Abhisit, Suthep set to sue public prosecutor

[centrala]

Someone should definitely sue the Attorney-General's barber for his haircuts.

[kingalfred]

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. 

 

 

because the country is fake, the justice system is a psuedo fake one and not enough people in Thailand care about it.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Hugh Jarse]

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

Ug!!

[hellodolly]

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

You are sadly mistaken when you say like the other coward.

If they were cowards they would not fight the amnesty bill that was presented that dropped all charges against them. They are men of principal willing to face the charges.

Note I am not saying they are happy about it. but you have to admit that it shows good character.

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.

I concur. Even in the third world countries such as Burma and many of the African third world countries that would never happen.

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.

Confusing high school logic is easy in Thailand. It has a long history of Governments avoiding teaching logic.

[whybother]

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....

Actually, in some cases, being able to sue the prosecutor before the case stops the prosecutor from filing ridiculous cases, or cases where he has no jurisdiction.

I don't know the process in Thailand, but in most western countries the defendant goes before the courts to ascertain whether there is sufficient evidence or jurisdiction prior to the case going ahead. It wouldn't surprise me if that didn't happen in Thailand.

[hansnl]

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....

Suing a Public Prosecutor is indeed a destructive practice.

However, if the Public Prosecutor is not operating as an independent officer of the law, but clearly prosecuting out of an political missue, most certainly there is a clear precedent for the prosecuted to bring charges against the PP.

The Thai laws seem to recognise this possibility.

So said a family member in his capacity of PP

Indeed, the whole bureau of PP, if found to be guilty of whatever in this case, would be impossible to function any more.

So it seems.

[moradave]

I sense a compromise in the making. Abhisit and Suthip are sure to be convicted if case goes to trial. Yingluck/Thaksin will get the charges dropped if Abhisit/Suthip will agree to support an amnesty bill to include Thaksin's amnesty and return to Thailand.

Everbody wins. Reset to zero and start all over again.

[Jim walker]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

[Bottlerocket]

“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.

Couldn't that be considered a real threat against national security?

[Jim walker]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

[klubex99]

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.

This post is classic example of someone who has not learned what Thailand is about yet.

The judges won't be throwing the case out..... If Thaksin has chosen this course of action, and we all know he has knobbled the AG, then we can assume that the judges will decide what he pays them to decide.

Get your head out of your arse and realize for once that you are in Thailand.

[Thaddeus]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

Wow ...... don't hold back, speak your mind.

Just in case you haven't been following this, they do want justice to take it's course, real justice that is, or has that escaped your unbiased attention?

[klubex99]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

The most feeble post in the past 24 hours for me.

And of course, Thaksin is totally innocent of all past charges and bring him back with a jubilant ceremony perhaps?

Of course..... because you are married to a red shirted bar girl whose family farm rice and sold their vote for 300 baht a pop.

That's why we should all listen to you.... isn't it?

[bigbamboo]

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.

This country needs an enema.

[davidstipek]

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.

This post is classic example of someone who has not learned what Thailand is about yet.

The judges won't be throwing the case out..... If Thaksin has chosen this course of action, and we all know he has knobbled the AG, then we can assume that the judges will decide what he pays them to decide.

Get your head out of your arse and realize for once that you are in Thailand.

<deleted>???

Just a couple Questions here...

Where did we miss the Attorney Generals Office assigning this issue to the Prosecutor"s Office? When is it said the the Public Prosecutor is filing Charges... Is not the correct Term, The Attorney Gerels Office is... Filing Charges and has... assigned the case to The Public Prosectutor's Office. Or has he (The Attorney General) Whitewashed his Hands of the complete ordeal?

This is the second time I have tried to post this reply, I believe we are possibly being Monitored here to Blocked if we are getting to close to the truth (Lets see if this gets thru... )

When I was much Younger we hand a game called Marbles... There were Glass ones, Clay ones and Steel ones then there are Gumballs... I think everyone knows uses are Glass, who's are Gum and who's are Steel! In this case I think Stainless Steel merits being brought up as it is not distracted by a Magnet. Also remember a Magnet also gets a lot of Garbage when used in the open! We know where the Magnet is located. In the game of marbles using one was called Cheating, who is not beneith this Practice???

