Thaksin Pardon Panel Has 3 Questions

[virtualtraveller]

Look, you don't just pardon criminals to then let them come back and continue being a criminal. So, pardoning Thaksin concludes that he was guilty all along, meaning he cannot appeal the sentence, get his money back or try to stop other cases against him (though in Thailand anything is possible). So, if he was granted a pardon, he could take it and come home, but would be under a careful watch for violating the pardon terms. All, he can turn down the pardon (imagine the insult) and go the route of an amnesty or appeal.

Thaksin could wait until his men are in the judiciary and then go for a re-trial, but it would be a pretty blatant re-trial, so amnesty and pardon are his two best options really, he knows there's lots of dirt on him.

Funny, that they are all asking on the law to pardon Thaksin, when 18 months ago he was calling the law a joke.

[Buchholz]

Who forms this "pardon panel"?

Is it set up by Democrat members and does it have any power at all?If so...............................Next.

If it is an impartial panel, I wouldnt be in their shoes for quids. I can just see the pickets outside their homes, the veiled, or not, threats to their persons , or their families as soon as any adverse consideration is leaked to the wolf pack.

Given their prior precedence in a similar situation, normal protocol for Red Shirts would be to announce their addresses at a rally.

.

[MAJIC]

So that's three 'NO's' out of three, then ? Time to play the magic joker-card, which reads "whose sister is PM here ?", and await the flashing-lights & bells to announce a new 'winner', Ker-ching !

It should be 3 NO's but TIT, err on the side of probability and think 2 YES's with outrageous excuses!

[kraplung]

The crux of this whole thing is that some think the law was used fairly and properly and should be upheld under any circumstance while some think the law was used unfairly (a substantially bigger group than the first judging by the recent survey discussed in Thai, but not english language media) and thus the conviction should be quashed and of course many dont even care. The problem is how do you either decide it was a fair conviction without causing those who think it was a poltical decision to have no faith in the law or how do you quash the conviction without causing those who think the law is even and fair to think it is undermining law and of course you dont have to worry about those who dont care. This is a very political issue now and politics is never ever about right and wrong or black and white but about accomodations. This is one reason why some people do not want to pass the pardon on. Accomodations need to be made at the political level but to date they cant be.

I don't agree. It's a very straightforward issue: He has a conviction, he did not appeal. Even if you believe the sentence is "unjust", court decisions sometimes go the wrong way against ordinary people and they just have to live with it. If you throw out the law for the benefit of a politician, you have to accept that others may discard the law when selecting methods to oppose it.

Thailand's has all the institutions and legal mechanisms required for a functional democracy. The reason it does not work is because the law is not applied. Making (another) exception to the law for the personal benefit of a corrupt politician is a step backwards and will perpetuate the situation, which is a mess.

He was sentenced by the highest court of law in the Kingdom and to the best of my knowledge they are a higher authority than any (as a famous British TV inquisator once put it) here today and gone tomorrow politician.

[Buchholz]

The issue of whether the correct procedure has been followed is a red herring as all they would need to do is give it the the right person.

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

.

Technically having your clone draft and push it through would be requesting it yourself. Basically approving it himself as well.

Let's be honest thaksin owns this government, and I am sure when he sells it to whoever the takers are, he won't pay taxes of those profits as well.

While Thaksin has said he considers Yingluck his eldest daughter, in reality, she's not, and therefore doesn't meet the requirement.

Neither does her government.

Neither do the Red Shirts.

The Red Shirt pardon request is flawed from the very beginning by not having it originate from one of those persons that can legally request it.

.

[ginjag]

Three questions;

1. What time can Taksin be ready to fly.

2. What time is his the taxi to the airport.

3. What time will his plane land in Thailand.

In or before December he already said he needs to be back for his kids wedding. Is it really necessary to even do a pardon review?

Supreme commander has already spoken.......... laws and other people's opinions are not relevant when in conflict to his wishes.

They should just hurry up and issue a "coupe" pardon, so that we can all get our free iPads.

I love Thailand the politicians are funnier than any comic I have read.

IT'S PAYBACK time.

1 surrender to the courts upon return...

2 serve his sentence ..

3 go into the temple to repent ..and donate money to the cause. show how really kind hearted you are.

[473geo]

The issue of whether the correct procedure has been followed is a red herring as all they would need to do is give it the the right person.

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

.

Technically having your clone draft and push it through would be requesting it yourself. Basically approving it himself as well.

Let's be honest thaksin owns this government, and I am sure when he sells it to whoever the takers are, he won't pay taxes of those profits as well.

While Thaksin has said he considers Yingluck his eldest daughter, in reality, she's not, and therefore doesn't meet the requirement.

