Yingluck And Thaksin Plead Ignorance About Amnesty

[bigbamboo]

Phue and Thai?.........!!! This mis-communication is catching!

But if it is true that one half of the party running the country doesn't know what the other half is doing I think that's need sorting PDQ.

Edited November 19, 2011 by bigbamboo

[Wlaisuwan]

Wow quite a heated debate and I have to say a lot of assumption has been thrown around.

So as a Thai national who grew up and educated abroad I got a perspective of both ways. I'd start with first, lying is NOT part of accepted Thai culture. It doesn't exist in Thai culture any more than any other culture. The thing is Thai people are bad liars and get gets spotted easily spotted and the country is wreaked with corruption.

Two, Thai people aren't gullible. A lot less so than what certain political camps likes to believe.Yingluck's party won a clear majority and let's face it nobody would believe that she would distance herself from Taksin. In reality that's what the voter wanted because their alternative are the Democrats. This point divides into two sub points here.

First is that majority of the country are fed up with the Democrats. Strange questions kept coming up during their time in power too. From authorizing live ammo on protesters who said to harboured terrorist that shot out grenades in the middle of Bangkok and yet fail to catch the perpetrators of the grenades shooting, to mysterious disappearance of cooking oil from the general market. Democrats themselves have been pending court hearing for years for election campaign money embezzlement. Under current law if they are found guilty they would have to be disband and received at least four years political ban and yet the party hasn't been to court of their corruption charges either. This list could run on forever but the point is that Taksin's enemy are no saint themselves either.

Second is that the general Thai feeling is that politics in Thailand are dirty and entirely corrupt. Which is probably isn't far from the truth. So it comes down to that if they are going to cheat and steal what are they giving back in return. So of course the country then compare what has the Democrats achieved to what has Taksin and his camp achieved whiles robbing the country blind? Because as speculative evidence is concern they both did. The answer that most of Thai population obviously come to is that Taksin and friends gave back more than the Democrats. You can debate that but clearly that's what the voter feels.

Three, the news article and the pardon process itself... So let's start off by saying we haven't yet seen what the proposal is made up off it's still under-wrap and in process. It would be hard to say that the multi-colour and the yellow didn't jump the gun in actions seeing as the details hasn't been released.

Secondly the proposal to the King can be rejected by the King himself. The King isn't a rubber stamp so the fear of setting dangerous trend is not really valid. Many people have been pardon before and it hasn't escalate the crimes of that those that have been pardon. The whole illegal proposal point is also a meek one here. The King have on many occasions if not always rejects to support or sign anything that isn't within the constitution. The Democrats and Taksin's enemy should know this point very well. During the political unrest that saw Democrats came into power they sought a short cut by requesting the King named Democrats party as a ruling part. The ground for the King's refusal was that it as not in the constitution and legally, he could not and should not be able to name a party to power (The Democrats then went on to come in power by putting together a coalition government). So just one of the many proof that the King have always use his discretion, he didn't became loved by the people by being a proxy to anyone else. Closing this point is that royal pardon is entirely up to the King's discretion. A proposal means nothing if the King refuse, and the King have been known to reject proposal before regardless of hurt feelings.

Four , a last point I like to make on this is that went you get news from Thai source do be aware of thier traditional supporters. It's a good rule for Thai media is that never take any one source as representing the whole truth. Nearly all Thai media are military, government or otherwise controlled by tycoons with political agendas. None of them are ever wholly truthful.

[bigbamboo]

In the end HRH will graciously decide on any proposed amnesty for whoever they shall be and all Thais and non Thais alike will respect his infinite wisdom..........

[Wlaisuwan]

In the end HRH will graciously decide on any proposed amnesty for whoever they shall be and all Thais and non Thais alike will respect his infinite wisdom..........

Pretty much it! Whatever ethical question anyone may have about that at the very least it will end one set of political bickering and Thailand really could do with less political bickering.

[rubl]

In the end HRH will graciously decide on any proposed amnesty for whoever they shall be and all Thais and non Thais alike will respect his infinite wisdom..........

Pretty much it! Whatever ethical question anyone may have about that at the very least it will end one set of political bickering and Thailand really could do with less political bickering.

Difficult to react on this. Definitely no disrespect intended. My feeling is that it is doubtful 'a set of political bickering' will end just like that. The bickering is done disjunct from the higher institution, even apart from how much or how little some people care. If some people cared they wouldn't even try to drag ... ... ...

