Stakes are huge if Yingluck goes to trial

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
Stakes are huge if Yingluck goes to trial
The Nation

Prosecutors must show fairness as well as undeniable evidence if we're to avoid further anguish in the streets

BANGKOK: -- The scandal over the Yingluck Shinawatra government's rice-pledging programme has reached another crucial stage with the National Anti-corruption Commission urging her prosecution on charges of corruption and dereliction of duty. The case has been forwarded to the Office of the Attorney-General.

This is no longer about rice or corruption alone. The aim is specifically to establish a new national standard for the way such programmes are administered.

Ideally, Thailand will end up one step closer to being free of the corruption that saps its finances and weakens its morals. The bad news is that the pursuit of former premier Yingluck could widen the country's hazardous political rift and trigger fresh confrontations in the streets.

In recent months the public has learned a great deal about how the rice scheme initiated by the Pheu Thai-led government went terribly wrong. Prosecutors claim there was corruption at every step of the process and say the programme cost the country more than Bt870 billion.

The government's failure to promptly pay the farmers involved has also been blamed for several of them committing suicide out of destitution.

It now falls on those same prosecutors to present irrefutable proof that such claims are true and to demonstrate that Yingluck played a central role in the ill-advised scheme.

As chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee, the then-premier clearly shares responsibility. Nevertheless, turning a blinded eye to corruption and being negligent in one's duties are not the same things. If Yingluck was somehow directly involved in the corruption at any stage of the process, how exactly did she personally benefit? We wait for the Anti-corruption Commission to explain.

If indeed the rice scheme was rife with corruption, the commission has no excuse for failing to present clear-cut evidence of the money trail.

Under military rule, Thailand is in limbo, the political battleground a fenced-off no-man's land. Putting Yingluck on trial could have temperatures boiling again among her supporters, and even if they remain restrained by the junta, that anger is not going to go away.

There is also the matter of setting a precedent for prosecuting corruption at the policy level. New ground will likely be trod in terms of politicians' accountability.

Meanwhile Yingluck has wondered aloud why the usually slow-moving commission is moving so quickly on her case, suggesting that her political opponents are influencing it, such as Warong Deikivikrom, the former Democrat MP who revealed problems in the rice scheme in the first place. It is thus important that any trial judges also hear neutral voices, such as those of ML Pridiyadorn Devakula, Ammar Siamwalla and Virabongse Ramangkura.

Voices of reason and undeniable evidence are absolutely essential if this case is to avoid being politicised. And the commission must move with slow, calm deliberation as it explain precisely how Yingluck failed in her duties and abetted such a serious crime.

The judges will not be the only ones issuing a ruling in this matter. The public is watching carefully. Only strong proof - sufficient beyond reasonable doubt - could maintain the relative peace we currently enjoy.

This is not about the rice policy anymore. The price-pledging policy will be a forgotten anecdote of bureaucracy compared to the history being written. How that history is recorded depends enormously on the transparency and fairness in the Yingluck case. Shoddy evidence and a lop-sided trial would only inflame the fury currently held in abeyance.

A well-conducted and patently fair trial would help pave the way to national reform.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Stakes-are-huge-if-Yingluck-goes-to-trial-30239180.html


-- The Nation 2014-07-23

[waza]

"Prosecutors must show fairness as well as undeniable evidence if we're to avoid further anguish in the streets"

Actually the courts need to act in accordance with the rule of law, and not be swayed by media or public opinion like this.

Edited July 23, 2014 by metisdead

[ramrod711]

Under military rule, Thailand is in limbo, the political battleground a fenced-off no-man's land. Putting Yingluck on trial could have temperatures boiling again among her supporters, and even if they remain restrained by the junta, that anger is not going to go away.

Oh well then, by all means sweep the entire debacle under the carpet. We wouldn't want to upset the red shirts. It becomes more and more obvious why Yingluck spent 3 months in the north rather than attending NACC hearings.

[otherstuff1957]

^^ This is why Yingluck is in Europe now and not likely to return.

