Abhisit faces court over people killed during 2010 crackdown

[webfact]

2010 POLITICAL VIOLENCE
Abhisit faces court over people killed during 2010 crackdown
Kesinee Taengkhiao
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010.

Abhisit faced court yesterday to deny murder and attempted murder charges filed against him. He was prime minister at the time of the crackdown.

His co-defendant is People's Democratic Reform Committee chief Suthep Thaugsuban, the then-director of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation.

The court said Abhisit could have committed an abuse of authority in accordance with the Criminal Code or offences under the Emergency Decree law if he issued wrongful or unreasonable orders after having imposed the state of emergency.

The Office of the Attorney General's Special Cases Litigation Office accused Abhisit and Suthep of issuing orders to security officials to conduct crowd-control operations at red-shirt rallies that resulted in the deaths of taxi driver Pan Kamgong, 43, and Kunakorn Srisuwan, 14, near Ratchaprarob Airport Link station.

A van driver, Samorn Maithong, was seriously injured after being shot with bullets fired from the direction of security agencies stationed in the Ratchaprarob area.

Prosecutors filed the indictment against Abhisit on December 12. The court permitted Samorn and Nuchid Kamkong, Pan's wife, to be co-plaintiffs with prosecutors on February 13.

The plaintiffs insist that people were killed and injured as a result of the crowd control operation ordered by Abhisit because security officials used real bullets.

They said the security officials were allowed to use arms when necessary, with Suthep approving the use of real bullets and sharp shooters during the operation.

Abhisit said the National Anti-Corruption Commission was still investigating a case with similar charges against him and had yet to resolve the case.

The court, thus, decided to wait till June 23 for the NACC's investigation results to prevent repetition of witness examinations.

Chokchai Angkaew, a lawyer for the co-plaintiffs, said relatives of six people killed at Wat Pathum Wanaram during the May 19, 2010 riots had also filed suits against Abhisit and Suthep on the same charges with the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court.

The Department of Special Investigation has an arrest warrant for Suthep to prosecute him in this case but has yet to arrest him. The statue of limitation for this case is 20 years.


-- The Nation 2014-03-25

[Ricardo]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

[patjem]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

There has never been any evidence whatsoever of K_Abhisit ever giving such an order. Yet, in the same 2010 timeframe, there is clearly recorded evidence from other notorious individuals of orders to burn Bangkok, attempts on the then-PM's life, etc etc, and even a proclamation from UDD's new Secretary General that he would take responsibility for their actions.

Tarit at the DSI is pushing this charge as hard as possible, without producing any evidence, which is strange, considering that he was a pivotal member of the CAPO, too anyway.... You got something to hide, Mr. Tarit?

[Mango Bob]

Actually this is a joke. As if they pulled the trigger. The Army is responsible for the killing. Give them a weapon and they will fire it at anything. But I would love to see a picture of Suthep and Abhisit in orange PJ's with hand and legs cuffs on.

[chainarong]

Before I start I will acknowledge that I have a lot of time for Abhisit (Mark) more than can be said for the Shinawatra clan and friends, is this because I find the Democrats Abhisit to be a moderate and not inclined to be radical, above the law , dishonest in programs that either don't happen or are a failure, no criminal past and not afraid to face the courts, having declared that , it would be highly unlikely that Abhisit would have given orders to kill, although I would regard him as being too generous, in letting the Red shirt protest drag on for so long, the commanders had the task of dispatching this public disobedient crowd, that in turn caused them to set alight the City block, Arson in most Democratic countries is taken very seriously, have any charges been made and court sentence been carried out, in my mind that is the only achievement the red shirts can lay claim to, the commanders are to be congratulated on being so patient , if I was in charge it would have turned out much different.

Edited March 25, 2014 by chainarong

[Fryslan boppe]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Fryslan boppe

[whybother]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

And the DSI. Then the charges would actually get withdrawn.

[oldsailor35]

I really do not believe that Abisit would have done this. However i would not put it past Suthep. In fact i sincerely believe that Abisit was really the defacto PM and that Suthep the man with all the mouth . Every time you saw them together facing questions, Suthep would be leaning over whispering into Abisits ear what to say.

[pisico]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

Not possible. Everybody knows that courts, judges, lawyers, "Academics", etc, are all part of the Bangkok Ammart. Therefore, they will never be in favor of anything truly impartial. Ammart know that only lopsided justice will be a detriment to their own. Why the Democrats do not participate in elections now? Why have they never won elections in 20 years? If they had connected and done something good for the "uneducated masses", maybe they would stand a chance of a clean and fair ascent to power.