Neither does her government.

Neither do the Red Shirts.

The Red Shirt pardon request is flawed from the very beginning by not having it originate from one of those persons that can legally request it.

.

Bit like you called the election campaign........

Pardon a virtual certainty then.........

Edited September 10, 2011 by 473geo

[kraplung]

Who actually decides whether the convicted criminal is pardoned?

[janverbeem]

Who forms this "pardon panel"?

Is it set up by Democrat members and does it have any power at all?If so...............................Next.

It was just set up this week by the Pheu Thai Party MP Justice Minister.

Their role is advisory and will only make their recommendations to the Justice Minister.

So we may expect a negative advise then

[MAJIC]

The fact that the director of Interpol did never issue an arrest warrant due to the belief at Interpol that the charge of terrorism against Thaksin was purely politically motivated.

The belief at Interpol that the charge of terrorism against Thaksin was purely politically motivated has never been expressed by Interpol themselves, but speculated by people like you who happen to believe that to be true. It's a belief that is at odds with other beliefs of yours, like people sitting in protest at an airport constituting terrorism.

I am of the same opinion as you,and I don't recall the Director of Interpol issuing any statement at all,concerning Thaksins Political Status either,

perhaps "backtonormal "could get "backtofacts"and show some evidence,of the Director of Interpols statement ?

[Crushdepth]

Who actually decides whether the convicted criminal is pardoned?

The Justice Ministry can make a recommendation (I assume this is why we are having the panel circus), but the decision is made by the King.

[kraplung]

I hesitate to ask this but I can't help wondering what if the decision came back in the negative?

Edited September 10, 2011 by kraplung

[lannarebirth]

I hesitate to ask this but I can't help wondering what if the decision came back in the negative?

Then the timeframe for Thaksin's ultimate goal gets shifted forward a bit, while he's still got his mobs.

[Orac]

The issue of whether the correct procedure has been followed is a red herring as all they would need to do is give it the the right person.

Which should make one wonder why, in the intervening 3 years since his conviction, that the legally-mandated requirement that the pardon request be initiated by himself, his spouse, or his offspring has never been done.

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

Short of that and considering he has no legal spouse now, if his offspring Oak et al want Dad to receive a Royal Pardon, why have they never requested one???

The red herring you speak of was created by the Red Shirts in their lets get a gazillion signatures endeavor.... when not one of those signers meets the requirement that it originates from one of the above authorized requesters.

.

I would guess the reason that Thaksin has not requested the pardon himself is more for appearances and his own ego than anything else - he wants to be seen as coming back because the people want him rather than asking for it himself. If it turns out that he does need to get a sibling involved then I am sure it will not be a problem though the appearance of coming back by popular demand will be lost.

As for not getting an appropriate family member to do this before - do you really think it would have acheived anything without having control of the government before hand???

[Buchholz]

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

Technically having your clone draft and push it through would be requesting it yourself. Basically approving it himself as well.

Let's be honest thaksin owns this government, and I am sure when he sells it to whoever the takers are, he won't pay taxes of those profits as well.

While Thaksin has said he considers Yingluck his eldest daughter, in reality, she's not, and therefore doesn't meet the requirement.

Neither does her government.

Neither do the Red Shirts.

The Red Shirt pardon request is flawed from the very beginning by not having it originate from one of those persons that can legally request it.

.

Bit like you called the election campaign........

Pardon a virtual certainty then.........

What did I call the election campaign? I don't do predictions (generally). I leave that to shamans.

As for whether or not he gets a Royal Pardon, I would never be so presumptuous to say so one way or the other.

To do so is inappropriate and disrespectful, IMHO, particularly if it's done with some woeful attempt at humor.

Edited September 10, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

The fact that the director of Interpol did never issue an arrest warrant due to the belief at Interpol that the charge of terrorism against Thaksin was purely politically motivated.

The belief at Interpol that the charge of terrorism against Thaksin was purely politically motivated has never been expressed by Interpol themselves, but speculated by people like you who happen to believe that to be true. It's a belief that is at odds with other beliefs of yours, like people sitting in protest at an airport constituting terrorism.

I am of the same opinion as you,and I don't recall the Director of Interpol issuing any statement at all,concerning Thaksins Political Status either,

perhaps "backtonormal "could get "backtofacts"and show some evidence,of the Director of Interpols statement ?

I don't recall backtonormal ever returning to show evidence in his posts whenever he's been confronted on numerous occasions by numerous posters.

.

[Buchholz]

The issue of whether the correct procedure has been followed is a red herring as all they would need to do is give it the the right person.

