Thai anti-graft panel to charge hundreds of Thai MPs

[Smokemachine]

Wish for the best outcome.

And saw the news from Bangkok post today Ahbisit unveiling the reform plan blueprint at the conference with Thai and foreign media.

I think it is good to share with others who are concerned. As they always mentioned what reform plan are the anti-govt talking about.

[marcusd]

Yes, anyone unfamiliar with the 'Thai Way' read right: graft charges for trying to make a partly appointed legislature fully elected. Has so many westerners outraged and up in arms, via the keyboard

The principles are RIGHT but the poeple doing this and what they are doing to this nation are not worthey of rule.... Suthep may be a bad egg also but he is speaking words that MAY be some what on the way to starting a DEMOCRACY. Remember, our western nations became democrat only after autocratic rule (Kings Queens etc). It was Goby who brought down communism in Russia.

It was Franco in Spain and he restored their modern day democracy.

It was and this may be starting here.

[surangw]

the list of those not involved is a blank page.

[icare999]

The investigation only says that there are sufficient grounds in which to bring charges. It is not a finding of guilt. The cases have to go through a judicial inquiry and often, the charges cannot be proven, or the "evidence" is shown to be unreliable. In other cases, the evidence is sufficient to obtain a guilty verdict, in which case, the guilty party should indeed suffer the penalty.

The charges may have been politically motivated, but that doesn't mean they may not be valid. I would expect that most will be dismissed. That being said, by the time the cases make their way through court, the PTP will have been re-elected and the MPs sitting for at least 2 years.The Democrats also face politically motivated charges that could see the party dissolved if successful. Again, while unlikely, it is doubtful the case(s) will be resolved anytime soon.

Some of you will be enjoying PM Yingluck for another term of office. Isn't that marvelous?

You just sent me a detailed reply to another topic, then come out with this pig sick wind up post. We all have to believe GK Yingluck back in after a landslide un opposed win. Your minority posters may well be right about your next government -but will be very shy after when the courts throw them out of office.

if theirs an election at all which is only 50/50 and then can't have a parliament due to 95% rule without further elections which will take months and then if Taksin does not try and send in his thugs and civil war erupts so army has to step in and all other factors which will stop a new Yingluk government not least being it appears Taksin has not bought the army

I think chances of Yingluk lasting all that is almost none

Only exit seems to be civil war or Army take over to rid Thailand of the Taksin cancer

[Spartakos]

Spartakos, on 07 Jan 2014 - 21:46, said:

I suggest to reform the PTP party to be composed of just 1 person think how much trouble it would save the country. Cut the brigade of useless cronies and just direct all the stolen money to 1 account. Simplicity is the key.

http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/162240/dictatorship

dictatorship, form of government in which one person or a small group possesses absolute power without effective constitutional limitations.

I can think of someone who might have that as the ultimate dream. Can anyone guess who I'm thinking of?

You can't be referring to a man from afar , he is just misunderstood, it is all just a big politically motivated misunderstanding .

[blabth]

Most probably I missed something, I thought a parliament is there to change, establish modify laws. To vote for change the constitution of the upper house to make it fully elected is against the constitution because it would alter the constitution. To monitor if changes or newly laws are in line with the constitution is the task of the constitutional law which will send the proposal to the parliament with the interpretation and the parliament has to modify the law until it meets the constitution. How can a court reject the basic rights of the parliament to establish laws. I must have missed something.......

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[SamMunich]

fab4 posted:

And if you knew a bit more you wouldn't keep on posting rubbish.

Firstly it wasn't 220 MP's who were banned for 5 years, it was 110.

Secondly they were not all guilty of corruption - they were executive members of the TRT political party that was dissolved after it's Chief Executive Officer, General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya was found guilty of electoral fraud.

Thirdly, said General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya has just been aquitted of those charges and therefore the TRT should theoretically not have been dissolved.

...

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

fab4, please don't twist the facts.

There were altogether 220 MPs banned, first the TRT leadership board and then 2 years or so later the leadership board of the party, that stepped in as a replacement for TRT. Colloquial called House No 111 and House 109.

True is however, that both TRT and it's re-incarnation were dissolved by law due to electoral fraud, committed by members of the party leadership. If a simple party member is found to have cheated, a red or yellow card is issued and that person is prohibitted from standing for election for 5 years, if red-carded. However if a leadership member is found to have commited such fraud, the whole party is to be dissolved... by law.

In general I think, that the relevant law is already existing, so no new law will be needed. But the problem is how to enforce it. As politics is about BIG money, there are lots of people dealing below surface to ensure "the right person" is being (s-)elected. And where money doesn't do it, brute force is also always available.

