Sunai To File Charge With World Court Against Democrat Govt Next Month

[backtonormal]

While it was unclear whether or not the Army intended to murder civilians, what WAS CLEAR, was that armed Red Shirts were using whatever they had in their arsenal. It wasn't meant for defense, it was meant for offense. A man with a gun shoots a policeman, policeman shoots back.. I hope you don't argue that the policeman was at fault because that's what you're implying.

If you truly believe that the Army has a blood thirsty intention of killing unarmed civilians then there's not much that can persuade you to think otherwise.

I do not think the army set out intending to murder civilians and in fact I believe the operation was generally professionally conducted.I also believe there were violent elements within the Red shirt encampment, although their origin and paymasters remain mysterious.I believe there were however some appalling abuses by the army which resulted in the murder of many civilians.The army has consistently refused to cooperate in the investigations.I believe the HRW is the most credible report so far produced and as you suggest it identifies abuses on both sides.To date no investigation has been made of the role of politicians (Abhisit, Suthep etc) or senior army officers (Prayuth etc).It may be they would be exonerated but we will never know without a full and transparent inquiry.

Agreed. Those orders will have been put in writing and the receivers of those orders would have not carried out those orders without that paper, its called covering your rear end. There is a copy of those orders somewhere. This is simple ask the people in charge, Abhisit and Suthep to produce and follow the chain of command down to the end of the rifle. Maybe we have darker forces dictating those orders and a true transparent investigation would identify those forces (its not that most people dont know who the dark forces are)

[whybother]

Wrong was done on both sides undoubtedly but lets move to a neutral venue and present the evidence. This scares the pants of those that gave the orders. What were those orders, its a good starting point and if those orders were the catalyst for retaliation lets hear it. The story is out there but it appears that many are blustering to prevent the truth appearing. One side in this dispute has a long history, not years but decades of suppressing people with extreme violence. The CC of the army has already stated that if an investigation finds the army guilty he will take the blame, cant give you a link on here because not surprisingly this neutral forum does not print such nonsense.

Obviously it doesn't scare the pants of those that "allegedly" gave the "alleged" orders, otherwise they would be leaving the country.

Those that "allegedly" gave the "alleged" orders have proclaimed from the start that everything that they did was as per the law.

[Briggsy]

My prediction is "Nothing will happen on Dec 9th." It is always like this.

[Buchholz]

Red Shirt Pheu Thai Party MP Sunai, and presumably with his Red Shirt European supporters in tow, plan to file the charges on Dec. 9th.

Zealots and uncritical supporters of the military apart, I don't suppose most balanced members are too alarmed at this development.All the evidence is that the initiative will not succeed but it is a useful reminder that the murder of civilians by the army cannot be wished away.

Red Shirt Apologists and Enablers aside, yes, it never hurts to be reminded that the Red Shirt instigators of violence have not been held accountable and that efforts to do so will likely not succeed.

.

Wrong was done on both sides undoubtedly but lets move to a neutral venue and present the evidence. This scares the pants of those that gave the orders. What were those orders, its a good starting point and if those orders were the catalyst for retaliation lets hear it. The story is out there but it appears that many are blustering to prevent the truth appearing.

Yes, what were the orders for the Red Shirt militia? Who backed them?

Lots of good questions in need of answering, unfortunately, Red Shirt Pheu Thai MP Sunai makes no mention of investigating the instigators of violence in his filing of charges with the ICC.

He also makes no mention of whether or not his government plan to ratify the necessary act in order for him to file charges with the ICC in the first place, but, then again, his blustering divisive actions aren't really an effort to having the truth appear.

.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

My prediction is "Nothing will happen on Dec 9th." It is always like this.

Red Shirt Pheu Thai MP Sunai will very likely be told to return to Thailand's Parliament and ratify the necessary Rome Statute.

.

[sbk]

Posts have been edited.

Please do not alter someone elses post in a quote with color or font changes, simply requote the relevant portion only, thanks

[KKK]

... many red shirts in Europe have organized everything for him.

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirts_(Italy) : The Redshirts gave inspiration to Mussolini to form the Fascist blackshirts units, and from there to Hitler's brownshirted Sturmabteilung (SA) units, as well as the quasi-fascist Irish Blueshirts under Eoin O'Duffy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirt_(character) : A "redshirt" is a stock character in fiction who dies soon after being introduced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_(academic) : practice of postponing entrance into kindergarten of age-eligible children in order to allow extra time for socioemotional, intellectual, or physical growth.