Which should make one wonder why, in the intervening 3 years since his conviction, that the legally-mandated requirement that the pardon request be initiated by himself, his spouse, or his offspring has never been done.

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

Short of that and considering he has no legal spouse now, if his offspring Oak et al want Dad to receive a Royal Pardon, why have they never requested one???

The red herring you speak of was created by the Red Shirts in their lets get a gazillion signatures endeavor.... when not one of those signers meets the requirement that it originates from one of the above authorized requesters.

.

I would guess the reason that Thaksin has not requested the pardon himself is more for appearances and his own ego than anything else - he wants to be seen as coming back because the people want him rather than asking for it himself. If it turns out that he does need to get a sibling involved then I am sure it will not be a problem though the appearance of coming back by popular demand will be lost.

As for not getting an appropriate family member to do this before - do you really think it would have acheived anything without having control of the government before hand???

A sibling is not a suitable requester.

The law specifically states the convict himself, his spouse, his offspring, or his parents are those empowered to make the request.

In Thaksin's case, the only legal option is his himself or his offspring.

Then again, Thaksin has never concerned himself too much regarding the legality of actions.

A proper legally-submitted Royal Pardon transcends the government of the day.

.

Edited September 10, 2011 by Buchholz

[OzMick]

The issue of whether the correct procedure has been followed is a red herring as all they would need to do is give it the the right person.

Which should make one wonder why, in the intervening 3 years since his conviction, that the legally-mandated requirement that the pardon request be initiated by himself, his spouse, or his offspring has never been done.

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

Short of that and considering he has no legal spouse now, if his offspring Oak et al want Dad to receive a Royal Pardon, why have they never requested one???

The red herring you speak of was created by the Red Shirts in their lets get a gazillion signatures endeavor.... when not one of those signers meets the requirement that it originates from one of the above authorized requesters.

.

I would guess the reason that Thaksin has not requested the pardon himself is more for appearances and his own ego than anything else - he wants to be seen as coming back because the people want him rather than asking for it himself. If it turns out that he does need to get a sibling involved then I am sure it will not be a problem though the appearance of coming back by popular demand will be lost.

As for not getting an appropriate family member to do this before - do you really think it would have acheived anything without having control of the government before hand???

A sibling is not a suitable requester.

The law specifically states the convict himself, his spouse, his offspring, or his parents are those empowered to make the request.

In Thaksin's case, the only legal option is his himself or his offspring.

Then again, Thaksin has never concerned himself too much regarding the legality of actions.

A proper legally-submitted Royal Pardon transcends the government of the day.

.

Not sure about the transcending bit. I had a couple of in-laws in gaol for drug offences (very much wrong place at the wrong time) during Thaksin's war on drugs. Although they had served the normal portion (1/2?) of their sentence before a pardon could be applied for, no pardons were accepted or issued to those gaoled on drug offences for a couple of years.

FYI - 8 people accepted a share expenses ride in a pick-up from Sukhothai - BKK. A bag containing ya-ba was found in the truck, all 8 were sentenced to 12 years EXCEPT the driver who was not prosecuted. SIL served 8.5, BIL 9 served 9 years.

[OzMick]

Should have added - AFAIK pardons normally granted on King's and Queen's birthdays. What date is the wedding?

[AleG]

Which should make one wonder why, in the intervening 3 years since his conviction, that the legally-mandated requirement that the pardon request be initiated by himself, his spouse, or his offspring has never been done.

If Thaksin wants a Royal Pardon, why does he not request it himself (as is the case in most pardon requests)?

Short of that and considering he has no legal spouse now, if his offspring Oak et al want Dad to receive a Royal Pardon, why have they never requested one???

The red herring you speak of was created by the Red Shirts in their lets get a gazillion signatures endeavor.... when not one of those signers meets the requirement that it originates from one of the above authorized requesters.

.

I have the nagging feeling that this charade is pursued as a means to drive a wedge between PTP/UDD and the elite. As in making a huge show in submitting a pardon request that is known beforehand to be flawed and inadmissible, and then accusing the elite of ignoring it on political grounds.

Devious and rotten to a mind-boggling degree. No, I don't think this crew is above such machinations.

[plumeria]

Thaksin pardon panel has three questions

1. How much money do we get for saying 'yes' ?

2. What will happen to us if we say 'no'?

3. What's for lunch?

Very likely.

Hey, if this is so urgent and important why are they meeting only every couple of weeks??

[plumeria]

Just who exactly are the 'hidden powers' that everyone keeps referring to but no one seems to know anything about?

Pure fantasy maybe?

If you do know, please pass the info on.

