Democrat heavy-weights set to sue public prosecutor
By English News



BANGKOK, Oct 29 – Opposition Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva and his deputy Suthep Thaugsuban said they would file a lawsuit against the Attorney General for mistreatment in their indictment against the pair for premeditated murder in the 2010 political upheaval.

They charged the Attorney General with attempting to force them to accept the controversial Amnesty Bill which, if passed, would grant blanket amnesty to those involved in the unrest, including core leaders and the authorities who gave out orders.

The former premier said he and Mr Suthep acted and made their commands in the 2010 protest in their capacities as state authorities and they should, instead, be investigated by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC).

The Attorney General said yesterday that it was empowered to indict Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep without having to go through the NACC’s investigative procedure.

The Democrat leader expressed suspicion on the Attorney General’s indictment without including the case of the armed men in black who were allegedly involved in the case.

He said the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) was not empowered to file lawsuits against them since they performed their duties as state officials.

The DSI charged them with refraining from performing their duties – a statement that justified the NACC’s investigation of the case, he said, adding that the DSI’s allegation that it was a murder case was self-contradictory.

Mr Abhisit said the Attorney General’s behaviour was not different from that of the DSI and they had no choice but to file a lawsuit against the public prosecutor.

He said the Democrat Party stood firm on its principle against the Amnesty Bill, indicating that the state was not authorised to pardon any offences concerning people’s deaths.

He vowed to intensity the protest against the Amnesty Bill and would petition the Constitution Court as well as participate in non-parliamentary social movement in his capacity as a Thai citizen.

“I strongly believe that lots of people agree with me that the bill is controversial and problematic. We will steadfastly oppose it. Please follow our movement inside and outside parliament,” said the Democrat leader.

Mr Suthep said he would never escape and would appear at the Attorney General’s Office on Thursday to acknowledge the allegation.

He said the public prosecutor’s action led him to believe that they wanted to pressure his party to accept to Amnesty Bill but “I assure you that they would be disappointed.”

“If the bill is submitted to the Lower House for the second and third readings, I will call on people nationwide who agree with us to stand up and fight against it,” he said. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2013-10-29

Moral flyweights, the Corporate shills! ;-} rap.

Bizarre system. They haven't even been found guilty or not guilty yet.

Does their case stand if they are found guilty and what would the compensation be if they are found guilty?

The timing of these charges makes the PTP/Thaksin crony of a prosecutor's intent so obvious. Abhisit has every right to fight these bullcrap political charges in court. At least he has the balls to do so. Unlike a certain other idiot who claims to be politically persecuted but runs away like a little b*t#h.

Good for them

Wonder what would happen if they were found guilty and sentenced to jail

Wonder if they would go to the olympics and never return like the other coward

Let the games begin . . . bring it on!

I honestly don't understand how one set of MPs can go in front of thousands and tell them to burn down Bangkok and burn down their town halls and get off on Parliamentary Immunity while another group, clearly exercising their rights and mission to protect the greater public, can be indicted, for murder no less.

I think this would be a global first.

If Lewis Carroll had written 'The Adventures of Politicians in Wonderful Thailand' people would have said he must been smoking a hookah or was as mad as a hatter.

But at least they would have pissed themselves laughing!

If Mark & Suthep lose, will they also sue the judges? Just curious.

I honestly don't understand how one set of MPs can go in front of thousands and tell them to burn down Bangkok and burn down their town halls and get off on Parliamentary Immunity while another group, clearly exercising their rights and mission to protect the greater public, can be indicted, for murder no less.

I think this would be a global first.

The whole system is one big steaming pile of dung.

If any country supposedly in the semi-developed world is in desperate need of a judicial reform it is Thailand. I don't think I have ever seen a country create cases and judgement which confound even high school logic.

In truth they are following the same road that Thaksin follows.

The difference being is that they are both here to actually press the charges and appear in court as the plaintiffs and not convicted bail jumping felons who cannot appear in court as plaintiffs to press the charges.

Indeed honesty has its virtues..

Way to go......

Bring it on.

Abhisit and Suthep, You are truly admirable in my book for not falling for the Thaksin tricks. You both have the balls to face down your accusers and the integrity to stick by your guns. I hope you win over a lot of support for this.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

I honestly don't understand how one set of MPs can go in front of thousands and tell them to burn down Bangkok and burn down their town halls and get off on Parliamentary Immunity while another group, clearly exercising their rights and mission to protect the greater public, can be indicted, for murder no less.

I think this would be a global first.

The whole system is one big steaming pile of dung.

