both events in my view reflect poorly on Thai culture.The objectives in both cases were reasonable even laudable, namely to rid Thailand of Thaksin's poisonous influence and to rid Thailand of the misery caused by the drugs trade.In both cases there was the typical Thai tendency to take the easy way out.No patience for chipping away at Thaksin democratically (which to be fair the PAD movement early on was doing effectively0.And no patience for a multi pronged assault on all the contributing factors in the drugs trade.

[gregb]

Yingluck is being completely disingenuous. She knows dam_n well that amnesty will not result in peace. The only result it will have is another coup at best, and civil war at worst. Let us hope the PT are trounced soundly at the ballot box so we might finally have some real peace in this country.

[rubl]

Yingluck is being completely disingenuous. She knows dam_n well that amnesty will not result in peace. The only result it will have is another coup at best, and civil war at worst. Let us hope the PT are trounced soundly at the ballot box so we might finally have some real peace in this country.

I don't like the 'another coup at best', on the other hand having a taxi driver tell me today 'another civil war with people shooting each other may still come after the elections' doesn't sound good either. With Ms. Yingluck's 'amnesty will restore peace, but it's not a priority' we're not going in the right direction it seems

(edit: add: personally I also do not believe amnesty will restore peace, let's be clear about that)

Edited May 20, 2011 by rubl

[Insight]

Yingluck is being completely disingenuous. She knows dam_n well that amnesty will not result in peace. The only result it will have is another coup at best, and civil war at worst. Let us hope the PT are trounced soundly at the ballot box so we might finally have some real peace in this country.

I don't like the 'another coup at best', on the other hand having a taxi driver tell me today 'another civil war with people shooting each other may still come after the elections' doesn't sound good either. With Ms. Yingluck's 'amnesty will restore peace, but it's not a priority' we're not going in the right direction it seems

(edit: add: personally I also do not believe amnesty will restore peace, let's be clear about that)

The army moving on the red shirt camp last year was supposed to bring out all the so-called "watermelons" and plunge the country into civil war. Didn't happen. Just the well-coordinated arson of several provincial halls (which I do recall reading somewhere some locals attempted to resist).

Thaksin is perpetuating the chaos (if people seriously still doubt this then I wonder how they react to these comments from little sis). The question is how many seriously have the will to see it through to the desired momentum. My money (pitifully meager in comparison) is still on "no where near enough".

[PoorSucker]

She said amnesty will cover all regions of Thailand, and the amendment will be effective for all cases since September 19, 2006.

Let all murderers and drug dealers free.

[Misterwhisper]

What her "vision" is becomes very clear when she says that a blanket amnesty that solely benefits political baddies will restore peace while under the same breath saying that the system must be adjusted to not only benefit particular groups of people. Advocating a blanket amnesty is NOT "adjusting the system" but rather "maintaining the system".

[jdinasia]

She said amnesty will cover all regions of Thailand, and the amendment will be effective for all cases since September 19, 2006.

Let all murderers and drug dealers free.

Can't have it start in 2003 when her brother's war on drugs was going on now can we? .... those people never had a trial. They were just executed. Nice of them to exclude anything prior to the coup ...

If I read the article correctly ... the EC isn't going to look at her perjury case until someone files a complaint. Anyone want to take odds (figuratively speaking of course) that about 4 different groups started writing out complaints about 8 seconds after the EC statement came out?

[janverbeem]

She said amnesty will cover all regions of Thailand, and the amendment will be effective for all cases since September 19, 2006.

Let all murderers and drug dealers free.

She meant all cases since 19/09/2006 concerning her beloved brother,she only was a tad short of breath when she made the announcement

[lungmi]

Bucholz, the master of databank, I ask you who was the financial minister the first years of T. , (a man at the same level of K.Korn,) who copied the "populist" strategies of Chuan Leek Pai and had been promoted to higher positions because he couldn't accept that this stategies was not accepeted for all Thailand

but only for regions where T. had his voters?

[hanuman1]

I would think that the "widely popular" at the time, and well accepted coup in 2006 was far less damaging than Thaksin's War on Drugs --- with 2700 killed ... at least for the families involved. Particularly the families of the 1400+ innocents killed .....