Wow! You just move here? Haven't you read the forum rules about things that cannot be mentioned?

Its not only here those things must remain "hidden" it is anywhere in the country.

Of course, the people truly controlling the country don't run for office nor get in front of cameras -- just like the members of the Council on Foreign Relations in the USA are not politicians and don't talk to the media.

Believe me, you are better off NOT knowing too much about who is behind this color shirt or that color shirt. Thai people do not like it when farangs know too much.

You are better off not knowing the gory, nitty gritty details of what is really going on. It's too ugly and depressing.

The drama we see if enough for me. But remember that they are just actors on the stage. Nothing in Thailand is as simple as it may seem.

Woven into the many posts on TVF are some excellent insights and very juicy details about the facts of life in Thailand. Hang around a bit and it will not take long to know which members are clueless and which ones have excellent sources.

[localsocalman]

WOW ---- the first and most important issue to be taken up is "pardon" Thaksin ---- of course Yingluck says it isn't me --- I have noting to do with it --- it is left over business!!!

REALLY ---- isn't there other left over business that is of higher priority? IE health, welfare, infrastructure --- Yingluck ran on raising minimum wage! Isn't that more important that working to pardon a convict who is on the run and flaunting it around the world as if he is an ambassador? Someone who orchestrated a multi $BILLION (multi-billion USD) TAX free transaction selling AIS and his family benefited by this TAX free transaction!!! Come on --- he's crook on the run. Interpol should have arrested him and he should be in jail pending all of this. Yingluck -- knows nothing -- I'm not doing anything to help my brother!!!! LMAO Corruption on DAY ONE!

[plumeria]

Thailand this is a horrid country, there are better places to go than Miracle pay here Thailand.

Better places , Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, India, anywhere by corrupt Thailand

Sorry but I can't let that statement pass.

I've lived in all those places except India.

I have a lot of respect for NZ about some things but it's not enough to convince me to move there.

Those places are NOT better. Each might have something better than Thailand but they are not "better" if all things are considered.

The Taksin pardon panel is just going to make "recommendations" to a minister so this is a non-issue and really NOT worth all of us commenting.

OF COURSE, influential people are going to try ensure things go their way. You think that is not the case in all other countries?

[lannarebirth]

Panel looking into petition has vested interests

By The Nation on Sunday

Published on September 11, 2011

Although all members of the committee to check and screen the petition seeking a royal pardon for former PM Thaksin Shinawatra have good track records and are honourable, after looking at those records it cannot be fully denied that the committee has been set up to solve problems for "the Dubai boss".

Assoc Professor Wuthisak Lapcharoensap, rector-to-be of Ramkhamhaeng University, has allegedly been promoted to the university top post because of his close ties with Prachuab Chaiyasarn, father of Deputy Public Health Minister Torpong Chaiyasarn.

Former Constitution Court judge Jumpol na Songkhla was a member of a judge panel that was part of the majority that ruled Thaksin not guilty in the assets concealment case.

Education Council secretary-general Tongthong Chantarangsu had voiced his opinion in favour of Thaksin over the controversy surrounding merit-making at the Temple of the Emerald Buddha.

Tongthong was assigned to take good care of the three former Election Commissioners who were jailed at the Bangkok Special Prison. Reports had it that the three were given special treatment compared to other prisoners. Even though Tongthong was supported by the Somchai Wongsawat government, he failed to get promoted to the post of permanent secretary at the Justice Ministry. However, since the Thaksin camp's return to power, Tongthong is tipped as Cabinet secretary-general, replacing Ampol Kittiampon.

Justice Ministry inspector Natti Jitsawang was outstanding in the Corrections Department but was transferred out of the department after the Thaksin government was brought down by a coup because he was seen as having too close ties with the Thaksin camp.

He was transferred back to the Corrections Department when the People Power Party formed the government before being transferred to an inactive post by Democrat Pirapan Salirathavibhaga as inspector before his retirement at the end of September.

Special Litigation Department director-general Thanapit Mulapruek had earlier backed the Thaksin camp over the two-and three-digit lottery scheme and the rubber saplings case. However, he did not support the indictment of the red shirts on terrorism charges and disapproved of the Department of Special Investigation's move to revoke bails of the red-shirt leaders.

Meanwhile, opposition Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva yesterday warned the government against applying "double standards" regarding the petition seeking royal amnesty for Thaksin.

He said that in the past there had been no petition seeking royal pardon for a person who escaped imprisonment.

Thaksin has been in exile overseas to avoid a two-year imprisonment handed down by the Supreme Court for abuse of authority over his wife's purchase of state-owned land.