Now about the two chamber system here, the reasoning of the court is interesting, i.e. why the Upper Chamber may not be elected in full. You can find more details at a blog by Bangkok Pundit,- at least that's where I found it.

An alternative setup is used in Germany, where the second chamber consists of delegates (also not elected) of the several states (16 to date) and the number of seats relates to the number of people of each state. These are delegates of the state government, not elected!. And they are to make sure that the insterests of each state is being taken into account during legislative work by the (elected) parliament. Just so that you know...

Sam

[englishoak]

seeing as the tomatoes and bananas seem to be wetting their pants every opportunity to get in a childish stab at each i think ill go fishing instead...

I was going to comment on the topic but ill just leave it with.......more talk no action.

[Robby nz]

fab4 posted:

And if you knew a bit more you wouldn't keep on posting rubbish.

Firstly it wasn't 220 MP's who were banned for 5 years, it was 110.

Secondly they were not all guilty of corruption - they were executive members of the TRT political party that was dissolved after it's Chief Executive Officer, General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya was found guilty of electoral fraud.

Thirdly, said General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya has just been aquitted of those charges and therefore the TRT should theoretically not have been dissolved.

As I Said before I don't usually read the garbage you post but as you have decided to have another pick at me I will again answer.

There were 2 lots who were banned for 5 years, one lot of 101 and another of 109 a total of 220, both have recently returned.

Election fraud is corruption

While the Gen has been aquitted the others involved have not, so much for your theory.

[noitom]

The investigation only says that there are sufficient grounds in which to bring charges. It is not a finding of guilt. The cases have to go through a judicial inquiry and often, the charges cannot be proven, or the "evidence" is shown to be unreliable. In other cases, the evidence is sufficient to obtain a guilty verdict, in which case, the guilty party should indeed suffer the penalty.

The charges may have been politically motivated, but that doesn't mean they may not be valid. I would expect that most will be dismissed. That being said, by the time the cases make their way through court, the PTP will have been re-elected and the MPs sitting for at least 2 years.The Democrats also face politically motivated charges that could see the party dissolved if successful. Again, while unlikely, it is doubtful the case(s) will be resolved anytime soon.

Some of you will be enjoying PM Yingluck for another term of office. Isn't that marvelous? width=20 alt=wub.png pagespeed_url_hash=242644079> width=31 alt=clap2.gif pagespeed_url_hash=892957568>

This kind of Thai announcement in and of itself is political maneuvering. Everyone knows that "charges" in Thailand cannot be taken seriously. In Thailand, there is no real thing such as an investigation, followed by an indictment, followed by handcuffing and perp walking, followed by grand jury, followed by a trial or plea. There is no real judicial process for white collar crimes in Thailand committed by Thais.

[chainarong]

Well for starters the senate should be elected by the people , the unrepresented swill that is the present lot ,is not accountable to the people, so therefore represent nobody but themselves and their mates, the charges against these hundreds of MP's is a window dressing exercise of XXX large proportion, of seen to be doing something but doing SFA, members who do get banned should be drummed out for life ,regardless of the five years penalty, it's all smoke and mirrors , when you can be let out on parole to attend parliament then the system is a disgrace.

[scorecard]

The investigation only says that there are sufficient grounds in which to bring charges. It is not a finding of guilt. The cases have to go through a judicial inquiry and often, the charges cannot be proven, or the "evidence" is shown to be unreliable. In other cases, the evidence is sufficient to obtain a guilty verdict, in which case, the guilty party should indeed suffer the penalty.

The charges may have been politically motivated, but that doesn't mean they may not be valid. I would expect that most will be dismissed. That being said, by the time the cases make their way through court, the PTP will have been re-elected and the MPs sitting for at least 2 years.The Democrats also face politically motivated charges that could see the party dissolved if successful. Again, while unlikely, it is doubtful the case(s) will be resolved anytime soon.

Some of you will be enjoying PM Yingluck for another term of office. Isn't that marvelous? width=20 alt=wub.png pagespeed_url_hash=242644079> width=31 alt=clap2.gif pagespeed_url_hash=892957568>

Well I guess there are those few who consider it OK for a fake, a puppet, to be allowed to sit in the PMs chair.

Let's face it her actual track record is a total joke, let alone her avoidance of both attending parliament and avoiding contributions to any debate.

The good people of this country have an absolute right to expect that their leader be a real leader. It's not been happening for more than 2 years.

An election now will just be a stepping stone to the same unethical gang raping the country again.

Time for reform before the next election.