[Thaddeus]

The Nation must be really pitching a tent now that the end of November has finally arrived and the annual petition process is underway. Love the headline, too, which is a thoroughly well-thought out piece of BS and not supported by the actual article itself. Thanks, Nation. Let the flames begin...

Question Mr. tlansford. If the government's draft decree includes a pardon for Thaksin do you support it?

Where's geriatrickid?

In bed with Tliansford - figuratively speaking, of course.

Getting hammered..... figuratively speaking, of course.

[elcent]

Wow quite a heated debate and I have to say a lot of assumption has been thrown around.

So as a Thai national who grew up and educated abroad I got a perspective of both ways. I'd start with first, lying is NOT part of accepted Thai culture. It doesn't exist in Thai culture any more than any other culture. The thing is Thai people are bad liars and get gets spotted easily spotted and the country is wreaked with corruption.

Two, Thai people aren't gullible. A lot less so than what certain political camps likes to believe.Yingluck's party won a clear majority and let's face it nobody would believe that she would distance herself from Taksin. In reality that's what the voter wanted because their alternative are the Democrats. This point divides into two sub points here.

First is that majority of the country are fed up with the Democrats. Strange questions kept coming up during their time in power too. From authorizing live ammo on protesters who said to harboured terrorist that shot out grenades in the middle of Bangkok and yet fail to catch the perpetrators of the grenades shooting, to mysterious disappearance of cooking oil from the general market. Democrats themselves have been pending court hearing for years for election campaign money embezzlement. Under current law if they are found guilty they would have to be disband and received at least four years political ban and yet the party hasn't been to court of their corruption charges either. This list could run on forever but the point is that Taksin's enemy are no saint themselves either.

Second is that the general Thai feeling is that politics in Thailand are dirty and entirely corrupt. Which is probably isn't far from the truth. So it comes down to that if they are going to cheat and steal what are they giving back in return. So of course the country then compare what has the Democrats achieved to what has Taksin and his camp achieved whiles robbing the country blind? Because as speculative evidence is concern they both did. The answer that most of Thai population obviously come to is that Taksin and friends gave back more than the Democrats. You can debate that but clearly that's what the voter feels.

Three, the news article and the pardon process itself... So let's start off by saying we haven't yet seen what the proposal is made up off it's still under-wrap and in process. It would be hard to say that the multi-colour and the yellow didn't jump the gun in actions seeing as the details hasn't been released.

Secondly the proposal to the King can be rejected by the King himself. The King isn't a rubber stamp so the fear of setting dangerous trend is not really valid. Many people have been pardon before and it hasn't escalate the crimes of that those that have been pardon. The whole illegal proposal point is also a meek one here. The King have on many occasions if not always rejects to support or sign anything that isn't within the constitution. The Democrats and Taksin's enemy should know this point very well. During the political unrest that saw Democrats came into power they sought a short cut by requesting the King named Democrats party as a ruling part. The ground for the King's refusal was that it as not in the constitution and legally, he could not and should not be able to name a party to power (The Democrats then went on to come in power by putting together a coalition government). So just one of the many proof that the King have always use his discretion, he didn't became loved by the people by being a proxy to anyone else. Closing this point is that royal pardon is entirely up to the King's discretion. A proposal means nothing if the King refuse, and the King have been known to reject proposal before regardless of hurt feelings.

Four , a last point I like to make on this is that went you get news from Thai source do be aware of thier traditional supporters. It's a good rule for Thai media is that never take any one source as representing the whole truth. Nearly all Thai media are military, government or otherwise controlled by tycoons with political agendas. None of them are ever wholly truthful.

after the flood of water comes the flood of heat. After the flood of heat comes the flood of anger.

Remember everyone, most wars started during an ElNino period.

Wlaisuwan, you're right with your statement. The only question is, how to get the masses to dive into more and various information sources?

Facebook won't do the trick, it's just a blinder to let the great manipulators do what they're doing. Playing games all night and day doesn't help either.

One of the biggest problems here is that people with higher education and understanding often wait for the opportunity and chances to become part of the big conspiracies and corruptions and will take the opportunity to be silenced with stashes of money. This is not only for Thailand, but a bit more present here than elsewhere. There're only a few who make a difference and one of them is Anand Panyarachun. Where is the younger generation?

[PingManDan]

As if the bad handling of the flood isen't enough, and now this.

I think PTP can be in for a hell of a bumpy ride.

I think it is time for a true civil war, side against side, anarchy in the making, fight till the rightgous win, the true Thai people :jap:

So your quite happy dodging bullets, are you?

