PM Yingluck warned by NACC she may lose an important opportunity

[icommunity]

There are over 25,000 outstanding probes and corruption cases that would have been wiped clean by YL's governments Amnesty Bill fiasco.

NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest.

The 'judges' have not resolved the issue raised by caretaker PM that it took only 21 days to complete the investigation from the date the complain was filed while the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme has been going on for about four years. Instead of addressing the issue raised, it related and connected the investigation as has been going on as far back as December 2012. This argument is irrelevant and open up more questions on their independence, transparent and free from conflict of interests.

The 'judges' also did not reply directly to a written request to change investigators before the investigation concluded - they went to the press instead.

The caretaker PM did not raise the issue in confrontation but that it is now a public interest wanting to know why AV's case has been dragging for about 4 years.

The NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and guilty of conflict of interest.

So perhaps a better question would be why the former PTP government, which took a much promoted role in "fighting" corruption. thought that slashing the NACC's budget was the right way to expedite all these cases.

Despite Mister Fixit's rude aspersions on Chupup's intelligence, which adds nothing to the discussion, this discussion is indeed about YL and the charges she faces. She would be better trying to defend the charges and show her innocence rather than attempt to discredit the process.

While raising the issues of public interest, the caretaker PM said she would cooperate fully through justice process. There was no attempt to discredit the process that is of much public interest and expected scrutiny. My comment is still about "NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest."

It is about the issues raised by caretaker PM that have not been resolved by NACC 'judges'. Not about the 25,000 cases that might be linked to "Amnesty bill" and the speculated suspicions that PTP led government slashing the NACC's budget.

Bringing up the Amnesty Bill and the 'slashing budget' issues and linked them to the issues raised by caretaker PM only create more questions and that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest.

[zakk9]

The NACC spokesman disclosed that he was approached by former Pheu Thai MPs asking whether the commission could be lenient with her. He said he told the ex-MPs that the NACC would not be an independent organization if it did not do its job properly after having been intimidated.

Interesting how there are no comments about this!!!!!!!

Seems to me the PTP is trying to be a little heavy handed and possibly threatening the NACC? Just a thought. Now you can blast me all you want.

It's the nature of the Red Shirts to intimidate and bully their opponents. We are simply getting too used to it to notice.

[icommunity]

NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest.

The 'judges' have not resolved the issue raised by caretaker PM that it took only 21 days to complete the investigation from the date the complain was filed while the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme has been going on for about four years. Instead of addressing the issue raised, it related and connected the investigation as has been going on as far back as December 2012. This argument is irrelevant and open up more questions on their independence, transparent and free from conflict of interests.

The 'judges' also did not reply directly to a written request to change investigators before the investigation concluded - they went to the press instead.

The caretaker PM did not raise the issue in confrontation but that it is now a public interest wanting to know why AV's case has been dragging for about 4 years.

The NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and guilty of conflict of interest.

Really, did you actualy read the thread, and this is not about A/V its about YL

Chupup doesn't come over as being too bright ...

Sorry, I withdraw that remark re Chupup. I misread the quotes. The remark should have been directed at icommunity...

Happy, Baerboxer?

I wonder how smart were you in making those remarks.

[Lupatria]

“Mr Vicha jokingly said that he could not reply the prime minister’s Facebook message in the social media because they were not Facebook friends yet.”

Amazing Thailand:

A via Skype remote controlled government and a virtual PM on Facebook. Could that be the reason behind the 'tablets for all kids" programm?

[casualbiker]

RT @tulsathit: Yincluck arrives in Chiang Rai, says she will seek advice on meeting NACC over rice scheme charges. via @nnanews

Let's hope the Skype connection is solid tonight.

Other posters have a belief that Thaksin fly's in and out of CR airport. Maybe no need for Skype!

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[casualbiker]

There are over 25,000 outstanding probes and corruption cases that would have been wiped clean by YL's governments Amnesty Bill fiasco.

NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest.

The 'judges' have not resolved the issue raised by caretaker PM that it took only 21 days to complete the investigation from the date the complain was filed while the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme has been going on for about four years. Instead of addressing the issue raised, it related and connected the investigation as has been going on as far back as December 2012. This argument is irrelevant and open up more questions on their independence, transparent and free from conflict of interests.

The 'judges' also did not reply directly to a written request to change investigators before the investigation concluded - they went to the press instead.

The caretaker PM did not raise the issue in confrontation but that it is now a public interest wanting to know why AV's case has been dragging for about 4 years.

The NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and guilty of conflict of interest.

So perhaps a better question would be why the former PTP government, which took a much promoted role in "fighting" corruption. thought that slashing the NACC's budget was the right way to expedite all these cases.

Despite Mister Fixit's rude aspersions on Chupup's intelligence, which adds nothing to the discussion, this discussion is indeed about YL and the charges she faces. She would be better trying to defend the charges and show her innocence rather than attempt to discredit the process.

While raising the issues of public interest, the caretaker PM said she would cooperate fully through justice process. There was no attempt to discredit the process that is of much public interest and expected scrutiny. My comment is still about "NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest."

It is about the issues raised by caretaker PM that have not been resolved by NACC 'judges'. Not about the 25,000 cases that might be linked to "Amnesty bill" and the speculated suspicions that PTP led government slashing the NACC's budget.

Bringing up the Amnesty Bill and the 'slashing budget' issues and linked them to the issues raised by caretaker PM only create more questions and that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest.

Icommunity. Why do you insist on calling the investigators "judges "?

You do know this is NOT a criminal case, Right?

This is a parliamentary case hence the involvement of the Senate.

" He explained that the case against Ms Yingluck is divided into two parts. The first part concerns the criminal charges against her which will be decided by the attorney-general and the second part regarding the impeachment process which is to be undertaken by the Senate."

Source : http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/nacc-agrees-indict-pm-rice-deal-scandal/

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited February 26, 2014 by casualbiker

[zakk9]

“Mr Vicha jokingly said that he could not reply the prime minister’s Facebook message in the social media because they were not Facebook friends yet.”

Amazing Thailand:

A via Skype remote controlled government and a virtual PM on Facebook. Could that be the reason behind the 'tablets for all kids" programm?

Are you indicating that this is not the normal way of running a country? Is Thailand really that far ahead of the others?

[Prbkk]

More than 40 years, they and their predecessors have achieved virtually nothing and now they choose to act with olympic record speed? Dracula in charge of the blood bank.

[casualbiker]

More than 40 years, they and their predecessors have achieved virtually nothing and now they choose to act with olympic record speed? Dracula in charge of the blood bank.

Who were the predecessors to the NACC?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[RubbaJohnny]

He also dismissed the Pheu Thai partys accusation that the NACC had deliberately dragged its feet on the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme which has been going on for about four years whereas it took the commission only 21 days on complete the probe against the prime minister on the rice pledging scheme.

He defended that the probe on the rice pledging scheme began in December 2012 and took more than a year to complete and not 21 days as suggested by the ruling party.

Yet Yingluck's case has progressed more in 14 months than Abhisit's case in 4 years?

But they're not dragging their feet ...no way.

The two cases are drastically different. Yingluck's is orders of magnitude more serious.

That is correct. It is bleeding billions of baht a month. Rice is coming in from across borders. The budget was 500 billion baht yet they still owe 130 billion. I am surprised they took as long as they did actually. I would be suing the court for neglect of duty. Every single day they waste not processing this is costing tax payers millions of baht.

In a transparent corrupt free normal accountancy I would agree.

However in the looking glass world of local sleaze its hard to say.

Firstly the actual loss,debt is very hard to quantify.

By delaying payment of what is effectively a welfare subsidy/bribe you could see this as cash positive.

Most busineses delay payments to creditors until the last moment,indeed without such cashflow many states and firms would be bust.

The transfer payment will in reality be borrowed skimmed from one government accessible source (and they are scraping the barrel) e.g BAAC or GSB etc.It will then be rationed to farmers who will by now be unlikely to spend it in the real economy where it will stimulate growth.The money will largely be needed to service debt.

I concur with your substantive point that it is bad news.

The scheme could hardly have been worse and has encouraged ,corruption,smuggling,waste of good food in a hungry world ,dmage to the reputation of one of the nations leading earners and loss of one of the few areas where Thailnd was a world leader ( I think renting daughters,jetski scams and hub bubble are better ignored by those hoping to promote a wholesome image)

Iw ill leave it for others to judge the motives of the scheme

1.Help poor majority attain sustainable income and free them from the cycle of debt and loan sharks

2.Get re-elected at any cost

3. A multi billion pork barrel sufficient to grease enough snouts until the high speed gravy train payola is ready

With the general lack of foresight and integrity I fear it is a wasteful combo of all three .

