'If The Justice System Is Strong, We Will Have Peace,' Chairman Believes: Thailand

[webfact]

EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW

'If the justice system is strong, we will have peace,' chairman believes

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Kanit na Nakorn, chairman of the Truth for Reconciliation Commission, has called for social sanctions against actions deemed to be wrongful. He has urged that reconciliation be achieved over time and according to justice, not dragged down by majority votes, and that the voice of the minority be respected. The justice system, he says, must be strong but efficient.

What is the essence of the committee's third report on reconciliation?

We clearly point out in the report that a reconciliation process takes time and patience from all sides. My committee was established on July 17 two years ago, and at that time [red-shirt leader] Nattawut [saikua] was shackled, which was not right. Our committee believes if suspects pose no flight risk, they should not be shackled. We made the suggestion to the Abhisit government to follow international standards on that aspect.

We also suggested it may not be necessary to detain suspects accused of murder if it is unlikely they will escape to kill witnesses. If they have assets to post bail, they should get bail, even though the law does not say [anything] about this. When suspects are detained, they struggle to get out of jail and this leads to the business of bail posting; there are professional guarantors and companies seeking business interests from them. This problem however can be manageable. Our committee went to Ubon Ratchathani last year and found a family that had to borrow Bt1 million from a loan shark to post bail for a suspect.

The justice procedure is expensive.

Our justice system is inefficient because we cannot bring culprits to justice. Second, the system violates human rights by not giving them bail. If a court gives a verdict that the suspect is innocent, then taxpayers have to foot the bill for rehabilitation. Mistakes in the justice system must be kept to a minimum. Third, the number of our justice officials, police, prosecutors and judges, is higher than in Japan, whereas the Japanese population is double ours. Personnel costs are higher and the state has to cover the cost of feeding 200,000 detainees.

The problem is structural?

When the 1997 Constitution was being drafted, I successfully pushed for the court to issue arrest and search warrants, which were the police's responsibility. I found that our justice system was not efficient because of three bad types of behaviour: first, people who do not take their jobs seriously but only work to pass their days; second, people who are too fearful of their bosses and are afraid to help justice prevail; and third, people who only flatter their bosses.

Your suggestions are not accepted because people who are adversely affected resist changes?

I believe our society is authoritarian. Anything to do with rights and liberty will come last. When we do not give importance to this, there is injustice in society.

Justice procedures can help bring about reconciliation.

A strong justice procedure can prevent a coup. Every time there is a coup, they cite corruption. For instance at Suvarnabhumi, I still follow corruption cases up till today - but I see nothing. Who can cite corruption, if we can manage it?

Coups bring about conflict.

If our justice system is strong, we can get rid of mafias, the country will be in peace. Don Mueang had a problem of parking lots. If Suvarnabhumi can manage the problem, the country is in peace. The justice system of a developed country is strong.

Expunging cases pursued by the Assets Examination Committee means our justice system is weak.

I do not want to get into politics. I speak only as a matter of principle. We have problems with law and legal officials. We amend laws only to increase punishment and never to improve the justice procedures. Our committee finds truth not to punish but to publicise what is right and wrong.

What should politicians do?

Germany is developed because its House committee chairmen come from a minority camp. The majority must respect the minority. I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree, which should be used only for emergency issues.

What is your view on discussing reconciliation in the House?

To bring about peace, we must [practise] high justice and every process must take time.

What could spark the next conflict?

I believe every sector of society is highly aware of the country's problems. It is not easy to do something nonsensical.

What is the committee's suggestion for preventing conflict?

I wonder if our society gives pardons too easily.

Can giving a pardon for a wrongdoing and reconciliation go together?

We must fight against bad deeds. I never invite competent lawyers to teach my students if they have a bad name.

What should the public do?

They must exercise social sanctions.

What effect can social sanctions have if legislation is done only in Parliament?

Look at Japanese prime ministers - they quit if they think things don't look good. The majority must respect the minority voice.

