Inequality in Thai justice system is the root cause of all problems

[Faranguy]

So, Dr. Ukrit Mongkolnavin, was not happy that the courts didn't rule in favour of PTP and the caretaker government.

He hasn't heard of unbiased or professional judgement and rulings.

The system has to be reformed, so in the future, everything suits PTP.

Very distinguished man, and in, no way, politically motivated.

Yes indeed many things are politically motivated in this country including you, as I have noticed, in many comments you make. I see the similar uncompromising dedication to unsubstantiated rhetoric that poisons any desire for compromise in the dual issues of poverty and democratic imbalance, the 2 key issues polarizing this nation. How can there be reform without compromise? Only from the barrel of the gun I fear. It is coming, I have lived through it before and it is not worth it. Arguement is the only way to turn your back on violence. Insults only bring arguement to a halt leaving violence as the only recourse. I personally find insults about Yingluck weeping especially abhorrent coming from the inflated machismo of individuals suffering from the 'weak man' complex. Yes that is also an insult. Notice how it destroys any capacity for compromise between you and me? Lesson learned!

[Dogmatix]

Dr Ukrit is a man with a king sized chip on his shoulder. He was debarred from sitting from a Constitutional Court judge in 1998 because of his track record in supporting military dictatorship in 1991-92 as president of the unelected national assembly. He had fraudulently stood under the academia quota but he was unmasked as only an honorary professor and kicked off the bench.

Somewhere along the line he changed his politics from serving military dictatorship to serving the man in Dubai. He has no credibility whatsoever and I am surprised that The Nation bothers to print any of the drivel that spouts from his self-serving mouth..

[Dogmatix]

The worst problem in the justice system is the corrupt police force, followed by corrupt prosecutors.

[Why ask]

So, Dr. Ukrit Mongkolnavin, was not happy that the courts didn't rule in favour of PTP and the caretaker government.

He hasn't heard of unbiased or professional judgement and rulings.

The system has to be reformed, so in the future, everything suits PTP.

Very distinguished man, and in, no way, politically motivated.

Yes indeed many things are politically motivated in this country including you, as I have noticed, in many comments you make. I see the similar uncompromising dedication to unsubstantiated rhetoric that poisons any desire for compromise in the dual issues of poverty and democratic imbalance, the 2 key issues polarizing this nation. How can there be reform without compromise? Only from the barrel of the gun I fear. It is coming, I have lived through it before and it is not worth it. Arguement is the only way to turn your back on violence. Insults only bring arguement to a halt leaving violence as the only recourse. I personally find insults about Yingluck weeping especially abhorrent coming from the inflated machismo of individuals suffering from the 'weak man' complex. Yes that is also an insult. Notice how it destroys any capacity for compromise between you and me? Lesson learned!

I'm sorry.

Can you explain a bit further in detail? Especially how argument is the only way to turn one's back on violence.

Thanks in advance.

[Why ask]

The worst problem in the justice system is the corrupt police force, followed by corrupt prosecutors.

The worst problem in Thailand is money corrupting the so-called purveyors of justice. If it were not for that, justice would perhaps have a chance to exist in its true state. Cleaning from top down and bottom up is the only way to permit true justice in this country and, by and large, that's an impossible task in the next few decades. Failure doesn't just pertain to the police force itself, but those who run it and the courts, and court decisions (currently based upon backhanders).

[smileydude]

I disagree. The Thai justice system is NOT the root cause of all problems.

The root of all the problems is greed and no one stands for greed better then politicians.

The inherent weaknesses of laws is that they are often open ended for interpretation depending upon intent but even people like OJ simpson can be acquitted if you can afford the best lawyers so is that to say that the inequality of the US justice sytem is the root of all problems?

I think Dr. Ukrit himself is poltically biased. Who isn't?

Edited March 24, 2014 by smileydude

[WitawatWatawit]

More criticism of judges and more in-depth analysis of judicial decisions must be permitted without fear of being charged with contempt of court. For decades the media and legal experts have been hamstrung by judges towering over them like a sweeping cloak of the black plague. Question my omnipotence and you'll spend eternity in a forgotten jail. Thepchai Yong is one person who knows well this sword of Damocles. But even then, if this threat is diminished, there's no guarantee other forces will come into play. still, being able to report without fear or favour would be a start - albeit a dangerous one for those involved.

