Chawanon: Foreign Ministry Should Rethink The Return Of Mr Thaksin's Passports

[JAG]

i don't understand, what is the big deal with allowing him to have a new citizen passport?

i) He's a convicted criminal that has not served his sentence.

ii) He's on the run from the law.

iii) He was convicted at the behest of the people who sponsored a military coup to overthrow him.

Seriously, is this kind of misinformation going to continue for years, until you have written your own history-books so everyone in your village will stay ignorant to what really happened?

I express my opinion. I am far from a lone voice. It is an opinion as valid as yours. It is not misinformation, nor an attempt to rewrite history. As a self professed libertarian you should at least tolerate other people expressing their views. a quick flip through your recent posts shows that that is not the case.

[TAWP]

iii) He was convicted at the behest of the people who sponsored a military coup to overthrow him.

Seriously, is this kind of misinformation going to continue for years, until you have written your own history-books so everyone in your village will stay ignorant to what really happened?

I express my opinion. I am far from a lone voice. It is an opinion as valid as yours. It is not misinformation, nor an attempt to rewrite history. As a self professed libertarian you should at least tolerate other people expressing their views. a quick flip through your recent posts shows that that is not the case.

Wait, did you just say that because I am a libertarian I must not object to people saying stupid things or stating false facts?

I should not object if a person says the sun is green and that elephants poop mars-mellows?

I think you have seriously misunderstood what the ideology stand for. I'll fight for your right to be an idiot, but I won't be silent when you make idiotic claims. Comprende?

[JAG]

Oh I comprende mate. I comprende that an opinion which differs from yours is met with accusations of misinformation and rewriting history! You need to understand that a differing opinion does not make me an idiot.

The claim I made was not an idiotic one. It was a somewhat tongue in cheek response admittedly, but it expressed a widely held opinion, both throughout Thailand and beyond. You accused me of misinformation and rewriting history. I stand by my view. You no doubt will stand by yours. Fine, but there is no call to ridicule it. Comprende!

[rubl]

Oh I comprende mate. I comprende that an opinion which differs from yours is met with accusations of misinformation and rewriting history! You need to understand that a differing opinion does not make me an idiot.

The claim I made was not an idiotic one. It was a somewhat tongue in cheek response admittedly, but it expressed a widely held opinion, both throughout Thailand and beyond. You accused me of misinformation and rewriting history. I stand by my view. You no doubt will stand by yours. Fine, but there is no call to ridicule it. Comprende!

An opinion widely held by Robert A. c.s. ?

"What has happened in Thailand over the past few years can be considered as nothing short of a democratic revolution, not dissimilar from the upheavals spreading like wildfire across the Arab world but luckily more successful."

(edit: add: RA quote)

Edited August 14, 2011 by rubl

[JAG]

I wouldn't know Rubl. I'll take your word for it.

[sfbandung]

I'm a bit of a drip I'll admit, but the tone of some of the invective here is a bit spooky.

Surely there are laws and due process and if everyone respects them, and the subsequent decisions made by the judiciary, then at least we avoid anarchy. Some people won't be happy sure, but we won't have blood flowing in the streets.

Why don't more people advocate that course of action?

[Ricardo]

III) He is a citizen of Montenegro,and a few other country's as I understand, and a Thai citizen is not allowed to have a dual nationality lets stand quadruple nationality's.

Sorry, but many other Thai-citizens have dual-nationality at least, I'm married to one.

by giving him a passport , you are allowing him to come back, good luck in that, at least the baht will go up to the us dollar, then.

He can already come back, indeed the sooner the better, to do his porridge and appear in court in his several other cases.

[JurgenG]

i don't understand, what is the big deal with allowing him to have a new citizen passport?

And whats the Big Deal not allowing your brothers to riot , pillage and murder in London and Birmingham... its about maintaining the law... and for heavens sake...What is a Carib Bean..?someone tell me..!

Now you want to blame Thaksin for England's riots ?

I've heard a lot of the things, but here you're really getting desperate !!!

[janverbeem]

III) He is a citizen of Montenegro,and a few other country's as I understand, and a Thai citizen is not allowed to have a dual nationality lets stand quadruple nationality's.

Sorry, but many other Thai-citizens have dual-nationality at least, I'm married to one.

by giving him a passport , you are allowing him to come back, good luck in that, at least the baht will go up to the us dollar, then.

He can already come back, indeed the sooner the better, to do his porridge and appear in court in his several other cases.

But by law it is illegal to have dual citizenship.Remember the issue not so long ago about Abhisit " maybe " holding dual citizenship.

[Ricardo]

III) He is a citizen of Montenegro,and a few other country's as I understand, and a Thai citizen is not allowed to have a dual nationality lets stand quadruple nationality's.

Sorry, but many other Thai-citizens have dual-nationality at least, I'm married to one.

by giving him a passport , you are allowing him to come back, good luck in that, at least the baht will go up to the us dollar, then.

He can already come back, indeed the sooner the better, to do his porridge and appear in court in his several other cases.

But by law it is illegal to have dual citizenship.Remember the issue not so long ago about Abhisit " maybe " holding dual citizenship.

So just one more law that DL has broken, then ? Perhaps he should be charged with it ? No Double Standards !

I thought the furore drummed-up by RA was about whether then-PM Abhisit was also a UK-citizen, and might therefore have charges laid against him at the ICC, over the Red-Shirts' 'peaceful protest' ? Came to nothing, so far.

[otherstuff1957]

Ok, here's my 2 cents worth... As to the validity of Thaksin's conviction, he did indeed clearly break a law that was in place long before the coup, so there was no retroactive legislation involved. However, it's questionable whether this law would have ever been enforced if it were not for the coup.

