Pardon A Test Of Yingluck's Allegiance

[webfact]

BURNING ISSUE

Pardon a test of Yingluck's allegiance

By Avudh Panananda

The Nation

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra will soon face a first test on her loyalty to the monarchy.

With the government reviewing a petition spearheaded by the red shirts in 2009 to seek a royal pardon for her brother Thaksin, new PM Yingluck is obliged to make a tough decision which will show the true colour of her leadership.

Will she uphold the monarchy by keeping the King out of politics? Or will she bend the rules in order to rescue Thaksin despite adverse implications that may undermine the monarchy?

The anti-Thaksin camp got it all wrong in attacking the pardon petition as a violation of provisions of the Criminal Procedural Code in relation to applicants who seek royal clemency.

Thaksin and his red-shirt supporters wanted to bypass the code and seek the King's direct intervention.

Under the code, Thaksin or his members of his immediate family would have to initiate the petition. He would also have show remorse and actually serve time - even for one day - before qualifying for a pardon.

Thaksin and his family members deliberately stayed out the petitioning process in order to avoid having to comply with the code - showing remorse and spending time in jail.

The red shirts cited their citizenship as grounds for petitioning the King on Thaksin's behalf.

If the reds put forward just their legal arguments for a pardon for Thaksin, then they would have every reason to expect their petition being forwarded to the King's attention. There is no justification to block a petition from Thai citizens.

But the reds undermined their petition by attacking the 2006 coup as inflicting injustice on Thaksin. In an unprecedented move, all 29 permanent secretaries and those equivalent in rank and seniority issued a statement condemning the content of the petition as politicisng the monarchy.

The statement pointed out that the monarchy would be mired by politics because of the wording in the petition - pardon or no pardon, the King would be seen as siding with either the coup or Thaksin.

All 29 co-signers were appointed by three governments led by Thaksin, Surayud Chulanont, Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat. Three of the 29 are Budget Bureau director Bandhoon Supakavanich, who is presently secretary general to Yingluck, permanent secretary for Justice Kittipong Kittyarak and Cabinet secretary general Ampon Kittiampon.

After almost two years of verifying the signatures of 2 million people, the petition is now ready for the government to make recommendations.

Kittipong is in charge of advising Justice Minister Pracha Promnok on his report to the Cabinet. Ampon is responsible for providing pertinent opinions on Pracha's report. And Bandhoon will play a critical role in mapping out options for Yingluck.

Possible scenarios faced by Yingluck include forwarding the petition for the King's attention. But the PM might risk being seen as passing a hot political potato to the monarch. Her government might face street protests sooner than expected.

Under this scenario, the Privy Council, with new councillor Chamras Kemacharu who has no past history with Thaksin, will likely urge the King to drop the petition on grounds it lacks the mandate for a pardon to be granted without the government to countersign the royal command.

The next scenario is for Yingluck to cite the petition as grounds for her government to intervene to issue a royal decree granting a pardon for Thaksin. This would please the reds, but risks angering the rest of the populace and failing to solve many other legal issues that Thaksin faces since the clemency would apply of just one of many legal cases.

The final scenario is for Yingluck to drop the petition on grounds for offending the monarchy and then try to rescue Thaksin via Parliament.

-- The Nation 2011-09-06

[webfact]

Before you post your comment please take note:

Many people have been losing their posting rights or receiving suspensions because they continue to make comments on the Monarchy, and members of the Thai Royal Family in a political context. This is in violation of Thai law which explicitly states that The Monarchy is above politics.

- Do not make any accusations about any individual's or groups' loyalty toward The Monarchy.

- Do not speculate on the opinions of any member of The Royal Family.

- Do not discuss succession or speculate on the future of The Monarchy.

Thank you for your co-operation and understanding

/Admin

[siampolee]

It may well be that the investment in puppets Thaksin has made regarding his personal situation and indeed his aims may well turn out to be an expensive failure.

[Buchholz]

In an unprecedented move, all 29 permanent secretaries and those equivalent in rank and seniority issued a statement condemning the content of the petition as politicisng the monarchy.

All 29 co-signers were appointed by three governments led by Thaksin, Surayud Chulanont, Samak Sundaravej and Somchai Wongsawat.

The unanimity and the diversity of these appointed officials is extremely revealing.

.

[Thai at Heart]

Its all a pretty high stakes game.

However, articles like this actually don't help to calm the situation at all. Adding statments such as someone is "likely to", and so and so "may have to" undermine the fact that this situation can be handled more than simply by the law and the law alone, without any recourse to interpretation.