[geriatrickid]

Will he file anything against Thaksin, the police and 2500 dead people too?

No. The case is in respect to allegations related to the state response to a civilian unrest arising from the protests against the former Democrat government.

[dominique355]

Has Khun Sunai filed charges with the International Criminal Court yet? No? No surprise there.

Has Khun Sunai set a date for filing charges yet? No? No surprise there.

More hot air. Thailand doesn't like international legislative bodies poking around its very dirty closets.

Red Shirt Pheu Thai Party MP Sunai, and presumably with his Red Shirt European supporters in tow, plan to file the charges on Dec. 9th.

.

From the website of the ICC we can learn that

Proceedings before the ICC may be initiated by a State Party, the Prosecutor or the United Nations Security Council.

The jurisdiction of the ICC is based on "complementarity", which allows national courts the first opportunity to investigate or prosecute.

So perhaps MP Sunai should do his homework before opening his mouth.

[Buchholz]

Has Khun Sunai filed charges with the International Criminal Court yet? No? No surprise there.

Has Khun Sunai set a date for filing charges yet? No? No surprise there.

More hot air. Thailand doesn't like international legislative bodies poking around its very dirty closets.

Red Shirt Pheu Thai Party MP Sunai, and presumably with his Red Shirt European supporters in tow, plan to file the charges on Dec. 9th.

From the website of the ICC we can learn that

Proceedings before the ICC may be initiated by a State Party, the Prosecutor or the United Nations Security Council.

The jurisdiction of the ICC is based on "complementarity", which allows national courts the first opportunity to investigate or prosecute.

So perhaps MP Sunai should do his homework before opening his mouth.

He'll claim the ICC turning his application down is "politically motivated" by the "Thai elite amataya" controlling it.

.

[thaihome]

Agreed. Those orders will have been put in writing and the receivers of those orders would have not carried out those orders without that paper, its called covering your rear end. There is a copy of those orders somewhere. This is simple ask the people in charge, Abhisit and Suthep to produce and follow the chain of command down to the end of the rifle. Maybe we have darker forces dictating those orders and a true transparent investigation would identify those forces (its not that most people dont know who the dark forces are)

You really need to read the HRW report.

There were indeed orders and rules of engagement given to the Army and widely published daily on TV from May 15th to 19th when the heaviest fighting took place.

“When the officers started to cordon the protest areas on 13 May, their instructions were clear. Use of live bullets was limited to three situations only, namely, 1) as warning shots, 2) for self-defense so as to protect the lives of officers and the public when absolutely necessary, and 3) to shoot at clearly identified individuals armed with weapons, who might otherwise cause harm to officers and members of the public.”

There is little doubt that in some instances Army personnel fired on people that were not clearly armed or an immediate threat to their safety. What they did do was use suppressing fire, shooting at the barricades on Rama IV and Din Daeng and at anyone that entered the area between the Army emplacements and the burning tire barricades.

Personally, I do not condone that, but as at least 2 soldiers were killed during this time and many wounded by shooting and grenade attacks, I do understand why they shot at anyone that came anywhere close or became visible behind the burning tire barricades.

Anyone that has been in combat will likely agree, you shoot first and ask questions later. It is easy to criticize such actions after the fact. After all, you weren’t the one that was risking your life to follow orders to set up a perimeter around the main protest site.

TH

Edited November 29, 2011 by thaihome

[lannarebirth]

BTW, the red shirts also condemned violent acts by other red shirts in this protest. For example :

On 30 April, more than 200 Red-Shirt protesters[93] forced their way into Chulalongkorn Hospital, which is near to the main protest site, searching for soldiers whom the protesters thought were hiding there. Hospital management had denied that troops were on its site. No soldiers were found after an hour of searching.[93] Following the incident, hospital staff moved approximately 600 patients to other facilities farther from the protest site. UDD leader Weng Tojirakarn, himself a medical doctor, apologized for the storming, calling it "inappropriate" and "unreasonable"

Any other condemnation examples, or is this one tepid example by only one Red Shirt Leader constitute the grand sum total of their "apology" for dozens of atrocities?