The mind begins to spin at the illogical drift of this post.(I will ignore the suggestion that the drugs war caused more harm to Thailand than the coup because it's such patent nonsense)

I don't actually accept the 2006 coup was widely popular, but hypothetically let's assume it was.Nobody disputes the coup leaders were guilty of a criminal act which had adverse effects on the country.The fact that the coup was "popular" has no relevance to the treasonable and criminal nature of the act.

We are always being told that the drugs war cannot be excused on the grounds it was popular with the Thai people.I agree.

You cannot have it both ways.Either you condemn the coup and the drugs war, or you can shrug your shoulders and say both ,while reprehensible, were popular with the Thai people.

Both events in my view reflect poorly on Thai culture.The objectives in both cases were reasonable even laudable, namely to rid Thailand of Thaksin's poisonous influence and to rid Thailand of the misery caused by the drugs trade.In both cases there was the typical Thai tendency to take the easy way out.No patience for chipping away at Thaksin democratically (which to be fair the PAD movement early on was doing effectively0.And no patience for a multi pronged assault on all the contributing factors in the drugs trade.

Thanks for the sanity check.

If it wasn't for posts such as this the neutral viewer would end up believing the prejudice-addled judgements of those who have valid points on some issues concerning red shirts and Thaksin, but allow their ire to run roughshod over more nuanced and arguable points.

Please keep posting, because I'm a lazy bast$%d.

[jdinasia]

I would think that the "widely popular" at the time, and well accepted coup in 2006 was far less damaging than Thaksin's War on Drugs --- with 2700 killed ... at least for the families involved. Particularly the families of the 1400+ innocents killed .....

The mind begins to spin at the illogical drift of this post.(I will ignore the suggestion that the drugs war caused more harm to Thailand than the coup because it's such patent nonsense)

I don't actually accept the 2006 coup was widely popular, but hypothetically let's assume it was.Nobody disputes the coup leaders were guilty of a criminal act which had adverse effects on the country.The fact that the coup was "popular" has no relevance to the treasonable and criminal nature of the act.

We are always being told that the drugs war cannot be excused on the grounds it was popular with the Thai people.I agree.

You cannot have it both ways.Either you condemn the coup and the drugs war, or you can shrug your shoulders and say both ,while reprehensible, were popular with the Thai people.

Both events in my view reflect poorly on Thai culture.The objectives in both cases were reasonable even laudable, namely to rid Thailand of Thaksin's poisonous influence and to rid Thailand of the misery caused by the drugs trade.In both cases there was the typical Thai tendency to take the easy way out.No patience for chipping away at Thaksin democratically (which to be fair the PAD movement early on was doing effectively0.And no patience for a multi pronged assault on all the contributing factors in the drugs trade.

Thanks for the sanity check.

If it wasn't for posts such as this the neutral viewer would end up believing the prejudice-addled judgements of those who have valid points on some issues concerning red shirts and Thaksin, but allow their ire to run roughshod over more nuanced and arguable points.

Please keep posting, because I'm a lazy bast$%d.

Thanks for the personal remarks

Please note that Jayboy didn't select the whole post to respond to (by name --- I did quote relevant material from A post ... not attributed for a reason .. as it was a quote from a different poster) ...

Let me help you out with a few fallacies in Jayboy's post .... that you appear to have quoted in full ... (I am not going to check)...

There was no way to remove an extra-constitutional caretaker, once resigned and then returned, democratically. By the 1997 constitution Thaksin wasn't supposed to be there ... the constitution failed to cover the situation that evolved. The fact that Thaksin has eroded all the checks and balances needed for democracy to function is an additional issue. Most countries have similar situations in their histories. In fact, my own country of origin "committed treason" against King George III Thailand has far too many similar situations, but a reasonable man can see the justification in this occurrence.

The point of my post was that, as always, in his attempts to put the ills of Thai society at the feet of the Army and "the elite", Jayboy, as usual put the wrong problem first. Thaksin was the issue. In fact, 5 years later Thaksin is STILL the issue --- which is why this thread is about an amnesty for him.

My entire --- non-cherry-picked post follows ....

That must be one of the singularly most subjective statements I have seen on TVF.