-- The Nation 2012-04-09

[swifty5x5]

It must of lost something in the translation.

[exeter]

Law , order and justice are the bedrock of what any society should be based on. Sounds good now the problem is that everyone has to agree and not look for excemption from the parts that could get in the way of "my" grand plan.

[gregb]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

[MEL1]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

And what was the response to your metaphorical truth?

-mel.

[phiphidon]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

What a ridiculous analogy.

[Insight]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

What a ridiculous analogy.

How so?

So do you believe that obtaining a majority vote places you above the law?

[FOODLOVER]

Smeagal has a point, but he is conflicted. Ask Frodo. I'm sure the "Precious" incident is still fresh in his mind.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

Justice beholden to majority vote.

...

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

I agree that Thailand doesn't have it and IMO won't get it within the lifetime of anyone reading this.

He that has the gold makes the rules, and in this case the real gold is public opinion. Civil war is only on the table if the opposition continues to insist on the continuation of results from their coup. If they simply give in and let Thaksin return, let the country go back to business as usual everyone will be better off.

Then over time they can figure out how to build a platform that will cause the disenfrachised poor to love them more than Thaksin, spend the money required on marketing and buying votes and buy the country back fair and square by outbidding Thaksin.

Their problem is that they feel they already "own" the country by right, have the "right" to rule just because they are the elite that knows better. They don't realize the cat's out of the bag, the ultimate owners of the country's political power are becoming empowered and any elite that wants power will just have to knuckle down and start providing bread and circuses for the common people just like they do in the so-called democratic west.

IMO that was Thaksin's real crime, making the poor realize they can have an impact on which corrupt elite mafia network rules over them.

[WackySomchai]

There will be no reconcillation until the rule of law is upheld and all criminals are behind bars incl. redshirts, yellowshirts and the fugitive.

[drdoom6996]

But the justice system is not strong when all people with money or power can do what they want when they want without reprocussions.

[geriatrickid]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

Your logic is defective. You equate a crime of violence directed at a person with the current political context. You are suggesting that thaksin raped Thailand. nice rhetoric, but the act is impossible. If you call wish to accuse him of financial crimes, just say so. However, your argument then makes reference to thaksin returning the money to the people.

This brings to mind Robin Hood. Are you saying that Thaksin was a modern day quasi Robin Hood?

[geriatrickid]

There will be no reconcillation until the rule of law is upheld and all criminals are behind bars incl. redshirts, yellowshirts andthe fugitive.

that would require fair trials wouldn't it? I am all in favour.

[Insight]

IMO that was Thaksin's real crime, making the poor realize they can have an impact on which corrupt elite mafia network rules over them.

Thaksin's *real crime*, the start of where all the countries current problems can be accurately pointed back to, was his sale of AIS to Temasek and his modifications of the law to ensure he obtained maximum profits. An achievement he subsequently boasted about.

It wasn't the "elite" being jealous and/or weary about his support. This is a myth perpetuated by red shirt supporters and PR groups as an attempt to legitimise his actions. Why is it a myth? Because the very people the Thaksin PR side claim were jealous/weary of his support actually voted for him during the 2005 elections, securing his final election victory before the sale of AIS was complete (and even public knowledge at the time). These elections occurred after the implementation of his "populist policies" which were supposed to have driven the very powerful "elite" people who voted for him away.

If the sale of AIS was completed before he became PM, or it was handled in a more transparent and fair manor, there would of been no PAD protests, no coup and none of the red-shirt instigated chaos we've seen over the years since.

[Thai at Heart]

IMO that was Thaksin's real crime, making the poor realize they can have an impact on which corrupt elite mafia network rules over them.

Thaksin's *real crime*, the start of where all the countries current problems can be accurately pointed back to, was his sale of AIS to Temasek and his modifications of the law to ensure he obtained maximum profits. An achievement he subsequently boasted about.

