PM given 15 more days to defend against rice charges

[Lite Beer]

PM given 15 more days to defend against rice charges
By Digital Content :

BANGKOK, March 13 - Thailand's National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) on Thursday resolved to extend the dateline for caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to defend herself against negligence of duty charges in connection with her government's rice pledging scheme.

The caretaker premier earlier assigned her lawyer Norawit Lalaeng to acknowledge charges on her behalf. Shortly afterward, the lawyer requested the NACC chairman for a 45-day extension for his client, reasoning that more time was needed to examine substantial evidence and witnesses.

Ms Yingluck is obliged to submit her written statement to the NACC before the March 14 deadline.

NACC secretary-general Sansern Poljieak said on Thursday that the graft-busting agency meeting agreed to extend the deadline for 15 more days.

The NACC unanimously decided last month to press charges of neglect of duty against Ms Yingluck in her capacity as chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee (NRPC).

The caretaker premier criticised the NACC for pressing charges against her after only 21 days of investigation.

She said she has performed her duty as prime minister in the past two years with honesty to protect the national interest but the NACC’s decision to investigate the Democrat Party’s allegations against her could be unfair to her for she should be given enough time to find witnesses and evidence to defend herself.

The charges relate to heavy financial losses to the state of as much as Bt200 billion (some US$ 6 billion) according to the NACC.

Vicha Mahakhun, a NACC member, said earlier that there was sufficient evidence and witnesses clearly pointing to Ms Yingluck’s awareness of corruption in the rice subsidy programme and rice distribution.

Her failure to stop corruption has severely damaged the country and the NACC will investigate the case, said Mr Vicha, adding that Ms Yingluck had also received a warning letter from the Office of the Auditor General which told her to stop the project but she insisted on continuing it.

She was also informed of corruption in the rice pledging programme during parliamentary debates and from reports on the rice subsidy operations, supplied to her by chairman of the subcommittee on paddy pledging scheme, that the subsidies had created Bt200 billion in damages while many farmers did not receive payment.
(MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2014-03-13

[Scamper]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

[winstonc]

those witnesses might be a bit thin on the ground...going down ..(proof read)..for the moosehead..

[clockman]

Nothing will happen,T.I.T. Never does, never will do!

[The Deerhunter]

those witnesses might be a bit thin on the ground...going down ..(proof read)..for the moosehead..

Improving No emoticons this time. Do you know something about witnesses being threatened??????

Edited March 13, 2014 by The Deerhunter

[northernjohn]

Will she even bother to show up or just send her lawyer?

It would take more than 15 days for her to figure it out.

[northernjohn]

Nothing will happen,T.I.T. Never does, never will do!

Well you are wrong.

That is how Dubai got a new citizen who will soon be joined by his sister.

Maybe they can put on a duet act entitled "I did it my way".

[JesseFrank]

Vicha Mahakhun, a NACC member, said earlier that there was sufficient evidence and witnesses clearly pointing to Ms Yingluck’s awareness of corruption in the rice subsidy programme and rice distribution.

Her failure to stop corruption has severely damaged the country and the NACC will investigate the case, said Mr Vicha, adding that Ms Yingluck had also received a warning letter from the Office of the Auditor General which told her to stop the project but she insisted on continuing it.

Oh that's why the red scum doesn't like him

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/710630-pro-govt-group-rallies-against-nacc-members-with-faeces/?p=7557448

The group put used sanitary napkins and excrement in a coffin in front of a banner featuring the face of NACC member Vicha Mahakun, before setting the coffin on fire. They later hung bags of faeces at the agency's gates next to the banner.

Sornrak Malaithong, leader of the group, said the NACC had to explain why Vicha was allowed to be on duty when he has not been royally endorsed.

Edited March 13, 2014 by JesseFrank

[bigbamboo]

I wonder if BB is going to man up and come to his little sister's aid. The rice scam was his baby and now she's left holding it, with nothing but;her 'incompetent aides' to help her but no mention of the incompetent ministers he appointed though.

But going by his recent comments about her weak leadership and with Chalerm barely disguising his desire for her job she appears to be up poo creek.

[tomacht8]

"The charges relate to heavy financial losses to the state of as much as Bt200 billion (some US$ 6 billion) according to the NACC."

