Jump to content

Temple Dispute: Surapong Takes Lead In Court Case


Lite Beer

Recommended Posts

TEMPLE DISPUTE

Surapong takes lead in court case

The Nation on Sunday

30197356-01_big.jpg

Surapong

BANGKOK: -- Accused of going easy on Cambodia, minister now says he'll be in The Hague to look Hor Namhong squarely in the eye

Foreign Minister Surapong Towichukchaikul made an about-turn yesterday, saying he would lead the Thai legal team to a World Court hearing on the Thai-Cambodian border dispute in April.

Surapong said he wanted to look his Cambodian counterpart Hor Namhong in the eye, "in order to cause him to lose his concentration".

He expressed confidence in Thailand's chances of winning a favourable ruling, while cautioning that Thais should also be prepared for possible disappointment.

Surapong, who is also deputy prime minister, said he did not want any group of people to use this issue for its political advantage. He noted that the Thai-Cambodian conflict had been used successfully to oust a government in the past.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, Netherlands, will listen to another round of testimony in April and expects to deliver its final verdict later this year. Cambodia is scheduled to present oral arguments to the ICJ judges on April 15 and 18, and Thailand on April 17 and 19.

Cambodia asked the ICJ for an interpretation of the scope and meaning of its 1962 verdict that the ancient Hindu Preah Vihear temple was located on Cambodian territory. Phnom Penh wants the court to explain who has sovereignty over the area surrounding the temple, which Thailand claims as its own.

Surapong said yesterday that he and Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra had attempted unsuccessfully to persuade Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen to withdraw the case.

The foreign minister also said he was preparing to sue people who had accused him of pursuing the case without sufficient vigour due to alleged vested interests in Cambodia.

Pheu Thai Party deputy spokesman Jirayu Huangsap yesterday also dismissed allegations that the ruling party had vested interests with the Cambodian government.

"The Pheu Thai Party and the government have no vested interests with Cambodia," the spokesman said.

He denied that the government was indifferent on the issue, as alleged by opposition politicians, adding that many Cabinet members had expressed concern about the territorial issue.

Meanwhile, opposition Democrat Party spokesman Chavanont Intarakomalyasut yesterday said the government's failure to protest when Cambodia unilaterally organised a Unesco World Heritage conference for later this year could affect Thailand's case at the World Court.

"It seems the Thai government intentionally allowed Cambodia to host the event," he said.

The Democrat spokesman said that if the meeting results in a complete listing of Preah Vihear as a World Heritage site, the ICJ might view Cambodia as the sole owner of the site, leading it to rule in the country's favour.

nationlogo.jpg

-- The Nation 2013-01-06

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Surapong said he wanted to look his Cambodian counterpart Hor Namhong in the eye, "in order to cause him to lose his concentration"."

tongue.png

And if that doesn't work, he's going to give him a wedgie.

Followed by a poke in the eye and then a knuckle nuggey on the head. The 3 stoogies at work here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Surapong said he wanted to look his Cambodian counterpart Hor Namhong in the eye, "in order to cause him to lose his concentration"."

tongue.png

Yay for Red-Shirt/PTP Mind-Control Techniques ! rolleyes.gif

I feel a Hub or Crack-Down coming-on ! laugh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the court decided against Thailand are they gearing up for a fight with Cambodia. On one hand they are prepairing the nation to accept the lose of the territory, on another, saber rattling! Great way to distract from the real problems is to create bigger ones.

Sent from my GT-P6200 using Thaivisa Connect App

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when you run out of an argument proving your "watershed" interpretations as being true, yes, you can try hypnotism. But it must work on all members of the round table. I would advise the sharp eyed minister to try getting backed up by a few of these strong laser pointers which are on sale at the Sukhumvit stalls. They will lead to blindness of the opponents, thus guaranteeing the Thai side a sure win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when you run out of an argument proving your "watershed" interpretations as being true, yes, you can try hypnotism. But it must work on all members of the round table. I would advise the sharp eyed minister to try getting backed up by a few of these strong laser pointers which are on sale at the Sukhumvit stalls. They will lead to blindness of the opponents, thus guaranteeing the Thai side a sure win.

Is the hill the temple is on higher than the hills around it? If so, then the peak of the hill and the ridge line is the watershed.

But besides that, the court has already ruled that the temple is on Cambodian soil, and the Thais have accepted that decision.

Sent from my HTC phone.

Edited by whybother
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Surapong said he wanted to look his Cambodian counterpart Hor Namhong in the eye, "in order to cause him to lose his concentration"."

I'd certainly lose my concentration if I had to look that old troll in the eye for any period of time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! The evil eye! What next? The black spot?

Surapong taking on the role of Medusa? cheesy.gifcheesy.gifcheesy.gif I suggest that he takes a couple of katoeys from Soi 6 along with him. They'd scare the living daylights out of most gentlefolk.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Surapong said he wanted to look his Cambodian counterpart Hor Namhong in the eye, "in order to cause him to lose his concentration"."

tongue.png

And if that doesn't work, he's going to give him a wedgie.

So Surapong will be disracted by looking his Cambodian counterpart squarely in the eye, (with his puppy dog eyes) and be of little use to the Thai legal team at the World Court hearing on the Thai-Cambodian border dispute he will lead.

At least he will get a face off, "The Horror"

.

post-46292-0-82625900-1357546402_thumb.j

Edited by waza
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But in order to maintain friendship between the two countries, and avoid politicising the situation as PM-Yingluck fears some might try to do, he should perhaps also try to avoid going "Grrrr", while looking his counterpart Hor Namhong in-the-eye. laugh.png

Edited by Ricardo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But 1st brother government leader has alot of vested interests in Cambodia, including friend of Hun Sen and also being offered a position as an advisor to the Cambodian government?

Other thing that amazed me was the confrontation magically disappeared when PT came into power. Almost like it was made up to cause problems for the Abhisit government?

Sent from my Andriod smartphone.

Now it has come back to bite them (PT) on the ass, especially if they lose. How will they deal with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Surapong's first statement was much more sensible. Thais SHOULD be prepared to accept the court's ruling, favorable or unfavorable. This nationalistic saber-rattling is just ridiculous.

The temple was built by the Khmer and the Siamese agreed that it is on their land over 100 years ago. The big arguement is over who owns the PARKING LOT!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, Surapong's first statement was much more sensible. Thais SHOULD be prepared to accept the court's ruling, favorable or unfavorable. This nationalistic saber-rattling is just ridiculous.

The temple was built by the Khmer and the Siamese agreed that it is on their land over 100 years ago. The big arguement is over who owns the PARKING LOT!

"the Siamese agreed that it is on their land over 100 years ago"

They didn't actually. The maps that put the temple in Cambodia were never officially accepted. BUT, they were never rejected either, which is why the court ruled the way they did in 1962.

The problem is that the maps don't match the treaty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...