If any country supposedly in the semi-developed world is in desperate need of a judicial reform it is Thailand. I don't think I have ever seen a country create cases and judgement which confound even high school logic.

Don't worry about High School logic. Their actions and statements would baffle Primary School children.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

Of course it is ridiculous. If it can be done to sue the prosecutor I don't blame anyone for suing him, but what a screwed up system.

They are going to sue him for what? Performing his job? His job is to prosecute, his isn't the "Non-Prosecutor", he is the "Prosecutor". What if they are found guilty? Does the case to sue him still stand?

Does anyone know anywhere else in the world where you can sue a prosecutor before the judgement is passed. Ah. I get it. It's the same country where a Prime Minister can be held responsible for pre-meditated murder when he orders governmental personnel to do a job within a legal framework, and he is held responsible if they step out of it? This legal system is an ABSOLUTE FARCE. I really worry about the intelligence of people within the Thai legal system and on what basis of right, wrong and public benefit they think, because I cannot see it.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

Of course it is ridiculous. If it can be done to sue the prosecutor I don't blame anyone for suing him, but what a screwed up system.

They are going to sue him for what? Performing his job? His job is to prosecute, his isn't the "Non-Prosecutor", he is the "Prosecutor". What if they are found guilty? Does the case to sue him still stand?

Does anyone know anywhere else in the world where you can sue a prosecutor before the judgement is passed. Ah. I get it. It's the same country where a Prime Minister can be held responsible for pre-meditated murder when he orders governmental personnel to do a job within a legal framework, and he is held responsible if they step out of it? This legal system is an ABSOLUTE FARCE. I really worry about the intelligence of people within the Thai legal system and on what basis of right, wrong and public benefit they think, because I cannot see it.

The only country that needs an assessor to assess the assessor. I cannot see the Asian movement of countries being in harmony. They need to be together, who is going to blend into Thai logic ????

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

There is no special law that allows a prosecutor to be sued. Any half-democratic country with a semblance of rule of law allows any individual who feels wronged to sue another. That's what is happening here and there's nothing wrong with it.

Abhisit feels, quite rightly, that prosecuting him has an ulterior motive and it's not hard to see. BTW the new AG stated only days ago that he would be independent of politics - didn't take him long to shed his independence & do what he's told.

Two other laws here which do not fall into international standards are the defamation law & the Lese Majeste law. Neither of these are being used in this case AFAIK.

Good for them

Wonder what would happen if they were found guilty and sentenced to jail

Wonder if they would go to the olympics and never return like the other coward

ucky: You clearly do not understand the personalities involved. Abisit and Suthep will always stand and be counted. The possibility of them running away is as close to nil as you can get.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

There is no special law that allows a prosecutor to be sued. Any half-democratic country with a semblance of rule of law allows any individual who feels wronged to sue another. That's what is happening here and there's nothing wrong with it.

Abhisit feels, quite rightly, that prosecuting him has an ulterior motive and it's not hard to see. BTW the new AG stated only days ago that he would be independent of politics - didn't take him long to shed his independence & do what he's told.

Two other laws here which do not fall into international standards are the defamation law & the Lese Majeste law. Neither of these are being used in this case AFAIK.

Huh? Shouldn't he do this after the judgement? And that the public prosecutor (who is after all representing the state) be responsible for judging the merits and rights of the case?

So, if the case gets thrown completely out of court in the first minute, then the public prosecutor should get laughed at and sued by the person he has so obvously wronged AFTER the event? It's a farcical situation.

Maybe the prosecutor should counter sue Abhisit because by suing, Abhisit is implying that the prosecutor is not carrying out his public duty correctly? And then Abhisit can countersue, the countersuit, for suing, and round and round we go.....

Edited October 29, 201312 yr by Thai at Heart

My dear curious chap, to spare you some time on having to read up on all this, loosing a court case one normally starts the appeal process rather than sue the judges

If Mark & Suthep lose, will they also sue the judges? Just curious.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

There is no special law that allows a prosecutor to be sued. Any half-democratic country with a semblance of rule of law allows any individual who feels wronged to sue another. That's what is happening here and there's nothing wrong with it.

Abhisit feels, quite rightly, that prosecuting him has an ulterior motive and it's not hard to see. BTW the new AG stated only days ago that he would be independent of politics - didn't take him long to shed his independence & do what he's told.

Two other laws here which do not fall into international standards are the defamation law & the Lese Majeste law. Neither of these are being used in this case AFAIK.