Whopping 200 Billion Baht.
200.000.000.000 Baht

Thailand lacks a functioning tax police and a police against organized crime.
I do not understand why Thailand does not attempt to retrieve the stolen money, or any part there of.
Bank accounts checking, Tax declare reviews, house searchings, Documents impounding, assets checks, assets freezing,
assets confiscate, Quick court hearings and Jail without bail for the culprits.

The (rich) criminals in Thailand almost never come into the prison.

This country does not reward the honest people, but the criminals.

Reforms are overdue.

Edited March 13, 2014 by tomacht8

[Old Man River]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

Bangkok Pundit wrote a brilliant piece on the charges today. Have a look.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[tomacht8]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

Bangkok Pundit wrote a brilliant piece on the charges today. Have a look.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I have read the article, he is informativ but not brilliant.

The article neglected unfortunately many facts of the specific case,

and is very general in terms of the responsibility of a state or committee leader.

It's not about the error behavior in a private company but about the misconduct in the trust duty in the administration and assistance of public money.

Right here is up to the leader / manager of public funds for special participation and information requirements.

And I hope Thailand can check and present the entire money flow of transmitters and receivers.

Maybe the greatest theft of tax funds in Thailands history!?

[Old Man River]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

Bangkok Pundit wrote a brilliant piece on the charges today. Have a look.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I have read the article, he is informativ but not brilliant.

The article neglected unfortunately many facts of the specific case,

and is very general in terms of the responsibility of a state or committee leader.

It's not about the error behavior in a private company but about the misconduct in the trust duty in the administration and assistance of public money.

Right here is up to the leader / manager of public funds for special participation and information requirements.

And I hope Thailand can check and present the entire money flow of transmitters and receivers.

Maybe the greatest theft of tax funds in Thailands history!?

I didn't say he was brilliant (although he might be), but rather that the article was brilliant.

He explains that the criminal charges don't relate to the "misconduct in the trust duty in the administration of public money" nor whether she directly participated in the corruption or not, but rather that there were rumors that she heard that corruption was taking place and by not following up on these rumors, she is as guilty as those that took the money. If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you, but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top.

It reminds me of just a few days ago, when Sukhumbhand was yellow carded by the EC because of statements made by some of his people, despite his not being involved.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[JesseFrank]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

Bangkok Pundit wrote a brilliant piece on the charges today. Have a look.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I have read the article, he is informativ but not brilliant.

The article neglected unfortunately many facts of the specific case,

and is very general in terms of the responsibility of a state or committee leader.

It's not about the error behavior in a private company but about the misconduct in the trust duty in the administration and assistance of public money.

Right here is up to the leader / manager of public funds for special participation and information requirements.

And I hope Thailand can check and present the entire money flow of transmitters and receivers.

Maybe the greatest theft of tax funds in Thailands history!?

I didn't say he was brilliant (although he might be), but rather that the article was brilliant.

He explains that the criminal charges don't relate to the "misconduct in the trust duty in the administration of public money" nor whether she directly participated in the corruption or not, but rather that there were rumors that she heard that corruption was taking place and by not following up on these rumors, she is as guilty as those that took the money. If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you, but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top.

It reminds me of just a few days ago, when Sukhumbhand was yellow carded by the EC because of statements made by some of his people, despite his not being involved.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you, but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top.

But doesn't that make it dereliction of duty ?

[tomacht8]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

Bangkok Pundit wrote a brilliant piece on the charges today. Have a look.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I have read the article, he is informativ but not brilliant.

The article neglected unfortunately many facts of the specific case,

and is very general in terms of the responsibility of a state or committee leader.

It's not about the error behavior in a private company but about the misconduct in the trust duty in the administration and assistance of public money.

Right here is up to the leader / manager of public funds for special participation and information requirements.

And I hope Thailand can check and present the entire money flow of transmitters and receivers.

Maybe the greatest theft of tax funds in Thailands history!?

I didn't say he was brilliant (although he might be), but rather that the article was brilliant.

He explains that the criminal charges don't relate to the "misconduct in the trust duty in the administration of public money" nor whether she directly participated in the corruption or not, but rather that there were rumors that she heard that corruption was taking place and by not following up on these rumors, she is as guilty as those that took the money. If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you, but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top.