[SantiSuk]

Most probably I missed something, I thought a parliament is there to change, establish modify laws. To vote for change the constitution of the upper house to make it fully elected is against the constitution because it would alter the constitution. To monitor if changes or newly laws are in line with the constitution is the task of the constitutional law which will send the proposal to the parliament with the interpretation and the parliament has to modify the law until it meets the constitution. How can a court reject the basic rights of the parliament to establish laws. I must have missed something....... Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

That seems to be the nub of the issue. Was it legal or not that the majority Government has the powers or not to make constitutional amendments in the nature of those that were proposed and enacted? But I don't think blabth that we can assume that there is a blanket power for all governments worldwide to amend constitutions with unfettered powers. I would imagine that some constitutions require some changes to put to referendum for instance.

In many countries it would be an open and shut legal argument. The Government of the day would have taken legal advice on the legality of what they were about to do and on challenge taht advice would be the first thing to be called for and put into the public arena. Here of course matters seem to descend into a name calling

bloodbath of emotions with no analysis given to the facts.

The full facts are not in the public domain and anyone on this thread has no full facts. More colour-coded cat-calling is a complete <deleted> waste of time and just sinking to the Thai level of political debate.

The fact that the Democrats did not produce a legal analysis of why the PT propositions were illegal as their response at the time seems to argue that the charges are trumped up by an establishment desperate to restore its power. The fact that the PT party railroaded them through at night and insulated the PM and some (senior?) MPS from involvement seems to argue they are not trumped up.

Please please can some journalist to undertake a proper legal analysis of the situation?

Edited January 8, 2014 by SantiSuk

[scorecard]

Ban them from politics for 5 years? That was so successful last time Abhisit you moron...

if you even knew a little bit about what was going on in this country you would know that before they lost the election the Dems had a bill before the house that would have increased the term of ban to life.

This was dumped when PT took over.

You should also realize that the 220 who have just come back from their ban were in fact convicted of corruption and the ban was in fact the same thing as a jail term.

That means they are convicted fraudsters and they have been welcomed back with open arms by PT where they will fit in perfectly.

And if you knew a bit more you wouldn't keep on posting rubbish.

Firstly it wasn't 220 MP's who were banned for 5 years, it was 110.

Secondly they were not all guilty of corruption - they were executive members of the TRT political party that was dissolved after it's Chief Executive Officer, General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya was found guilty of electoral fraud.

Thirdly, said General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya has just been aquitted of those charges and therefore the TRT should theoretically not have been dissolved.

Incidentally the Democrat Party who were accused at the same time of bribing smaller parties to expose the involvement of high-profile Thai Rak Thai party members in election fraud in April 2006 were acquitted of all charges alt=whistling.gif pagespeed_url_hash=3700464609 width=19 height=18>

Funny, I remember at the time this happened the reporting said very clearly that he was caught red handed in doctoring the election / voting documents.

[bigbamboo]

I hear Paradorn is intent on becoming a politician. I just hope he realises he'll see even more courts in Thai politics than he did as a tennis player.

[Emptyset]

Saw this posted on Facebook:

Kaewmala ThaiTalk
November 19, 2013 via mobile · Edited
In Thailand, the land of cognitive dissonance and unrecognized ironies, men with guns and tanks can just tear up a constitution, flush it down the toilet, write a new one and shove it down our collective throat and we barely make a squeal.

But when the elected and authorized representatives of the people try to change even one part of that law previously shoved down our throat, the whole country hyperventilates as though it were a holy document not to be tampered with.

As a Thai you either find it hysterically funny or become depressed by it. Just like the pathetic Thai TV soaps, Thai politics is full of repetitive inane plots with almost no character development. The same, interchangeable inane cast never learn to act properly or improve their craft, keep on repeating their stupid lines over and over. Such an insult to the people's intelligence!

Also:

Gothom Arya, a former election commissioner and one of the country’s leading constitutional experts, said the investigations announced on Tuesday were “highly political.” The anticorruption commission, he said, had “charged the legislators for just doing their jobs,” adding that the controversy amounted to a power struggle between the governing party and elite bureaucrats “fighting for their turf.”

Precisely.

Edited January 8, 2014 by Emptyset

[Toscano]

This might be a way to try to put the Puea Thai party out of action fot the coming election .

One hopes that no action will be taken . This equates with putting a big stick in a hornets nest .

This is not a time to try to play legal/political games , when the country is so divided , it risks an explosion into civil war .

[Toscano]

Scorecard

" The good people of this country have an absolute right to expect that their leader be a real leader. "

There appears to be NO REAL LEADER at present , the only real leader Thailand has had in recent years was Thaksin Shinawatra .

