webfact Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 House to consider lifting immunity of 9 red-shirt MPs By The Nation The House of Representatives will tomorrow debate whether to lift legal immunity of nine Pheu Thai MPs, who are red-shirt leaders and wanted under a national-security charge. The House will consider a request by Tharit Pengdit, the director-general of the Department of Special Investigation, to lift the legal immunity. Tharit alleged that the nine red-shirt leaders gave a speech during a rally on April 10, which was held to mark the first anniversary of the Kokwua Intersection crackdown, in a way that was seen as violating the Criminal Code and national security. The nine MPs are Weng Tojirakarn, Natthawut Saikua, Jatuporn Promphan, Wiphuthalaeng Pattanaphumthai, Korkaew Pikulthong, Phayup Panket, Wichien Khaokham, Karun Hosakul, and Prasit Chaisisa. In his request, Tharit said the DSI could not pursue legal action against the nine MPs during the parliamentary session, as they enjoyed legal immunity. Tharit said that since the nine MPs themselves had declared that they did not want to use the immunity, he would like the House to consider lifting it. -- The Nation 2011-09-06 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtualtraveller Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 With Peua Thai's 300 votes in the House and Tharit about to be moved to an inactive post, what are the chances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKvampire Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 (edited) When PTP votes against "Lifting legal immunity" It will prove to the rest of the country and the outside world that Yingluck leads a government that endorses criminals and wants to preven t"potential criminals being prosecuted" and are no better than the nine amongst them. But who cares, the PTP voters who voted for some of these , (Party list or directly) dont care about criminality and they deserve be condemned along with their "thugs and terrorist MPs" Edited September 6, 2011 by KKvampire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Soon to be ex-head of the DSI, Tharit Pengdit said......................................"called your bluff !" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siampolee Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 (edited) Tharit said that since the nine MPs themselves had declared that they did not want to use the immunity, he would like the House to consider lifting it. Therein lies the answer. The accused parties have declared publicly that they do not seek immunity from prosecution so why do they not go and surrender to the authorities and let the law take its course? Surely if they were " principled people" there would indeed be a vast amount of kudos to be gained along with public sympathy as a result of facing up to their responsibilities. Or possibly it's a case of, "we are really waiting for the law to be manipulated to our own interests ?" However it has crossed my mind that there is of course another scenario and that is that their recent paymaster see's them as a risk to himself his families future plans and a little prodding here and there removes the intruding flaw from his grandiose scheme. One needs a long spoon to sup with the devil. Edited September 6, 2011 by siampolee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 One wonders why such a broad spectrum immunity from prosecution for MP's exists anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Soon to be ex-head of the DSI, Tharit Pengdit said......................................"called your bluff !" I'm sure he'll be happy with his promotion to Tea Lady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 (edited) The Red Shirts should get what the Red Shirts want.... Jatuporn to waive immunity and face lese majeste charge THE NATION Published on August 17, 2011 Pheu Thai MP Jatuporn Promphan on Wednesday said he would not invoke his parliamentary immunity after acknowledging offence against the monarchy in connection with his April 2 speech at the red-shirt rally. Jatuporn said he would report to the Department of Special Investigation and sign a consent form to surrender himself tor the legal proceedings without invoking his immunity. He would also notify the House speaker about his intent not to use the immunity as shield from prosecution. 9 MPs ready to give up immunity and face charges THE NATION Published on August 18, 2011 Nine red-shirt leaders have decided not to exercise their right of parliamentary immunity as MPs when they defend themselves against the charge of attempting to dislodge the monarchy. DSI Director-General Tarit Pengdith said the DSI would have to first get the nine MPs to sign a document giving up their right and then pass it on to the House Speaker to get House approval. If the House does not okay their intention, the nine MPs will still be under protection, Tarit said. Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan said he would ask House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont to propose the issue at the House meeting next week. The nine MPs ready to give up their immunity are Jatuporn, Natthawut Saikua, Karoon Hosakul, Wiphuthalaeng Pattanaphumthai, Weng Tojirakarn, Payap Panket, Kokaew Pikulthong, Vichien Khaokham and Prasit Srichaiya. Edited September 6, 2011 by Buchholz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whybother Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 The Red Shirts should get what the Red Shirts want.... Jatuporn to waive immunity and face lese majeste charge 9 MPs ready to give up immunity and face charges Will they take to the streets if they don't get to waive their immunity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 (edited) The Red Shirts should get what the Red Shirts want.... Jatuporn to waive immunity and face lese majeste charge THE NATION Published on August 17, 2011 Pheu Thai MP Jatuporn Promphan on Wednesday said he would not invoke his parliamentary immunity after acknowledging offence against the monarchy in connection with his April 2 speech at the red-shirt rally. Jatuporn said he would report to the Department of Special Investigation and sign a consent form to surrender himself tor the legal proceedings without invoking his immunity. He would also notify the House speaker about his intent not to use the immunity as shield from prosecution. 9 MPs ready to give up immunity and face charges THE NATION Published on August 18, 2011 Nine red-shirt leaders have decided not to exercise their right of parliamentary immunity as MPs when they defend themselves against the charge of attempting to dislodge the monarchy. DSI Director-General Tarit Pengdith said the DSI would have to first get the nine MPs to sign a document giving up their right and then pass it on to the House Speaker to get House approval. If the House does not okay their intention, the nine MPs will still be under protection, Tarit said. Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan said he would ask House Speaker Somsak Kiatsuranont to propose the issue at the House meeting next week. The nine MPs ready to give up their immunity are Jatuporn, Natthawut Saikua, Karoon Hosakul, Wiphuthalaeng Pattanaphumthai, Weng Tojirakarn, Payap Panket, Kokaew Pikulthong, Vichien Khaokham and Prasit Srichaiya. Do I detect the smell of burning martyr? Edited September 6, 2011 by Crushdepth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 What exactly are they charged with and which of these charges are the red shirts offering to waive immunity on and are these the same charges as the DSI boss is asking for immunity to be lifted on would seem to be pertinent questions? There seem to be reports of charges against attempts to overthrow the monarchy and charges as breaches of a security act, which would seem to be different things or is it just crappy reporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 What exactly are they charged with and which of these charges are the red shirts offering to waive immunity on and are these the same charges as the DSI boss is asking for immunity to be lifted on would seem to be pertinent questions? There seem to be reports of charges against attempts to overthrow the monarchy and charges as breaches of a security act, which would seem to be different things or is it just crappy reporting? The Red Shirts involved have both terrorism and LM charges. Their prior declarations of waiving their Parliamentary immunity are seemingly related to LM charges, although might presume their fierce independence applies to all their charges. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 What exactly are they charged with and which of these charges are the red shirts offering to waive immunity on and are these the same charges as the DSI boss is asking for immunity to be lifted on would seem to be pertinent questions? There seem to be reports of charges against attempts to overthrow the monarchy and charges as breaches of a security act, which would seem to be different things or is it just crappy reporting? The Red Shirts involved have both terrorism and LM charges. Their prior declarations of waiving their Parliamentary immunity are seemingly related to LM charges, although might presume their fierce independence applies to all their charges. . If all of those go to court on those charges it is going to attract a lot of international coverage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 What exactly are they charged with and which of these charges are the red shirts offering to waive immunity on and are these the same charges as the DSI boss is asking for immunity to be lifted on would seem to be pertinent questions? There seem to be reports of charges against attempts to overthrow the monarchy and charges as breaches of a security act, which would seem to be different things or is it just crappy reporting? The Red Shirts involved have both terrorism and LM charges. Their prior declarations of waiving their Parliamentary immunity are seemingly related to LM charges, although might presume their fierce independence applies to all their charges. If all of those go to court on those charges it is going to attract a lot of international coverage The PTP-initiated amnesty will probably occur first. Many of these same Red Shirts have charges from their 2007 riot that have not yet been to court. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MunterHunter Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 I bet you a pound to a pinch of sh*t that they will invoke their immunity the moment their cases start heading south... the first wiff of jail time and Jutaporn will be screaming "But i'm an MP, you cant jail me... i have immunity!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 IMHO waiving of immunity is irrevocable and not selective. i.e.waiving for 1 charge would allow others to proceed. I base that on a dimly remembered diplomatic immunity waiver case some time back, and may not apply here - but I would check first. Why am I offering advice to these idiots???????