"Inappropriate"..."Unreasonable"...

.

Weng's normal response to Red Shirt violence is that it must have been conducted by "fake" Red Shirts. The Chulalongkorn assault was well documented and videos abound of easily identifiable persons in the Red Shirt movement. Seeing as how one of the patients that was forced to be moved, later died, "Inappropriate" doesn't begin to excuse these invasive actions. I'm not sure if the patient is listed among the 91 dead, but I somehow doubt it.

[SICHONSTEVE]

of course the army personnel lives are as valuable as every other life. Exactly my point is that if the army had not been ordered to use lethal force against the protesters, many fewer would have died, and - maybe a long shot, but - possibly no one

You fail to realize that the Army were using rubber bullets and tear gas to repel the ARMED protesters. These armed protesters were lobbing grenades onto BTS stations, attacking their opponents (who happened to be civilians), causing injuries (which should not make it any more okay than deaths). When things got really heated and it seemed more and more ARMED Red shirts were getting out of control, the government had to say "enough is enough". What did you expect the service men to do, stand there and be cannon fodder? Would that be alright with you? What about the other regular civilians...who were going to protect them from these TERRORISTS.

you say that the army "were in danger just as anyone else". One, that is an occupational hazard of anyone in the army. Ask the guys who served in Afghanistan & Iraq - they know it. And normally, that is a service that can be done with honor. Two, in this case, the army was in danger due to the orders that they were given. The army's attack escalated the situation rather than diffusing it.

Imagine yourself being a service member standing in front of someone with a gun, who have used it and will not hesitate to use it against you. How are you going to make him think twice about using that gun? In this situation, you'd have to be armed as well, making him aware that if he intends to use that gun, there's a chance that he himself might suffer the same fate. In a battle or war, there's an attacker and a defender. In this case, the Red Shirts were the attacker while the defenders are the Army personnel and the "non colored" civilians are the victims. Let's suppose the Army didn't get involved, what does that leave you with. The attackers and the victims. Who's going to protect the farang riding on the BTS while grenades were being lobbed? Who's going to protect the regular people who just wanted to get on with their daily life without having to cower in fear of bombs and explosions? Let's remove the attackers and what do you have... a defender with nothing to defend against and victims no longer victims. Life goes back to normal.

If you want a peaceful protest, by all means, do it. However, DO NOT instigate burning down the city. DO NOT carry weapons. DO NOT act like savages by bring HIV infected blood to pour onto government buildings. DO NOT set buses on fire. This was NOT a peaceful protest at all and the minute weapons were brought out. It became a different ball game and "non-armed civilians" became "terrorists". If someone in my neighborhood was firing a gun and throwing grenades in order to get his political message across, I hope he's shot dead, plain and simple.

Precisely!!!! The black clad provocateurs started it - no actually, the blame lies fair and square at those "thug" red shirt leaders who after accepting the dismantling of the barricades in return for a November dissolving of parliament and early elections changed their minds and decided to attempt to make more capital out of the situation and refused Abhisit's "olive branch".

That these objectional scumbags are now MP's is absoutely scandalous to the extreme as it is THEY that are ultimately responsible for the ensuing deaths of civilians AND soldiers whereas Abhisit tried to prevent things escalating out of control by being conciliatory!!!!

[hellodolly]

It seems The Nation may have misunderstood. The other newspaper mentions a complaint to be raised with the ICC. Now that makes more sense.

Interestingly it also mentions that Pheu Thai party list MP Charuphan said since the cabinet had ratified the ICC Rome Convention of 2000 in 2009

They've read your post, rubl.

and address both points in their latest.

Sunai to file complaint with ICC over deaths of 91 reds

Pheu Thai MP Sunai to petition ICC against the 91 killed during military crackdown last year.

Pheu Thai MP Sunai Julponsathorn said Monday he will petition the International Criminal Court (ICC) at the Hague on December 9 to take up the crime against humanity case against the 91 who were killed during the military crackdown on red shirts in April and May last year.

Sunai said the move is aimed at making sure that there will be no suspicion that the current Pheu Thai government will interfere with the ongoing investigations by the local authorities.

Sunai, who is Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, said he will use his own money for the travel and many red shirts in Europe have organized everything for him.