[chainarong]

First of all, editorial should have scrapped this article, as it could be deemed to be in contempt of the court, the message is to attack the judgment of the courts , you are applying pressure once again, like in the PTP days, whinging and whining about public figures being hard done by , Yingluck will get what's she deserves nothing more , nothing less, anything else is subject to the courts, not a trial by media

[jaidam]

^^ This is why Yingluck is in Europe now and not likely to return.

Yes, she has left Thailand already this morning, not to return until the Peoples Democratic Republic of Lanna has been won.

This is a major turning point. She will now be used as the mascot/ figurehead of the govt in exile. Expect the Thaksin propaganda machine to ramp up again to dizzying levels. Major faux-pas letting this happen, but then in the Yutthasak tape we learned that Thaksin "trusts" Prayuth. It appears a deal has been brokered, and like every other deal for Thaksin, it only benefits him at the expense of the other 65.99 million citizens.

The dream was nice while it lasted, meanwhile back on the ranch.....

[daveAustin]

^^ Dream on. T would know that if she did stay away and be a part of a gov in exile, the junta will never give the country back.

[Bender]

fairness

[notmyself]

Stakes are even huger (bigger?) if Yingluck does not go to trial! Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it. If Yingluck is seen to have been given a free pass then their opinion will no doubt change.

[noitom]

The Thai press bandies around such phrases as "the way such programs are administered." This looks conspicuously like a euphemism for "the money grab and food chain."

[WitawatWatawit]

Bad Nation, bad boy. The NACC has recommended charges of negligence only ... NOT corruption.

If the OAG decides not to prosecute, despite the millions of tonnes of rotting evidence, it will destroy a certain someone's credibility. This whole issue cannot be judged on political sensitivities - it is too big for that. The country has been screwed big time, seriously big time, and a complete accounting is necessary. It's the flagship corruption case to end flagship corruption cases. If it's not pursued to its logical conclusion, regardless of who is involved or who gets hurt, then the world's condemnation of the coup will be justified.

[lostmebike]

There is also the matter of setting a precedent for prosecuting corruption at the policy level. New ground will likely be trod in terms of politicians' accountability.

Thailand needs this so badly. Politicians from all sides need to see they aint untouchable.

Meanwhile Yingluck has wondered aloud why the usually slow-moving commission is moving so quickly on her case, suggesting that her political opponents are influencing it,

Get over yourself girl, the NCPO are pushing this with huge support from a lot of the country one would guess. You and big bruv were too greedy and guess what? It backfired badly, that's why your in the <deleted>.

For the sake of the country, this trial needs to go ahead.

[oneday]

"As chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee, the then-premier clearly shares responsibility. Nevertheless, turning a blinded eye to corruption and being negligent in one's duties are not the same things. If Yingluck was somehow directly involved in the corruption at any stage of the process, how exactly did she personally benefit? We wait for the Anti-corruption Commission to explain."

Exactly! Was she derelict in her duties, especially with respect to the rice-scheme, almost certainly, but that is not a criminal offense, it is only grounds to remove her from office. Did she personally gain money in her bank from this, I seriously doubt it. Why would she take the chance when she has enough money? She is simply guilty of getting into a game she knew nothing about, of being naive and not making sure the rice-scheme was being managed properly and probably also guilty of listening to bad advice and her brother.

[Andrew5]

As chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee, the then-premier clearly shares responsibility. Nevertheless, turning a blinded eye to corruption and being negligent in one's duties are not the same things.

Fundamentally flawed logic.

Her failing to be diligent is precisely what being negligent is.

[SOTIRIOS]

........more threats......

[Andrew5]

Did she personally gain money in her bank from this, I seriously doubt it. Why would she take the chance when she has enough money?

More flawed logic.

Thaksin was a billionaire before becoming PM. The common saying then was that he was too rich to ever be corrupt, yet he was, and in a huge way.

People with huge bank accounts are not immune from being corrupt. Megalomaniacs never seem to be satisfied with their wealth and power, irregardless of how much they accumulate of either.

Did she personally gain from this rice scam? I don't know. That's what we will hopefully learn from her trial.

Still, however, she's being charged with negligence, not personal corruption.

With the corruption in the rice scam estimated now at a staggering 800 Billion Baht plus... I serious doubt that she was NOT negligent as the Boss of the Rice Scam committee.

