Thai opinion: A thin line between 'set zero' and 'ground zero'

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME
A thin line between 'set zero' and 'ground zero'
Tulsathit Taptim

BANGKOK: -- Thaksin Shinawatra has no qualms about stating the obvious, but one part of his latest interview may have taken the cake. "I can't spell 'lose'," he told a Thai-language newspaper. Although that came in the don't-push-me context, it still sounded extraordinary given all the amnesty and reconciliation noises emanating from the Pheu Thai camp. Thank you, Thaksin, but we all already knew it's a war.

I guess my proposal a few weeks ago - that all of his seized money went to charity - stands no chance now. Thaksin definitely wants it back, although the question of whether it was stolen from him or he had stolen it has all but torn the country apart. He told the interviewer he wanted the amnesty to go all the way, something the initial amnesty bill could not do. Let's call it a "set zero [eestart]", he said.

Whether Thailand can start over or go back to Square One should perhaps be the question for later. As of now, it has to be about two main technical points: Can a law be enacted to absolve political "crimes" of the past without contravening the present charter? And even if Thaksin is "pardoned" or covered by an "amnesty", will that make him eligible to reclaim the seized money?

The answer to the first question has to do with the very top and very bottom of the present Constitution. Article 6 states that no law can breach or contradict the charter, and Article 309 endorses the legal clampdown on Thaksin and Co. in the wake of the 2006 coup. To be more specific, Article 309 protects legal action prescribed by and carried out under the 2006 (post-coup) interim Constitution.

How can a law undo the post-coup legal action without breaching the present Constitution? The simplest, but not necessarily easy, way is to abolish the current charter. That explains why Pheu Thai has been so keen about writing a brand-new charter. There's one little problem, though, because drafting a new charter is a long process and no democratic country can function without a Constitution, at least on an interim basis.

Pheu Thai can pass the long-standing bill to set up an "independent" Constitution Drafting Assembly but the trick is how to get Article 309 out of the way when Thailand is under an interim Constitution. Common sense dictates that while Thailand awaits a new charter, the current one should serve as the interim highest law of the land.

Article 309 is the crux of the whole matter. Pheu Thai and Thaksin were a little shy in the beginning, so they took a lot of detours around that article for fear of criticism that the charter reform agenda was simply meant to help him. The need to pretend is giving way to political urgency.

If Thaksin wants to "reset" the amnesty bill, a constitutionally "safe" way to do it is to first erase Article 309 from the current Constitution. Considering he is no longer shy about his agenda, we may soon see that happening.

Now, the second question. Will amnesty give him the right to reclaim the money? Some experts say "absolutely", because, legally speaking, when there is no A then there can be no B. The seizure of money is pretty much a "civil" action that follows a "criminal" conviction. When the conviction is no more, then there is no base for the civil action.

Others say it depends on the final wording of the amnesty bill if/when it becomes law. If Thaksin is "forgiven", then allowing him to get back the money will be like allowing a pardoned thief to repossess what he had stolen from a bank at gunpoint. Moreover, if Thaksin allows himself to be "pardoned", doesn't that mean he effectively admits to committing the crime? That will be equivalent to the aforementioned robber saying, "Thank you. I'm extremely sorry for what I did, but can I get the loot now?"

One way to get around those headaches is to make the bill (or law) say no crime ever took place. The said legislation must comprehensively clear Thaksin. If he did nothing wrong, then taking his money was wrong. He or his party or his government can manoeuvre to get it back later once such a bill is passed.

This "no-crime-happened" bill will also find Article 309 standing in its way. Which brings us back to where we started. To add to the complexities, any bill alluding to the possibility of the money being returned could easily be classified as a "financial bill", which would require Yingluck Shinawatra's name on it.

It's a badly messed-up ball of string, and this is about legal technicality alone. When we throw in the Urupong rally, which could get fiercer and bigger, and some red shirts' growing resistance to "forgiving the murderers", resentment against Thaksin in the military and other political aspects, "setback" may sound more accurate than "set zero".


