Rice scheme case: Verdict could force Yingluck to step down, serve time

[webfact]

RICE-PLEDGING SCHEME
Rice scheme case: a dangling sword
Opas Boonlom
The Nation

NACC verdict could force Yingluck to step down, serve time

BANGKOK: -- Caretaker prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra is facing allegations of dereliction of duty and negligence over her role in the rice-pledging scheme, and the anti-graft probe could lead to impeachment and prosecution - meaning she could be toppled.

If she is indicted by the National Anti-Corruption Commission, she will have to stop performing her duties as prime minister immediately.

The NACC is expected to rule on the case on May 8 after having undertaken an investigation for more than a year. No one knows what the outcome will be or whether her fate will be the same as that of her brother, ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Many people have said her destiny will depend on her defence against the allegations and the testimonies of her four key witnesses.

The probe was separated into two areas based on Yingluck's different duties: as the prime minister who governs the Cabinet and government policies, and as the chairwoman of the National Rice Policy Committee who is in charge of directing rice policy.

The NACC accused her of committing the following offences:

- Dereliction of duty in violation of Section 157 of the Criminal Code leading to damages;

- As a government official, doing or not doing something that caused damage, or being negligent in violation of the NACC Act of 1999; and

- Intentional exercising of power contrary to Article 178 of the Constitution, which stipulates that the prime minister shall carry out the administration of state affairs in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, laws and the policies stated before Parliament.

Yingluck allegedly let corruption occur in the rice-pledging scheme and release of rice from government stockpiles, while the dereliction-of-duty charge relates to whether or not she tried to put the brakes on the project, and whether damage was done to the country as a result.

If she is indicted by the NACC, the following will happen:

She will have to suspend her duties as prime minister immediately while the Senate decides whether to impeach her and the Supreme Court's Criminal Division decides whether to prosecute her.

The NACC will submit all of its reports on the case to the Senate and the Office of the Attorney-General.

If Yingluck were found guilty criminally, she could face a prison term of one to 10 years and/or a fine of between Bt2,000 and Bt20,000.

If three-fifths of the Senate voted to impeach her, she would be barred from politics for five years.

Defence testimony

Caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra

- Rejects the National Anti-Corruption Commission's authority to look into alleged graft in the rice-pledging scheme, saying taking the case to the NACC was illegal.

l Insists that she is not a wrongdoer for the following reasons:

1. The rice-pledging scheme is one of the government's most immediate and basic policies that both the government and its Cabinet are mutually responsible for. Therefore, if the prime minister orders the suspension of the project, it could violate the Constitution's Section 178, which obliges the government to implement what it announces to Parliament.

2. Implementing the rice-pledging scheme is part of the prime minister's general duties under the State Administration Act.

3. The prime minister's duties are related to the policies and strategies proposed to the Cabinet and as chairwoman of the National Rice Policy Committee, the prime minister does not have the authority to suspend the scheme.

4. Upon receiving a written warning from the NACC that there were problems with the project, especially corruption, the prime minister immediately ordered that an investigative committee be set up to prevent further graft.

Deputy Commerce Minister Yanyong Phuangrach

l Allegations of Yingluck's dereliction of duty in relation to the rice-pledging scheme were based on four illogical assumptions:

1. Allegation that the government distorted the market mechanism via the rice-pledging scheme, hence forcing down the prices: There is no perfect market for rice.

2. Allegation that the project was created to secure votes and fill the pockets of corrupt officials: The project was able to increase both the volume and price of rice in a bid to reduce the income gap.

3. Allegation that the PM was negligent in not ending the scheme when it only made losses: The PM cannot cancel or suspend any projects that were promised during the election campaign and later ratified in Parliament after the government was formed.

4. Allegation that the project was making heavy losses based on data collected from the post-audit committee and Office of the Auditor-General of Thailand: Data not acceptable as the project had not ended.