Sunai said both then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his Deputy Suthep Thuaksubhan will have to be accountable as they were in charge of the crackdown last year.

Pheu Thai Party-list MP Kattiyar Sawasdiphol, whose father Maj Gen Kattiya Sawasdiphol was shot and killed by sniper fire last year said there has been no progress in the investigation of her father's death and thus she is counting on the ICC to take up the case.

Thailand however is not among 119 member states to the ICC. It has not yet ratified the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The Nation - 19 minutes ago

.

This: Sunai said the move is aimed at making sure that there will be no suspicion that the current Pheu Thai government will interfere with the ongoing investigations by the local authorities.

is most important. After over 12 months of the DEms stalling the process an independant body may be the way forward. Everybody needs to know the story from both sides. Let the Reds present there evidence and the ex Gov and army present theirs. The PT mp sure is confident and good luck for appearing to do the right thing. Its nots just the relatives of the deceased that need answers its the group that where badly injured by sniper bullets. Snipers attempted to kill people(over 2000 sniper rounds fired),under orders, and if it were not for luck, crosswinds and poor shooting the death toll could have quadrupled.

What ever side your allegiance the same questions need answering if we want reconcilliation

1 Who gave the orders

2. What were those orders

3. Who were the orders given too

4. Where those orders obeyed.

5. If disobeyed, who made the decision to disobey.

I am sorry some Dem supporters dont see this stage in the reconcilliation process but it will happen

1 Who gave the orders?

Answer some one in authority and ultimately he Prime Minister will bear the responsibility.

That is on the Governments side Thaksin will have to bear the responsibility on the red shirts side.

2. What were those orders?

Answer Good Question this is a question that has to be answered.

3. Who were the orders given too?

Answer all the soldiers below the ranking officer charged with handling the situation.

4. Where those orders obeyed?

Answer good question all though question number 2 should be answered first.

5. If disobeyed, who made the decision to disobey?

Answer good question like question number four question two will have to be answered first.

All those questions and answers should be applied to the red shirts also

Why is it never asked why were they allowed to illegally take over the center of the business district to burn it down invade hospitals and no one receive jail time for instigating it and paying the armed peace loving citizens to do it.

Does no one realize that this was a armed illegal terrorist act and the government was doing the best it could to negotiate with the red shirts. Twice he met their demands and twice the red shirts changed them.

It doe's not take a rocket scientist to see that they the red shirts had no intentions of creating peace.

Yet here we are a year and a half later ignoring them and asking why they were stopped the way they were when they made it perfectly clear they would not change there demands one bit and were ready and willing to burn Bangkok down if they could not get their way.

I can understand the Thai's giving the level of education they are giving but I can not understand the farongs who carry on like the red shirts were innocent bystanders.

If the army had been guilty of what those nitwits think it is the death toll would have been in the thousands.

Edited November 29, 2011 by hellodolly

[tlansford]

- snip -

Red Shirt Pheu Thai Party MP Sunai, and presumably with his Red Shirt European supporters in tow, plan to file the charges on Dec. 9th.

Zealots and uncritical supporters of the military apart, I don't suppose most balanced members are too alarmed at this development.All the evidence is that the initiative will not succeed but it is a useful reminder that the murder of civilians by the army cannot be wished away.

Red Shirt Apologists and Enablers aside, yes, it never hurts to be reminded that the Red Shirt instigators of violence have not been held accountable and that efforts to do so will likely not succeed.

.

Wrong was done on both sides undoubtedly but lets move to a neutral venue and present the evidence. This scares the pants of those that gave the orders. What were those orders, its a good starting point and if those orders were the catalyst for retaliation lets hear it. The story is out there but it appears that many are blustering to prevent the truth appearing. One side in this dispute has a long history, not years but decades of suppressing people with extreme violence. The CC of the army has already stated that if an investigation finds the army guilty he will take the blame, cant give you a link on here because not surprisingly this neutral forum does not print such nonsense.

It would be nice if more facts can be made public - at the very least. The country deserves that.

[phiphidon]

... many red shirts in Europe have organized everything for him.