ACTION

Debt moratorium,encourage inefficient farm into co-op or larger combines

Remove all product subsidy to ensure only market price and conform to WTO,if the poor need income support allow taxpayers to choose through the ballot system and enforce collection,abjure waste.

This solves the smuggling ,rotating rice scalping

A strong clear irrevocable message to the corrupt would be for some rich important types to do time,unlikely I know but as long as a culture of impunity persists little will change.

Set aside some unwanted tract in the capital as the unique permitted demo area e.g Snam Luang half each for the 'shirts' and let them shout and abuse each other while allow the rest of society to work rest and play in safety without fear of waitin in traffic for hospital appointment or maimed by evil.

[webfact]

NACC member rules out double standard in rice graft probe
By Digital Content



BANGKOK, Feb 26 – The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has rejected charges of double standards in its investigation of alleged corruption in the government’s rice pledging scheme.

NACC member Vicha Mahakhun said the investigation was jointly conducted by all NACC members, and emphasised that they could never be influenced by anyone to be biased.

He was referring to caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s statement on her Facebook page, questioning the NACC’s transparency and neutrality investigating her role in the rice scheme.

The NACC has summoned Ms Yingluck to acknowledge corruption charges tomorrow, in her capacity as chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee.

Mr Vicha said the prime minister would be required to personally acknowledge the charges but she could postpone it if necessary.

If she fails to show up, the NACC will mail the accusation documents to her, and she can explain in writing or verbally, he said.

Mr Vicha ruled out any NACC double standards in the case against the current government and an earlier case regarding the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s rice guarantee programme.

Investigation of the government-to-government rice deal by the Yingluck government began in December 2012 which is more than a year ago, not only 21 days as alleged by the Pheu Thai Party, he said.

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

The NACC was always told by government agencies that the required documents on the government’s rice stocks in 2009 and 2010 (in the Abhisit government) were damaged and lost in the massive 2011 floods, said Mr Vicha.

He said the NACC would conclude its investigation, as demanded by the Pheu Thai Party and make public, calling on the pro-government United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship to stop pressuring the NACC.

Pheu Thai spokesman Prompong Nopparit said the party's legal team was wrapping up a petition requesting the NACC to remove Mr Vicha from the rice corruption case.

He said Mr Vicha was charged with prejudice and double standards in the corruption charges against Ms Yingluck.

The next move is to seek endorsements from 20,000 people to lodge a complaint with the Senate president to remove Mr Vicha from the NACC, he said. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2014-02-26

[Mister Fixit]

Bringing up the Amnesty Bill and the 'slashing budget' issues and linked them to the issues raised by caretaker PM only create more questions and that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest.

And you know this precisely how? Have you met senior NACC civil servants, as I have?

Please show solid evidence of your assertions, not just your assumptions and prejudices that dance around inside your head ...

[Scamper]

" ... the NACC would not be an independent organization if it did not do its job properly after having been intimidated. Mr Vicha jokingly said that he could not reply the prime minister’s Facebook message in the social media because they were not Facebook friends yet. "

Indeed, the attacks that the NACC have been under - from the UDD, from Pheu Thai, from this administration, and from Yingluck herself - have been unprecedented - by a country mile. They are also a direct threat to the institution, all independent agencies, and the judicial system itself. For a sitting prime minister - who faces possible removal from office over this - it is outrageous that Yingluck will communicate with it only indirectly ( and even then with admonitions ! ) through facebook. It is outrageous that Yingluck will accord greater respect to a woman who sells cloth at a market hundreds of kilometers away from Trat, than to the institution that she is constitutionally obligated to honour, and who have the power to indict her on impeachment charges, that could lead to her constitutional removal from office. The NACC in its message yesterday, is clearly indicating that it is in Yingluck's best interests to show up tomorrow, as that is the last remaining chance she has to address the serious questions that have arisen from this inquiry. If instead, Yingluck does not show up, if instead the UDD surround the NACC offices and threaten the committee members, all eyes will be on Chalerm, and whether he will now place greater emphasis on the protection of the judicial process than on his loyalty to Thaksin, Yingluck and to Pheu Thai. The fact that Yingluck has been openly been called on to defy the independent agencies and the courts by the UDD is jaw-dropping, and a clear, clear sign that this administration is embarking on a lawless path in their desperate quest to hold on to power at any cost.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Scamper

[zakk9]

The messages come across from NACC very clear. The fact that PTP tries to sabotage the legal process comes as no shock.