I would think that the "widely popular" at the time, and well accepted coup in 2006 was far less damaging than Thaksin's War on Drugs --- with 2700 killed ... at least for the families involved. Particularly the families of the 1400+ innocents killed .....

That the coup removed an extra-constitutional caretaker PM, that was the center of so much divisiveness with one single death ---- (self-inflicted)... pales in comparison. It can be argued that the consequences of the coup are still being felt. I would disagree. I would say that the consequences of Thaksin (which led to the coup) are still being felt.

I honestly don't see the more extreme elements of the PAD accepting an amnesty for Thaksin, if it includes wiping away Thaksin's court mandated jail time. Which would mean that an amnesty that allowed Thaksin back into politics would land Thailand right back into the protests of 2005-2006.

If I am wrong about this it wouldn't be the first time I have been wrong about things in Thailand

As you can read ---- I clearly state "at least for the families involved" --- referring to those that were killed in what Jayboy always refers to as "widely popular" ---

I was simply responding to the FACT that more people were killed (and arguably far more illegally) in the War on Drugs than in all the divisive Thaksin funded crap that followed the coup. I was also pointing out that the root problem wasn't the coup, it was Thaksin. You are free to disagree .... there is no need for the personal remarks.

[landofthefree]

Puppet of Thaksin, appointed by Thaksin, sister of Thaksin. Credibility: Zero.

....and that's why in uneducated no thinking Thailand she is bound to win! The people deserve what they vote for, I predict a huge Pheu Thai victory followed by a coup (obviously to defend National security) and then people on the streets again. Same same as ever!

[hanuman1]

The mind begins to spin at the illogical drift of this post.(I will ignore the suggestion that the drugs war caused more harm to Thailand than the coup because it's such patent nonsense)

I don't actually accept the 2006 coup was widely popular, but hypothetically let's assume it was.Nobody disputes the coup leaders were guilty of a criminal act which had adverse effects on the country.The fact that the coup was "popular" has no relevance to the treasonable and criminal nature of the act.

We are always being told that the drugs war cannot be excused on the grounds it was popular with the Thai people.I agree.

You cannot have it both ways.Either you condemn the coup and the drugs war, or you can shrug your shoulders and say both ,while reprehensible, were popular with the Thai people.

Both events in my view reflect poorly on Thai culture.The objectives in both cases were reasonable even laudable, namely to rid Thailand of Thaksin's poisonous influence and to rid Thailand of the misery caused by the drugs trade.In both cases there was the typical Thai tendency to take the easy way out.No patience for chipping away at Thaksin democratically (which to be fair the PAD movement early on was doing effectively0.And no patience for a multi pronged assault on all the contributing factors in the drugs trade.

Thanks for the sanity check.

If it wasn't for posts such as this the neutral viewer would end up believing the prejudice-addled judgements of those who have valid points on some issues concerning red shirts and Thaksin, but allow their ire to run roughshod over more nuanced and arguable points.

Please keep posting, because I'm a lazy bast$%d.

Thanks for the personal remarks

Please note that Jayboy didn't select the whole post to respond to (by name --- I did quote relevant material from A post ... not attributed for a reason .. as it was a quote from a different poster) ...

Let me help you out with a few fallacies in Jayboy's post .... that you appear to have quoted in full ... (I am not going to check)...

There was no way to remove an extra-constitutional caretaker, once resigned and then returned, democratically. By the 1997 constitution Thaksin wasn't supposed to be there ... the constitution failed to cover the situation that evolved. The fact that Thaksin has eroded all the checks and balances needed for democracy to function is an additional issue. Most countries have similar situations in their histories. In fact, my own country of origin "committed treason" against King George III Thailand has far too many similar situations, but a reasonable man can see the justification in this occurrence.

The point of my post was that, as always, in his attempts to put the ills of Thai society at the feet of the Army and "the elite", Jayboy, as usual put the wrong problem first. Thaksin was the issue. In fact, 5 years later Thaksin is STILL the issue --- which is why this thread is about an amnesty for him.

My entire --- non-cherry-picked post follows ....

'''snipped'''

As you can read ---- I clearly state "at least for the families involved" --- referring to those that were killed in what Jayboy always refers to as "widely popular" ---

I was simply responding to the FACT that more people were killed (and arguably far more illegally) in the War on Drugs than in all the divisive Thaksin funded crap that followed the coup. I was also pointing out that the root problem wasn't the coup, it was Thaksin. You are free to disagree .... there is no need for the personal remarks.