.

http://en.wikipedia....edshirts_(Italy) : The Redshirts gave inspiration to Mussolini to form the Fascist blackshirts units, and from there to Hitler's brownshirted Sturmabteilung (SA) units, as well as the quasi-fascist Irish Blueshirts under Eoin O'Duffy.

http://en.wikipedia....hirt_(character) : A "redshirt" is a stock character in fiction who dies soon after being introduced.

http://en.wikipedia....rting_(academic) : practice of postponing entrance into kindergarten of age-eligible children in order to allow extra time for socioemotional, intellectual, or physical growth.

Is it beyond reasoning that there are many (Thai and Non-Thai) Red Shirt supporters that live outside of Thailand who would be willing to "organize" things? Which does make me wonder <deleted> your post is on about?

[phiphidon]

Agreed. Those orders will have been put in writing and the receivers of those orders would have not carried out those orders without that paper, its called covering your rear end. There is a copy of those orders somewhere. This is simple ask the people in charge, Abhisit and Suthep to produce and follow the chain of command down to the end of the rifle. Maybe we have darker forces dictating those orders and a true transparent investigation would identify those forces (its not that most people dont know who the dark forces are)

You really need to read the HRW report.

There were indeed orders and rules of engagement given to the Army and widely published daily on TV from May 15th to 19th when the heaviest fighting took place.

“When the officers started to cordon the protest areas on 13 May, their instructions were clear. Use of live bullets was limited to three situations only, namely, 1) as warning shots, 2) for self-defense so as to protect the lives of officers and the public when absolutely necessary, and 3) to shoot at clearly identified individuals armed with weapons, who might otherwise cause harm to officers and members of the public.”

There is little doubt that in some instances Army personnel fired on people that were not clearly armed or an immediate threat to their safety. What they did do was use suppressing fire, shooting at the barricades on Rama IV and Din Daeng and at anyone that entered the area between the Army emplacements and the burning tire barricades.

Personally, I do not condone that, but as at least 2 soldiers were killed during this time and many wounded by shooting and grenade attacks, I do understand why they shot at anyone that came anywhere close or became visible behind the burning tire barricades.

Anyone that has been in combat will likely agree, you shoot first and ask questions later. It is easy to criticize such actions after the fact. After all, you weren’t the one that was risking your life to follow orders to set up a perimeter around the main protest site.

TH

"shoot first and ask questions later" - that may well work in a combat zone against enemy troops. I'm not quite as sure as to how that stands up against crowd control of your own civilians let alone "live fire" zones which as far as I am aware have never been designated in such circumstances anywhere else before.

[whybother]

"shoot first and ask questions later" - that may well work in a combat zone against enemy troops. I'm not quite as sure as to how that stands up against crowd control of your own civilians let alone "live fire" zones which as far as I am aware have never been designated in such circumstances anywhere else before.

Do you know of any other similar situations where the authorities have been attacked by men armed with military weapons?

[phiphidon]

"shoot first and ask questions later" - that may well work in a combat zone against enemy troops. I'm not quite as sure as to how that stands up against crowd control of your own civilians let alone "live fire" zones which as far as I am aware have never been designated in such circumstances anywhere else before.

Do you know of any other similar situations where the authorities have been attacked by men armed with military weapons?

Probably the various arab / israeli settler conflicts. Israeli soldiers have been found guilty of using uneccessary force i.e killing unarmed civilians when certainly some of the arabs around them were armed. I can't see why that can not be the case here.

If Abhisit really wanted reconcilliation, amongst other things, he would not have allowed the investigation into the deaths of last year to have dragged on for so long. He would not have claimed through his Security Forces that they did not fire on civilians. He would not have allowed his deputy PM to make so many fatuous claims. He would not have claimed that the the people shot dead at the Temple were shot at ground level. He would not have told the Japanese Ambassador that Murimoto was not killed by his Security forces.

And most of all he wouldn't have sanctioned the use of snipers for crowd control.

He was supposedly educated in one of the UKs finest Universities - and this is what you get?

Edited November 29, 2011 by phiphidon

[yoshiwara]

"shoot first and ask questions later" - that may well work in a combat zone against enemy troops. I'm not quite as sure as to how that stands up against crowd control of your own civilians let alone "live fire" zones which as far as I am aware have never been designated in such circumstances anywhere else before.

Do you know of any other similar situations where the authorities have been attacked by men armed with military weapons?