-- The Nation 2013-10-30

[Thai at Heart]

The answer to the first question has to do with the very top and very bottom of the present Constitution. Article 6 states that no law can breach or contradict the charter, and Article 309 endorses the legal clampdown on Thaksin and Co. in the wake of the 2006 coup. To be more specific, Article 309 protects legal action prescribed by and carried out under the 2006 (post-coup) interim Constitution.

Ummm. Have a coup and write a new one? If the army can do it over and over again, I can't see the issue with a businessman doing it.

[chainarong]

Thaskin has to be sure that he is on friendly ground if and when he returns back to ground zero , Thailand, security had one sniff of danger when he was in Burma awhile back and cancelled the shebang , the danger that haunts him in Thailand is strong and he's minders should be well aware that if he comes back to Thailand he comes with a target on he's head, this then is a case for Thaskin to stay away, while he is out of Thailand a certain amount of Peace prevails, this cannot be guaranteed on he's return , this in turn could result in a Thai civil war, reds V yellow tops and others. .

[bigbamboo]

Mr T can't spell lose? I know English isn't his first language so I'd be willing to help out.

It's L O S E as in 'Even with a telegraph pole as Pheu Thai's candidate we won't lose gubernatorial election in Bangkok".

Everyone remembers that!

[worgeordie]

This megalomaniac will never give up until he is in power again,

with his money returned plus interest @ 7%,and he is free to

put his critics and perceived enemies to the sword,and return

to reaping ill gotten gains again from Thailand,

regards Worgeordie

[renaissanc]

The TAT will soon have more sights to promote: burning tires, colourful groups beating each other up, bombs exploding, buildings on fire, sreaming ambulances, deserted shopping malls, etc.

[waza]

Cocky little diktator

Edited October 30, 2013 by waza

[rametindallas]

The answer to the first question has to do with the very top and very bottom of the present Constitution. Article 6 states that no law can breach or contradict the charter, and Article 309 endorses the legal clampdown on Thaksin and Co. in the wake of the 2006 coup. To be more specific, Article 309 protects legal action prescribed by and carried out under the 2006 (post-coup) interim Constitution.

Ummm. Have a coup and write a new one? If the army can do it over and over again, I can't see the issue with a businessman doing it.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't there a national referendum on the 2007 Constitution? The 'businessman' (Thaksin?) would at least need a national referendum if you want equal justification.

[indyuk]

This megalomaniac will never give up until he is in power again,

with his money returned plus interest @ 7%,and he is free to

put his critics and perceived enemies to the sword,and return

to reaping ill gotten gains again from Thailand,

regards Worgeordie

Well Worgeordie your comment is a golden opportunity for you to follow-up with a list of the offenses you perceive that Thaksin committed for which the Democrat Gang have tangible evidence that Thaksin ever committed a crime whilst prime minister of Thailand.

The Coups is a crime.

The slaughter of the protesters is a crime.

And I suspect, based on the Democrat Fear that Thaksin's conviction was brought about by a conspiracy designed to destroy his political adversary. After all if Thaksin is a real criminal Abhisit could have got rid of him via impeachment.

[Robby nz]

Paving the way for the criminals return :

Read somewhere in the last couple of days that the tax man wants to remove the tax on money being brought into the country from overseas tax haven bank accounts.

That is money that has been taken out of Thailand and stashed away to avoid tax in the first place.

This would open the way for Thaksin to bring his ill gotten gains into the country without having to pay tax.

Plenty of others who would also be in the same position, must have been a huge amount of corruption money that has flown the country.

[billd766]

This megalomaniac will never give up until he is in power again,

with his money returned plus interest @ 7%,and he is free to

put his critics and perceived enemies to the sword,and return

to reaping ill gotten gains again from Thailand,

regards Worgeordie

Well Worgeordie your comment is a golden opportunity for you to follow-up with a list of the offenses you perceive that Thaksin committed for which the Democrat Gang have tangible evidence that Thaksin ever committed a crime whilst prime minister of Thailand.

The Coups is a crime.

The slaughter of the protesters is a crime.

And I suspect, based on the Democrat Fear that Thaksin's conviction was brought about by a conspiracy designed to destroy his political adversary. After all if Thaksin is a real criminal Abhisit could have got rid of him via impeachment.

How about the murders of 2,500 "alleged" drug dealers, perhaps the Tak Bai massacre or even the Krue Se killings.

