Indictment Of Abhisit, Suthep Based On Legal Mumbo Jumbo

[webfact]

Indictment of Abhisit, Suthep based on legal 'mumbo jumbo'

Avudh Panananda

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The prosecution of top Democrats Abhisit Vejjajiva and Suthep Thaugsuban has all the hallmarks of a political show trial without a bearing on justice.

The Department of Special Investigation will on Thursday notify the pair of the criminal charges they face in connection with the 2010 political violence.

By next year the trial should be in full swing, although the outcome of the court battle is not the issue.

Courtroom drama is what the government wants. And throwing Abhisit and Suthep into the sacrificial pit is tantamount to a game specifically designed for the red shirts as spectators.

With two key Democrats being tried, the coalition leaders hope for leverage to keep the opposition at bay during the turbulent time when the Constitution is rewritten next year.

Despite the questionable legal merit of the bid to prosecute the two, the legal community is curiously quiet. Some observers see the prosecution as a price that must be paid to stop moves to try to involve the International Criminal Court.

The government is under intense pressure from the red shirts to consent to Thailand becoming a party to the ICC in the hope that it would conduct an inquiry into the 2010 bloodshed. Trying Abhisit and Suthep under Thai law is a timely way to appease the red shirts, as well as keeping the world court - which specialises in crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes - out of local affairs.

Although the red shirts are roaring their approval for the upcoming trial, the legal endgame is far from clear.

While the Criminal Code has been enforced for more than a century, the country has never had a single precedent in prosecuting leaders linked to extrajudicial killings or other forms of legally justified deaths.

News reports use a layman's term of "murder" to refer to the alleged offence involving Abhisit and Suthep. But legally speaking, public prosecutors have invoked four criminal provisions to concoct an unprecedented indictment, which never existed before in the compilation of legal jargon.

Abhisit and Suthep will be charged with "conspiring to instigate others to kill with intent to achieve foreseen effect". This legal mumbo jumbo is based on Articles 59, 83, 84 and 288 of the Criminal Code.

Article 59 prescribes criminal liability for intentional offences to achieve foreseen effects.

Article 83 relates to principal figures in regard to an offence, while Article 84 gives a definition of an instigator.

Article 288 outlines the penalty for murder, which ranges up to capital punishment from 15-20 years in prison.

When the four provisions are read together, the meaning is that Abhisit and Suthep, as political overseers and instigators, may be held liable, as if they were the killers of taxi driver Phan Khamkong on May 14, 2010.

The case is linked to a judicial inquest. The Criminal Court ruled in September that Phan was shot dead by an unidentified soldier during an emergency situation at Rajprarop Road.

Because of a curfew, Phan had sought and received shelter at a condominium office. Later he ran out alone to look - as soldiers opened fire - at a suspicious van on the opposite side of the street. He came back to the office with a gunshot wound in the right arm and died of massive loss of blood.

There was no witness or physical evidence to confirm how or why he was shot at. Furthermore, the emergency law grants immunity to soldiers in the line of duty.

Law professors will have to wait eight to 10 years for the completion of a three-tier judicial review before concluding where the case will lead in terms of legal merit.

-- The Nation 2012-12-11

[waza]

Sound a bit like they are clutching at straws.

[siampolee]

By next year the trial should be in full swing, although the outcome of the court battle is not the issue.

Courtroom drama is what the government wants. And throwing Abhisit and Suthep into the sacrificial pit is tantamount to a game specifically designed for the red shirts as spectators.

With two key Democrats being tried, the coalition leaders hope for leverage to keep the opposition at bay during the turbulent time when the Constitution is rewritten next year.

Despite the questionable legal merit of the bid to prosecute the two, the legal community is curiously quiet. Some

The government is under intense pressure from the red shirts to consent to Thailand becoming a party to the ICC in the hope that it would conduct an inquiry into the 2010 bloodshed. Trying Abhisit and Suthep under Thai law is a timely way to appease the red shirts, as well as keeping the world court - which specialises in crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes - out of local affairs.

Although the red shirts are roaring their approval for the upcoming trial, the legal endgame is far from clear.

While the Criminal Code has been enforced for more than a century, the country has never had a single precedent in prosecuting leaders linked to extrajudicial killings or other forms of legally justified deaths.

So if one is to be totally honest there is in the terms of both reality and judicially there is no case to answer to,indeed a fine example of double standards so as the members of the current maladministration can continue in theirr relentless corruption and self enrichment by throwing a bone to the dogs.

The dogs being the Red Shirts.so as to actually ensure that the I.C.C. is not involved in Thailands domestic judicial mates which of course would rebound upon the puppet master himself and of course his cronies too.

One wonders if the Thai people actually realise, nay even understand that they are paying a high price for the abolishing of what little democracy that they currently now have in order to facilitate the return of the whitewashed puppet master and the the death of democracy.?

Edited December 10, 2012 by siampolee

[londonthai]

because the author believes, that charges are mumbo jumbo, make everybody happy and let the International Criminal Court to make a judgement.

Edited December 10, 2012 by londonthai

[Rich teacher]

And the Ratchada land case was an open and shut case!