[Mister Fixit]

I wonder how smart were you in making those remarks.

Smarter than you, certainly. Or are you threatening me?

Oh, and it's 'you were', not 'were you' - not Thai by any chance, are you ...?

Edited February 26, 2014 by Mister Fixit

[Pops]

He also dismissed the Pheu Thai partys accusation that the NACC had deliberately dragged its feet on the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme which has been going on for about four years whereas it took the commission only 21 days on complete the probe against the prime minister on the rice pledging scheme.

He defended that the probe on the rice pledging scheme began in December 2012 and took more than a year to complete and not 21 days as suggested by the ruling party.

Yet Yingluck's case has progressed more in 14 months than Abhisit's case in 4 years?

But they're not dragging their feet ...no way.

"misplacing" 500 billion baht is no small matter

So what you mean is, that Abhisit's case, could have been handled faster.

Because it commonly takes longer to handle "no small matters" due to sheer size.

[icommunity]

There are over 25,000 outstanding probes and corruption cases that would have been wiped clean by YL's governments Amnesty Bill fiasco.

NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest.

The 'judges' have not resolved the issue raised by caretaker PM that it took only 21 days to complete the investigation from the date the complain was filed while the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme has been going on for about four years. Instead of addressing the issue raised, it related and connected the investigation as has been going on as far back as December 2012. This argument is irrelevant and open up more questions on their independence, transparent and free from conflict of interests.

The 'judges' also did not reply directly to a written request to change investigators before the investigation concluded - they went to the press instead.

The caretaker PM did not raise the issue in confrontation but that it is now a public interest wanting to know why AV's case has been dragging for about 4 years.

The NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and guilty of conflict of interest.

So perhaps a better question would be why the former PTP government, which took a much promoted role in "fighting" corruption. thought that slashing the NACC's budget was the right way to expedite all these cases.

Despite Mister Fixit's rude aspersions on Chupup's intelligence, which adds nothing to the discussion, this discussion is indeed about YL and the charges she faces. She would be better trying to defend the charges and show her innocence rather than attempt to discredit the process.

While raising the issues of public interest, the caretaker PM said she would cooperate fully through justice process. There was no attempt to discredit the process that is of much public interest and expected scrutiny. My comment is still about "NACC 'judges' had lose an important opportunity to explain that it is independence, conducted investigation transparently and that it is free of conflict of interest."

It is about the issues raised by caretaker PM that have not been resolved by NACC 'judges'. Not about the 25,000 cases that might be linked to "Amnesty bill" and the speculated suspicions that PTP led government slashing the NACC's budget.

Bringing up the Amnesty Bill and the 'slashing budget' issues and linked them to the issues raised by caretaker PM only create more questions and that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest.

Icommunity. Why do you insist on calling the investigators "judges "?

You do know this is NOT a criminal case, Right?

This is a parliamentary case hence the involvement of the Senate.

" He explained that the case against Ms Yingluck is divided into two parts. The first part concerns the criminal charges against her which will be decided by the attorney-general and the second part regarding the impeachment process which is to be undertaken by the Senate."

Source : http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/nacc-agrees-indict-pm-rice-deal-scandal/

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

My comment was on the issue that were raised by caretaker PM that was mentioned in this news report as an accusation that the "judges" dismissed - "Pheu Thai party’s accusation that the NACC had deliberately dragged its feet....". It has nothing to do with what are involved in the case that you've brought up here.

ALSO "The NACC spokesman disclosed that he was approached by former Pheu Thai MPs asking whether the commission could be lenient with her. He said he told the ex-MPs that the NACC would not be an independent organization if it did not do its job properly after having been intimidated."

The NACC spokesman should disclosed the names of former PTP MPs. His remark makes people wonder if he is not accusing the ex-MPs of trying to influence investigations.

The NACC's independence, transparency and free of conflict of interest are now on the 'spotlight' of public interests and scrutiny.

[than]

Interesting, Pheu Thai cry of double standard, but when NACC ask actual administration document about allegation of corruption against Abhisit they not send or this document have disappeared in 2011 flood ( for remember under YL administration) where the evidence Mr Prompong

If I was strong evidence against my foes I will protect them and send them quickly to the requesting agency......

[Stan7444]

Can they actually strip a defendants right to a copy of evidence and exhibits that are going to used against a person. Don't people hire lawyers to collect and examine these documents on their behalf?

