Ministry 'studying' Ombudsman's Take On Thaksin Passport Issue

[webfact]

Ministry 'studying' Ombudsman's take on Thaksin passport issue

Nuntida Puangthong,

Attaphum Aungkulna

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Foreign Ministry is studying the Office of the Ombudsman's recommendation that former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's passport be revoked, and will handle the case in accordance with laws and regulations, permanent secretary Sihasak Phuangketkeow said yesterday.

Thaksin's passport re-emerged as a hot issue last week when the Ombudsman advised that the issuing of a Thai passport to the fugitive former premier, who fled a court verdict in 2008, was illegal. The Ombudsman recommended that the Foreign Ministry review its decision to issue the passport.

The ministry would reply to the Ombudsman once concerned agencies within the ministry have completed their study of the issue, Sihasak said.

"We will do everything in accordance with the laws and regulations," he said.

Thaksin's Thai passport was revoked by then foreign minister Kasit Piromya in April 2009. The current minister, Surapong Towichukchaikul, issued Thaksin a new one in October last year via the Thai Embassy in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

Kasit revoked Thaksin's regular passport under Article 23 (7) of the ministry's regulations on the grounds that his stay abroad might hurt the country's interests. Thaksin was accused of manipulating the red-shirt protests from overseas. Surapong revoked Kasit's order and approved the issuance of a passport to Thaksin because his government did not consider the former premier's activities abroad as a threat to the country.

Opposition Democrat MP Nipit Intarasombat of Phatthalung yesterday challenged Surapong to explain the legal basis for issuing a new passport to Thaksin, saying the minister had cited the same law as Kasit.

The previous Democrat Party-led government had no policy to issue a passport to any fugitive from prosecution, Nipit said. "It's impossible to invoke the same clause [of the ministry's regulations] to return a passport to Thaksin," he said.

In view of the Ombudsman's decision, Nipit said, Surapong had only one option: to revoke Thaksin's passport, otherwise the minister could be prosecuted for violating Article 157 of the criminal code, which prescribes 20 years of imprisonment for officials who abuse their power.

Another Democrat MP, Wirat Kanlayasiri of Songkhla, said his party would take legal action against Surapong over the matter soon.

Thaksin's legal adviser Noppadon Pattama said the Foreign Ministry had done nothing illegal. It was Kasit's termination of Thaksin's passport that was illegal, the adviser said, as the action was politically motivated.

The Ombudsman should consider the case neutrally, rather than taking sides with the Democrats, who have a strategy to hunt Thaksin, he said. The Ombudsman has no authority to instruct the Foreign Ministry to take or not take any action; rather, it can simply offer legal advice, he said. If such advice is wrong or illegal, the concerned agency has the right to reject it, Noppadon said.

-- The Nation 2012-09-17

[jerrysteve]

THE Thais do have some deep seated issues

[MaiChai]

How would other countries deal with a convicted fellon who had skipped jail, broken a condition to go abroad and then turn up at a consulate to apply for a new passport? Surely he would be arrested and kept at the consulate, and then later taken back to his country on a one way temporary passport and back to jail?

[ezflip]

In any other country, an ombudsman would be a voice of reason and carefull consideration would be taken but, in Thailand, he or she has about the same power as my next door neighboor who thinks that we should all be wearing tin foil hats to block brain wave scanners.

[Buchholz]

Opposition Democrat MP Nipit Intarasombat of Phatthalung yesterday challenged Surapong to explain the legal basis for issuing a new passport to Thaksin, saying the minister had cited the same law as Kasit.

The previous Democrat Party-led government had no policy to issue a passport to any fugitive from prosecution, Nipit said. "It's impossible to invoke the same clause [of the ministry's regulations] to return a passport to Thaksin," he said.

Pheu Thai logic

to revoke Thaksin's passport, otherwise the minister could be prosecuted for violating Article 157 of the criminal code, which prescribes 20 years of imprisonment for officials who abuse their power.

Reflects the extreme at what a family member is willing to do for another.

.