As far as I understand it the situation is this:

The AG is given the case either from the NACC or the DSI - whoevers' duty it is to investigate the case (that incidentally is what abhisit is suing over, he reckons his case should be investigated by the NACC)

If the AG decides that the information he has been given has enough evidence to rate a court case he gives the go ahead. Nothing political about it.

If it is supposedly a political decision and there is no evidence to back up the charges then the Judge/s will just throw the case out of court.

So let's wait until the Judge/s see the evidence and what happens next before you get all teary eyed over the teflon one.

Nobody has the moral high ground here.

As the AG decided that the murder charges have nothing to do with Abhisit/Suthep official functioning and therefor there is no need to give the case to the NACC there may be a bit more explaining to do.

Interesting would be if the court would reject the case as clearly Abhisit/Suthep were in function and being listened to / obeyed because of that. That would cause some unnecessary delay. Imagine a blanket amnesty enforced before we get a change to judge the illustrious duo. Now that wouldn't do, now would it?

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

There is no special law that allows a prosecutor to be sued. Any half-democratic country with a semblance of rule of law allows any individual who feels wronged to sue another. That's what is happening here and there's nothing wrong with it.

Abhisit feels, quite rightly, that prosecuting him has an ulterior motive and it's not hard to see. BTW the new AG stated only days ago that he would be independent of politics - didn't take him long to shed his independence & do what he's told.

Two other laws here which do not fall into international standards are the defamation law & the Lese Majeste law. Neither of these are being used in this case AFAIK.

As far as I understand it the situation is this:

The AG is given the case either from the NACC or the DSI - whoevers' duty it is to investigate the case (that incidentally is what abhisit is suing over, he reckons his case should be investigated by the NACC)

If the AG decides that the information he has been given has enough evidence to rate a court case he gives the go ahead. Nothing political about it.

If it is supposedly a political decision and there is no evidence to back up the charges then the Judge/s will just throw the case out of court.

So let's wait until the Judge/s see the evidence and what happens next before you get all teary eyed over the teflon one.

Edited October 29, 201312 yr by rubl

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

There is no special law that allows a prosecutor to be sued. Any half-democratic country with a semblance of rule of law allows any individual who feels wronged to sue another. That's what is happening here and there's nothing wrong with it.

Abhisit feels, quite rightly, that prosecuting him has an ulterior motive and it's not hard to see. BTW the new AG stated only days ago that he would be independent of politics - didn't take him long to shed his independence & do what he's told.

Two other laws here which do not fall into international standards are the defamation law & the Lese Majeste law. Neither of these are being used in this case AFAIK.

Huh? Shouldn't he do this after the judgement? And that the public prosecutor (who is after all representing the state) be responsible for judging the merits and rights of the case?

So, if the case gets thrown completely out of court in the first minute, then the public prosecutor should get laughed at and sued by the person he has so obvously wronged AFTER the event? It's a farcical situation.

Maybe the prosecutor should counter sue Abhisit because by suing, Abhisit is implying that the prosecutor is not carrying out his public duty correctly? And then Abhisit can countersue, the countersuit, for suing, and round and round we go.....

Actually you are just turning it into a farce by too many 'maybes'.

Normally a public prosecutor does represent the state and is not an agent of the government. Unfortunately the latter is not true here. The fact is that there is no merit in the case which has been drummed up by Tarit to pressure Abhisit & his party into accepting Thaksin's amnesty.

BTW merit is a foreign concept to the AG anyway. They sat on the case against against the Red Bull heir for a year & still haven't got him into court. I'd suggest that justice is also a foreign concept to the AG.

Let the (corrupt?) AG defend himself just as he's forcing Abhisit to do.

Edited October 29, 201312 yr by khunken

Ridiculous. They are threatening to sue the public prosecutor " with attempting to force them to accept the controversial Amnesty Bill". The answer is simple. Don't accept the amnesty bill. If you have no case to answer regarding the charges laid, then no problem, go to court and defend yourselves. Do they have no faith in the courts? if this is the case, why sue? This only substantiates Mr T's claims that his case was politically motivated. Pathetic little children arguing in the school yard....

The only real fix is for Thailand to sign up to the International Criminal Court. Unfortunately, this will never happen as there are too many dirty hands from all sides, plus those we don't know and will never know. Time to wipe the slate clean. Get rid of the the lot of them. This country needs a revolution.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

There is no special law that allows a prosecutor to be sued. Any half-democratic country with a semblance of rule of law allows any individual who feels wronged to sue another. That's what is happening here and there's nothing wrong with it.