Abhisit, I Salute you, your Deputy, and your Party!! Just do Thailand a Just and Loyal Favor, always continue the Game in a Legal and Just Fashion, doing what is Politically Correct for the People of Thailand. Use Jai Honestly and don't let it be Tarnished!!

[pookiki]

In the US system of justice, an indictment is brought before a 'grand jury' by the public prosecutor/attorney general to decide if there is sufficient evidence to warrant a trail. The grand jury is the deciding body. I have never heard of a public prosecutor/attorney general being sued in the US because they brought a matter before a grand jury or the members on a grand jury being sued because they decided to uphold the indictment. One simply goes to court after the grand jury decision to prove one's guilt or innocence. There is a concept of prosecutorial misconduct where the public prosecutor/attorney general breached court rules of the code of ethics. Before coming to Thailand, I thought the US was a litigious society. Thailand goes beyond the pall. Thaksin is a fugitive of Thai justice system. Abhisit and Suthep ordered 'lethal' force to be used against their own citizens but I don't think they will ever be held to account.

[fab4]

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.

This post is classic example of someone who has not learned what Thailand is about yet.

The judges won't be throwing the case out..... If Thaksin has chosen this course of action, and we all know he has knobbled the AG, then we can assume that the judges will decide what he pays them to decide.

Get your head out of your arse and realize for once that you are in Thailand.

Personal insults do not make your imparted wisdom any more credible.

I realise that I am in Thailand which makes me wonder whether you have learned about Thailand. Just how many judges do you think, as you put it, "will decide what he pays them to decide" with the "he" in this case being Thaksin?

And this "knobbled AG" - the one that is now looking into overturning the decision to drop terrorist charges against Thaksin, how much under the influence of Thaksin do you think he is?

One would think it should be you looking for the last place you left your head.

Edited October 30, 2013 by fab4

[Tanlic]

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.

Like!!!! your post a lot..........unfortunately Che Guevara passed on years ago......But they do say hell has a new boss, so If I go there I'll put a good word in for you and se if he'll send a few of the boys along

Edited October 30, 2013 by Tanlic

[timewilltell]

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.

Well they clearly state they do not accept the Amnesty Bill and have been fighting that corner for a long time. I agree with them that political parties have no business giving amnesty to people who have criminally caused death. The forum for that is the judicial process.

And they ARE at court defending themselves which seems to me the right and proper thing to be doing.

As for suing the Public Prosecutor, they are quite entitled to sue him under the law. If the Public Prosecutor is failing in his duty by bowing justice to pressure from one political party and thereby abrogating his official responsibility then that is fair enough.

However Thailand has long used the law for political infighting which is all about why Abhisit and Suthep are facing lawsuits for basically doing their duty as a strong arm tactic to encourage them to accept the amnesty bill designed to bring Thaksin back and reunite him with his confiscated billions. A bill than fee few people support, which is extremely divisive and has zero intent on reconciliation, in fact does not even pretend to be any more. The PTP are forcing through for the sole benefit of Thaksin and the red shirts he used to force his way, the democrats 'helped' by the bill are collateral damage, collateral damage the red shirts don't like any more than the democrats but for similar reasons applied to opposite factions - that the OTHER side should not get away with the killing of THEIR people.

So Abhisit and Suthep hold the high ground here and I hopeThais realize the difference between the two sides for and against this Bill. Personally I have my doubts that many either understand, want to understand or are sufficiently informed to see what the Bill means.

If the PTP were in any way serious about the reconciliation then the bill would not have been summarily amended by the scrutinizing committee without debate and without the consent or knowledge (supposedly) of the prime minister who is doing all she can to completely avoid any responsibility or connection with this political time bomb - is anyone surprised?

I do however agree with your final paragraph and additionally that Thailand needs a thorough and complete overhaul of their judicial system and laws if the country hopes to make any progress.

It seems to me the government has done nothing to further the progress of the country and has focussed on popularist looking schemes that are in reality fronts for unparalleled corruption and diversion of the countries finances into the pockets of individuals. I don't think anything they have done has truly benefitted Thai society as a whole but sad to say that the Democrats are a very weak opposition and have no cogent policies to fight this government which is looking more and more as a precursor to a democratic dictatorship Cambodian style which may be one reason for Thaksin & Hun Sen to marry their family offspring together to tighten ties medieval European style.