It reminds me of just a few days ago, when Sukhumbhand was yellow carded by the EC because of statements made by some of his people, despite his not being involved.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

"If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you,"

"but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top."

Remains the jail question.

I understand this 15 days more, as a warning.

The NACC has already shown that they probably has more than 200 billion Baht evidence of misappropriated funds!

Now I wonder how it is with her duty to cooperate?

200 Billion from 800 Billion in dark cannels.

This are not private funds from YL, this is the money from many many tax payers.

She is the chairwoman from the rice committee, EX PM now C-PM.

She is responsible, who else?

Does she help to procure the missing money?

Does she actively helps to limit the damage?

When she sued the members of the NACC, this helps little!

If she hinders investigations, provides no information and does not support the entire investigation, - in her function as chairwoman and CPM -,

then that is obfuscation.

Then jail without bail.

Sorry for my bad english.

[dickyknee]

"The NACC unanimously decided last month to press charges of neglect of duty against Ms Yingluck in her capacity as chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee (NRPC).

The caretaker premier criticised the NACC for pressing charges against her after only 21 days of investigation."

she has now been given more time to defend herself than she alleges it took to investigate and compile the case in the first place.

[Old Man River]

It is good that the NACC has given her an additional 15 days instead of 45. Yingluck left her credibility at the door some time ago, and she has been dodging the committee from the get go. And let's not forget, not only is the UDD placing pressure on the NACC but Yingluck herself is trying to impeach one of the NACC committee members ( in addition to trying to impeach six judges of the Constitutional Court ). The NACC has worked on this case since December, 2012, so Pheu Thai's assertions are found-less. Yingluck clearly doesn't realize how serious this is. But the NACC do, and they are fulfilling their constitutional duty to pursue this investigation - as it uncovers the worse fiscal scandal in the country's history.

Bangkok Pundit wrote a brilliant piece on the charges today. Have a look.

http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I have read the article, he is informativ but not brilliant.

The article neglected unfortunately many facts of the specific case,

and is very general in terms of the responsibility of a state or committee leader.

It's not about the error behavior in a private company but about the misconduct in the trust duty in the administration and assistance of public money.

Right here is up to the leader / manager of public funds for special participation and information requirements.

And I hope Thailand can check and present the entire money flow of transmitters and receivers.

Maybe the greatest theft of tax funds in Thailands history!?

I didn't say he was brilliant (although he might be), but rather that the article was brilliant.

He explains that the criminal charges don't relate to the "misconduct in the trust duty in the administration of public money" nor whether she directly participated in the corruption or not, but rather that there were rumors that she heard that corruption was taking place and by not following up on these rumors, she is as guilty as those that took the money. If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you, but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top.

It reminds me of just a few days ago, when Sukhumbhand was yellow carded by the EC because of statements made by some of his people, despite his not being involved.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

If the charges were malfeasance or dereliction of duty carrying charges of Impeachment and banning I would easily agree with you, but putting someone in jail for not acting on rumors when everyone knows YL was most probably out shopping anyway, is a bit over the top.

But doesn't that make it dereliction of duty ?

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[GentlemanJim]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

those witnesses might be a bit thin on the ground...going down ..(proof read)..for the moosehead..

Improving No emoticons this time. Do you know something about witnesses being threatened??????

Do proof read and check your spaces, capitals and punctuation or lack of it....please (the problem with telling others to proof read posts is that you kinda set yourself up for a permanent fail don't you, and everyone is going to check your posts thereafter).

[commie Joe]

Well from what I see & not going into this or that because unlike some on TV I openly admit that I dont know the ins & outs of it. However what I do know is that the only way that MPs can be corrupt is by making Laws that benifit their business interest. MPs make policies then the people that handle it all are the invisable men/women in the offices . They are the very same employee 's Civil servents that are there all the time & it is they that get paid to do what the Government says. Really is impossible for a PM to over see what they are doing . It is down to the heads of depts to oversee & to make sure that the policies are carried out. Why do TV members choose to ignore the facts as to who actually has the means to fiddle civil servents.

[DrTuner]

A hippie peace necklace ? &lt;deleted&gt; ? What's next, a swastika ?