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 What exactly are they charged with and which of these charges are the red shirts offering to waive immunity on and are these the same charges as the DSI boss is asking for immunity to be lifted on would seem to be pertinent questions? There seem to be reports of charges against attempts to overthrow the monarchy and charges as breaches of a security act, which would seem to be different things or is it just crappy reporting? The Red Shirts involved have both terrorism and LM charges. Their prior declarations of waiving their Parliamentary immunity are seemingly related to LM charges, although might presume their fierce independence applies to all their charges. If all of those go to court on those charges it is going to attract a lot of international coverage The PTP-initiated amnesty will probably occur first. Many of these same Red Shirts have charges from their 2007 riot that have not yet been to court. . Im not sure their opponents would want these cases to really come to court with 9 elected MPs who waived their immunity standing there and the world media following as it would with such a case and Amsterdam making sure it got maximum play. I dont think they are saying they will waive immunity because they think they will end up in jail as martyrs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mic6ard Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Umm changes? Might be about the same success rate as Thai Football team winning the world cup!!!!. But it would show how the Gov't really is, if we even need more evidence. They started by talking about reconciliation, but now... Some how I see more Chalerm talking than Yingluck, Who is really incharge here. What worries me is how long are the oppositions willing to sit and wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Umm changes? Might be about the same success rate as Thai Football team winning the world cup!!!!. But it would show how the Gov't really is, if we even need more evidence. They started by talking about reconciliation, but now... Some how I see more Chalerm talking than Yingluck, Who is really incharge here. What worries me is how long are the oppositions willing to sit and wait. PTP expect to be unseated in around 6-24 months by some "accident" depending on what PTP source is listened to although I would doubt they will just play along with that scenario but rather see it as a timeframe for their opponents to set in motion the events needed to stymie a democratically elected government. Hopefully of course it is all paranoia on the part of PTP, and consdiering the past quite understandable paranoia, and they will actually get to call an election and be judged by the electorate. You never know the incapable of winning party may even get its act together in the next 4 years although initial signs are not positive, so they better hope there is no early election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 (edited) I dont think they are saying they will waive immunity because they think they will end up in jail as martyrs Martyrs, they ain't. They are all talk without real cahones... Returning to their 2007 riot... When first jailed, they proudly proclaimed they would refuse bail "The protestors can be detained for up to 48 days," Police Colonel Supisarn Bhakdinarinath told Reuters, although he said if investigations into last Sunday's clashes with police were completed quicker, their pre-trial detention would be shorter. The eight have denied the charges and refused to apply for bail. A ninth man was released on bail on Friday. 2007-07-29 followed a scant week later... 6 PTV Leaders Released on BailThe Criminal Court releases the six detained PTV leaders on bail today from the Bangkok Remand Prison after they each posted 200,000 baht in cash as bond. The Criminal Court granted bail to the six PTV leaders on Monday afternoon, including Weera Musikkapong, Jakkrapob Penkair, Jatuporn Prompan, Natthawut Saikua, Apiwan Wiriyachai and Wiputalaeng Pattanapumthai. 2007-08-06 *edited to add: These four year-old cases are still pending, btw, which why I am not expecting their more recent charges are coming up any time soon. Interestingly, from this older article, 4 out of the 6 released on bail 4 years ago are now Members of Parliament. Amazing Thailand. Edited September 6, 2011 by Buchholz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
looping Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Maybe they should consider lifting immunity from all MP's permanently, as a token gesture against corruption! How did this insane law come to be in the first place? Just the thought that the very people who are in the 'best' position to break the law should be immune to it... Is total insanity! 'TING TONG THAILAND' could be their new slogan, and that's being nice!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Maybe they should consider lifting immunity from all MP's permanently, as a token gesture against corruption! How did this insane law come to be in the first place? Just the thought that the very people who are in the 'best' position to break the law should be immune to it... Is total insanity! 'TING TONG THAILAND' could be their new slogan, and that's being nice!!! It is a fairly standard thing in many democracies if not all. It is meant to be to protect elected parliamentarians (and parliaments are usually theoretically considered the supreme body among the democratic institutions in a parliamentary democracy) from being held from being intimidated by use of laws particularly laws that may hinder free speech in a democracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