To dislike the frauds, shady maneuvers of Thaksin during his tenure is not a powerful reason to be in favor of others who are not lily white and have in their records assassination (Se Dang killed by sniper's bullet caught live while being interviewed on TV), the Palm Oil Scam, the Land scam of 1995, etc. If ever Thailand is to adopt the Rule of Law, one important tenet is that The Principal (Thaksin, Abhisit, Suthep, et al) is responsible for the actions of their agents.

Blind simpletons have a compulsion to support Abhisit and his banana republic politico side-kick and will justify anything they do or didn't do because they do not like Mr T.

If Thailand is dysfunctional it seems that Thainess is seeping into the heads of some in TV.

If Abhisistas and Suthepistas want true justice they should be clamoring for Democrats to live up to their moniker.

Unlikely. Democrats want the privilege of power no matter by which means (by the way the meaning of Abhisit in Thai is that) because they know better and understand that the uneducated cannot be trusted and that Bangkok IS Thailand.

Edited March 25, 2014 by pisico

[Rimmer]

Inflammatory troll posts and some quoted replies removed

[gemini81]

No need for him to acknowledge it until the PM in Dubai who runs his proxy gov't acknowledges his 1. convictions and 2. tons of additional charges.

[gemini81]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

Not possible. Everybody knows that courts, judges, lawyers, "Academics", etc, are all part of the Bangkok Ammart. Therefore, they will never be in favor of anything truly impartial. Ammart know that only lopsided justice will be a detriment to their own. Why the Democrats do not participate in elections now? Why have they never won elections in 20 years? If they had connected and done something good for the "uneducated masses", maybe they would stand a chance of a clean and fair ascent to power.

To dislike the frauds, shady maneuvers of Thaksin during his tenure is not a powerful reason to be in favor of others who are not lily white and have in their records assassination (Se Dang killed by sniper's bullet caught live while being interviewed on TV), the Palm Oil Scam, the Land scam of 1995, etc. If ever Thailand is to adopt the Rule of Law, one important tenet is that The Principal (Thaksin, Abhisit, Suthep, et al) is responsible for the actions of their agents.

Blind simpletons have a compulsion to support Abhisit and his banana republic politico side-kick and will justify anything they do or didn't do because they do not like Mr T.

If Thailand is dysfunctional it seems that Thainess is seeping into the heads of some in TV.

If Abhisistas and Suthepistas want true justice they should be clamoring for Democrats to live up to their moniker.

Unlikely. Democrats want the privilege of power no matter by which means (by the way the meaning of Abhisit in Thai is that) because they know better and understand that the uneducated cannot be trusted and that Bangkok IS Thailand.

What a total load of rubbish.

So you can't put it together, who had Seh Daeng assassinated huh? Well known among locals, long time expats. Funny there were no suspects nor verification's over who whacked that fool, eh? Who would benefit from his removal who caused others associated to lose face on an international, global level? Man you clearly were not here when 2010's incidents occured.

Edited March 25, 2014 by gemini81

[fab4]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

I'm not aware of any country where the use of live fire zones and snipers are regarded as legitimate crowd control practices. There is written proof that suthep as Head of CRES signed the authorisation for the use of snipers.

That could be a difficult action to defend in a court, one would imagine.

[fab4]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

There has never been any evidence whatsoever of K_Abhisit ever giving such an order. Yet, in the same 2010 timeframe, there is clearly recorded evidence from other notorious individuals of orders to burn Bangkok, attempts on the then-PM's life, etc etc, and even a proclamation from UDD's new Secretary General that he would take responsibility for their actions.

Tarit at the DSI is pushing this charge as hard as possible, without producing any evidence, which is strange, considering that he was a pivotal member of the CAPO, too anyway.... You got something to hide, Mr. Tarit?

Perhaps you would like to revisit "your no evidence of abhisit giving such an order" gambit. The authorisation of snipers by CRES is documented. That is not part of normal "crowd control practises" nor are live fire zones.

Edited March 25, 2014 by fab4

[losworld]

A former PM being charged like this and the reds wonder why they may soon get a coup. How <deleted> stupid can ya be?????