.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Andrew5

[lostmebike]

"As chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee, the then-premier clearly shares responsibility. Nevertheless, turning a blinded eye to corruption and being negligent in one's duties are not the same things. If Yingluck was somehow directly involved in the corruption at any stage of the process, how exactly did she personally benefit? We wait for the Anti-corruption Commission to explain."

Exactly! Was she derelict in her duties, especially with respect to the rice-scheme, almost certainly, but that is not a criminal offense, it is only grounds to remove her from office. Did she personally gain money in her bank from this, I seriously doubt it. Why would she take the chance when she has enough money? She is simply guilty of getting into a game she knew nothing about, of being naive and not making sure the rice-scheme was being managed properly and probably also guilty of listening to bad advice and her brother.

Part of her charge is dereliction of duty and this I believe is a criminal offense as she failed to stop the program.

'Did she personally gain money from this?' ... Well hopefully the evidence will allowed to be presented for all to see but would it really be a surprise if she did gain? With so much money floating around, I wouldn't like to say for sure that she didn't gain and after all, greed is what drives that family.

[Bignose]

"This is not about the rice policy anymore. The price-pledging policy will be a forgotten anecdote of bureaucracy compared to the history being written. How that history is recorded depends enormously on the transparency and fairness in the Yingluck case. Shoddy evidence and a lop-sided trial would only inflame the fury currently held in abeyance"

I am normally a great fan of The Nation's articles but (to me anyway) this one steps way over the line, the preceding article, and especially the above quote, seems to me to be a clear attempt to influence/manipulate public opinion.

The whole issue in regard to this matter is most definitely all about the rice policy, the alleged corruption and maladministration was huge by any standards. The effect on the lives of many ordinary Thais and their families was massive and will be long lasting, it must be brought before the courts and dealt with without delay, interference or prejudice.

This matter can not be swept under the carpet or negotiated away by any back room deal, the people of Thailand deserve better! This family and their cohorts, acquaintances and business partners have abused the present system and population for years, this whole shoddy matter must be laid bare and those responsible punished. The way the rest of the world perceives Thailand will be determined by how this kind of issue is dealt with, this dynasty may well have money, influence and power but they should no longer be above the law!

The progress and rate of change under the present regime has been both welcome and breathtaking, I personally don't see any need to put a time limit on how long it should remain in place. They should stay in power until the job is done, maybe then Thailand shall start to live up to it's true potential with the benefits shared by all, not just a privileged few.

[PREM-R]

Stakes are even huger (bigger?) if Yingluck does not go to trial! Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it. If Yingluck is seen to have been given a free pass then their opinion will no doubt change.

"Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it."

Wow, that is a very bold statement, on what do you base your 'thinking'?

Edited July 23, 2014 by PREM-R

[balford]

And that article is exactly why the military in interim government needs to have some control over the media so as to ensure fair and unbiased reporting without applying undue and unethical pressure pending a new Constitution in which hopefully ethics for the media are inscribed. As stated above, the article should have been pulled.

The media world-wide and that of the Murdoch empire in particular has a history of distorting news to their own agenda or purely for sensationalism rather than reporting the facts and have for too much influence on the political stage.

Murdoch himself stated that he was going all out to ensure the conservatives won Australian elections over Labor through his media. So much for balance and ethics.

Bob A.

Relaxed in Lampang

[mrmicbkktxl]

Stakes are even huger (bigger?) if Yingluck does not go to trial! Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it. If Yingluck is seen to have been given a free pass then their opinion will no doubt change.

Why should she come back?To stand trial in front of handpicked judges,handpicked by the people who kicked her out in the first place?Same happened with her brother.First they kicked him out of office,then the same people trialed him.In Thailand a government what wants to cut power of army or royalists and BKK elite will never succeed.I don't say she is not guilty,but why people like Suthep not stand trial for land scam,palm oil scam and and?

[gemini81]

Stakes are even huger (bigger?) if Yingluck does not go to trial! Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it. If Yingluck is seen to have been given a free pass then their opinion will no doubt change.

Why should she come back?To stand trial in front of handpicked judges,handpicked by the people who kicked her out in the first place?Same happened with her brother.First they kicked him out of office,then the same people trialed him.In Thailand a government what wants to cut power of army or royalists and BKK elite will never succeed.I don't say she is not guilty,but why people like Suthep not stand trial for land scam,palm oil scam and and?