[Alwyn]

QUOTE: "BANGKOK, January 7, 2014 (AFP) - Thailand's anti-graft panel said Tuesday it would press charges against hundreds of politicians, mostly from the party of embattled Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, over a failed attempt to amend the constitution."

"But 308 others from the upper and lower houses were found to have violated the law, based on a preliminary investigation, by drafting or proposing changes to the charter, panel spokesman Vicha Mahakun told reporters"

I thought the whole process of changing a consitution was that (basically) a person drafts a charter with the desired changes and presents it to be approved or not approved by a process of voting from the house? Does this mean now ANY charter which has been not approved or blocked, the person who wrote the charter is a criminal or will face criminal investigations? The fact that certain amendments got turned down should prove the process in place is working? How can people suggest ammendments if they are going to be ciminally investigated?

[webfact]

NACC resolves to press charges against 308 legislators
By Digital Content



BANGKOK, Jan 8 – Thailand's National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has resolved to file charges against 308 of 381 former legislators for their unlawful roles in passing a proposed charter amendment on the composition of the Senate.

NACC member Vicha Mahakun said 73 former MPs and senators including caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra were cleared of charges.

Among them, 65 lawmakers did not vote for the bill in the first and second readings but exercised their voting rights in the third reading while eight others including Ms Yingluck had no role in proposing the bill, nor passing it on the third reading, he said.

NACC members voted 7-2 to dismiss charges against the prime minister and seven other people.

Another NACC member, Prasart Pongsivapai, said 293 of the 308 ex-MPs and senators voted for the bill on Constitution amendment in all three readings while 15 others jointly sponsored the bill.

The 308 lawmakers are due to formally acknowledge the charges at the NACC January 15-17 during which time they will be allowed to give full clarifications, said Mr Vicha, who promised to speed up handling the case.

The NACC earlier instructed former parliament president Somsak Kiatsuranont and senate speaker Nikom Wairatpanij to acknowledge similar charges on Friday.

Referring to a recent complaint that Mr Vicha and Pakdi Pothisiri should be excused from the case for fear of possible bias, the NACC disagreed and confirmed that the pair’s role would not be a breach of Article 46 of the charter as alleged. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2014-01-08

[Emptyset]

This might be a way to try to put the Puea Thai party out of action fot the coming election .

One hopes that no action will be taken . This equates with putting a big stick in a hornets nest .

This is not a time to try to play legal/political games , when the country is so divided , it risks an explosion into civil war .

Well, that's the assumption:

[Ulic]

I would like to see real charges against real corruption not some BS vote in Parliament violation. A complete

load of crap and waste of time. Belittles the fight against real corruption.

[fab4]

fab4 posted:

And if you knew a bit more you wouldn't keep on posting rubbish.

Firstly it wasn't 220 MP's who were banned for 5 years, it was 110.

Secondly they were not all guilty of corruption - they were executive members of the TRT political party that was dissolved after it's Chief Executive Officer, General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya was found guilty of electoral fraud.

Thirdly, said General Thammarak Isaragura na Ayuthaya has just been aquitted of those charges and therefore the TRT should theoretically not have been dissolved.

...

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

fab4, please don't twist the facts.

There were altogether 220 MPs banned, first the TRT leadership board and then 2 years or so later the leadership board of the party, that stepped in as a replacement for TRT. Colloquial called House No 111 and House 109.

True is however, that both TRT and it's re-incarnation were dissolved by law due to electoral fraud, committed by members of the party leadership. If a simple party member is found to have cheated, a red or yellow card is issued and that person is prohibitted from standing for election for 5 years, if red-carded. However if a leadership member is found to have commited such fraud, the whole party is to be dissolved... by law.

In general I think, that the relevant law is already existing, so no new law will be needed. But the problem is how to enforce it. As politics is about BIG money, there are lots of people dealing below surface to ensure "the right person" is being (s-)elected. And where money doesn't do it, brute force is also always available.

Now about the two chamber system here, the reasoning of the court is interesting, i.e. why the Upper Chamber may not be elected in full. You can find more details at a blog by Bangkok Pundit,- at least that's where I found it.

An alternative setup is used in Germany, where the second chamber consists of delegates (also not elected) of the several states (16 to date) and the number of seats relates to the number of people of each state. These are delegates of the state government, not elected!. And they are to make sure that the insterests of each state is being taken into account during legislative work by the (elected) parliament. Just so that you know...

Sam

No twisting from me. 110 Executive members of the TRT Party were banned for 5 years.

[aimbc]

I think they should dissolve the entire party for conspiricy.