It wasn't the "elite" being jealous and/or weary about his support. This is a myth perpetuated by red shirt supporters and PR groups as an attempt to legitimise his actions. Why is it a myth? Because the very people the Thaksin PR side claim were jealous/weary of his support actually voted for him during the 2005 elections, securing his final election victory before the sale of AIS was complete (and even public knowledge at the time). These elections occurred after the implementation of his "populist policies" which were supposed to have driven the very powerful "elite" people who voted for him away.

If the sale of AIS was completed before he became PM, or it was handled in a more transparent and fair manor, there would of been no PAD protests, no coup and none of the red-shirt instigated chaos we've seen over the years since.

There is a tacit understanding among the wealthy of Bangkok though that they play the business game along of the lines of keeping foreigners out. They keep the governments in line about this issue, do their business and largely pay their due taxes. By this I am talking the very large conglomerates. They pay their dues in return for protection from the big wide world market. Thaksin had an enormous problem, he had a technology company that needed a ton of new money to upgrade itself, and he didn't want to keep it. What to do? Sell to whom? CP already had a phone company, the richest in Thailand weren't interested, so sell to whom? The only option was overseas.

Now you can wonder about the details, but the financial industry was slated for some kind of reform within 10 years of the IMF deal in 1997, and it never came, but Thaksin did issue a new license to L&H bank, and after seeing what he did with AIS, I think this really put the cat among the pigeons. Just look at how CP was with him, but rapidly slinked off into the shadows. He scared the bejeesus out of them by appearing to start to dismantle the very protections that had made them all billionaires, just in the same way that the IMF deals and the reform of the telecoms opened him up to competition.

Basically he took his company as far as he wanted and flogged it, but the blue rinsed Tatler brigade of Bangkok were very much caught out by this and realised that if he kept going, the farang companies were going to be on their doorstep pretty quickly and the days of monopoly profit on ATM transfers and continually manipulating rice markets and the such were going to be long gone. So they canned him forthwith, but unfortunately, never landed the knock out punch, so expect some pretty big payback when he finally gets back in here.

[WackySomchai]

There will be no reconcillation until the rule of law is upheld and all criminals are behind bars incl. redshirts, yellowshirts andthe fugitive.

that would require fair trials wouldn't it? I am all in favour.

Yes, no more pastry boxes from Dubai allowed ...

[WackySomchai]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

Your logic is defective. You equate a crime of violence directed at a person with the current political context. You are suggesting that thaksin raped Thailand. nice rhetoric, but the act is impossible. If you call wish to accuse him of financial crimes, just say so. However, your argument then makes reference to thaksin returning the money to the people.

This brings to mind Robin Hood. Are you saying that Thaksin was a modern day quasi Robin Hood?

The fugitive is doing much worse than raping Thailand and his 'ambitions' can only be compared with other mad dictators through world history.

[smutcakes]

IMO that was Thaksin's real crime, making the poor realize they can have an impact on which corrupt elite mafia network rules over them.

Thaksin's *real crime*, the start of where all the countries current problems can be accurately pointed back to, was his sale of AIS to Temasek and his modifications of the law to ensure he obtained maximum profits. An achievement he subsequently boasted about.

It wasn't the "elite" being jealous and/or weary about his support. This is a myth perpetuated by red shirt supporters and PR groups as an attempt to legitimise his actions. Why is it a myth? Because the very people the Thaksin PR side claim were jealous/weary of his support actually voted for him during the 2005 elections, securing his final election victory before the sale of AIS was complete (and even public knowledge at the time). These elections occurred after the implementation of his "populist policies" which were supposed to have driven the very powerful "elite" people who voted for him away.

If the sale of AIS was completed before he became PM, or it was handled in a more transparent and fair manor, there would of been no PAD protests, no coup and none of the red-shirt instigated chaos we've seen over the years since.