Caretaker Commerce Minister Nitwatthumrong Boonsongpaisan

l The scheme was originally started in 1993 under the Democrat-led government of Chuan Leekpai and Yingluck's government has improved the scheme, making it more efficient and less prone to corruption.

l As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012.

l As for allegations of the project making huge losses, all government subsidies are meant to boost living conditions, so money needs to be injected to boost consumer spending in order to boost the economy. No public project can be expected to make a profit or loss, as it is not a business.

l As long as the project has not come to an end, data from the post-audit committee cannot be taken into account.

Caretaker Finance Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong

l Revolving funds budgeted for the rice-pledging scheme were not too large.

l There was fiscal discipline and it was constantly reported to the Cabinet.

l Despite the presence of corruption at the operational level, each step of the scheme can be investigated.

l The scheme cannot be terminated as it was promised to the public.

Deputy secretary general to the PM for Political Affairs Pol Maj General Thawat Boonfueng

l In practice, the government has employed up to 30,000 personnel to inspect the state's rice stockpiles and investigate any problems.


-- The Nation 2014-05-02

[Tokay]

Allow me to be the first to come in here and laugh hysterically at the idea that she will spend a single night in a jail cell.

[Scamper]

" As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012. "

This is Yingluck's defense ?

[Payboy]

Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012.

That explains everything.

[Robby nz]

Rejects the National Anti-Corruption Commission's authority to look into alleged graft in the rice-pledging scheme, saying taking the case to the NACC was illegal.

She rejects the National Anti-Corruption Commissions authority to investigate corruption.

Thats a great start.

What does she think their job is ?

[The Deerhunter]

"..............If she is indicted by the National Anti-Corruption Commission, she will have to stop performing her duties as prime minister immediately."

She stopped that when she dissolved parliament. This Caretaker thing is a bit hard for some to understand.

[ezzra]

Oh dear, time to pack up those 30 odd LV suit cases and buy a one way ticket to Dubai....

[Thaddeus]

"..............If she is indicted by the National Anti-Corruption Commission, she will have to stop performing her duties as prime minister immediately."

She stopped that when she dissolved parliament. This Caretaker thing is a bit hard for some to understand.

Small correction, she never started,

[seajae]

what a joke the ptp are, they really expect this bullsh*t to get them off the hook. Cant stop it because it was an election promise, what a load of sh*t, losing money hand over fist and they say it cant be stopped or is it that they dont want to lose their voter base. Not responsible, who in the hell is responsible if not the person that appointed themselves as the head dog. These excuses are a laugh at best, these idiots think that because they have been put into office through their backhanded deals they can do as they please and no one can tell them otherwise. Why does it take 12 committees to stop corruption, oh thats right, because they have to give their corrupt mates a reason to get their corrupt money, its laughable at best. The sooner these drop kicks are jailed the better, this is simply pathetic.

Edited May 2, 2014 by seajae

[bristolgeoff]

_{brother I,am coming very soon fuel up the plane for me outside thailand}

[kurnell]

Corruption, all around,
Sometimes up, sometimes down,
But always around.
Corruption, are you coming to my town
Or am I coming to yours?
We're on different buses, corruption
But we're both using petrol.

[AleG]

The excuses by the "witnesses" are utterly pathetic, but this really takes the cake:

Caretaker Finance Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong

l Revolving funds budgeted for the rice-pledging scheme were not too large.

l There was fiscal discipline and it was constantly reported to the Cabinet.

[lostmebike]

NACC verdict could force Yingluck to step down, serve time

Why continue to write such crap when we all know that the 'poo yais' just buy their way out of tight spots anyway.

If Yingluck were found guilty criminally, she could face a prison term of one to 10 years and/or a fine of between Bt2,000 and Bt20,000.

Serve time? I very much doubt it.

[barryofpattaya]

" As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012. "

This is Yingluck's defense ?

Mr. Chalerm in charge? We don't have to know anything else. That explains it all.