If it means getting Thailand out of this BS situation, then yes

[Chupup]

If I was a betting man I would give odds that the reason Chalerm ran everyone out of the room except a select few during the secret meeting is that a call was established to K T and he gave them instructions on how to change the decree.

Couldn't have put that better myself, but wait,the PM & k t knew nothing about it (NOT) if people needed any futher proof that this government were a bunch of LIARS

[localsocalman]

PM Yingluck and her PTP Government are playing a well orchestrated HIGH STAKES shell game here. Her claiming this is just a normal annual B'Day event ---- perhaps but NOT under these NEW terms. This is blatant corruption and in plain view. The country is still suffering from the floods --- campaign promises unfulfilled and yet they have time to PUSH this through hiding behind closed doors. This is shameful and offensive Or just Shinwatra business as usual.

[MaiChai]

My tuppence worth on this is that it seems a pretty desperate attempt to get back by Taksin. It is a long shot and involves the monarchy in politics, which is a big no no. Educated people in Thailand are not stupid and no one wants to be used or see something that is sacred be used. I am pretty sure it won't happen.

Taksin should not have run away. He should have played the political games and got out of it somehow (and he would have). He should have even listen to his wife (and she still is his wife): get out of politics. He is a megalomaniac and doesn't know when to stop. Most of us would be very happy with his wealth and even just make more money or just enjoy it. Instead he needs to feed his ego. His karma will come back to him; it always does. Why can't he go away like all other former prime ministers and let Thailand move on?

[AleG]

Wow quite a heated debate and I have to say a lot of assumption has been thrown around.

So as a Thai national who grew up and educated abroad I got a perspective of both ways. I'd start with first, lying is NOT part of accepted Thai culture. It doesn't exist in Thai culture any more than any other culture. The thing is Thai people are bad liars and get gets spotted easily spotted and the country is wreaked with corruption.

Two, Thai people aren't gullible. A lot less so than what certain political camps likes to believe.Yingluck's party won a clear majority and let's face it nobody would believe that she would distance herself from Taksin. In reality that's what the voter wanted because their alternative are the Democrats. This point divides into two sub points here.

First is that majority of the country are fed up with the Democrats. Strange questions kept coming up during their time in power too. From authorizing live ammo on protesters who said to harboured terrorist that shot out grenades in the middle of Bangkok and yet fail to catch the perpetrators of the grenades shooting, to mysterious disappearance of cooking oil from the general market. Democrats themselves have been pending court hearing for years for election campaign money embezzlement. Under current law if they are found guilty they would have to be disband and received at least four years political ban and yet the party hasn't been to court of their corruption charges either. This list could run on forever but the point is that Taksin's enemy are no saint themselves either.

Second is that the general Thai feeling is that politics in Thailand are dirty and entirely corrupt. Which is probably isn't far from the truth. So it comes down to that if they are going to cheat and steal what are they giving back in return. So of course the country then compare what has the Democrats achieved to what has Taksin and his camp achieved whiles robbing the country blind? Because as speculative evidence is concern they both did. The answer that most of Thai population obviously come to is that Taksin and friends gave back more than the Democrats. You can debate that but clearly that's what the voter feels.

Three, the news article and the pardon process itself... So let's start off by saying we haven't yet seen what the proposal is made up off it's still under-wrap and in process. It would be hard to say that the multi-colour and the yellow didn't jump the gun in actions seeing as the details hasn't been released.

Secondly the proposal to the King can be rejected by the King himself. The King isn't a rubber stamp so the fear of setting dangerous trend is not really valid. Many people have been pardon before and it hasn't escalate the crimes of that those that have been pardon. The whole illegal proposal point is also a meek one here. The King have on many occasions if not always rejects to support or sign anything that isn't within the constitution. The Democrats and Taksin's enemy should know this point very well. During the political unrest that saw Democrats came into power they sought a short cut by requesting the King named Democrats party as a ruling part. The ground for the King's refusal was that it as not in the constitution and legally, he could not and should not be able to name a party to power (The Democrats then went on to come in power by putting together a coalition government). So just one of the many proof that the King have always use his discretion, he didn't became loved by the people by being a proxy to anyone else. Closing this point is that royal pardon is entirely up to the King's discretion. A proposal means nothing if the King refuse, and the King have been known to reject proposal before regardless of hurt feelings.