How nice to know that all the issues started really because the PAD, Sonthi, the army generals were all so outraged at the corruption. Makes you wonder how corruption in this country is still so rife given the above powerful parties are going to hold coups, political protests etc in trying to eradicate it. Its as if that before TS there was no corruption and everyone was so outraged and shocked by his, that the army and whichever other figures just had to act out of moral outrage and the audacity of the man to do a corruption

Whilst that would be nice to believe, i would wager that jelousy of his personal success (legal and illegal) and genuine worry for protecting their future/money was the real reason behind the issues.

[RigPig]

The system (corruption) is too endemic now and repairing it would take a revolution. The police have too much power here and you have no recourse without suffering some consequenses. They need to start with the basics first. Policemen not wearing helmets when riding their bikes, lead by example. If a policeman in our countries was blatently seen thumbing his nose at the law it would make every newspaper in the country. The Farang is always guilty. The police decide these things and innocent or not you have no recourse. If they say you caused the accident and you know you didn't if you stick to your guns you are likely to wait in the police lock up until a court case can be arranged. This could be indefinate.

How can you fix the big things when you can't fix the small things. We all know of someone who has been "wronged" by the law here. The police's job is not to make the law but to uphold it, fairly. Thais have no respect for the law whatsoever and it is no surprise.

Yeah it's great to be able to slip someone a few baht to get what you want but it is a double edged sword and you can't have your cake and eat it. I would be a lier if I said I hadn't done it. Personally I would rather see it go the other way. I like to know where I stand and not leave thing s up to chance and who paid the most first.

Unfortunately these things start at the top of the tree not the bottom. It will never happen, but until it does Thai society and the peoples rights will always be compromised.

I guess we just accept it for what it is and just "play the game" or move on. The problem with that is we also then become part of the problem.

My 2 cents worth

[MEL1]

The system (corruption) is too endemic now and repairing it would take a revolution. The police have too much power here and you have no recourse without suffering some consequenses. They need to start with the basics first. Policemen not wearing helmets when riding their bikes, lead by example. If a policeman in our countries was blatently seen thumbing his nose at the law it would make every newspaper in the country. The Farang is always guilty. The police decide these things and innocent or not you have no recourse. If they say you caused the accident and you know you didn't if you stick to your guns you are likely to wait in the police lock up until a court case can be arranged. This could be indefinate.

How can you fix the big things when you can't fix the small things. We all know of someone who has been "wronged" by the law here. The police's job is not to make the law but to uphold it, fairly. Thais have no respect for the law whatsoever and it is no surprise.

Yeah it's great to be able to slip someone a few baht to get what you want but it is a double edged sword and you can't have your cake and eat it. I would be a lier if I said I hadn't done it. Personally I would rather see it go the other way. I like to know where I stand and not leave thing s up to chance and who paid the most first.

Unfortunately these things start at the top of the tree not the bottom. It will never happen, but until it does Thai society and the peoples rights will always be compromised.

I guess we just accept it for what it is and just "play the game" or move on. The problem with that is we also then become part of the problem.

My 2 cents worth

Last time I got stopped by BIB for alledgedly speeding, even though he didn't have a radar gun but simply saw a farang driving a car, he asked me for 1,700 baht. I said to him you're having a larrfff, in Thai. He reduced his price to 800 Bhat when he knew I spoke Thai.

I asked him for the ticket, and that I'd like to duly pay it at the relevant police station to his superior.

Guess what??

Hum......

I went on my way!

-mel.

[Insight]

How nice to know that all the issues started really because the PAD, Sonthi, the army generals were all so outraged at the corruption. Makes you wonder how corruption in this country is still so rife given the above powerful parties are going to hold coups, political protests etc in trying to eradicate it. Its as if that before TS there was no corruption and everyone was so outraged and shocked by his, that the army and whichever other figures just had to act out of moral outrage and the audacity of the man to do a corruption

Whilst that would be nice to believe, i would wager that jelousy of his personal success (legal and illegal) and genuine worry for protecting their future/money was the real reason behind the issues.