Edited May 2, 2014 by barryofpattaya

[Sydebolle]

Allow me to be the first to come in here and laugh hysterically at the idea that she will spend a single night in a jail cell.

+1

[Thait Spot]

NACC verdict could force Yingluck to step down, serve time

Why continue to write such crap when we all know that the 'poo yais' just buy their way out of tight spots anyway.

If Yingluck were found guilty criminally, she could face a prison term of one to 10 years and/or a fine of between Bt2,000 and Bt20,000.

Serve time? I very much doubt it.

Don't involve me in this.

[Publicus]

Oh dear, time to pack up those 30 odd LV suit cases and buy a one way ticket to Dubai....

Keep your red cap on and your trolley wheels greased cause you can make a good buck - it's been reported Thais are the region's biggest tippers.

According to the many posts of a whole lotta posters over a long period of months, there will be a parade of exiles-in-the-making going through so give 'em that PDRC service with that billion baht smile.

You should also think of what you're gonna do when the peasants lay siege to the airport.

[geriatrickid]

" As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012. "

This is Yingluck's defense ?

no it is not her defense.

[MaxLee]

NACC verdict could force Yingluck to step down, serve time

Could,... COULD,.... COOOOOULLLDDDDD , but it may never happen

[geriatrickid]

The Prime Minister will not go to jail.

Any attempt to take this inquisition down that path will see an outright uprising and a strong display of public disgust at the process.

Even people who want to see the PTP replaced do not wish for the PM to be treated in this manner.

[gabruce]

Rejects the National Anti-Corruption Commission's authority to look into alleged graft in the rice-pledging scheme, saying taking the case to the NACC was illegal.

She rejects the National Anti-Corruption Commissions authority to investigate corruption.

Thats a great start.

What does she think their job is ?

I think that the argument goes thusly. Only the government can submit cases to the NACC. So it is illegal and wrong for the NACC to consider corruption cases that the government doesn't submit. Hence, no case against Yingluck or anyone in the government is possible, unless the government decides to punish one of their own.

Whether their argument is legally solid or not is not clear to me (no a lawyer). However in my opinion it is definitely morally wrong, and if their argument is correct, there is definitely a need for a change to the law/constitution, because making the government immune from corruption prosecution is bad for the country.

[gabruce]

" As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012. "

This is Yingluck's defense ?

It sounds more like grounds for another charge of malfeasance.

A better defense might be "I screwed up badly BUT I had good intentions!"

[soalbundy]

"..............If she is indicted by the National Anti-Corruption Commission, she will have to stop performing her duties as prime minister immediately."

She stopped that when she dissolved parliament. This Caretaker thing is a bit hard for some to understand.

No, she didn't even start performing her duties which is why she is in trouble

[pattayaorganic]

It is hard to respond without relying on sarcasm and humour. A cogent analysis of YL's defences will show that a nest of logical fallacies, straw men and non-responsiveness to the questions at hand. I look forward to the hearings and finding of facts and arguments and counter arguments but it is getting harder and harder to claim "judicial coup" as the facts and defences certainly do no bode well for YL.

[sae57]

Just wish we could get our English straight. "Impeach" means to "accuse a public official", i.e. to "indict" (c.f. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impeach).

The NACC may "impeach" YL. If it does, the Senate will decide whether or not to "convict".

Just a little note for the Nation etc.

--S

[Bignose]

As this whole debacle continues it becomes more and more absurd, if these "reason's" are the best the caretaker PM and government can come up with then it's patently clear why the economy is in the state it is!

As several previous poster's have stated, the points put forward are at best laughable and pathetic. If this is the best they can present as mitigation for their incompetence, inexperience and disdain for the electorate then the sooner we are rid of them the better. The standard of the sitting politician's in Australia is deplorable and quite shocking, unfortunately they make their Thai counterparts look like Einsteins in comparison.

A truly sad state of affairs.

[hawker9000]

The Prime Minister will not go to jail.