[Buchholz]

this situation can be handled more than simply by the law and the law alone, without any recourse to interpretation.

But according to Chalerm in the other brand new thread on this topic, the law is not sufficient. His interpretation of its implementation differs from that of history.

[webfact]

one post deleted. Use the correct names of politicians

[OzMick]

Perhaps he could ask for pre-signed pardons on a roll of perforated sheets - then he could just tear one off when required and fill in the appropriate crime.

Ronnie Biggs was popular in his day. I wonder if a petition signed by 2 million UK citizens would have got him out of Belmarsh? At least, he had served some of his sentence, and didn't have a string of other offences waiting to be heard.

[Thai at Heart]

this situation can be handled more than simply by the law and the law alone, without any recourse to interpretation.

But according to Chalerm in the other brand new thread on this topic, the law is not sufficient. His interpretation of its implementation differs from that of history.

Well, in this situation I think we know whom will be proven to be on the right side of the law.

[mic6ard]

UMM. not to say anything offensive, but isn't the colour red associated with a system of government/politics? I am not accusing any one here, let's be clear on that. But rather it's my train of thought with regard to current situations.

[Crushdepth]

Perhaps he could ask for pre-signed pardons on a roll of perforated sheets - then he could just tear one off when required and fill in the appropriate crime.

Preferably soft, non-abrasive paper.

[djvolak]

Before you post your comment please take note:

Many people have been losing their posting rights or receiving suspensions because they continue to make comments on the Monarchy, and members of the Thai Royal Family in a political context. This is in violation of Thai law which explicitly states that The Monarchy is above politics.

- Do not make any accusations about any individual's or groups' loyalty toward The Monarchy.

- Do not speculate on the opinions of any member of The Royal Family.

- Do not discuss succession or speculate on the future of The Monarchy.

Thank you for your co-operation and understanding

/Admin

Long Live The King And Queen Of Thailand!!!!!

[lungmi]

Before you post your comment please take note:

Many people have been losing their posting rights or receiving suspensions because they continue to make comments on the Monarchy, and members of the Thai Royal Family in a political context. This is in violation of Thai law which explicitly states that The Monarchy is above politics.

- Do not make any accusations about any individual's or groups' loyalty toward The Monarchy.

- Do not speculate on the opinions of any member of The Royal Family.

- Do not discuss succession or speculate on the future of The Monarchy.

Thank you for your co-operation and understanding

/Admin

Long Live The King And Queen Of Thailand!!!!!

But bad irony is allowed?

[lannarebirth]

Its all a pretty high stakes game.

However, articles like this actually don't help to calm the situation at all. Adding statments such as someone is "likely to", and so and so "may have to" undermine the fact that this situation can be handled more than simply by the law and the law alone, without any recourse to interpretation.

You don't have to look back more than a week to see what " the law" has become.

[lannarebirth]

UMM. not to say anything offensive, but isn't the colour red associated with a system of government/politics? I am not accusing any one here, let's be clear on that. But rather it's my train of thought with regard to current situations.

Yes it is, but it's important to remember these are all just "tools" to gain certain outcomes. Same like "democracy" is " just a tool", so might be socialism/communism/fascism. Look at China; communism is merely a competitive advantage these days. Pretty great for the 50 families at the top, pretty bad for everyone else.

[swifty5x5]

[nurofiend]

Under the code, Thaksin or his members of his immediate family would have to initiate the petition. He would also have show remorse and actually serve time - even for one day - before qualifying for a pardon.

Will she uphold the monarchy by keeping the King out of politics? Or will she bend the rules in order to rescue Thaksin despite adverse implications that may undermine the monarchy?

1) if that's the case, then the petition made should in no way be granted any legitimacy

2) is the king always kept out of politics? has there not been cases where he has intervened and had sit downs due to requests of the government? not baiting, a genuine question.

because if that is the case then would it be acceptable, legally speaking, for Yingluck to draft a petition being a family member?

these are genuine questions and not arguments

[jdinasia]

Under the code, Thaksin or his members of his immediate family would have to initiate the petition. He would also have show remorse and actually serve time - even for one day - before qualifying for a pardon.

Will she uphold the monarchy by keeping the King out of politics? Or will she bend the rules in order to rescue Thaksin despite adverse implications that may undermine the monarchy?

1) if that's the case, then the petition made should in no way be granted any legitimacy

2) is the king always kept out of politics? has there not been cases where he has intervened and had sit downs due to requests of the government? not baiting, a genuine question.

because if that is the case then would it be acceptable, legally speaking, for Yingluck to draft a petition being a family member?

these are genuine questions and not arguments

re-read the second line of your quoted material.