[whybother]

"because of a curfew"

There was no curfew.

Sent from my HTC phone.

[endure]

What needs to happen is that the general population of Thailand laughs in the general direction of all these buffoons who are in charge of the country. What a bunch of clowns and donkeys they are! What an injustice they perpetrate on the decent citizens of Thailand!

[virtualtraveller]

8-10 years, that's how long it will take for a case like this to run it's full course of judicial avenues (i.e. appeal etc), by which time guess who would have appointed a new set of judges. The court will likely throw this one out leaving egg on the govts face, but they will have to go through the whole sordid trial to appear unbiased, so it gets to discredit Abhisit, kind of like what Mahatir did to Anwar in Malaysia. Thaksin must know that it's not going return a guilty verdict because it then opens up a whole can of worms for himself. Besides, it suggests that the PAD can then seize the airport and refuse to budge until Yingluck and her govt resigns, and when she sends in the army to clear them out, a few can get themselves killed. It's such a silly argument, considering Ratchaprasong was a set up from the start to spill blood. The tactics that seem to be willing in this political fight are truly depressing.

[fareastguy]

Quote: Law professors will have to wait eight to 10 years for the completion of a three-tier judicial review before concluding where the case will lead in terms of legal merit.

It will lead exactly nowhere.

It's just another scam to hopefully give the Reds some freedom with Abhisit Vejjajiva and Suthep Thaugsuban tied up in court.

[otherstuff1957]

because the author believes, that charges are mumbo jumbo, make everybody happy and let the International Criminal Court to make a judgement.

I rather suspect that all of this talk of getting the IC involved is just grandstanding. Thaksin is just to vulnerable himself to really want an impartial investigation.

[OzMick]

A few points come to mind:

1/ Won't this unprecedented legal gobbledegook first have to survive a judicial scrutiny to see if it is a justifiable charge?

2/ Surely there wouldn't be an appeal process for the prosecution if they are tried and found innocent - double jeopardy.

3/ How can someone be found guilty of ordering somebody else to commit a crime, when the person committing the act has legal immunity?

4/ Where is the cut-off level for immunity for those acting under an SoE? Why doesn't it apply to all?

[Skywalker69]

Sound a bit like they are clutching at straws.

Sound a bit like they Thaksin are clutching at straws

[whybother]

A few points come to mind:

1/ Won't this unprecedented legal gobbledegook first have to survive a judicial scrutiny to see if it is a justifiable charge?

2/ Surely there wouldn't be an appeal process for the prosecution if they are tried and found innocent - double jeopardy.

3/ How can someone be found guilty of ordering somebody else to commit a crime, when the person committing the act has legal immunity?

4/ Where is the cut-off level for immunity for those acting under an SoE? Why doesn't it apply to all?

Immunity can't really "apply to all", since that would give a legal right for someone to go out and blindly shoot everyone. Someone has to be to blame IF the shooting is deemed illegal.

In this case, the illegality of the shooting is questionable, since it was potentially an accidental shooting while the soldiers were doing their duty.

The only question IMO is whether the orders given to the soldiers was legal. I don't really see how telling the soldiers to be armed with live ammunition for self defence or for dealing with armed protesters could be considered illegal, especially since police carry live ammunition every day.

[GentlemanJim]

Abhisit and Suthep will be charged with "conspiring to instigate others to kill with intent to achieve foreseen effect".

Now what was it again that those pesky Red shirt leaders were shouting when they were on stage about the crowd should go out and kill soldiers by hitting them with their cars so that they could only be charged with a road traffic offence? And of course some of the crowd did indeed go out and kill some of the soldiers.

I don't quite feel as optimistic as the journo who thinks the court case will be 'in full swing', by next year. With the way parliamentary immunity hinders the legal process it will be three years before the two of them have been co-ordinated to go to court on the same day just to confirm their names and addresses.

[smedly]

although an investigation into the death of the Taxi driver concluded he was shot by the army - was it murder ?. from what I've read of the incident he was hit by a stray bullet, I don't know what the legal definition of murder is in Thailand but this certaintly wouldn't qualify anywhere in the west, also when there is an inquest into a death in the west they will conclude and clasify the death for example "Death By Misadventure"

Seems to me that some of the details that you would normally associate with an inquest have been left out, I wonder who handled the inquest investigation and final report

[FarangTalk]

What needs to happen is that the general population of Thailand laughs in the general direction of all these buffoons who are in charge of the country. What a bunch of clowns and donkeys they are! What an injustice they perpetrate on the decent citizens of Thailand!

Disagree, they are entirely representative of the Thai electorate.

[FarangTalk]

Why do people believe that the case against Thaksin for the War on Drugs can be investigated?

It can never ever be investigated because it was sanctioned!

[Nickymaster]

What a game!

The government tells (fools) the reds into believing that they want ICC to investigate 2010. The ICC presumably was pulled so far into the game that they told Thailand to either become a signatory or stop wasting their time. The government which is run by cowards and liars will never become a full signatory.

So what to do next?