[Diddl]

Slandering and bashing Thailand and Thais again! So boring!

Maybe you have never lived in other countries because, believe me, they are no different. My experience has been the corruption and injustice of the judicial system in the UK. I hear all about the injustices and crooked law in America also, as well as Europe. What is so different in Thailand? All African and Asian countries were told that they should be prosperous like the British Empire and then like the American Empire, and so they copied the West and lost their morals and scruples. Who is to blame when the West would not leave these countries alone to live their lives as they always had, in peace and tranquillity, and taught them and encouraged them to the Western ways.

As for inequality, just look at the British system with their class system, or have you forgotten. Same for America – if you have money and fame, it excuses everything!

Anybody would think that all Westerners were honest and decent people and that only others in the world are corrupt and lawless. How ignorant can you get!

I think that some people on TV just want to live in a fantasy world and prefer to ignore the truth because it hits too close to home.

[fab4]

Let's face it, abhisit was "on the ball" back in 2006. It was only an electioneering throwaway promise and he didn't do anything about it, but the thought was nice, if insincere.

Judicial reform will be part of the Democrat Party's policies to create a moral society, Abhisit said yesterday.

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/08/07/headlines/headlines_30010532.php

(Note this was August 2006 and he was on the election campaign for the forthcoming election scheduled for October, an election some posters on here have denied was going to take place or even existed.)

An election which would take place a wee bit later than 60 days after the April 2006 elections were annulled, you mean?

So, since Abhisit got to form a government in which the Democrat party was one of the coalition partners with the government having a minimal majority, you think that sweeping reforms could have been made? With UDD protests, Songkhran fun and so? With a lost 2008 which saw Thaksin selected PMs only busy with trying to get their lord and master back, ignoring the Global Financial crisis around them? A crisis the Abhisit government tried to cope with and rather nicely even with all obstruction?

Anyway, even you seem to agree reforms are necessary when you blame Abhisit didn't do anything.

I won't be drawn into off topic pointless arguments with you.

I have already made my views clear on the need for reform in the judicial sector.

Edited March 24, 2014 by fab4

[surangw]

like the saying goes "the best justice money can buy"

[rreddin]

So, one more reason to come to reforms which bind ALL.

You are right of course. However, the house of cards collapses because nobody is being realistic about how long it will take to achieve thise reforms. It will take at least a generation to complete the task. Some people think it can be done in a few months by a movement led by a person who himself is mired in corruption. At best, they are misguided. At worst, they are deluded.

[Roadman]

....duh....how about the non-enforcement of the law......???

Correct...add in the others like patronage and corruption as well and the justice system is only one of the root causes.

[bigbamboo]

The Thai legal system is a mess, even other Asian nations countries have said so.

They have more courts than Wimbledon and so many conflicting laws even the judges don't know their lunch boxes from their cake boxes.

[noitom]

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

In Thailand, the "Rule of Law" is directly connected to your bank account and/or family connections. Pure and simple. Mercedes bus stop killer; poor little rich girl who slams into van of uni students & teachers, Red Bull heir, just to name a few.

these folks should be handcuffed tried and convicted on tv and sentenced to hard time. That would be a good start and set a good example.

[Publicus]

So, one more reason to come to reforms which bind ALL.

ALL must participate and ALL must have ownership of any initial process of reform if ALL are to be bound by "reforms."

Reforms are meaningless if only one side elbows its way to state power, once there gathers up its own incestuous grouping, itself only writes new laws and rules that only it likes, then imposes them from their exclusive perch down onto the huddled masses who otherwise don't get any say.

One sided reforms enabled via a power grab by a closed clique is a guarantee of failure, so people hollering for "reform" need to be inclusive rather than exclusive, play well with others, proceed mutually and cooperatively, constructively, rather than approach the issues as the lord and master who will purify society by expelling certain people they don't like and by further imposing themselves on the others.

The statement in the OP suggests a move in the right direction regardless of anything else I've seen nor heard so far. If some don't like the messenger, they nonetheless need to show respect of the message of inclusion and egalitarian cooperation, otherwise they themselves will continue to be rightfully dismissed by the vast majority of citizens and by democratic nations abroad.