[JRSoul]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

[GeorgeO]

those witnesses might be a bit thin on the ground...going down ..(proof read)..for the moosehead..

Improving No emoticons this time. Do you know something about witnesses being threatened??????

I don't think there was any suggestion there of witnesses being threatened ... it seemed to me to suggest that there are now likely to be far fewer people prepared to give her the support she needs...!!

[northernjohn]

I wonder if BB is going to man up and come to his little sister's aid. The rice scam was his baby and now she's left holding it, with nothing but;her 'incompetent aides' to help her but no mention of the incompetent ministers he appointed though.

But going by his recent comments about her weak leadership and with Chalerm barely disguising his desire for her job she appears to be up poo creek.

Is he criticizing her caddy?

I think he should also criticize her clone.

[northernjohn]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

The sooner the better.

[Old Man River]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

Negligence is a given. However, under 157, she can be put in jail without evidence of her profiting from this policy. Under 157 it doesn't matter. They just need proof that she was aware of rumors that corruption may have existed to be given a jail sentence.

Where do you draw the line?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Old Man River]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

Negligence is a given. However, under 157, she can be put in jail without evidence of her profiting from this policy. Under 157 it doesn't matter. They just need proof that she was aware of rumors that corruption may have existed to be given a jail sentence.

Where do you draw the line?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

These give more info on what YL may be facing:

http://asiancorrespondent.com/120545/malfeasance-dereliction-of-duty-and-the-problems-of-selective-enforcement/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangkokPundit+%28Bangkok+Pundit%29

http://www.thailawonline.com/images/documents/Criminal%2520Code%2520of%2520Thailand.pdf

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Old Man River]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

Negligence is a given. However, under 157, she can be put in jail without evidence of her profiting from this policy. Under 157 it doesn't matter. They just need proof that she was aware of rumors that corruption may have existed to be given a jail sentence.

Where do you draw the line?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

These give more info on what YL may be facing:

http://asiancorrespondent.com/120545/malfeasance-dereliction-of-duty-and-the-problems-of-selective-enforcement/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangkokPundit+%28Bangkok+Pundit%29

I tried, but can't attach Thailawonline's English version of the Criminal Act, but there are others you can find online anywhere. Section 157 leaves open a lot of room for different interpretations.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Old Man River]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

Negligence is a given. However, under 157, she can be put in jail without evidence of her profiting from this policy. Under 157 it doesn't matter. They just need proof that she was aware of rumors that corruption may have existed to be given a jail sentence.

Where do you draw the line?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

These give more info on what YL may be facing:

http://asiancorrespondent.com/120545/malfeasance-dereliction-of-duty-and-the-problems-of-selective-enforcement/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BangkokPundit+%28Bangkok+Pundit%29

I tried, but can't attach Thailawonline's English version of the Criminal Act, but there are others you can find online anywhere. Section 157 leaves open a lot of room for different interpretations.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

http://www.samuiforsale.com/law-texts/thailand-penal-code.html

This is a translation in English. Look at 157. It's in Chapter 2 Malfeasance in Office.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Lupatria]

Looks like the famous "it will happen next week-strategy" becomes a standard in all areas now.

[JRSoul]

I agree 100%! I think she should be banned or 5 years or more if possible for the rice scheme. She clearly was derelict in doing her job. Clearly she knew it was a financial fiasco, but she continued it. If that isn't malfeasance, then I don't know what is.

What I disagree with is jailing her, because there were rumors of corruption and she didn't act on the rumors. There are no charges directly against her for corruption, only that she could have heard rumors and didn't Act on what she heard. Due to this, they are making it out to where she is as guilty as those who stole the money. I disagree with this.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

She is charged with negligence. The charges of corruption will come later when evidence of her profiting from this policy is presented.

Negligence is a given. However, under 157, she can be put in jail without evidence of her profiting from this policy. Under 157 it doesn't matter. They just need proof that she was aware of rumors that corruption may have existed to be given a jail sentence.

Where do you draw the line?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I don't accept "rumours". The policy was tried before under her brother's government and was known to enable corruption, with IIRC only 37% reaching farmers, and most of the recipients were far from poor. She re-implemented the policy without remedial changes KNOWING it to be a source of corruption, and claiming it was to raise the income of POOR farmers, KNOWING that it had failed to do any such thing.