So people should sit back and accept a prime minister who triples his own personal wealth during his term by modifying laws and storing the gains in off-shore bank accounts, simply because the people opposing him may or may not of been involved in some level of corruption before...

I suppose because of this every attempt of Thaksin to subvert the law and avoid the charges against him since is also justified...?

You don't have to be the person mentioned in the OP to realise that the attitude of "they done it (maybe), so I can to" is completely unsustainable, and the further this circus continues, the more apparent it becomes that Thaksin is probably the last man in Thailand who will be willing to challenge it in any way - for very obvious reasons.

[OzMick]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

Your logic is defective. You equate a crime of violence directed at a person with the current political context. You are suggesting that thaksin raped Thailand. nice rhetoric, but the act is impossible. If you call wish to accuse him of financial crimes, just say so. However, your argument then makes reference to thaksin returning the money to the people.

This brings to mind Robin Hood. Are you saying that Thaksin was a modern day quasi Robin Hood?

And organising and financing the red shirt insurgence wasn't a crime of violence? How about the "let's kill a druggie" campaign?

[phiphidon]

IMO that was Thaksin's real crime, making the poor realize they can have an impact on which corrupt elite mafia network rules over them.

Thaksin's *real crime*, the start of where all the countries current problems can be accurately pointed back to, was his sale of AIS to Temasek and his modifications of the law to ensure he obtained maximum profits. An achievement he subsequently boasted about.

It wasn't the "elite" being jealous and/or weary about his support. This is a myth perpetuated by red shirt supporters and PR groups as an attempt to legitimise his actions. Why is it a myth? Because the very people the Thaksin PR side claim were jealous/weary of his support actually voted for him during the 2005 elections, securing his final election victory before the sale of AIS was complete (and even public knowledge at the time). These elections occurred after the implementation of his "populist policies" which were supposed to have driven the very powerful "elite" people who voted for him away.

If the sale of AIS was completed before he became PM, or it was handled in a more transparent and fair manor, there would of been no PAD protests, no coup and none of the red-shirt instigated chaos we've seen over the years since.

There is a tacit understanding among the wealthy of Bangkok though that they play the business game along of the lines of keeping foreigners out. They keep the governments in line about this issue, do their business and largely pay their due taxes. By this I am talking the very large conglomerates. They pay their dues in return for protection from the big wide world market. Thaksin had an enormous problem, he had a technology company that needed a ton of new money to upgrade itself, and he didn't want to keep it. What to do? Sell to whom? CP already had a phone company, the richest in Thailand weren't interested, so sell to whom? The only option was overseas.

Now you can wonder about the details, but the financial industry was slated for some kind of reform within 10 years of the IMF deal in 1997, and it never came, but Thaksin did issue a new license to L&H bank, and after seeing what he did with AIS, I think this really put the cat among the pigeons. Just look at how CP was with him, but rapidly slinked off into the shadows. He scared the bejeesus out of them by appearing to start to dismantle the very protections that had made them all billionaires, just in the same way that the IMF deals and the reform of the telecoms opened him up to competition.

Basically he took his company as far as he wanted and flogged it, but the blue rinsed Tatler brigade of Bangkok were very much caught out by this and realised that if he kept going, the farang companies were going to be on their doorstep pretty quickly and the days of monopoly profit on ATM transfers and continually manipulating rice markets and the such were going to be long gone. So they canned him forthwith, but unfortunately, never landed the knock out punch, so expect some pretty big payback when he finally gets back in here.

Nobody seemed to take much notice when the Bencharongkul family sold DTAC to Norway (retaining 9% in a nominee holding company) in a similar way that Thaksin sold AIS. It could have been investigated under the foreign nominee holdings act but wasn't, didn't comply with foreign dominance regs and as far as I'm aware, still doesn't.

Boonchai Bencharongkul is above Shiniwatra in the Forbes 2011 list.