Excellent point in seems the NACC are making up the rules as they go along. None of this is pointed out in the original charter forming the NACC. Any defendant's appointed attorney or representative should have the legal right to copies of all documents being used in this matter. In a court of law this is normal, but the NACC is not a court of law. I also read recently that one or more of the members of NACC is an old Thaksin enemy and was involved in the 2006 coup.

[Mister Fixit]

" ... the NACC would not be an independent organization if it did not do its job properly after having been intimidated. Mr Vicha jokingly said that he could not reply the prime minister’s Facebook message in the social media because they were not Facebook friends yet. "

Indeed, the attacks that the NACC have been under - from the UDD, from Pheu Thai, from this administration, and from Yingluck herself - have been unprecedented - by a country mile. They are also a direct threat to the institution, all independent agencies, and the judicial system itself. For a sitting prime minister - who faces possible removal from office over this - it is outrageous that Yingluck will communicate with it only indirectly ( and even then with admonitions ! ) through facebook. It is outrageous that Yingluck will accord greater respect to a woman who sells cloth at a market hundreds of kilometers away from Trat, than to the institution that she is constitutionally obligated to honour, and who have the power to indict her on impeachment charges, that could lead to her constitutional removal from office. The NACC in its message yesterday, is clearly indicating that it is in Yingluck's best interests to show up tomorrow, as that is the last remaining chance she has to address the serious questions that have arisen from this inquiry. If instead, Yingluck does not show up, if instead the UDD surround the NACC offices and threaten the committee members, all eyes will be on Chalerm, and whether he will now place greater emphasis on the protection of the judicial process than on his loyalty to Thaksin, Yingluck and to Pheu Thai. The fact that Yingluck has been openly been called on to defy the independent agencies and the courts by the UDD is jaw-dropping, and a clear, clear sign that this administration is embarking on a lawless path in their desperate quest to hold on to power at any cost.

Well said, Scamper, you have your finger right on it.

If the UDD did turn up at the NACC offices at Sanam Bin Nam Road tomorrow, they may like to remember that there's an Army barracks just a kilometer away - it only takes a phone call from one senior officer in the NACC to another in the Army ...

On another humorous point, the Thaivisa spell-checker for 'Yingluck' comes up as 'Duckling' for an alternative. 'Yingluck's' comes up as 'Suckling' 'Nuff said there ... Sucking up to her brother?

Edited February 26, 2014 by Mister Fixit

[zakk9]

He also dismissed the Pheu Thai partys accusation that the NACC had deliberately dragged its feet on the probe against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva over the rice price guarantee scheme which has been going on for about four years whereas it took the commission only 21 days on complete the probe against the prime minister on the rice pledging scheme.

He defended that the probe on the rice pledging scheme began in December 2012 and took more than a year to complete and not 21 days as suggested by the ruling party.

Yet Yingluck's case has progressed more in 14 months than Abhisit's case in 4 years?

But they're not dragging their feet ...no way.

"misplacing" 500 billion baht is no small matter

So what you mean is, that Abhisit's case, could have been handled faster.

Because it commonly takes longer to handle "no small matters" due to sheer size.

Read the article on the previous page. It's explained there.

[icommunity]

I wonder how smart were you in making those remarks.

Smarter than you, certainly. Or are you threatening me?

Oh, and it's 'you were', not 'were you' - not Thai by any chance, are you ...?

You were threatening yourself. You were frightened off from intelligent discussion.

Come on, have some intelligent discussion on the topic. Not making silly remarks.

[antimedia]

Let's see. Suthep has refused to appear to acknowledge his murder indictment since last December -- he's too busy? What are the consequences for him? Absolutely nothing I would say. Whether a court or an administrative agency, as is the NACC, how are the proceedings prejudiced by having a lawyer acknowledge the charges on behalf of the accused when appearing in person could be a security issue? To threaten the accused with due process rights under the circumstances is beyond any type of logical reasoning.

Never fails, the what about Suthep obsession.

[Mister Fixit]

I wonder how smart were you in making those remarks.

Smarter than you, certainly. Or are you threatening me?

Oh, and it's 'you were', not 'were you' - not Thai by any chance, are you ...?

You were threatening yourself. You were frightened off from intelligent discussion.

Come on, have some intelligent discussion on the topic. Not making silly remarks.

Me? Frightened of YOU?

Having an intelligent discussion with you is the biggest oxymoron I have read on here in ages.