Abhisit, who headed the previous administration, said he saw no need to set up a committee to deal with Thaksin's petition. "The government should treat Thaksin's case in the same way as the cases against other Thais. Don't allow double standards," he said.

Democrat Party spokesman Chavanont Intornkomalsut said the government's move to set up this committee was aimed at misleading the public with information in order to get public support in helping bring Thaksin home without having to serve a jail term. "Appointing so many people to pressure the petition process is not right. It would have been enough if only three or four relatives of Thaksin signed the petition. There is no need to use the signatures of 3 million to 4 million people to put pressure on state agencies. This is formidable. Their intention may be more than just helping Thaksin," he said.

</H1> Edited September 10, 2011 by lannarebirth

[MAJIC]

The fact that the director of Interpol did never issue an arrest warrant due to the belief at Interpol that the charge of terrorism against Thaksin was purely politically motivated.

The belief at Interpol that the charge of terrorism against Thaksin was purely politically motivated has never been expressed by Interpol themselves, but speculated by people like you who happen to believe that to be true. It's a belief that is at odds with other beliefs of yours, like people sitting in protest at an airport constituting terrorism.

I am of the same opinion as you,and I don't recall the Director of Interpol issuing any statement at all,concerning Thaksins Political Status either,

perhaps "backtonormal "could get "backtofacts"and show some evidence,of the Director of Interpols statement ?

I don't recall backtonormal ever returning to show evidence in his posts whenever he's been confronted on numerous occasions by numerous posters.

.

Agreed!

But if left unchallenged,it indicates truth in the Posting & Poster,when neither often does not exist,

merely for the Record!

[HerbalEd]

I say let Thaksin come back to Thailand, then start serving his sentence and then "maybe" he can get a pardon. Otherwise, let him live outside Thailand the rest of his life.

[rametindallas]

Who forms this "pardon panel"?

Is it set up by Democrat members and does it have any power at all?If so...............................Next.

I very much doubt the Democrats would choose any of these men

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/09/11/national/Panel-looking-into-petition-has-vested-interests-30164993.html

[rametindallas]

Excellent point. How many convicted criminals in the past have actually been pardoned before serving even a single day of their sentence? Especially if those convicted criminals have jumped bail even before the verdict was handed down and thus indirectly admitted their guilt and since then have not shown one iota of remorse.

As I'm for sure no Thaksin fanboy,I'm actually the opposite,but what in my country and many country's over the world actually happens is this.

One who has been convicted in absence will be given a new trial when he returns or get caught which usually results in a much lower sentence.In this particular country where sandwich boxes change hands on a frequent base,the result will be aquittal of all charges.

Wrong! He was here for the trial and had representation of his choosing. He left before the verdict and chose not to appeal. For someone who is not a fanboy you sure go out of your way to whitewash him and distort the history.

[rametindallas]

The crux of this whole thing is that some think the law was used fairly and properly and should be upheld under any circumstance while some think the law was used unfairly (a substantially bigger group than the first judging by the recent survey discussed in Thai, but not english language media) and thus the conviction should be quashed and of course many dont even care. The problem is how do you either decide it was a fair conviction without causing those who think it was a poltical decision to have no faith in the law or how do you quash the conviction without causing those who think the law is even and fair to think it is undermining law and of course you dont have to worry about those who dont care. This is a very political issue now and politics is never ever about right and wrong or black and white but about accomodations. This is one reason why some people do not want to pass the pardon on. Accomodations need to be made at the political level but to date they cant be.

I don't agree. It's a very straightforward issue: He has a conviction, he did not appeal. Even if you believe the sentence is "unjust", court decisions sometimes go the wrong way against ordinary people and they just have to live with it. If you throw out the law for the benefit of a politician, you have to accept that others may discard the law when selecting methods to oppose it.

Thailand's has all the institutions and legal mechanisms required for a functional democracy. The reason it does not work is because the law is not applied. Making (another) exception to the law for the personal benefit of a corrupt politician is a step backwards and will perpetuate the situation, which is a mess.

People are governed and judged under a form of social contract where they allow themselves to be governed and judged by systems they see as fair and benefitting them and society. If conflict arises between any of these things and the people it is the things that need to change and not the people. That is quite simple democratic theory. Or put simply if the people lose faith in any of the branches: executive, legislature, judiciary then it needs to reform. I am not making a judgement call here but pointing out the relationship between the governed and and judged and those who govern and judge. What happens in Thailand is up to the people in final analysis as governmental and judicial bodies are there to serve the people in the people's interest. It is pointless you or I stating that the mechanisms are fine and enough. It is not up to us.

I think you want 'mobocracy' we change the social contract whenever to suit our current needs.