[Insight]

Nobody seemed to take much notice when the Bencharongkul family sold DTAC to Norway (retaining 9% in a nominee holding company) in a similar way that Thaksin sold AIS. It could have been investigated under the foreign nominee holdings act but wasn't, didn't comply with foreign dominance regs and as far as I'm aware, still doesn't.

Boonchai Bencharongkul is above Shiniwatra in the Forbes 2011 list.

Boonchai Bencharongkul... hmmm... When was he PM?

[silsburyhill]

The system (corruption) is too endemic now and repairing it would take a revolution. The police have too much power here and you have no recourse without suffering some consequenses. They need to start with the basics first. Policemen not wearing helmets when riding their bikes, lead by example. If a policeman in our countries was blatently seen thumbing his nose at the law it would make every newspaper in the country. The Farang is always guilty. The police decide these things and innocent or not you have no recourse. If they say you caused the accident and you know you didn't if you stick to your guns you are likely to wait in the police lock up until a court case can be arranged. This could be indefinate.

How can you fix the big things when you can't fix the small things. We all know of someone who has been "wronged" by the law here. The police's job is not to make the law but to uphold it, fairly. Thais have no respect for the law whatsoever and it is no surprise.

Yeah it's great to be able to slip someone a few baht to get what you want but it is a double edged sword and you can't have your cake and eat it. I would be a lier if I said I hadn't done it. Personally I would rather see it go the other way. I like to know where I stand and not leave thing s up to chance and who paid the most first.

Unfortunately these things start at the top of the tree not the bottom. It will never happen, but until it does Thai society and the peoples rights will always be compromised.

I guess we just accept it for what it is and just "play the game" or move on. The problem with that is we also then become part of the problem.

My 2 cents worth

We often seem to post re corruption in this country as though it were only noticed/cared about by the expat contingent. There have been recent elections here on Phuket with the usual smiley posters of potential plunderers being paraded around the streets. However, one caught me eye very recently, a roadside poster of some close cropped young guy dressed in what looked like a Thai schoolboy shirt three quarter seated profile sans the ubiquitous 'smile', with the word 'CHANGE' in big caps above the Thai script.

It should be remembered that the majority of the local population are tired of this 'who has the most money' system and are perhaps are at long last attempting to do something about it, albeit announcing the idea with a copied Obama slogan, in typical Thai fashion. Yes we are are rightfully cynical, but I wish them luck. They're going to need it.

Edited April 9, 2012 by silsburyhill

[phiphidon]

Nobody seemed to take much notice when the Bencharongkul family sold DTAC to Norway (retaining 9% in a nominee holding company) in a similar way that Thaksin sold AIS. It could have been investigated under the foreign nominee holdings act but wasn't, didn't comply with foreign dominance regs and as far as I'm aware, still doesn't.

Boonchai Bencharongkul is above Shiniwatra in the Forbes 2011 list.

Boonchai Bencharongkul... hmmm... When was he PM?

So the law only applies to Prime Ministers? Try reading this in context with the post I quoted , Thai at Hearts post and you will see that this gentleman was one of those who benefit from the status quo that existed/exists after Thaksin was ousted. An example of the Amart if you wish but his family wasn't touched.

[anterian]

Nobody seemed to take much notice when the Bencharongkul family sold DTAC to Norway (retaining 9% in a nominee holding company) in a similar way that Thaksin sold AIS. It could have been investigated under the foreign nominee holdings act but wasn't, didn't comply with foreign dominance regs and as far as I'm aware, still doesn't.

Boonchai Bencharongkul is above Shiniwatra in the Forbes 2011 list.

Boonchai Bencharongkul... hmmm... When was he PM?

You don't need to be PM when you are rich enough to buy him.

[Insight]

Nobody seemed to take much notice when the Bencharongkul family sold DTAC to Norway (retaining 9% in a nominee holding company) in a similar way that Thaksin sold AIS. It could have been investigated under the foreign nominee holdings act but wasn't, didn't comply with foreign dominance regs and as far as I'm aware, still doesn't.