[moe666]

O well another day in paradise

[Thai at Heart]

With the amount of people who have gone into "voluntary" exile over the years, I really wouldn't be surprised if there is precedent somewhere for issuing people with un"punished" criminal records new passports.

[alstaxi]

Certain that a new Ombudsman is coming soon, one with a different definition of convicted , on the run , scum bag.

[jerrysteve]

What is there to Decide ? What is there to Study? EHER Extradite or Don't. We all know what western countries would do.

Western would of had him extradited, handcuffed, on a plane, and back into his own country in a heart beat; faster than stink on poop!

As a matter of fact, he wouldn't have had a ghost of a chance boarding an 747 out of the country to begin with.

[OzMick]

How would other countries deal with a convicted fellon who had skipped jail, broken a condition to go abroad and then turn up at a consulate to apply for a new passport? Surely he would be arrested and kept at the consulate, and then later taken back to his country on a one way temporary passport and back to jail?

Not sure this is correct. Consul not having arrest powers, would arrange to issue emergency travel documentation valid only for use to to return home.

It seems Surapong destined to join the ranks of charged criminals in this government. Are they trying for the Guinness book of Records?

[Thaddeus]

How would other countries deal with a convicted fellon who had skipped jail, broken a condition to go abroad and then turn up at a consulate to apply for a new passport? Surely he would be arrested and kept at the consulate, and then later taken back to his country on a one way temporary passport and back to jail?

Not sure this is correct. Consul not having arrest powers, would arrange to issue emergency travel documentation valid only for use to to return home.

It seems Surapong destined to join the ranks of charged criminals in this government. Are they trying for the Guinness book of Records?

Chinless Book of Records would be more apt, the soft spine edition.

[Baerboxer]

Opposition Democrat MP Nipit Intarasombat of Phatthalung yesterday challenged Surapong to explain the legal basis for issuing a new passport to Thaksin, saying the minister had cited the same law as Kasit.

The previous Democrat Party-led government had no policy to issue a passport to any fugitive from prosecution, Nipit said. "It's impossible to invoke the same clause [of the ministry's regulations] to return a passport to Thaksin," he said.

Pheu Thai logic

to revoke Thaksin's passport, otherwise the minister could be prosecuted for violating Article 157 of the criminal code, which prescribes 20 years of imprisonment for officials who abuse their power.

Reflects the extreme at what a family member is willing to do for another.

.

The logic does seem to be that as the "democratically elected goverment" they can do what they want. Keep it in the family where possible for sure too. Don't worry about minor details like the consitiution or existing laws - you can just change it to suit.

[lounger]

To find a reference point I looked up the UK parallel. I think (and am not sure) that being a citizen is marked by holding a passport.

"British nationals could be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied they are responsible for acts seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or an Overseas Territory.

So if my line of thought is correct then assuming Thai law is similar to UK law Thaksin is probably entitled to his passport unless it can be proven that his activities are prejudicial to .......Thailand.

The alternative would be that he is banished; a status hardly consistent with the Thai claims to get him back into Thailand and into jail.

[OzMick]

To find a reference point I looked up the UK parallel. I think (and am not sure) that being a citizen is marked by holding a passport.

"British nationals could be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied they are responsible for acts seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or an Overseas Territory.

So if my line of thought is correct then assuming Thai law is similar to UK law Thaksin is probably entitled to his passport unless it can be proven that his activities are prejudicial to .......Thailand.

The alternative would be that he is banished; a status hardly consistent with the Thai claims to get him back into Thailand and into jail.

You can be a citizen but be denied a passport. Don't confuse the 2 issues.

[Thai at Heart]

To find a reference point I looked up the UK parallel. I think (and am not sure) that being a citizen is marked by holding a passport.

"British nationals could be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied they are responsible for acts seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or an Overseas Territory.

So if my line of thought is correct then assuming Thai law is similar to UK law Thaksin is probably entitled to his passport unless it can be proven that his activities are prejudicial to .......Thailand.

The alternative would be that he is banished; a status hardly consistent with the Thai claims to get him back into Thailand and into jail.

You can be a citizen but be denied a passport. Don't confuse the 2 issues.

Precisely. How you can issue a passport to a fugitive is absolutely crazy.