[atsiii]

The investigation only says that there are sufficient grounds in which to bring charges. It is not a finding of guilt. The cases have to go through a judicial inquiry and often, the charges cannot be proven, or the "evidence" is shown to be unreliable. In other cases, the evidence is sufficient to obtain a guilty verdict, in which case, the guilty party should indeed suffer the penalty.

The charges may have been politically motivated, but that doesn't mean they may not be valid. I would expect that most will be dismissed. That being said, by the time the cases make their way through court, the PTP will have been re-elected and the MPs sitting for at least 2 years.The Democrats also face politically motivated charges that could see the party dissolved if successful. Again, while unlikely, it is doubtful the case(s) will be resolved anytime soon.

Some of you will be enjoying PM Yingluck for another term of office. Isn't that marvelous?

But sincere question: how can it be illegal (a crime) for an elected representative to propose a change/amendment to the constitution? If the proposal is unconstitutional, then it will be thrown out. But how can it be a crime to propose a law or amendment? Conversely, how is it not a crime for anti-government protesters to propose doing away with elections altogether (as mandated by the same constitution), and instead propose that Thailand be governed by a ruling council of buddies, brothers, uncles and various other technocrats? Isn't what is going on ridiculously evident?

[DrTuner]

I think they should dissolve the entire party for conspiricy.

For some reason I first read they should dissolve the whole country. If Thais want to get rid of corruption, they have to start with themselves at the grass roots level.

[aimbc]

This might be a way to try to put the Puea Thai party out of action fot the coming election .

One hopes that no action will be taken . This equates with putting a big stick in a hornets nest .

This is not a time to try to play legal/political games , when the country is so divided , it risks an explosion into civil war .

It is funny you say that. This is the rght time to stop the corrupt politician and scrutinize the law. It is exactly these two that has been hijacking Thai Democracy. Only those who does not want to change and see no need to change and has the most to loose will resort to violence to keep it unchanged and in their favor.

[Harry2]

This might be a way to try to put the Puea Thai party out of action fot the coming election .

One hopes that no action will be taken . This equates with putting a big stick in a hornets nest .

This is not a time to try to play legal/political games , when the country is so divided , it risks an explosion into civil war .

Well, that's the assumption:

Emptyset - that is a fascinating action chart, please can you give us a source?

[fab4]

The investigation only says that there are sufficient grounds in which to bring charges. It is not a finding of guilt. The cases have to go through a judicial inquiry and often, the charges cannot be proven, or the "evidence" is shown to be unreliable. In other cases, the evidence is sufficient to obtain a guilty verdict, in which case, the guilty party should indeed suffer the penalty.

The charges may have been politically motivated, but that doesn't mean they may not be valid. I would expect that most will be dismissed. That being said, by the time the cases make their way through court, the PTP will have been re-elected and the MPs sitting for at least 2 years.The Democrats also face politically motivated charges that could see the party dissolved if successful. Again, while unlikely, it is doubtful the case(s) will be resolved anytime soon.

Some of you will be enjoying PM Yingluck for another term of office. Isn't that marvelous?

But sincere question: how can it be illegal (a crime) for an elected representative to propose a change/amendment to the constitution? If the proposal is unconstitutional, then it will be thrown out. But how can it be a crime to propose a law or amendment? Conversely, how is it not a crime for anti-government protesters to propose doing away with elections altogether (as mandated by the same constitution), and instead propose that Thailand be governed by a ruling council of buddies, brothers, uncles and various other technocrats? Isn't what is going on ridiculously evident?

Well it should be ridiculously evident, but for some reason certain people think it's perfectly normal for a Constitutional Court to make up their interpretations of the Constitution as they go along, ignoring any precedent (there being no legal basis to precedent in Thailand, I believe). This has led to a situation where feasibly, any government of whatever political party, will not be able to make any changes to the Military Junta written 2007 Constitution.

That a parliamentary effort to amend a contested constitution should be deemed either treasonous or to be usurping power is nonsensical. It would have been greeted with quizzical disbelief if it had not been a decision by one of Thailand’s highest courts. Because the country’s judiciary has become so highly politicized, decisions that defy legal logic now seem the norm.............. Thailand’s “interesting times” are set to continue. The biased judiciary may be required to intervene again, but it is probably content to have provided legitimacy for those seeking to bring down the elected government. http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/thailand-judiciary-politicized/

Which, of course, was the plan all along. We don't want the status quo threatened, do we?

Edited January 8, 2014 by fab4

[gabruce]

Yes, anyone unfamiliar with the 'Thai Way' read right: graft charges for trying to make a partly appointed legislature fully elected. Has so many westerners outraged and up in arms, via the keyboard

I think that if you look more carefully you will find that it's for how it was done, not generically drafting a law.