Find a Mickey Mouse department (DSI) to trump up murder charges against AV and Suthep. This keeps the reds occupied for a while and at the same time gives a sign to the ICC that they are not "needed" anymore because an internal "investigation" has started.

[geriatrickid]

because the author believes, that charges are mumbo jumbo, make everybody happy and let the International Criminal Court to make a judgement.

If that were to happen, the military would have to answer for the treatment of the Rohingya. The allegations over cross border human trafficing could also end up at the ICC.

[Nickymaster]

because the author believes, that charges are mumbo jumbo, make everybody happy and let the International Criminal Court to make a judgement.

If that were to happen, the military would have to answer for the treatment of the Rohingya. The allegations over cross border human trafficing could also end up at the ICC.

So we all agree that Thailand should become a signatory to the ICC. So what is this government waiting for? I would like to know.

[givenall]

Thailand, the hub of soaps. Finally the TV live SOP are in their politics.

[Hog Head]

I wonder why a certain person whose name begins with a T and lives in Dubai has not been charged with murder over the war on drugs, and the 2 incidents in the South where scores were killed

[Nickymaster]

I wonder why a certain person whose name begins with a T and lives in Dubai has not been charged with murder over the war on drugs, and the 2 incidents in the South where scores were killed

If they would become a signatory to the ICC Mr. T would be charged. They know that.

[monkfish]

Abhisit interview on BBC

[GentlemanJim]

Why do people believe that the case against Thaksin for the War on Drugs can be investigated?

It can never ever be investigated because it was sanctioned!

Sanctioned by whom?

[waza]

Why do people believe that the case against Thaksin for the War on Drugs can be investigated?

It can never ever be investigated because it was sanctioned!

Sanctioned by whom?

Thaksin, Charlem et al.

Accused of being "drug dealers," they were systematically exterminated based on "hit lists" compiled by police given carte blanche by then Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra (a former police bureaucrat himself). It would later be determined by official investigations that over half of those killed had nothing to do with the drug trade in any way.

In recent weeks, the government of Thailand has publicly threatened the resumption of killings. On 20 February [2008], Interior Minister, Chalerm Yubamrung, told parliament that

"... For drug dealers if they do not want to die, they had better quit staying on that road... drugs suppression in my time as Interior Minister will follow the approach of [former Prime Minister] Thaksin. If that will lead to 3,000-4,000 deaths of those who break the law, then so be it. That has to be done ... For those of you from the opposition party, I will say you care more about human rights than drug problems in Thailand."

Readers should note that then Interior Minister Chalerm Yubamrung is now Deputy Prime Minister of Thaksin Shinwatra's sister's government, and just recently promoted his son - accused cop-killer Duang Yubamrung - to "platoon leader of a military police company." Rampant "banana republic" nepotism is a prevalent feature of Thaksin's political party - disbanded and renamed several times due to persistent voter fraud.

While the United States attempts to sanction the dirt out from under the feet of Syrians and Iranians for "crimes against humanity" while they battle admittedly foreign-terrorists armed and funded by the US, Gulf States, NATO, and others, the US has granted a visa to a convicted criminal, a fugitive, a mass murderer, and a man presiding over a political machine that is to this day rife with nepotism, murder, intimidation, and sweeping corruption. http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/hypocrisy-syria-burns-while-mass.html

Thaksin said in an interview, "The United Nations is not my father

[Tatsujin]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but there was a legal State of Emergency in effect at that time, which pretty much gave the Govt carte blanche to do whatever they wanted to, no? If so, then the argument would surely be that the (unfortunate) victims were breaking this SoE and therefore cannot have been 'murdered'.

[righteous]

Beware of re-direction of difficult conversations. Difficult for some agenda's. The best defense for some is to "Change The Conversation - Quickly (CTC-Q)"

• In this case - the murder investigation of Abhisit/Suthep, CTC-Q to the war on drugs.
  
• Deaths at R'song, CTC-Q to "Men In Black"
  
• Accusations of R'song realities as concerning Abhisit , CTC-Q to Somchai
  
• If all else fails, CTC-Q to Thaksin.
  

Classic cases of offense being better than defence. Who can argue with that.

Edited December 11, 2012 by righteous

[GentlemanJim]

Beware of re-direction of difficult conversations. Difficult for some agenda's. The best defense for some is to "Change The Conversation - Quickly (CTC-Q)"

• In this case - the murder investigation of Abhisit/Suthep, CTC-Q to the war on drugs.
  
• Deaths at R'song, CTC-Q to "Men In Black"
  
• Accusations of R'song realities as concerning Abhisit , CTC-Q to Somchai
  
• If all else fails, CTC-Q to Thaksin.
  

Classic cases of offense being better than defence. Who can argue with that.

The foundation of law is precedent.

[chrisrazz]

Signing up to the ICC is meritorious in the extreme. An independent judiciary to investigate all the crimes committed by both sides. Meanwhile exposing those pulling the strings behind the scenes. Yes please, put this whole debacle to bed once and for all. An international corruption commission would be good while we are at it, expose a few more opportunists in the process. Put any would be pollitician on notice that they will be held to account. Then all on TV can get back to discussing their favourite flavour of potato chips. Oh shit, I just woke up!