looping Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Maybe they should consider lifting immunity from all MP's permanently, as a token gesture against corruption! How did this insane law come to be in the first place? Just the thought that the very people who are in the 'best' position to break the law should be immune to it... Is total insanity! 'TING TONG THAILAND' could be their new slogan, and that's being nice!!! It is a fairly standard thing in many democracies if not all. It is meant to be to protect elected parliamentarians (and parliaments are usually theoretically considered the supreme body among the democratic institutions in a parliamentary democracy) from being held from being intimidated by use of laws particularly laws that may hinder free speech in a democracy A real mouthful, very impressive...but in this context, immunity has been abused beyond belief; inciting riots, breaking countless laws and then waving it around liberally as a personal right to abuse the law without consequence. Indeed, red shirt leaders and the phrase 'free speech in a democracy' are clearly not well aligned as they've most recently shown in their thinly veiled threats against anyone who asks YL any 'inappropriate' questions. In Thailand this law is abused as much as the very idea of democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crushdepth Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Maybe they should consider lifting immunity from all MP's permanently, as a token gesture against corruption! How did this insane law come to be in the first place? Just the thought that the very people who are in the 'best' position to break the law should be immune to it... Is total insanity! 'TING TONG THAILAND' could be their new slogan, and that's being nice!!! It is a fairly standard thing in many democracies if not all. It is meant to be to protect elected parliamentarians (and parliaments are usually theoretically considered the supreme body among the democratic institutions in a parliamentary democracy) from being held from being intimidated by use of laws particularly laws that may hinder free speech in a democracy It usually just provides immunity for speech conducted *in* Parliament and civil matters. Thailand is unusual in also giving immunity against criminal charges, but then again, they would appear to need it :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Maybe they should consider lifting immunity from all MP's permanently, as a token gesture against corruption! How did this insane law come to be in the first place? Just the thought that the very people who are in the 'best' position to break the law should be immune to it... Is total insanity! 'TING TONG THAILAND' could be their new slogan, and that's being nice!!! It is a fairly standard thing in many democracies if not all. It is meant to be to protect elected parliamentarians (and parliaments are usually theoretically considered the supreme body among the democratic institutions in a parliamentary democracy) from being held from being intimidated by use of laws particularly laws that may hinder free speech in a democracy A real mouthful, very impressive...but in this context, immunity has been abused beyond belief; inciting riots, breaking countless laws and then waving it around liberally as a personal right to abuse the law without consequence. Indeed, red shirt leaders and the phrase 'free speech in a democracy' are clearly not well aligned as they've most recently shown in their thinly veiled threats against anyone who asks YL any 'inappropriate' questions. In Thailand this law is abused as much as the very idea of democracy. Good post , as no one has an answer for that; only bullshit spin. I hope you post more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The Red Shirt Leader is STILL insisting on no immunity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Red-shirt MPs to Forego Parliamentary Immunity Nine red-shirt MPs, led by Jatuporn Prompan, have expressed their wish to waive their parliamentary privilege and if rejected by the House Speaker, they will ask the Department of Special Investigation to refile the charges against them. Pheu Thai Party-list MP Jatuporn Prompan announced that after having consulted with the Party, he and eight other red-shirt MPs will request that the Lower House waive their parliamentary privilege as they face their criminal charges and let the justice system take its course. If their request is rejected, they will ask the Department of Special Investigation to refile the charges against them. -- Tan Network 2011-09-07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janverbeem Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Must be that that the bread box already has succesfully changed hands this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Must be that that the bread box already has successfully changed hands this time. It would seem he ate the bread box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 (edited) The red leaders say they don't want to use immunity, and then let PTP vote down lifting their immunity. They have it and no one can says squat to them. Of course as pointed out above, it shows the vast majority of the country that PTP could care less about the law since these red leaders were charged BEFORE being given partly list position high enough up the PTP rungs to be guaranteed immunity. So it comes down to PTP caring about perceptions of the public vis a vis their take on double standards and the rule of law. Or not. Edited September 7, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
.thumb.jpg.8d1a71394325b508272291755f4e1850.jpg)
.thumb.png.76be522b3b43e7458166b9dac9e422ed.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now