They all ahppened on Thaksins watch so if Abhisit is charged then so should your hero Thaksin.

After all both were PM at the relevant times.

I just remembered, you believe in double standards as do all the trusty Red Shirt and Thaksin supporters.

[billd766]

Paving the way for the criminals return :

Read somewhere in the last couple of days that the tax man wants to remove the tax on money being brought into the country from overseas tax haven bank accounts.

That is money that has been taken out of Thailand and stashed away to avoid tax in the first place.

This would open the way for Thaksin to bring his ill gotten gains into the country without having to pay tax.

Plenty of others who would also be in the same position, must have been a huge amount of corruption money that has flown the country.

A lot of it dates back to the 1997 crash too.

[kurnell]

Mr T can't spell lose? I know English isn't his first language so I'd be willing to help out.

It's L O S E as in 'Even with a telegraph pole as Pheu Thai's candidate we won't lose gubernatorial election in Bangkok".

Everyone remembers that!

Seems he can spell 'run away' though. Perhaps he is a Python fan?

[virtualtraveller]

Simple. Let him get his money back then put him on trial under this elected government to confiscate it again because he's on record saying it was 'his' money, when in fact it was apparently his maid's, and wife's and kids, 'cause the law states MPs cannot own more than 5% of a company.

[FangFerang]

I don't like any of the arguments fielded by either side here. "Article 309 endorses the legal clampdown on Thaksin and Co. in the wake of the 2006 coup" this is a law allowing non-democratic princlples to function inside a democratic framewok. "Common sense dictates that while Thailand awaits a new charter, the current one should serve as the interim highest law of the land." This a circular argument. It is like saying, "British people should be hated, therefore; all British people are bad." It is too much like asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" The question itself makes referents to an invalid assumption.

"I can't spell 'lose'," he told a Thai-language newspaper.

Really? So none of this is to benefit yourself above the welfare of others....what a crock. This whole thing is like watching a train wreck that no one can prevent. You are obviousl just as dirty as the rest, but did not have a seat at the 'shadow table'. Once you have one, how will you benefit Thais?

And what part of the public is served by the giving away of the money to "charities"? At my last glance, corruption eats funds faster than a blue whale in starvation mode. Maybe one baht in twenty would serve the designees.

Worse, Agh! It is like listening to children arguing about whose birthday cake it really is, when ten children in the room all were born today.

YUCK.

[Baerboxer]

This megalomaniac will never give up until he is in power again,

with his money returned plus interest @ 7%,and he is free to

put his critics and perceived enemies to the sword,and return

to reaping ill gotten gains again from Thailand,

regards Worgeordie

Well Worgeordie your comment is a golden opportunity for you to follow-up with a list of the offenses you perceive that Thaksin committed for which the Democrat Gang have tangible evidence that Thaksin ever committed a crime whilst prime minister of Thailand.

The Coups is a crime.

The slaughter of the protesters is a crime.

And I suspect, based on the Democrat Fear that Thaksin's conviction was brought about by a conspiracy designed to destroy his political adversary. After all if Thaksin is a real criminal Abhisit could have got rid of him via impeachment.

Can you actually impeach someone who resigned as PM, left office and then grabbed it back illegally, refusing to go? Or was it the army simply removing a wannabee dictator because the police were too inept, corrupt, frightened to do their sworn duty?

Is removing a person who occupies the seat of the PM, but is no longer entitled to do so actually a coup?

Thaksin has been convicted of a criminal offence by a court and chose to flee the country rather than appeal. He also faces more serious outstanding criminal charges should he return without the blanket whitewash he is trying to engineer. Has he has been convicted of committing a crime and sentenced to jail, it would appear he is a real criminal, hence the reason he chose to become a fugitive from justice.

The deaths that occurred during the 2010 Thaksin instigated insurgency were deplorable. Insurgents, security forces, journalists and innocent citizens lost their lives because one man was trying to manipulate his return to power regardless of cost or consequences. Dropping the terrorist charges against this person shows the lengths his corruption has reached.

Perhaps you should follow up with the reasons why you think Thaksin is innocent of the crime for which the court convicted him, and the other outstanding criminal charges.