Abhisit feels, quite rightly, that prosecuting him has an ulterior motive and it's not hard to see. BTW the new AG stated only days ago that he would be independent of politics - didn't take him long to shed his independence & do what he's told.

Two other laws here which do not fall into international standards are the defamation law & the Lese Majeste law. Neither of these are being used in this case AFAIK.

Huh? Shouldn't he do this after the judgement? And that the public prosecutor (who is after all representing the state) be responsible for judging the merits and rights of the case?

So, if the case gets thrown completely out of court in the first minute, then the public prosecutor should get laughed at and sued by the person he has so obvously wronged AFTER the event? It's a farcical situation.

Maybe the prosecutor should counter sue Abhisit because by suing, Abhisit is implying that the prosecutor is not carrying out his public duty correctly? And then Abhisit can countersue, the countersuit, for suing, and round and round we go.....

Actually you are just turning it into a farce by too many 'maybes'.

Normally a public prosecutor does represent the state and is not an agent of the government. Unfortunately the latter is not true here. The fact is that there is no merit in the case which has been drummed up by Tarit to pressure Abhisit & his party into accepting Thaksin's amnesty.

BTW merit is a foreign concept to the AG anyway. They sat on the case against against the Red Bull heir for a year & still haven't got him into court. I'd suggest that justice is also a foreign concept to the AG.

Let the (corrupt?) AG defend himself just as he's forcing Abhisit to do.

Truly bizarre system.

I think that the public prosecutor should sue them back. Because by making such claims Abhisit and Suthep imply that the public prosecutor is not honest. Its defamation. Sue them.

It's a never ending farce

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

Of course it is ridiculous. If it can be done to sue the prosecutor I don't blame anyone for suing him, but what a screwed up system.

They are going to sue him for what? Performing his job? His job is to prosecute, his isn't the "Non-Prosecutor", he is the "Prosecutor". What if they are found guilty? Does the case to sue him still stand?

Does anyone know anywhere else in the world where you can sue a prosecutor before the judgement is passed. Ah. I get it. It's the same country where a Prime Minister can be held responsible for pre-meditated murder when he orders governmental personnel to do a job within a legal framework, and he is held responsible if they step out of it? This legal system is an ABSOLUTE FARCE. I really worry about the intelligence of people within the Thai legal system and on what basis of right, wrong and public benefit they think, because I cannot see it.

Do not forget they are being charged as average Somchai not the PM and deputy PM.

I am not taking sides. I am attacking the process altogether or, rather, the lack of process.

Suing a prosecutor is a very idiosyncratic and destructive practice. If the case has merit, process it. If the case has no merit, drop the case. Then file for false arrest, biased usage of justice proceedings, etc..

Being able to sue a prosecutor is insane, and sets a vile precedent for any side to do anything now or in the future, and threaten those who would bring charges to bear. The complete lack of jurisprudence regarding the existence of a law that allows such recursive attacks is obviously a tool put in place for all to misuse, abuse and confuse. Amazing Thailand.

In short, this log jamming exercise before due process is suspicious and should never be allowed by either side for any reason. This law should not be on the books. It allows whoever is charged to threaten the process. I actually agree that the timing of the pressure is extremely suspicious, however that does not bear scrutiny when the contiunued existence of such processes as pre=emptive recourse is, itself, a glaring proof of high level corruption.

This makes the whole ideological debate laughable, as if two opposing groups of pirates were each accusing the other of being criminals, and now threatening to sue if either side utters a single sentence.

Land of Smiles? More like Land of Wiles to me today....

Of course it is ridiculous. If it can be done to sue the prosecutor I don't blame anyone for suing him, but what a screwed up system.

They are going to sue him for what? Performing his job? His job is to prosecute, his isn't the "Non-Prosecutor", he is the "Prosecutor". What if they are found guilty? Does the case to sue him still stand?

Does anyone know anywhere else in the world where you can sue a prosecutor before the judgement is passed. Ah. I get it. It's the same country where a Prime Minister can be held responsible for pre-meditated murder when he orders governmental personnel to do a job within a legal framework, and he is held responsible if they step out of it? This legal system is an ABSOLUTE FARCE. I really worry about the intelligence of people within the Thai legal system and on what basis of right, wrong and public benefit they think, because I cannot see it.

Do not forget they are being charged as average Somchai not the PM and deputy PM.

When it comes down to being charged with something carried out in your governmental capacity, it isn't as a private individual any more.

If Mark & Suthep lose, will they also sue the judges? Just curious.

Think they'll try to sue the makers of the ammunition for making them lose face?