Probably the various arab / israeli settler conflicts. Israeli soldiers have been found guilty of using uneccessary force i.e killing unarmed civilians when certainly some of the arabs around them were armed. I can't see why that can not be the case here.

If Abhisit really wanted reconcilliation, amongst other things, he would not have allowed the investigation into the deaths of last year to have dragged on for so long. He would not have claimed through his Security Forces that they did not fire on civilians. He would not have allowed his deputy PM to make so many fatuous claims. He would not have claimed that the the people shot dead at the Temple were shot at ground level. He would not have told the Japanese Ambassador that Murimoto was not killed by his Security forces.

And most of all he wouldn't have sanctioned the use of snipers for crowd control.

He was supposedly educated in one of the UKs finest Universities - and this is what you get?

Probably not a good idea comparing the situation in Thailand to that of the Middle East, particularly if your grasp of either place is a bit weak.

[TAWP]

Do you know of any other similar situations where the authorities have been attacked by men armed with military weapons?

Probably the various arab / israeli settler conflicts. Israeli soldiers have been found guilty of using uneccessary force i.e killing unarmed civilians when certainly some of the arabs around them were armed.

'Found guilty'? By the international Court of Jesters and Smurfs? Or some other imaginary institution?

Edited November 29, 2011 by TAWP

[rubl]

Sunai to discuss red-shirt crackdown with judge

THE NATION December 2, 2011 1:00 am

Says it's too early to say whether the case would be taken to the ICC

Pheu Thai Party MP Sunai Jullapongsathorn said yesterday he would consult the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the possibility of Thailand bringing before it the government's deadly crackdown on red-shirt protesters last year, despite the fact that the Kingdom has yet to ratify the Rome statute.

Thailand signed the statute - the treaty that founded the court - in October 2000 during Chuan Leekpai's administration, but has not yet ratified it, Sunai said.

Sunai, who heads the House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee, yesterday consulted with Foreign Minister Surapong Towichukchaikul and senior officials at the Foreign Ministry to explore the possibility of bringing the case before the ICC.

Sunai said he would make a courtesy call on the ICC's chief judge in the Netherlands next week to discuss the case.

Senior officials and legal experts at the ministry would accompany him at his personal expense, he |said.

A military crackdown on red shirts protesting against Abhisit Vejjajiva's government in April and May last year killed 91 people, including some military officers and journalists.

Pheu Thai MP Khattiya Sawasdipol, a daughter of the late Maj-General Khattiya Sawasdipol, who was shot dead during the protest, and overseas-based |supporters of the red shirts are |also interested in the case, Sunai said.

Asked whether the case could be taken to the international court in The Hague, Sunai said, "It's too early to answer the question, since I don't know the law, but I have to do something since the case has made no progress in the Thai justice system.

"Members of the opposition Democrat Party should not have anything to fear if they did nothing wrong," Sunai told reporters.

Opposition Democrat leader Abhisit said yesterday he has not yet received an official summons from the Metropolitan Police Bureau to give his account of the bloody incident.

Former deputy prime minister Suthep Thuagsuban, who was then in charge of security matters, has not received any official letter from the police regarding the case, either, Abhisit said.

"I'm ready to cooperate, but it's very strange that some government politicians and media knew about the [possibility of a] police letter before I did," he said.

Abhisit said the government is trying to link the 91 fatalities with its move to seek amnesty for all parties involved in the political struggle of recent years. Abhisit has said he is opposed to an amnesty designed to benefit individuals.

"I personally disagree with the amnesty since it would not benefit the public or rule of law, but is intended to benefit somebody in particular," he said.

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Promphong Nopparit challenged Abhisit to face justice and take responsibility for the bloody incident.

"As many as 91 people died during Abhisit's government, and the then-prime minister won't take any responsibility?" he said.

-- The Nation 2011-12-02

[rubl]

Too many opportunities to wonder, let us just remark on the last two sentences

Pheu Thai Party spokesman Promphong Nopparit challenged Abhisit to face justice and take responsibility for the bloody incident.

"As many as 91 people died during Abhisit's government, and the then-prime minister won't take any responsibility?" he said.

Please remind me, how many people died during k. Thaksin's government and the then-PM won't take any responsibility?

[webfact]

continue:

Pheu Thai MP Sunai to discuss red-shirt crackdown with ICC judge

Follow this link:

//CLOSED//