[nurofiend]

Under the code, Thaksin or his members of his immediate family would have to initiate the petition. He would also have show remorse and actually serve time - even for one day - before qualifying for a pardon.

Will she uphold the monarchy by keeping the King out of politics? Or will she bend the rules in order to rescue Thaksin despite adverse implications that may undermine the monarchy?

1) if that's the case, then the petition made should in no way be granted any legitimacy

2) is the king always kept out of politics? has there not been cases where he has intervened and had sit downs due to requests of the government? not baiting, a genuine question.

because if that is the case then would it be acceptable, legally speaking, for Yingluck to draft a petition being a family member?

these are genuine questions and not arguments

re-read the second line of your quoted material.

yes but surely that would be after a petition had been initiated by a family member

the article is about whether it would be acceptable for Yingluck to get involved

and one question i asked is would it be acceptable, legally speaking, for Yingluck to draft a petition, being a family member?

if thaksin was then to actually do what the second line you pointed out says, is irrelevant to Yingluck 'starting' a petition, it would be completely relevant once she initiated it obviously

[nurofiend]

Possible scenarios faced by Yingluck include forwarding the petition for the King's attention. But the PM might risk being seen as passing a hot political potato to the monarch. Her government might face street protests sooner than expected.

i think the PAD/Dem supporters might be a bit more wary about a mass street protest given that they now have a huge opposing protestor force in the red shirts....hopefully anyway, as things would get extremely nasty and it would be a very sad time indeed.

i would bet my right arm that Yingluck won't personally start a petition for amnesty in Thaksin's case, so i think this whole article is irrelevant.

[jdinasia]

re-read it again.

He would not qualify for a pardon until AFTER he had served time and shown remorse. If he doesn't qualify then asking for it is moot.

Look at the paper asking for clemency/pardon .. ask In jail? No. ask Expressed remorse? No.

No pardon can be granted until those conditions are met. I assume that no back-room pre-arranged deal would be acceptable, what if the other side reneged?

Can Yingluck petition for a pardon after Thaksin is in jail? Yes.

[nurofiend]

re-read it again.

He would not qualify for a pardon until AFTER he had served time and shown remorse. If he doesn't qualify then asking for it is moot.

Look at the paper asking for clemency/pardon .. ask In jail? No. ask Expressed remorse? No.

No pardon can be granted until those conditions are met. I assume that no back-room pre-arranged deal would be acceptable, what if the other side reneged?

Can Yingluck petition for a pardon after Thaksin is in jail? Yes.

so you can't petition for a pardon if someone has been charged and then convicted in absence? ok then.

but drafting a petition is different to forwarding the petition, so is it still not a fair question to ask if it would be legally acceptable for her to draft a petition? which is what i did asked

then they would obviously try and work with thaksin on arranging a deal to come back and show remorse and do his day in jail.

anyway as i said in a newer post, she's not gonna personally draft a petition and i'll stand by that...and if i'm wrong i'll be the first to hold my hands up.

Edited September 6, 2011 by nurofiend

[hanuman1]

Possible scenarios faced by Yingluck include forwarding the petition for the King's attention. But the PM might risk being seen as passing a hot political potato to the monarch. Her government might face street protests sooner than expected.

i think the PAD/Dem supporters might be a bit more wary about a mass street protest given that they now have a huge opposing protestor force in the red shirts....hopefully anyway, as things would get extremely nasty and it would be a very sad time indeed.

i would bet my right arm that Yingluck won't personally start a petition for amnesty in Thaksin's case, so i think this whole article is irrelevant.

'Passing a political hot potato to the monarch' didn't seem to phase the Dem opposition when Thaksin was caretaker PM and they were calling for him to resign. Thaksin's resignation would have invoked article 7 of the constitution, which required the monarch to appoint a new PM, no less.

Edited September 6, 2011 by hanuman1

[animatic]

Possible scenarios faced by Yingluck include forwarding the petition for the King's attention. But the PM might risk being seen as passing a hot political potato to the monarch. Her government might face street protests sooner than expected.

i think the PAD/Dem supporters might be a bit more wary about a mass street protest given that they now have a huge opposing protestor force in the red shirts....hopefully anyway, as things would get extremely nasty and it would be a very sad time indeed.

i would bet my right arm that Yingluck won't personally start a petition for amnesty in Thaksin's case, so i think this whole article is irrelevant.

'Passing a political hot potato to the monarch' didn't seem to phase the Dem opposition when Thaksin was caretaker PM and they were calling for him to resign. Thaksin's resignation would have invoked article 7 of the constitution, which required the monarch to appoint a new PM, no less.