[chotthee]

How would other countries deal with a convicted fellon who had skipped jail, broken a condition to go abroad and then turn up at a consulate to apply for a new passport? Surely he would be arrested and kept at the consulate, and then later taken back to his country on a one way temporary passport and back to jail?

Go ask USA.

Why bar girls get no visa while a convicted fellon who had skipped jail, broken a condition to go abroad and ....

Edited September 17, 2012 by chotthee

[Nickymaster]

Opposition Democrat MP Nipit Intarasombat of Phatthalung yesterday challenged Surapong to explain the legal basis for issuing a new passport to Thaksin, saying the minister had cited the same law as Kasit.

The previous Democrat Party-led government had no policy to issue a passport to any fugitive from prosecution, Nipit said. "It's impossible to invoke the same clause [of the ministry's regulations] to return a passport to Thaksin," he said.

Pheu Thai logic

to revoke Thaksin's passport, otherwise the minister could be prosecuted for violating Article 157 of the criminal code, which prescribes 20 years of imprisonment for officials who abuse their power.

Reflects the extreme at what a family member is willing to do for another.

.

The logic does seem to be that as the "democratically elected goverment" they can do what they want. Keep it in the family where possible for sure too. Don't worry about minor details like the consitiution or existing laws - you can just change it to suit.

I bet you Thaksin must be jealous at his eternal friend Hun Sen who doesn't have all the headaches of laws that have to be followed and all those people advising/telling him what to do.

[indyuk]

Why can't Thai politions accept an elected leader? It is simple really often in the past the prime minister was appointed by persons unknown to the electorate. One such leader, him too allegedly in disgrace for the mismanagement of a demonstration that resulted in some deaths. He was ejected yet some years later appointed prime minister again.

The name of the game in Thailand was always sedition which came back into play when many Hi So politicians struggled to find ways to get rid of him (Taksin). In the end they usually succeeded. It appears to have been a classic case of sedition. Of course the men responsible to the supposed conspiracy must have closed the jaws of the sedition in the deep south of Thailand. If true all persons involved in Taksin's removal will have to be put on trial as part of the truth and reconciliation process.

Edited September 17, 2012 by indyuk

[Thai at Heart]

Why can't Thai politions accept an elected leader? It is simple really often in the past the prime minister was appointed by persons unknown to the electorate. One such leader, him too allegedly in disgrace for the mismanagement of a demonstration that resulted in some deaths. He was ejected yet some years later appointed prime minister again.

The name of the game in Thailand was always sedition which came back into play when many Hi So politicians struggled to find ways to get rid of him (Taksin). In the end they usually succeeded. It appears to have been a classic case of sedition. Of course the men responsible to the supposed conspiracy must have closed the jaws of the sedition in the deep south of Thailand. If true all persons involved in Taksin's removal will have to be put on trial as part of the truth and reconciliation process.

But he broke the law, no matter how stupid you can say the law was, the judgement may have been, the process flawed, on and on and on, the reality is that he was convicted.

I don't like coups either, but over turning court judgements for one person is absolutely no way to proceed.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Thai at Heart

[easybullet3]

go Go Go !! cancel that passport and lets see how corruptly he manages to get it re-issued !

[dude007]

Amazing how many forum members share the same opinion: a striking majority seems to know well this convicted criminal who is the sole reason of the hopelessly splitted Thai Nation. Do the Thais realise well what damage this populist Shinawatra and his family have done to the country? Pre-Sihanwatra Thailand will never come back again, never ever...

[dude007]

Why can't Thai politions accept an elected leader? It is simple really often in the past the prime minister was appointed by persons unknown to the electorate. One such leader, him too allegedly in disgrace for the mismanagement of a demonstration that resulted in some deaths. He was ejected yet some years later appointed prime minister again.

The name of the game in Thailand was always sedition which came back into play when many Hi So politicians struggled to find ways to get rid of him (Taksin). In the end they usually succeeded. It appears to have been a classic case of sedition. Of course the men responsible to the supposed conspiracy must have closed the jaws of the sedition in the deep south of Thailand. If true all persons involved in Taksin's removal will have to be put on trial as part of the truth and reconciliation process.