Focusing on the binding aspect alone while ignoring or dismissing the importance of an inclusionary process is a self-defeating militancy that is narrow minded due to its inherent exclusivity. The PDRC and the DP need to respond positively to the message presented in the OP. Standing off and throwing rocks doesn't cut it.

The PDRC and the DP continue to take the zero-sum approach, continue to demonstrate the win-lose destructive attitude, the obey-disobey mentality.

[rubl]

Let's face it, abhisit was "on the ball" back in 2006. It was only an electioneering throwaway promise and he didn't do anything about it, but the thought was nice, if insincere.

Judicial reform will be part of the Democrat Party's policies to create a moral society, Abhisit said yesterday.

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/08/07/headlines/headlines_30010532.php

(Note this was August 2006 and he was on the election campaign for the forthcoming election scheduled for October, an election some posters on here have denied was going to take place or even existed.)

An election which would take place a wee bit later than 60 days after the April 2006 elections were annulled, you mean?

So, since Abhisit got to form a government in which the Democrat party was one of the coalition partners with the government having a minimal majority, you think that sweeping reforms could have been made? With UDD protests, Songkhran fun and so? With a lost 2008 which saw Thaksin selected PMs only busy with trying to get their lord and master back, ignoring the Global Financial crisis around them? A crisis the Abhisit government tried to cope with and rather nicely even with all obstruction?

Anyway, even you seem to agree reforms are necessary when you blame Abhisit didn't do anything.

I won't be drawn into off topic pointless arguments with you.

I have already made my views clear on the need for reform in the judicial sector.

Not going your way, take your ball and leave. No problem.

Mind you, your need for reform of the judicial sector seems focussed on your perceived bias against the Yingluck government, against all who don't like that criminal fugitive and so. Your views seem to have nothing in common with normal Thai who want to be treated fairly and as equals by ALL, not just till their vote is counted.

[lucjoker]

Long ago ,in the wild west, every body could carry a gun.

But this is too dangerous in our days !

So now only the villains can carry a gun !

Much safer ? No,It's now very easy to steel from an unarmed person .

The thief would think twice before he breaks into my house ,when he knows i have a gun .Wont he?

[rubl]

So, one more reason to come to reforms which bind ALL.

ALL must participate and ALL must have ownership of any initial process of reform if ALL are to be bound by "reforms."

Reforms are meaningless if only one side elbows its way to state power, once there gathers up its own incestuous grouping, itself only writes new laws and rules that only it likes, then imposes them from their exclusive perch down onto the huddled masses who otherwise don't get any say.

One sided reforms enabled via a power grab by a closed clique is a guarantee of failure, so people hollering for "reform" need to be inclusive rather than exclusive, play well with others, proceed mutually and cooperatively, constructively, rather than approach the issues as the lord and master who will purify society by expelling certain people they don't like and by further imposing themselves on the others.

The statement in the OP suggests a move in the right direction regardless of anything else I've seen nor heard so far. If some don't like the messenger, they nonetheless need to show respect of the message of inclusion and egalitarian cooperation, otherwise they themselves will continue to be rightfully dismissed by the vast majority of citizens and by democratic nations abroad.

Focusing on the binding aspect alone while ignoring or dismissing the importance of an inclusionary process is a self-defeating militancy that is narrow minded due to its inherent exclusivity. The PDRC and the DP need to respond positively to the message presented in the OP. Standing off and throwing rocks doesn't cut it.

The PDRC and the DP continue to take the zero-sum approach, continue to demonstrate the win-lose destructive attitude, the obey-disobey mentality.

Practically speaking it is not possible for ALL to participate. The approach the PDRC is currently taking with trying to come with a possible framework to be used to more properly define reforms and make it possible to let a larget group of the population join discussions and provide input is doable.

All your further remarks are simply assuming that 'some' will 'ignore' what 'some' may be 'don't' like. If the PDRC needs to respond to all who are indiced to write a nice piece in a newspaper we will never ever get anywhere.

Am I being somewhat undemocratic here? Most likely, but Thailand isn't a democracy and following normal democratic procedures will not help here. If we could find a reliable person to help force real and proper reforms I'd even vote for that person to be dictator for a year. As it is, I fear lots of people keep complaining about the PDRC not taking the 'right' approach while having no problem with Pheu Thai demanding elections as if that would help.