But that was simply doing his constitutional duty, not taking a political position.

Those that put him in the position to do one of his constitutional functions didn't force any favoritism by HRM, but only that he must do one of his duties, because it became necessary. In effect Care Taker Thaksin if anyone forced the issue. <snip>

The Dems in opposition only called for proper legal procedures to be followed, that is not politica action, but constitutional action.

Edited September 7, 2011 by soundman
Speculative comment removed.

[hanuman1]

i think the PAD/Dem supporters might be a bit more wary about a mass street protest given that they now have a huge opposing protestor force in the red shirts....hopefully anyway, as things would get extremely nasty and it would be a very sad time indeed.

i would bet my right arm that Yingluck won't personally start a petition for amnesty in Thaksin's case, so i think this whole article is irrelevant.

'Passing a political hot potato to the monarch' didn't seem to phase the Dem opposition when Thaksin was caretaker PM and they were calling for him to resign. Thaksin's resignation would have invoked article 7 of the constitution, which required the monarch to appoint a new PM, no less.

But that was simply doing his constitutional duty, not taking a political position.

Those that put him in the position to do one of his constitutional functions didn't force any favoritism by HRM, but only that he must do one of his duties, because it became necessary. In effect Care Taker Thaksin if anyone forced the issue. <snip>

The Dems in opposition only called for proper legal procedures to be followed, that is not politica action, but constitutional action.

But article 7 was not invoked. It is on public record - during a speech he made when inaugurating Supreme Court judges - that the monarch considered it undemocratic.

How the appointment of a new PM anywhere in the world can not be considered a political action, I do not know. In this case therefore, 'following legal procedure' (or was it just calling for Thaksin to resign?) was a de facto political action and an undemocratic one at that.

I hope this doesn't fall foul of the mods. I haven't attributed any opinion to the monarch apart from what he is on public record as stating himself.

[animatic]

The real question of the day is will she allow her hand to be forced by 'commoner loyalties' into a clearly political move, not a constitutional move, that favors her brother and clan, and the reds, and would quite clearly bring HRM, or those close to him into a political appearing move that should not be even be approached with?

So yes this is a crucial test

that I wouldn't wish on Methuselah, Sophocles nor King David .

"Loyal"

Faithful to law; upholding the lawful authority; faithful and true to the lawful government; faithful to the prince or sovereign to whom one is subject; unswerving in allegiance.

True to any person or persons to whom one owes fidelity, especially as a wife to her husband, lovers to each other, and friend to friend; constant; faithful to a cause or a principle.

A few views on Loyalty:

My honor is my loyalty.

- Heinrich Himmler

The greater the loyalty of a group toward the group, the greater is the motivation among the members to achieve the goals of the group, and the greater the probability that the group will achieve it's goals.

- Rensis Likert

The scholar does not consider gold and jade to be precious treasures, but loyalty and good faith.

- CONFUCIUS, The Wisdom of Confucius

Total loyalty is possible only when fidelity is emptied of all concrete content, from which changes of mind might naturally arise.

- HANNAH ARENDT, The Origins of Totalitarianism

Loyalty is an asset, independent and scarce, parceled out among different contestants for power. No ruling government or nonruling group enjoys absolute loyalty -- no contestant can have the whole pie.

- YOSSI SHAIN, The Frontier of Loyalty

Unless you can find some sort of loyalty, you cannot find unity and peace in your active living.

- Josiah Royce

A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers, and woods, but it is a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that principle.

- George William Curtis.

Fidelity is the sister of Justice.

- Horace

From the Chinese:

• Fortune has a fickle heart and a short memory.
• Sow melon, reap melon; sow beans, reap beans.
• Harsh words and poor reasoning never settle anything.
• Dangerous enemies will meet again in narrow streets.
• Better to bend in the wind than to break.
• Do not lift a rock only to drop it on your own foot
• Kill the chicken to frighten the monkey
• Distance tests the endurance of a horse; time reveals a man's character.
• Order moves slowly but surely disorder always in a hurry.
• One foot cannot stand on two boats
• Beware the person with a Buddha's mouth and a snake's heart.

Edited September 6, 2011 by animatic

[animatic]

i think the PAD/Dem supporters might be a bit more wary about a mass street protest given that they now have a huge opposing protestor force in the red shirts....hopefully anyway, as things would get extremely nasty and it would be a very sad time indeed.

i would bet my right arm that Yingluck won't personally start a petition for amnesty in Thaksin's case, so i think this whole article is irrelevant.

