All Legal Traces Of 2006 Coup Should Be Removed: Thai Academics

[whybother]

If we use Chalerm's logic, if all traces of the coup are removed, then the generals that staged the coup are not guilty of anything.

[rogerdee123]

Does this mean that the lawyers deny the legitimacy, of any administration or Prime Minister since April 2006, when former-PM Thaksin resigned ? That would surely seem to be a bit of a 'judicial coup', were it to be accepted ? Now whose interests would all this serve ?

This is all for the sole purpose of doing away with the CCC, etc .... in which case the corruption charges and the guilty verdict against Thaksin would be nullified. Despite all the ranting about democracy, this is the ONLY agenda in this issue. Money money money money power power power power

But of course .... "it's not about Thaksin" ..... blah blah blah .... even after running Thaksin's sister/clone for PM .... "it's not about Thaksin" ....... blah blah blah ..... after the FM asks Japan to issue Thksin a visa ... "It's not about Thaksin" .... blah blah blah .... Thaksin in Cambodia with Hun Sen .... "It's not about Thaksin" .... blah blah blah.

I see comments from the Red shirts and PT supporters complaining that everyone is focusing upon Thaksin ... well yes! But I've listened to some of them and have come to realize that some of them actually sincerely believe that all this s__t is really about democracy and "not about Thaksin".

Really I don't know how people can be so blind about what's taking place now.

Amazing Thailand!

[otherstuff1957]

So, we would return to the '97 constitution, which was undoubtedly more representative and democratic than the '07 constitution, but was weak in checks on executive power.

We would also see Thaksin's conviction expunged, which undoubtedly the prime motivation for this proposal.

[siampolee]

So those innocents who were slaughtered in the , '" war on drugs, the Tak Bai slaughter missing Muslim lawyers etc are of course to be resurrected.

All the money Thaksin diverted to himself will of course be returned to the state, his tax bills and his family's tax paid in full,. And that often promised quote. " I want nothing to do with politics will become a fact?"

Somehow I don't think so.

Edited September 20, 2011 by siampolee

[longtimepassed]

Throw in all the "ifs" and "probablys" you like, it still fits my definition of corruption. IF he had recused himself, the implication that he may have influenced the decision would still be there, the point is he didn't care.

The loan is usually referred to as "soft," hence my assumption below market interest rates, or am I wrong?

You simply emphasize again you don't understand export credit business.Export credit loans are always "soft", ie below commercial banking rates or even interest free.That's the whole point, namely to encourage foreign countries to buy one's own country's goods and services.

Whether the process could have been fair even if Thaksin had played by the rules is a very reasonable point.In other words difficult for ministers, banking officials and civil servants to turn down an application associated with Thaksin given the climate of that time.Difficult to get around when the PM is a major industrialist, even in a country where transparency and governance is better than in Thailand.

The point is jayboy as you correctly say - "it is a difficult situation" but yet again Thaksin showed his LACK of moral scruples and ability to make a reasoned judgement by not steering clear of something which could easily be construed as at best dishonest...therein lies this posters problem with Khun T - if in doubt he always goes for personal gain ,,,,in my opinion a leader should be above that.

Edited September 20, 2011 by longtimepassed

[longtimepassed]

So those innocents who were slaughtered in the , '" war on drugs, the Tak Bai slaughter missing Muslim lawyers etc are of course to be resurrected.

All the money Thaksin diverted to himself will of course be returned to the state, his tax bills and his family's tax paid in full,. And that often promised quote. " I want nothing to do with politics will become a fact?"

Somehow I don't think so.

noooooooooooo - he didnt do anything wrong - hes "just a vi vi vi vi victim"

[scorecard]

Does this mean that the lawyers deny the legitimacy, of any administration or Prime Minister since April 2006, when former-PM Thaksin resigned ? That would surely seem to be a bit of a 'judicial coup', were it to be accepted ? Now whose interests would all this serve ?

Plus, if this lawyers group sincerely believe everything put on the statute books (Thailand's laws) after the 2006 coup should be now totally removed from the statute books, then why aren't they saying remove everything (repeat everything) from the statute books after the first ever coup?

I wonder what there attitude is to 'no double standards'.

[scorecard]

Throw in all the "ifs" and "probablys" you like, it still fits my definition of corruption. IF he had recused himself, the implication that he may have influenced the decision would still be there, the point is he didn't care.

The loan is usually referred to as "soft," hence my assumption below market interest rates, or am I wrong?

You simply emphasize again you don't understand export credit business.Export credit loans are always "soft", ie below commercial banking rates or even interest free.That's the whole point, namely to encourage foreign countries to buy one's own country's goods and services.

Whether the process could have been fair even if Thaksin had played by the rules is a very reasonable point.In other words difficult for ministers, banking officials and civil servants to turn down an application associated with Thaksin given the climate of that time.Difficult to get around when the PM is a major industrialist, even in a country where transparency and governance is better than in Thailand.

The point is jayboy as you correctly say - "it is a difficult situation" but yet again Thaksin showed his LACK of moral scruples and ability to make a reasoned judgement by not steering clear of something which could easily be construed as at best dishonest...therein lies this posters problem with Khun T - if in doubt he always goes for personal gain ,,,,in my opinion a leader should be above that.

".........difficult for ministers, banking officials and civil servants to turn down an application associated with Thaksin given the climate of that time.Difficult to get around when the PM is a major industrialist, even in a country where transparency and governance is better than in Thailand."

I would certainly agree the officials concerned were all very frightened of the paymaster and not one of them would have dared to say one word.

That doesn't mean it was all OK.

Soft or not soft, it was all a plan to use taxpayers money to create massive benefits for his own family.

Whether he was a major industrialist is besides the point.

By the way, do you call someone who had a telecoms license handed to him on a plate (no bidding, total reversal of public policy with no discussion or announcements) by a ruthless general (part of the gang of thug generals who conducted the 1992 coup) and then charged exorbitant rates and made hundreds of millions a major industrialist. And by the way his earlier business attempts all failed miserably and one farang partner is still trying to get justice.

And by the way, the paymaster and his thugs now preach 'no coups' and 'no double standards'. Surely it's somewhat hypercritical when the paymaster accepted a 'gift' from a ruthless general just after a coup, and just after the same gang of generals ordered troops to open fire on unarmed civilians and some 200 citizens assassinated and never seen again, to now be the champion of 'no coups' and 'no double standards', and tacitly supporting the recent suggestion from the lawyers group to remove everything from the statute books.

If that was carried through then surely the decree which gave the paymaster the telecoms license should also be removed therefore cancelled.

Edited September 30, 2011 by scorecard