Boonchai Bencharongkul is above Shiniwatra in the Forbes 2011 list.

Boonchai Bencharongkul... hmmm... When was he PM?

So the law only applies to Prime Ministers? Try reading this in context with the post I quoted , Thai at Hearts post and you will see that this gentleman was one of those who benefit from the status quo that existed/exists after Thaksin was ousted. An example of the Amart if you wish but his family wasn't touched.

Well if people at the top can't follow the law - never mind promote it - there's very little chance of much of a trickle-down effect.

That said, I wonder why Team Thaksin didn't highlight this case specifically during their "duben stan tat" campaign? If he is as guilty as Thaksin I would have no problems whatsoever with any attempt to put him behind bars. However, instead Team Thaksin chose to focus on some petty land encroachment issues involving some privy councilors, while hypocritically ignoring larger, more renowned cases such as The Alpine Golf Course encroachment. Probably because they'll implicate themselves. Yet again.

[gregb]

I have never seen any country amend criminal law through emergency decree

What a classic line, summing up the absurdity of the current Thai political scene. Justice beholden to majority vote. I have pointed this out many times to people not only on this forum, but to my Thai friends also and to my wife's family in the village: if I rape your daughter, but give 51% of the people free stuff so they like me, does that mean the rape of your daughter was democracy?

Rule of law is the very basis of democracy, and Thailand doesn't have it. Voting is irrelevant until it can be established. Otherwise, you get the abomination we have today, which is leading nowhere but civil war.

Your logic is defective. You equate a crime of violence directed at a person with the current political context. You are suggesting that thaksin raped Thailand. nice rhetoric, but the act is impossible. If you call wish to accuse him of financial crimes, just say so. However, your argument then makes reference to thaksin returning the money to the people.

This brings to mind Robin Hood. Are you saying that Thaksin was a modern day quasi Robin Hood?

So let me get this straight...you are agreeing with me? You can't fault the logic at all? Your only meagre comeback is that the particular crime I chose to illustrate my point is, in your opinion, not an equivalent act?

OK. How about if I changed the crime from rape to theft of all your possessions leaving your family to starve to death? Now that is exactly equivalent to what Thaksin did to me. (For the purposes of this discussion, we will ignore the fact that I feel raped by what he did to my family and therefore I disagree with even your small point.) So, since you can no longer criticize the crime, am I correct in assuming you agree with me?

[Thai at Heart]

Nobody seemed to take much notice when the Bencharongkul family sold DTAC to Norway (retaining 9% in a nominee holding company) in a similar way that Thaksin sold AIS. It could have been investigated under the foreign nominee holdings act but wasn't, didn't comply with foreign dominance regs and as far as I'm aware, still doesn't.

Boonchai Bencharongkul is above Shiniwatra in the Forbes 2011 list.

Boonchai Bencharongkul... hmmm... When was he PM?

So the law only applies to Prime Ministers? Try reading this in context with the post I quoted , Thai at Hearts post and you will see that this gentleman was one of those who benefit from the status quo that existed/exists after Thaksin was ousted. An example of the Amart if you wish but his family wasn't touched.

Well, not knowing the exact share structures it is very difficult to compare, but Forbes lists him at 275mn USD, a far cry from 2bn, and it appears that the laws were changed to allow Temasek/Singtel to own a greater amount of shares in their names directly instead of the use for nominees. Presumably Temasak wanted an increased amount, so the law got changed. As for the issue not being raised, within a few days of the coup, the papers were full of stories about DTAC, Tesco, Holcim and a few others.

As for why fingers get pointed at some and not others, well that is not for me to decide, but I would imagine it is largely down to whether the powers that be believe you are playing by the overall "rules" of making sure that certain industries stay out of the "control" of foreigners, or an even worse statement "in the country's interests".