Any attempt to take this inquisition down that path will see an outright uprising and a strong display of public disgust at the process.

Even people who want to see the PTP replaced do not wish for the PM to be treated in this manner.

Lol. And you know about this irresistable undertow of universal public sentiment how? Typical "I speak for the masses" nonsense which can't be sourced and means absolutely nothing (except possibly that the speaker suffers from delusions of grandeur). I'm surprised you didn't threaten the usual civil war & total anarchy. Or are you saving that for indictment day?

But no. She won't go to jail. She's a Shinawatre after all. She might be hounded from the country like big brother however. Another page in the illustrious Shinawatre family epic (the growing - if not exactly flourishing - ‘Dubai branch‘ of the family).

[fab4]

" As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012. "

This is Yingluck's defense ?

What do you think, Einstein? I suspect there is a bit more to it than that.

[HUAHIN62]

Okay say they get rid of YS like they did with TS then the caretaker government appoints a new PM, and then? Do these people not understand that they can't wish away the PTP supporters just like PTP can't wish away Dem supporters. With PTP supporters drifting further and further away from the Dems position, it is becoming impossible for the Dems to ever win an election. Thus they are trying to take short cuts like they did in 2006 and 2008. By trying to enforce the entrenchment of the traditional elite on Thailand by getting the Dems back in power (with out an election) the opposite may happen and the country may loose an institution that dear to most Thai's. Many times in life one's actions result in the opposite of what we intended and this maybe true with the PDRC folly.

[WoopyDoo]

Let is take a look at her defence and mark it on its merits shall we?

Defence testimony

Caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra

- Rejects the National Anti-Corruption Commission's authority to look into alleged graft in the rice-pledging scheme, saying taking the case to the NACC was illegal.

She has also tried that one with the Constitutional Court trial..... It didn't work........................... Weak.

l Insists that she is not a wrongdoer for the following reasons:

1. The rice-pledging scheme is one of the government's most immediate and basic policies that both the government and its Cabinet are mutually responsible for. Therefore, if the prime minister orders the suspension of the project, it could violate the Constitution's Section 178, which obliges the government to implement what it announces to Parliament.

But she could have and 'should have' recommended to parliament that the scheme be changed to counter all the problems after everyone was warning her it was failing and losing huge amounts of money...... but she didn't....... Weak.

2. Implementing the rice-pledging scheme is part of the prime minister's general duties under the State Administration Act.

Implementation is not the issue, It is the controlling that she never did that created all the problems......... Weak.

3. The prime minister's duties are related to the policies and strategies proposed to the Cabinet and as chairwoman of the National Rice Policy Committee, the prime minister does not have the authority to suspend the scheme.

As above... she did have the authority to adjust the scheme so it worked properly and did not incur all the losses through corruption and bad policy making..... Weak.

4. Upon receiving a written warning from the NACC that there were problems with the project, especially corruption, the prime minister immediately ordered that an investigative committee be set up to prevent further graft.

So she admits that there was graft happening and she only wanted to prevent 'FURTHER' graft..... Still no evidence of an investigation taking place.... where are the investigation reports?....... Weak.

Deputy Commerce Minister Yanyong Phuangrach

l Allegations of Yingluck's dereliction of duty in relation to the rice-pledging scheme were based on four illogical assumptions:

1. Allegation that the government distorted the market mechanism via the rice-pledging scheme, hence forcing down the prices: There is no perfect market for rice.

Rubbish.... Your own ministry boasted that it was going to force the market prices UP... which never happened... you just handed Thailand's rice export industry to Vietnam and India..... Weak.

2. Allegation that the project was created to secure votes and fill the pockets of corrupt officials: The project was able to increase both the volume and price of rice in a bid to reduce the income gap.

It WAS used to secure votes and fill pockets of officials, and it has not reduced the income gap as it has forced people into massive debt they can't pay back and also over a million farming families into a suicidal state of abject poverty.....You were warned that this would happen....... Weak.