[antimedia]

There are no security issues at the NACC building at Sanam Bin Nam. I worked there for 18 months, teaching English to four Deputy Secretaries-General, one of whom is now the Secretary-General. They were all very efficient and diligent people, as senior civil servants should be in any country. I'd say they are also as impartial as it's possible to be in Thailand, all trained lawyers with Master's degrees and one working on his PhD.

Have you met these NACC 'judges', icommunity? No, thought not.

I have known them for 18 months and I say they are highly impartial and professional . And worked off their feet. All of them had desks, tables and even the floor with 3 feet high stacks of files - that's how rampant corruption is in Thailand.

And they are not 'judges'. They are investigators, just trying to get at the truth. That's their job, and it's the courts job to look at the investigation and decide whether to proceed or not, depending on the information laid before them.

There's a huge lawn outside the building where Yinger's helicopter could land, and there's an Army barracks half a mile away. What's she worried about?

Apart from being found guilty, of course ...

Holy Jesus! Don't hit these red raggers with the truth front on, they won't be able to get back on their bar-stool after falling off.

[icommunity]

Bringing up the Amnesty Bill and the 'slashing budget' issues and linked them to the issues raised by caretaker PM only create more questions and that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest.

And you know this precisely how? Have you met senior NACC civil servants, as I have?

Please show solid evidence of your assertions, not just your assumptions and prejudices that dance around inside your head ...

Have I met senior NACC civil servant? Why should I tell you like the way you claimed you had?

What assertions I made and that you wanted evidence for them?

The perception and the more questions surfaced that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law, that they have no interest in independence, that they don't conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest are of public interest and scrutiny now.

BTW, you quoted only part of my comment and it became completely out of context. Not smart at all.

[icommunity]

I wonder how smart were you in making those remarks.

Smarter than you, certainly. Or are you threatening me?

Oh, and it's 'you were', not 'were you' - not Thai by any chance, are you ...?

You were threatening yourself. You were frightened off from intelligent discussion.

Come on, have some intelligent discussion on the topic. Not making silly remarks.

Me? Frightened of YOU?

Having an intelligent discussion with you is the biggest oxymoron I have read on here in ages.

What kind of intelligent discussion is this? You are off to my rubbish bin automatically from now.

Edited February 26, 2014 by icommunity

[pookiki]

Let's see. Suthep has refused to appear to acknowledge his murder indictment since last December -- he's too busy? What are the consequences for him? Absolutely nothing I would say. Whether a court or an administrative agency, as is the NACC, how are the proceedings prejudiced by having a lawyer acknowledge the charges on behalf of the accused when appearing in person could be a security issue? To threaten the accused with due process rights under the circumstances is beyond any type of logical reasoning.

Suthep has resigned from the National Assembly and is formally only an ordinary citizen. Yingluck is the democratically elected prime minister, which has been pointed out by her supporter repeatedly, and is responsible to the nation in every way thinkable.

So, it's ok for an ordinary citizen to skip out on a murder indictment? On the other hand, I am very encouraged that you acknowledge that Yingluck is the democratically elected PM. As such, it isn't ok for her to be represented at the NACC by an attorney without prejudicing her due process rights? Does the NACC realize what's happening in Bangkok?

[zakk9]

Bringing up the Amnesty Bill and the 'slashing budget' issues and linked them to the issues raised by caretaker PM only create more questions and that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law. They have no interest in independence, conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest.

And you know this precisely how? Have you met senior NACC civil servants, as I have?

Please show solid evidence of your assertions, not just your assumptions and prejudices that dance around inside your head ...

Have I met senior NACC civil servant? Why should I tell you like the way you claimed you had?

What assertions I made and that you wanted evidence for them?

The perception and the more questions surfaced that the NACC 'judges' have shown their double standard in the administration of the rule of law, that they have no interest in independence, that they don't conducting investigation transparently and that they were guilty of conflict of interest are of public interest and scrutiny now.

BTW, you quoted only part of my comment and it became completely out of context. Not smart at all.

In other words: You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

[RubbaJohnny]

Fortunately we can be sure the NACC is the one institution that is squeaky clean !

There is an old saying

Quies custodiet ipsos custodes

Freely translated who shall ovesee these magistrates.

It was lovely to learn their spokesman say the would never be swayed,though I'm not sure the article siad never ever.

While the individual scandals bribes,nepotism reveal instances of corruption the elephnat in the room is that a tradition of impunity has created a society that condones and often admires corrupt people.This is not unique to Thailand.