'Passing a political hot potato to the monarch' didn't seem to phase the Dem opposition when Thaksin was caretaker PM and they were calling for him to resign. Thaksin's resignation would have invoked article 7 of the constitution, which required the monarch to appoint a new PM, no less.

But that was simply doing his constitutional duty, not taking a political position.

Those that put him in the position to do one of his constitutional functions didn't force any favoritism by HRM, but only that he must do one of his duties, because it became necessary. In effect Care Taker Thaksin if anyone forced the issue. <snip>

The Dems in opposition only called for proper legal procedures to be followed, that is not politica action, but constitutional action.

But article 7 was not invoked. It is on public record - during a speech he made when inaugurating Supreme Court judges - that the monarch considered it undemocratic.

How the appointment of a new PM anywhere in the world can not be considered a political action, I do not know. In this case therefore, 'following legal procedure' (or was it just calling for Thaksin to resign?) was a de facto political action and an undemocratic one at that.

I hope this doesn't fall foul of the mods. I haven't attributed any opinion to the monarch apart from what he is on public record as stating himself.

It was a constitutional move appointing an acting PM to finish an election, and thus legal and based on democratic principle that the legislative passed that constitution and made that maneuver legitimate.

In the speech it seems to be pointing out; the action itself was outside 'democratic definition', but not one of illegality or impropriety. It appeared to essentially be a hint to the pols to get back to work and not make it necessary.

It is not a political action if it is not used as a politically favoritizing act,

but effectively one of 'returning a neutral rudder to a ship adrift'

without assigning more than a 'maintain this course' directive,

until a new captain is chosen.

If this is putting to much comment on the speech content, mods please edit or remove. There is no bad intent involved.

[hanuman1]

'Passing a political hot potato to the monarch' didn't seem to phase the Dem opposition when Thaksin was caretaker PM and they were calling for him to resign. Thaksin's resignation would have invoked article 7 of the constitution, which required the monarch to appoint a new PM, no less.

But that was simply doing his constitutional duty, not taking a political position.

Those that put him in the position to do one of his constitutional functions didn't force any favoritism by HRM, but only that he must do one of his duties, because it became necessary. In effect Care Taker Thaksin if anyone forced the issue. <snip>

The Dems in opposition only called for proper legal procedures to be followed, that is not politica action, but constitutional action.

But article 7 was not invoked. It is on public record - during a speech he made when inaugurating Supreme Court judges - that the monarch considered it undemocratic.

How the appointment of a new PM anywhere in the world can not be considered a political action, I do not know. In this case therefore, 'following legal procedure' (or was it just calling for Thaksin to resign?) was a de facto political action and an undemocratic one at that.

I hope this doesn't fall foul of the mods. I haven't attributed any opinion to the monarch apart from what he is on public record as stating himself.

It was a constitutional move appointing an acting PM to finish an election, and thus legal and based on democratic principle that the legislative passed that constitution and made that maneuver legitimate.

In the speech it seems to be pointing out; the action itself was outside 'democratic definition', but not one of illegality or impropriety. It appeared to essentially be a hint to the pols to get back to work and not make it necessary.

It is not a political action if it is not used as a politically favoritizing act,

but effectively one of 'returning a neutral rudder to a ship adrift'

without assigning more than a 'maintain this course' directive,

until a new captain is chosen.

If this is putting to much comment on the speech content, mods please edit or remove.

You are using interpretation and opinion whereas I was simply presenting facts. You are welcome to do so, so thanks for that.

[bristolgeoff]

a pardon to the brother will only make the thai people be wary of her motives in power,and why she put herself foward in the first place

[sfbandung]

Perhaps he could ask for pre-signed pardons on a roll of perforated sheets - then he could just tear one off when required and fill in the appropriate crime.

Ronnie Biggs was popular in his day. I wonder if a petition signed by 2 million UK citizens would have got him out of Belmarsh? At least, he had served some of his sentence, and didn't have a string of other offences waiting to be heard.

Quite true. And it should be noted that even during Biggs' self imposed exile, and his pseudo "folk hero" status (a la Ned Kelly in Oz) there was never any question of him not facing the music on his return. A fundamental respect for the judicial process remained throughout.

Regardless of what side of the red/yellow fence people sit the law simply must prevail. Yingluck seeking a royal pardon for her brother, or simply passing the petition on to HM would be a huge mistake.

The coup makers of the past are restraining themselves and so far paying respect to democracy. A stunt like this may provide many of them with an excuse to push for an undemocratic change of government again.

Edited September 6, 2011 by sfbandung