3. Allegation that the PM was negligent in not ending the scheme when it only made losses: The PM cannot cancel or suspend any projects that were promised during the election campaign and later ratified in Parliament after the government was formed.

As above...... again....... She could have ordered an overhaul through parliament..... she didn't.......Weak

4. Allegation that the project was making heavy losses based on data collected from the post-audit committee and Office of the Auditor-General of Thailand: Data not acceptable as the project had not ended.

Hahaha...... A very weak point indeed..... 600 Bn lost in 2 years and the third year still in massive debt to farmers.... You say it should have been completed before you look at the problems.......... WEAK.

Caretaker Commerce Minister Nitwatthumrong Boonsongpaisan

l The scheme was originally started in 1993 under the Democrat-led government of Chuan Leekpai and Yingluck's government has improved the scheme, making it more efficient and less prone to corruption.

Are you on drugs???..... Where in the past has ANY rice subsidy policy lost so much money and attracted so much corruption?? You have improved nothing of the Dems... This scheme is nowhere near as efficient as the original format,it was a vote buying policy from the start.. you improved nothing... you destroyed it all....... Weak.

l As chair of the National Rice Policy Committee, Yingluck established 12 subcommittees to oversee and suppress any graft problems arising from the project. Caretaker Labour Minister Chalerm Yoobamrung was given the job of looking into corruption related to the scheme since early 2012.

First off it is not the role of a labour minister to undertake this task.... He is a paid off crony of Thaksin, as corrupt as they come and nothing less.... More like she handed the wolf the keys to the hen house....... Weak.

l As for allegations of the project making huge losses, all government subsidies are meant to boost living conditions, so money needs to be injected to boost consumer spending in order to boost the economy. No public project can be expected to make a profit or loss, as it is not a business.

Again.... Your ministry boasted it was going to manipulate the global market to pay for the scheme and possibly a profit...... It didn't.... you failed.... But this case isn't really about that...We all know what policies are 'MEANT' to achieve...... It is about the amount of corruption in the face of many warnings that went totally ignored by your puppet..... Weak.

l As long as the project has not come to an end, data from the post-audit committee cannot be taken into account.

Not important enough to even save the neck of Yingluck?......Anything can be taken into account, you just have no desire to show the data, I wonder why you are withholding it???..... But all that data will be collected once you lot are gone.... book you flights now....... Weak.

Caretaker Finance Minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong

l Revolving funds budgeted for the rice-pledging scheme were not too large.

About a trillion baht not too large?.... Where is the 600 Bn???? That is what the case is about...... Weak

l There was fiscal discipline and it was constantly reported to the Cabinet.

So what?.... who cares that you report to the cabinet, it changes nothing..... trust you brought a copy of all cabinet meeting minutes to prove this?..... Weak

l Despite the presence of corruption at the operational level, each step of the scheme can be investigated.

And it is being investigated.... By the NACC..... Get ready to book your flights... It probably was never investigated by the rice scheme commission and 'can' is not 'was' meaning this is totally irrelevant.......Weak.

l The scheme cannot be terminated as it was promised to the public.

No.... It was promised to the rice farmers of which I suspect all 4.6 million rice farming families voted PTP to show their gratitude...... NOT the public, and already pointed out several times already.... It could have been fixed... but there was no desire to fix it... once again.... proven negligence probably to keep the corruption flowing...... Weak.

Deputy secretary general to the PM for Political Affairs Pol Maj General Thawat Boonfueng

l In practice, the government has employed up to 30,000 personnel to inspect the state's rice stockpiles and investigate any problems.

I take it this 30,000 represents all the employees that work at all the rice stockpiling locations that are interdependently own by large.... So the government has not really employed anyone have they?...... Weak.

In summary, I would say that if this lot were my witnesses and this is their defence.... I would rather walk in there and argue my own case.... Many of these points of defence are either laughable, lies or outright irrelevant. This lot is going to hang her for sure.