Four , a last point I like to make on this is that went you get news from Thai source do be aware of thier traditional supporters. It's a good rule for Thai media is that never take any one source as representing the whole truth. Nearly all Thai media are military, government or otherwise controlled by tycoons with political agendas. None of them are ever wholly truthful.

You know, if you say lying is not accepted and then you argue that people that voted for PTP voted knowing that their aim was to get Thaksin back then you are saying that lying is accepted, because Yingluck and the others have said over and over that its not about Thaksin, they are not going to work for the benefit of one man, etc, etc. So, they lie and people not only accept it but they vote for them.

Also, Red Shirts that carried grenade attacks have been arrested, so there goes another non-fact on your post.

[Buchholz]

IGNORANCE IS BLISS

then they must in Utopia

.

[Buchholz]

If I was a betting man I would give odds that the reason Chalerm ran everyone out of the room except a select few during the secret meeting is that a call was established to K T and he gave them instructions on how to change the decree.

Bingo

+ 2

.

[nurofiend]

i asked this in another thread but didn't seem to get a response

would thaksin first have to admit guilt/wrongdoing to be granted amnesty?

[whybother]

i asked this in another thread but didn't seem to get a response

would thaksin first have to admit guilt/wrongdoing to be granted amnesty?

I would think that the answer to that is No. Mainly because I doubt very much that he would admit to anything.

[nurofiend]

i asked this in another thread but didn't seem to get a response

would thaksin first have to admit guilt/wrongdoing to be granted amnesty?

I would think that the answer to that is No. Mainly because I doubt very much that he would admit to anything.

but i mean legally speaking does one need to admit guilt before being granted amnesty? it obviously should be yes.

i asked because i was going to say the same, i couldn't see him ever admitting any guilt or any wrongdoing...so unless they made that drastic change to the law, then how can he ever come back unless he bowed his head and admitted guilt?

Edited November 20, 2011 by nurofiend

[hyperdimension]

i couldn't see him ever admitting any guilt or any wrongdoing...so unless they made that drastic change to the law, then how can he ever come back unless he bowed his head and admitted guilt?

It's too late for Thaksin to admit guilt and express remorse anyway. After years of denying any wrongdoing and fomenting revolution, if he now suddenly expresses guilt and remorse it will be perceived by many people to be insincere, probably including the granter of the pardons. People know that he just says things to get what he wants.

Edited November 20, 2011 by hyperdimension

[whybother]

i asked this in another thread but didn't seem to get a response

would thaksin first have to admit guilt/wrongdoing to be granted amnesty?

I would think that the answer to that is No. Mainly because I doubt very much that he would admit to anything.

but i mean legally speaking does one need to admit guilt before being granted amnesty? it obviously should be yes.

i asked because i was going to say the same, i couldn't see him ever admitting any guilt or any wrongdoing...so unless they made that drastic change to the law, then how can he ever come back unless he bowed his head and admitted guilt?

It "obviously" should be a lot of things. But I don't think that is relevant.

I noticed in one of the other threads (PAD Vows to Thwart Government ...)

The Democrat-led previous government amended the Royal Pardon Law in 2010 by incorporating Article 6(2), which stipulates that only those with no more than three years of their sentences left to serve are eligible for release.

The Yingluck government has maintained Article 6(2) because it believes it qualifies Thaksin for release. Thaksin is 62 years old and was only sentenced to a two-year jail term. Panthep said the government may remove Article 4, which stipulates that only those currently in detention are eligible for a pardon.

So they're going to change Article 4, or you can expect Thaksin back on December 4.

[Soupdragon]

If I was a betting man I would give odds that the reason Chalerm ran everyone out of the room except a select few during the secret meeting is that a call was established to K T and he gave them instructions on how to change the decree.

Bingo

+ 2

.

I would take that bet.

Do you think these numpties would be capable of drafting such and important document during one short cabinet meeting. No this was planned a long time in advance with lawyers wording the document to try to disguise the obvious intention. If Mr T called it was most probably just to give the go ahead.

[biplanebluey]

I get a mental image of a Thaksin aide saying to him over breakfast " Khun Meow have you seen the papers? The government are trying to get the annual amnesty to include you." and Thaksin looking all embarrassed and replying "Really....Aaw shucks. That's nice of them."

HaHa----------------------------------------------- Good one !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lannarebirth]

i asked this in another thread but didn't seem to get a response

would thaksin first have to admit guilt/wrongdoing to be granted amnesty?

Not according to Voranai's column in todays Bangkok Post.