[pisico]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

There has never been any evidence whatsoever of K_Abhisit ever giving such an order. Yet, in the same 2010 timeframe, there is clearly recorded evidence from other notorious individuals of orders to burn Bangkok, attempts on the then-PM's life, etc etc, and even a proclamation from UDD's new Secretary General that he would take responsibility for their actions.

Tarit at the DSI is pushing this charge as hard as possible, without producing any evidence, which is strange, considering that he was a pivotal member of the CAPO, too anyway.... You got something to hide, Mr. Tarit?

You are so expert can you give me a copy of all the evidance that will be presented ? You know, are the offical stuff that you have read that makes you support this Oxbridge serial killer. Thanks in anticipation

and you have evidence that he did issue such an order? Of course not. I expect that everything is speculation until the evidence, or lack of evidence, is made public the trial. I would also expect that if Tarit or Pheu Thai or UDD had evidence it would already be public. Just an opinion.

If the Democrats did not sign the order and allowed the army to have free reign, the PM and his 2nd. in command are responsible for the actions of their agents: the Army.

If there is any evidence that Abhisit and Suthep explicitly ordered the Army not to use live ammo and excessive force, then they will be absolved by a truly impartial court. Personal opinions and ranting are not valid arguments in a court of law.

But, TIT and this is TV where issues usually end up ad hominem

[northernjohn]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

What about dropping them all together as they were clearly just trumped upo charges to make the red shirt failed attempted coup look legal.

Even you can see that.

[northernjohn]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

I know who the honest caring peace loving clear thinking citizens of Thailand are who care about Thailand and want to see it made better with election reform are.

I have not heard of this group you are talking about.

Can you be specific and name names. It would be a great help if Suthep and the rest of the peace loving loyal anti separatist Thailand were aware of who these people you speak of are?

[northernjohn]

A former PM being charged like this and the reds wonder why they may soon get a coup. How <deleted> stupid can ya be?????

They find new depths every day.

Now the indiscriminate beating up of Monks is OK with them.

Stay tuned folks the ride to complete stupidity is just starting. Jatuporn is at the throttle.

[ggold]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

I'm not aware of any country where the use of live fire zones and snipers are regarded as legitimate crowd control practices. There is written proof that suthep as Head of CRES signed the authorisation for the use of snipers.

That could be a difficult action to defend in a court, one would imagine.

Where is that written proof, or is this another spurious claim?

[fab4]

I'm not aware of any country where the use of live fire zones and snipers are regarded as legitimate crowd control practices. There is written proof that suthep as Head of CRES signed the authorisation for the use of snipers.

That could be a difficult action to defend in a court, one would imagine.

Where is that written proof, or is this another spurious claim?

Again, another spurious claim? I provide links to back up my points unlike some others on here, I can't help it if you don't read or believe them.

I have provided this link before, but here it is again

According to Point 2.5 in the document,

‘In the case when [the authorities] find flagrant offences in which the perpetrators are using firearms against officials, or use weapons or explosives against military positions and important premises as specified by the CRES, the authorities are authorized to use firearms against the perpetrators to stop their actions. But, if the perpetrators are mingling among the protesters to the extent that such use of firearms might endanger innocent people, the use of firearms is prohibited, except in cases where military units have already deployed marksmen sufficiently able to shoot to stop the activities. In addition, if military units find targets but cannot themselves carry out the shooting, for example, because the targets are shielded, etc., the units can ask for support from snipers from the CRES.’

The document was approved by the CRES on 18 April 2010, signed by then Deputy Prime Minister and CRES Director Suthep Thaugsuban, among other high-ranking military officers.

Army spokesperson Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd admitted that the classified document was authentic, but expressed doubts about the real motivation of those who had leaked it.

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/3330

[pisico]

I'm not aware of any country where the use of live fire zones and snipers are regarded as legitimate crowd control practices. There is written proof that suthep as Head of CRES signed the authorisation for the use of snipers.

That could be a difficult action to defend in a court, one would imagine.

Where is that written proof, or is this another spurious claim?

Again, another spurious claim? I provide links to back up my points unlike some others on here, I can't help it if you don't read or believe them.