It is scary!

[timewilltell]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

What blind ignorance! Do you even understand that Suthep & Abhisit are the ones saying they will fight their case in court?

They are surely not perfect but at least they are standing up to be counted.

Perhaps you misunderstand their action against the public prosecutor has little if anything to do with the case on which they are indicted. That case is going ahead anyway and they have turned up to answer charges. I am sure they neither expect nor want that case to be dropped. They do however wish to expose the public prosecutor for his vicarious actions which look to be determined through political interference rather than the course of proper justice.

Edited October 30, 2013 by timewilltell

[Baerboxer]

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.

The outgoing AG dismisses charges against Thaksin for his terrorist involvement in the 2010 armed insurgency, despite widely available evidence under some vague mumbling of "not in the country at the time". Clearly not aware of Skype and video links and modern technology. Then conveniently retires.

His successor declares he will be unbiased, uphold the law free from political influence. Then he announces a decision to prosecute the 2 people who most loudly oppose the amnesty bill aimed at whitewashing the fugitive criminal Thaksin, who his predecessor declined to prosecute, for carrying out their lawful sworn duty to uphold the law and protect citizens from the armed insurgents. The investigation of the "facts" was carried out by the DSI, which has become a byword for carrying out actions aimed against opponents of the government, whilst ignoring other cases, or failing to bring anyone to book. The investigators overlooked the role of their own DSI leader who was part of CRES, but no doubt simply following orders, as he does now for different masters.

I can see why you don't think any of this is a political decision. Simply following the course of the law, eh ?

So when will the AG be charging the PM/DM and her cousin the FM over the illegal issuing of a passport to their sibling? You know, the one the PM/DM refuses to answer the Ombudsman's questions on and hopes will go away as part of brother's whitewash.

The government / law relationship here is reminiscent of the old Soviet Bloc and Mao regimes - judges did what they were told and bent the law to suit the desired outcome. PTP would have it more so if they could.

[Nickymaster]

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.

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.

Nothing political...yeeah right.

Cabinet grants Bt10-million bonus to Office of Attorney-General staffs

October 29, 2013 6:00 pm

The Cabinet Tuesday approved Bt10-million allocation for paying bonuses to administrative staffs and employees of the Office of the Attorney-General.

The allocation came from the remaining money of the 2012 fiscal year budget, Government Spokesman Teerat Ratanasevi said.

The Nation

And we are not even talking about the retirement packages Thaksin is giving out. You remember the conversation between Thaksin and the former defense minister?

Edited October 30, 2013 by Nickymaster

[Baerboxer]

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.

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.

Nothing political...yeeah right.

Cabinet grants Bt10-million bonus to Office of Attorney-General staffs

October 29, 2013 6:00 pm

The Cabinet Tuesday approved Bt10-million allocation for paying bonuses to administrative staffs and employees of the Office of the Attorney-General.

The allocation came from the remaining money of the 2012 fiscal year budget, Government Spokesman Teerat Ratanasevi said.

The Nation

And we are not even talking about the retirement packages Thaksin is giving out. You remember the conversation between Thaksin and the former defense minister?

I'm sure FAB4 will see this as a pure coincidence !

Let's see - Thaksin terrorist charge dropped, but promise to review (555); opposition charged in double quick time; 10 Million baht awarded from government funds for bonus.

No - sure doesn't look political to FAB4 -

Edited October 30, 2013 by Baerboxer

[Thaddeus]

I would suggest a change of title, to Public Persecutor.

Except it isn't that public is it.

[Thaddeus]

I'm sure FAB4 will see this as a pure coincidence !

Let's see - Thaksin terrorist charge dropped, but promise to review (555); opposition charged in double quick time; 10 Million baht awarded from government funds for bonus.

No - sure doesn't look political to FAB4 -

You, I, and many others know that it isn't a bonus, but playing the starts with the letter game that some of them are so fond of, it does begin with a B.

[Nickymaster]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

I miss the "Have a nice day" part

[Nickymaster]

Guilty as sin otherwise why would they not want justice to take its course, String them up a right pair of murderers.

I miss the "Have a nice day" part