I apologize if I hurt your feelings, that wasn't my intention.

I'm now not entirely sure if you will accept my picking out specific things you say and commenting on them, or if it is better to quote everything you say at the risk of not making myself clear. I guess this is judged on a post-by-post basis, huh.

Anyway, for what it's worth:

There was no way to remove an extra-constitutional caretaker, once resigned and then returned, democratically. By the 1997 constitution Thaksin wasn't supposed to be there ... the constitution failed to cover the situation that evolved. The fact that Thaksin has eroded all the checks and balances needed for democracy to function is an additional issue. Most countries have similar situations in their histories. In fact, my own country of origin "committed treason" against King George III Thailand has far too many similar situations, but a reasonable man can see the justification in this occurrence.

Here, the use of the word 'reasonable' rings alarm bells with me. I strongly suspect that what you and the next man regard as 'reasonable' can vary widely. That's not to say that 'reasonable' can't be used as a legal term, but its meaning is for those far more learned in jurisprudence to decide than people like you or I. It is your opinion, and that's all it is.

I think Jayboy's point was that either you respect the law to the hilt or you are selective about it based on what you as an individual consider 'reasonable'. You mention though that Thaksin was at one point an 'extra-constitutional' caretaker. Could you expand on why it was extra-constitutional? Did the events leading up to this status fall within the constitution, or was it a situation that was arrived at through constitutional steps, but had no constitutional stipulations governing it beyond that point?

Thanks for the clarification. I'm willing to learn something new here.

Cheers.

PS - please forgive me for snipping a bit of your post - system didn't allow too many quotes.

[moe666]

I shiver every time I here one of these business people spout "elect me I will run government like a business" well government isn't a business. i think they mean Enron.

[Crushdepth]

I predict a huge Pheu Thai victory followed by a coup (obviously to defend National security) and then people on the streets again. Same same as ever!

I agree, except I would expect a couple of years of Shinawatra shennanigans in the lead up to the next coup, which is Thailand's substitute for good governance.

[hanuman1]

I predict a huge Pheu Thai victory followed by a coup (obviously to defend National security) and then people on the streets again. Same same as ever!

I agree, except I would expect a couple of years of Shinawatra shennanigans in the lead up to the next coup, which is Thailand's substitute for good governance.

Let us sit, pause and ruminate over your words.

Given that 'good governance' has been largely absent in Thai politics as far back as is relevant, you're saying that the next best thing Thailand has to offer is a never ending cycle of unconstitutional leadership.

Is there any value in any constitution of this country at all?

[473geo]

I shiver every time I here one of these business people spout "elect me I will run government like a business" well government isn't a business. i think they mean Enron.

Well government does have a large element of balancing the books..........and bad management means tax rises.....or inflation........or both...........

The current government would probably appreciate being voted out, just as the subsidy fund for fuel evapourates.......but the country is apparently buying tanks and submarines...

[Roadman]

"As for amnesty, Yingluck said justice is essential to the country's development, while emphasizing that the system will need to be adjusted to provide fairness for all Thai citizens, and not just for particular groups of people.

She said amnesty will cover all regions of Thailand, and the amendment will be effective for all cases since September 19, 2006."

Wow such credibility. Welcome home dear brother, you are above the law.

Edited May 20, 2011 by Roadman

[jayboy]

There was no way to remove an extra-constitutional caretaker, once resigned and then returned, democratically. By the 1997 constitution Thaksin wasn't supposed to be there ... the constitution failed to cover the situation that evolved. The fact that Thaksin has eroded all the checks and balances needed for democracy to function is an additional issue. Most countries have similar situations in their histories. In fact, my own country of origin "committed treason" against King George III Thailand has far too many similar situations, but a reasonable man can see the justification in this occurrence.

The point of my post was that, as always, in his attempts to put the ills of Thai society at the feet of the Army and "the elite", Jayboy, as usual put the wrong problem first. Thaksin was the issue. In fact, 5 years later Thaksin is STILL the issue --- which is why this thread is about an amnesty for him.