But he broke the law, no matter how stupid you can say the law was, the judgement may have been, the process flawed, on and on and on, the reality is that he was convicted.

I don't like coups either, but over turning court judgements for one person is absolutely no way to proceed.

Even worse: this family-Government and its red shirt terrorists are ready to change the constitution for a convincted criminal. Can you see the post-Thaksin period already how many political criminals can use this trick to be a free man again? If you have the majority in the Government, simply change the law, even the constitution....

Edited September 17, 2012 by dude007

[Thai at Heart]

Why can't Thai politions accept an elected leader? It is simple really often in the past the prime minister was appointed by persons unknown to the electorate. One such leader, him too allegedly in disgrace for the mismanagement of a demonstration that resulted in some deaths. He was ejected yet some years later appointed prime minister again.

The name of the game in Thailand was always sedition which came back into play when many Hi So politicians struggled to find ways to get rid of him (Taksin). In the end they usually succeeded. It appears to have been a classic case of sedition. Of course the men responsible to the supposed conspiracy must have closed the jaws of the sedition in the deep south of Thailand. If true all persons involved in Taksin's removal will have to be put on trial as part of the truth and reconciliation process.

But he broke the law, no matter how stupid you can say the law was, the judgement may have been, the process flawed, on and on and on, the reality is that he was convicted.

I don't like coups either, but over turning court judgements for one person is absolutely no way to proceed.

Even worse: this family-Government and its red shirt terrorists are ready to change the constitution for a convincted criminal. Can you see the post-Thaksin period already how many political criminals can use this trick to be a free man again? If you have the majority in the Government, simply change the law, even the constitution....

Well the issue goes way deeper than that. If they can carry out a root and branch reform of the legal system so that it can start to make impartial, non political judgements.

If the army can start to play by the rules and they can work our what exactly the political role of the privy council should be, maybe he can come back someday and be pardoned.

There are dozens of dirty hands in this whole mess, thaksins just a big focal point in far deeper long term problems in the country.

In reality, are they honestly going to keep resorting to coups to sort crap out, or are they actually going to start building a robust system?

[hellodolly]

To find a reference point I looked up the UK parallel. I think (and am not sure) that being a citizen is marked by holding a passport.

"British nationals could be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied they are responsible for acts seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or an Overseas Territory.

So if my line of thought is correct then assuming Thai law is similar to UK law Thaksin is probably entitled to his passport unless it can be proven that his activities are prejudicial to .......Thailand.

The alternative would be that he is banished; a status hardly consistent with the Thai claims to get him back into Thailand and into jail.

Yes it was proven in court that his actions were prejudicial to Thailand. Unless one considers Corruption by the highest office in the country to be non prejudicial.

Not sure what you would call taking up a citizenship in another country. But I would say he does not deserve a Thai passport as his actions have brought much criticism on Thailand. For those who are new here he led a attempted coup in 2010. It was a miserable failure and had the rest of the world shaking there head.

[Chads]

O well another day in paradise

[Noistar]

Even worse: this family-Government and its red shirt terrorists are ready to change the constitution for a convincted criminal. Can you see the post-Thaksin period already how many political criminals can use this trick to be a free man again? If you have the majority in the Government, simply change the law, even the constitution....

Well the issue goes way deeper than that. If they can carry out a root and branch reform of the legal system so that it can start to make impartial, non political judgements.

If the army can start to play by the rules and they can work our what exactly the political role of the privy council should be, maybe he can come back someday and be pardoned.

There are dozens of dirty hands in this whole mess, thaksins just a big focal point in far deeper long term problems in the country.

In reality, are they honestly going to keep resorting to coups to sort crap out, or are they actually going to start building a robust system?

I take it this is a rhetorical question.

If it's not, I think the answer is likely to be 'not in my lifetime, nor the lifetime of my children'

[Narratio]

I will sheepishly admit to enjoying the political ping-pong with its lawsuits and counter suits that the various Thai governments engage in so publically. It gives me a much better understanding of Thai soap operas.