I have provided this link before, but here it is again

According to Point 2.5 in the document,

‘In the case when [the authorities] find flagrant offences in which the perpetrators are using firearms against officials, or use weapons or explosives against military positions and important premises as specified by the CRES, the authorities are authorized to use firearms against the perpetrators to stop their actions. But, if the perpetrators are mingling among the protesters to the extent that such use of firearms might endanger innocent people, the use of firearms is prohibited, except in cases where military units have already deployed marksmen sufficiently able to shoot to stop the activities. In addition, if military units find targets but cannot themselves carry out the shooting, for example, because the targets are shielded, etc., the units can ask for support from snipers from the CRES.’

The document was approved by the CRES on 18 April 2010, signed by then Deputy Prime Minister and CRES Director Suthep Thaugsuban, among other high-ranking military officers.

Army spokesperson Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd admitted that the classified document was authentic, but expressed doubts about the real motivation of those who had leaked it.

http://www.prachatai.com/english/node/3330

They lazily ask for proof without bothering to research the matter and prove you wrong. Nevertheless, you provided information that they will undoubtedly contest.

Facts are anathema to delusional Suthepistas and anti-Thaksinistas. Their feeling and opinions (no matter how outlandish) will always be a "solid" argument to them.

Never mind that people inside a Wat common innocent folks, the wounded and even nurses (not fighters) were killed by sniper fire from positions held by the army. Just to cite one of such egregious abuse of power.

The anti-Thaksinistas will always revert to the burning of Central World (act to be condemned by a sane mind) to justify the actions of the Abhisit, Suthep and their agent: the Thai Army.

[Bkungbank]

Any countries a police officer have the right to protect himself by self defend in order to fire back if his life was treated during on duty, same as this crackdown the whole city on fire and state of emergency was declared ,

I don't mean they deserve but why only one sided but red must charge with burning the city too, as to defend innocent citizen from burning to death by the red, this was not empty execution the red side arms do have fire arm , guns and bombs, Why it didn't mention in investigation ?

[Thait Spot]

The coup-mongers talk about "Reform before elections".

What about de-politicizing the judiciary before considering this case, and the one against Suthep.

Mods - can you please create a "coup mongers and elitists" thread and lock these idiots into it?

We really don't need to be seeing all this &lt;deleted&gt; in every possible thread

[arminbkk]

I'm willing to wager a small bet that by the end of this year or early next year, both sides/all sides of the political divide at this moment, will be discussing an allround amnesty.

[Thait Spot]

My take on reading this thread was that Abhisit and Suthep could be charged with abuse of power........

Maybe I'm reading between the lines and missing something........

[Rimmer]

Off topic video removed

[AleG]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

I'm not aware of any country where the use of live fire zones and snipers are regarded as legitimate crowd control practices. There is written proof that suthep as Head of CRES signed the authorisation for the use of snipers.

That could be a difficult action to defend in a court, one would imagine.

On the other hand I'm aware than in every country security forces use deadly force to counteract armed terrorists. If you had a gram of intellectual honesty in your body you wouldn't obfuscate the issue by calling it "crowd control".

[wolfmanjack]

"BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court yesterday warned that Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva could have committed an abuse of authority if he had failed to follow crowd control practices or issue orders without reasonable grounds in connection with the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in April-May 2010."

"Could" and "if", which remain to be proven.

There has never been any evidence whatsoever of K_Abhisit ever giving such an order. Yet, in the same 2010 timeframe, there is clearly recorded evidence from other notorious individuals of orders to burn Bangkok, attempts on the then-PM's life, etc etc, and even a proclamation from UDD's new Secretary General that he would take responsibility for their actions.

Tarit at the DSI is pushing this charge as hard as possible, without producing any evidence, which is strange, considering that he was a pivotal member of the CAPO, too anyway.... You got something to hide, Mr. Tarit?

Perhaps you would like to revisit "your no evidence of abhisit giving such an order" gambit. The authorisation of snipers by CRES is documented. That is not part of normal "crowd control practises" nor are live fire zones.

Protesters being armed with military weapons is not a "normal" crowd that needed to be controlled.

The way I read the order it simply means that if the army is getting shot at with live ammo then they can return fire with live ammo. If the perps are hiding behind unarmed persons then the regulars are not to use live ammo and to call in snipers to take out the perps hiding behind unarmed citizens if it can be done in a way as not to injure unarmed citizens.

That is what was written as I see it and the army did not adhere to the restrictions put in place.

[chotthee]

"The Department of Special Investigation has an arrest warrant for Suthep to prosecute him in this case but has yet to arrest him. The statue of limitation for this case is 20 years."

No way can they arrest Suthep.

He is now more famous than God.