My entire --- non-cherry-picked post follows ....

That must be one of the singularly most subjective statements I have seen on TVF.

I would think that the "widely popular" at the time, and well accepted coup in 2006 was far less damaging than Thaksin's War on Drugs --- with 2700 killed ... at least for the families involved. Particularly the families of the 1400+ innocents killed .....

That the coup removed an extra-constitutional caretaker PM, that was the center of so much divisiveness with one single death ---- (self-inflicted)... pales in comparison. It can be argued that the consequences of the coup are still being felt. I would disagree. I would say that the consequences of Thaksin (which led to the coup) are still being felt.

I honestly don't see the more extreme elements of the PAD accepting an amnesty for Thaksin, if it includes wiping away Thaksin's court mandated jail time. Which would mean that an amnesty that allowed Thaksin back into politics would land Thailand right back into the protests of 2005-2006.

If I am wrong about this it wouldn't be the first time I have been wrong about things in Thailand

As you can read ---- I clearly state "at least for the families involved" --- referring to those that were killed in what Jayboy always refers to as "widely popular" ---

I was simply responding to the FACT that more people were killed (and arguably far more illegally) in the War on Drugs than in all the divisive Thaksin funded crap that followed the coup. I was also pointing out that the root problem wasn't the coup, it was Thaksin. You are free to disagree

None of this makes a great deal of sense.Some of the more obvious errors.

1.He comically compares the criminal coup of 2006 in Thailand to the American Revolution.His understanding of his own country's history seems as limited as his understanding of Thailand's.

2.He denies that Thaksin was legally PM of Tailand at the time of the coup - a straightforward lie here

3.He argues that Thaksin was the cause of Thailand's political problems, not the greedy feudal elite, the corrupt military and the manifest unfairness in Thai society.

4.He thinks the overall damage to Thailand was done by the Drugs War, not the coup.Silly of him to compare - a meaningless statement.

Incidentally mods encourage quotation of long posts to be cut down and it is not necessary to address every point raised.He calls this cherry picking.

[SteeleJoe]

What it's all been about from day one - getting Thaksin off the hook (so-called "amnesty") will restore peace in Thailand.

Simply because Thaksin will then stop causing chaos.

Nicely nut-shelled.

Except then the "other side" will cause the chaos. And probably more of them than ever before, were he allowed to return an face no punishment (assuming -- without cause -- that the military would let it get to that point).

[SteeleJoe]

On the question of amnesties, those frothing with indignation at the prospect might care to reconcile their position on the coup makers of 2006 who, conscious of their criminality, awarded themselves an ex post facto pardon for an offence far worse than any committed by Thaksin and with more lasting and disastrous consequences.In some countries the gallows would have beckoned.

Where there's a will there's a way

Just for the record: that's what -- for obvious reasons -- every what every single 'coup-making' group has done for the last 80 years.

That doesn't make it right of course, but it's a given. It is by definition a different situation than giving amnesty to a person like Thaksin (not claiming it's better or worse -- different.)

Edited May 21, 2011 by SteeleJoe

[jayboy]

On the question of amnesties, those frothing with indignation at the prospect might care to reconcile their position on the coup makers of 2006 who, conscious of their criminality, awarded themselves an ex post facto pardon for an offence far worse than any committed by Thaksin and with more lasting and disastrous consequences.In some countries the gallows would have beckoned.

Where there's a will there's a way

Just for the record: that's what -- for obvious reasons -- every what every single 'coup-making' group has done for the last 80 years.

That doesn't make it right of course, but it's a given. It is by definition a different situation than giving amnesty to a person like Thaksin (not claiming it's better or worse -- different.)

I agree of course.You will appreciate I was trying to expose the hypocrisy of selective indignation.

But on the issue of Thai coups the question of amnesty cannot be taken for granted.The key issue is whether the coup is approved, or in the case of the last one - orchestrated, by the feudal elite and its military supporters.If an attempted coup takes place that doesn't have this approval, the consequences can be rather severe - notably in the case of General Chalard in the 1970's who faced a firing squad within days.

[ianf]

What it's all been about from day one - getting Thaksin off the hook (so-called "amnesty") will restore peace in Thailand.

Simply because Thaksin will then stop causing chaos.

Well said.