The courts are theoretically separate from and above the government, but they have shown repeatedly that they can be influenced by the government and by popular opinion (remember the Thaksin asset concealment case?). So, he did break the law, but was honestly surprised when he was convicted. If there was a retrial now, the judgement might very well go the other way, not based on any new evidence, just based on his party being in power!

Thaksin is the current de facto PM of Thailand. Other countries know this and will be acting accordingly. This means that he will be given visas and will be meeting foreign officials - though they will probably try to be discrete about it. His movements and meetings are just as, or more important than Yingluck's, so we will undoubtedly be hearing about them on an almost daily basis. I suggest that we all just get used to this. For better or worse, this is Thailand's government and he is Thailand's leader.

[janverbeem]

Ok, here's my 2 cents worth...

Thaksin is the current de facto PM of Thailand.

A convicted fugitive,banned from politics without a Thai passport is the defacto PM of Thailand.I must be missing something.

[TAWP]

Oh I comprende mate. I comprende that an opinion which differs from yours is met with accusations of misinformation and rewriting history! You need to understand that a differing opinion does not make me an idiot.

The claim I made was not an idiotic one. It was a somewhat tongue in cheek response admittedly, but it expressed a widely held opinion, both throughout Thailand and beyond. You accused me of misinformation and rewriting history. I stand by my view. You no doubt will stand by yours. Fine, but there is no call to ridicule it. Comprende!

It doesn't matter if it is your opinion that he 'was convicted at the behest of the people who sponsored a military coup to overthrow him' (sic) if it isn't true. Those accusations are things you should lead to proof or get accused of spreading propaganda - because it is the same lines some Red speakers and underground movements have been spreading. And it goes against the facts of the events in question.

[scorecard]

PTP --- "Not for the benefit of one man" --- or "Thaksin thinks PTP does" .... which is it?

Some of the new ministers haven't even yet adjusted their office chairs. PT hasn't even yet made it's first major statement of it's priorities etc., but already some of their pyramid scheme members are gaining controversy in regard to thakins passports etc.

Proves again, they think they have a right to do whatever they please, dam_n the public at large, dam_n the law, dam_n ensuring that their actions and words help gain ground in terms of their own professionalist and ethics, etc.

No way, in fact it's all very simple: 'we paid our deposit money and we want our place at the trough, now'!

[scorecard]

Oh I comprende mate. I comprende that an opinion which differs from yours is met with accusations of misinformation and rewriting history! You need to understand that a differing opinion does not make me an idiot.

The claim I made was not an idiotic one. It was a somewhat tongue in cheek response admittedly, but it expressed a widely held opinion, both throughout Thailand and beyond. You accused me of misinformation and rewriting history. I stand by my view. You no doubt will stand by yours. Fine, but there is no call to ridicule it. Comprende!

It doesn't matter if it is your opinion that he 'was convicted at the behest of the people who sponsored a military coup to overthrow him' (sic) if it isn't true. Those accusations are things you should lead to proof or get accused of spreading propaganda - because it is the same lines some Red speakers and underground movements have been spreading. And it goes against the facts of the events in question.

Agreed, he broke the law, a law in place for decades, and there is no connection to the agencies put in place by the 2006 coup masters.

He broke the law and he knew he was breaking the law.

[scorecard]

Ok, here's my 2 cents worth... As to the validity of Thaksin's conviction, he did indeed clearly break a law that was in place long before the coup, so there was no retroactive legislation involved. However, it's questionable whether this law would have ever been enforced if it were not for the coup.

The courts are theoretically separate from and above the government, but they have shown repeatedly that they can be influenced by the government and by popular opinion (remember the Thaksin asset concealment case?). So, he did break the law, but was honestly surprised when he was convicted. If there was a retrial now, the judgement might very well go the other way, not based on any new evidence, just based on his party being in power!

Thaksin is the current de facto PM of Thailand. Other countries know this and will be acting accordingly. This means that he will be given visas and will be meeting foreign officials - though they will probably try to be discrete about it. His movements and meetings are just as, or more important than Yingluck's, so we will undoubtedly be hearing about them on an almost daily basis. I suggest that we all just get used to this. For better or worse, this is Thailand's government and he is Thailand's leader.

Agree with some of your comments but not all:

"As to the validity of Thaksin's conviction, he did indeed clearly break a law that was in place long before the coup, so there was no retroactive legislation involved. However, it's questionable whether this law would have ever been enforced if it were not for the coup. Please let's get this clear, there is some opinion (typically from the thaskin lovers)that the law he broke was in regard to the requirement for Thai women have their male spouse sign (approve) any land purchase. This specific law is controversial and many would say it is inappropriate, is unfair to females, etc

But that's not the matter at hand. He broke a specific and serious law about transparency, a law which says very specifically and been on the statute books for decades that PMs and parliamentarians and their families cannot have bsuness dealngs withe the state. A highly appropriate law, he knew he was breaking he law and I remember it was on TV with him signing a document, with a smirk on his face, which was blatantly illegal, and further at this point in time the paymaster had decides very clearly that he was outside of the law.

"..... but was honestly surprised when he was convicted". "honestly surprised", sorry but I don't buy that. Surprised that the jdges has the nerve, the temerity, the guts, to find him guilty might be more appropriate comment.

"a convisted criminal on the run is th defacto PM" Is that allowed under Thai law?

[whybother]

But by law it is illegal to have dual citizenship.Remember the issue not so long ago about Abhisit " maybe " holding dual citizenship.

Abhisit does hold dual citizenship. He holds Thai citizenship by being born to Thai parents, and British citizenship by being born on British soil. Apparently, he has never taken advantage of his British citizenship.

I've seen it posted on here many times that it is NOT illegal for Thais to have dual citizenship.