[nurofiend]

I would think that the answer to that is No. Mainly because I doubt very much that he would admit to anything.

but i mean legally speaking does one need to admit guilt before being granted amnesty? it obviously should be yes.

i asked because i was going to say the same, i couldn't see him ever admitting any guilt or any wrongdoing...so unless they made that drastic change to the law, then how can he ever come back unless he bowed his head and admitted guilt?

It "obviously" should be a lot of things. But I don't think that is relevant.

I noticed in one of the other threads (PAD Vows to Thwart Government ...)

The Democrat-led previous government amended the Royal Pardon Law in 2010 by incorporating Article 6(2), which stipulates that only those with no more than three years of their sentences left to serve are eligible for release.

The Yingluck government has maintained Article 6(2) because it believes it qualifies Thaksin for release. Thaksin is 62 years old and was only sentenced to a two-year jail term. Panthep said the government may remove Article 4, which stipulates that only those currently in detention are eligible for a pardon.

So they're going to change Article 4, or you can expect Thaksin back on December 4.

your reply bears no answer to the original question i asked.. which is all i wanted to know, legally speaking...a simple yes or no would do.

[nurofiend]

i asked this in another thread but didn't seem to get a response

would thaksin first have to admit guilt/wrongdoing to be granted amnesty?

Not according to Voranai's column in todays Bangkok Post.

i'd quote a section but obviously it's not allowed here.....but clearly this guy doesn't have a definitive answer to this question

[Thaddeus]

If I was a betting man I would give odds that the reason Chalerm ran everyone out of the room except a select few during the secret meeting is that a call was established to K T and he gave them instructions on how to change the decree.

Bingo

+ 2

.

I would take that bet.

Do you think these numpties would be capable of drafting such and important document during one short cabinet meeting. No this was planned a long time in advance with lawyers wording the document to try to disguise the obvious intention. If Mr T called it was most probably just to give the go ahead.

I think Chalerm has been doing little else for the last few months.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/496806-chalerm-vows-to-help-get-fugitive-ex-pm-thaksin-pardoned/page__p__4684368__fromsearch__1#entry4684368

[whybother]

your reply bears no answer to the original question i asked.. which is all i wanted to know, legally speaking...a simple yes or no would do.

i'd quote a section but obviously it's not allowed here.....but clearly this guy doesn't have a definitive answer to this question

Do you think that if there was a definitive answer to the question that there would even be a discussion about it?

There are lots of "should"s and "shouldn't"s, but there doesn't appear to be anything legally stopping the government from requesting the pardon that would include Thaksin.

[lannarebirth]

your reply bears no answer to the original question i asked.. which is all i wanted to know, legally speaking...a simple yes or no would do.

i'd quote a section but obviously it's not allowed here.....but clearly this guy doesn't have a definitive answer to this question

Do you think that if there was a definitive answer to the question that there would even be a discussion about it?

There are lots of "should"s and "shouldn't"s, but there doesn't appear to be anything legally stopping the government from requesting the pardon that would include Thaksin.

What would be interesting is if someone said it's not constitutional and the court couldn't rule that it may be because of who that someone is.

[whybother]

What would be interesting is if someone said it's not constitutional and the court couldn't rule that it may be because of who that someone is.

I think the onus would be on someone to prove it was unconstitutional or against the law.

Possibly, someone could get a delay to the pardon (or just the changes) while a court decided on it. Whether that would mean Thaksin would miss out, or that it would just be delayed ......

[lannarebirth]

What would be interesting is if someone said it's not constitutional and the court couldn't rule that it may be because of who that someone is.

I think the onus would be on someone to prove it was unconstitutional or against the law.

Possibly, someone could get a delay to the pardon (or just the changes) while a court decided on it. Whether that would mean Thaksin would miss out, or that it would just be delayed ......

I had a special someone in mind.

[garrfeild]

As if the bad handling of the flood isen't enough, and now this.

I think PTP can be in for a hell of a bumpy ride.

I think it is time for a true civil war, side against side, anarchy in the making, fight till the rightgous win, the true Thai people :jap:

So your quite happy dodging bullets, are you?

If it means getting Thailand out of this BS situation, then yes

I doubt that the gun has ever really sorted out anything, yes someone wins the war, but everyone looses as far a democracy is concerned. We might agree on one thing Politicians are only interested in themselves, regardless of which country you choose to mention. There is corruption where ever you look, here it is maybe more open as lets face it, the sophistication of Thai politics belongs in the kindergarten.

If you want civil war why not look at your own country first, before deciding there should be one here.