He wasn't the frickin PM..they were!!! Hands in the cookie jar whilst right in the spotlight. Epidemic graft on a devastating level. Suicides among victims of the rice scheme left with nothing, while her and her brother run around shamelessly. Out of some 15th century Chinese tyrant family.

You covered all the bases there on your trendy pro-red post: royalist, elite..you just forgot 'fascist' thought I'd throw that in to help you keep it hip! haha.

[Andrew5]

Stakes are even huger (bigger?) if Yingluck does not go to trial! Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it. If Yingluck is seen to have been given a free pass then their opinion will no doubt change.

Why should she come back?

Because she promised she would.

Is she an untrustworthy liar?

.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Andrew5

[WitawatWatawit]

And that article is exactly why the military in interim government needs to have some control over the media so as to ensure fair and unbiased reporting without applying undue and unethical pressure pending a new Constitution in which hopefully ethics for the media are inscribed. As stated above, the article should have been pulled.

The media world-wide and that of the Murdoch empire in particular has a history of distorting news to their own agenda or purely for sensationalism rather than reporting the facts and have for too much influence on the political stage.

Murdoch himself stated that he was going all out to ensure the conservatives won Australian elections over Labor through his media. So much for balance and ethics.

Bob A.

Relaxed in Lampang

The alternative is media censorship. I think I would prefer the opportunity to counter-attack or dismiss such articles as above than never to have seen them in the first place.

[Ricardo]

Meanwhile Yingluck has wondered aloud why the usually slow-moving commission is moving so quickly on her case,

Fast movement in the case of ramming-through her brother's amnesty was good, but slower movement when investigating her own responsibility for the rice-scheme, is somehow bad ?

One would almost think, they were sitting at four-in-the-morning, or denying some NACC-members from speaking, as she & her government did !

Edited July 23, 2014 by Ricardo

[jaidam]

If Yingluck and her family own rice growing land, that is rented out to farmers then she gained a lot directly as a result of the rice scam. She does, and they did.

[mrmicbkktxl]

Stakes are even huger (bigger?) if Yingluck does not go to trial! Most of the world had publically condemned the coup but in private condone it. If Yingluck is seen to have been given a free pass then their opinion will no doubt change.

Why should she come back?To stand trial in front of handpicked judges,handpicked by the people who kicked her out in the first place?Same happened with her brother.First they kicked him out of office,then the same people trialed him.In Thailand a government what wants to cut power of army or royalists and BKK elite will never succeed.I don't say she is not guilty,but why people like Suthep not stand trial for land scam,palm oil scam and and?

He wasn't the frickin PM..they were!!! Hands in the cookie jar whilst right in the spotlight. Epidemic graft on a devastating level. Suicides among victims of the rice scheme left with nothing, while her and her brother run around shamelessly. Out of some 15th century Chinese tyrant family.

You covered all the bases there on your trendy pro-red post: royalist, elite..you just forgot 'fascist' thought I'd throw that in to help you keep it hip! haha.

Good point,some people in Thailand still live in past with sakdina system,but now is 2557Bkk,not sukothai anymore.I can't cover everything,because if I do I will get kicked out from TV and end up in prison.You and others here can complain,defame and insult as much u want without worry to get punished.I'm not sure if my post is pro red,I would say it's more a logical post with a lot of truth inside

[Halion]

"As chairperson of the National Rice Policy Committee, the then-premier clearly shares responsibility. Nevertheless, turning a blinded eye to corruption and being negligent in one's duties are not the same things. If Yingluck was somehow directly involved in the corruption at any stage of the process, how exactly did she personally benefit? We wait for the Anti-corruption Commission to explain."

Exactly! Was she derelict in her duties, especially with respect to the rice-scheme, almost certainly, but that is not a criminal offense, it is only grounds to remove her from office. Did she personally gain money in her bank from this, I seriously doubt it. Why would she take the chance when she has enough money? She is simply guilty of getting into a game she knew nothing about, of being naive and not making sure the rice-scheme was being managed properly and probably also guilty of listening to bad advice and her brother.

There can be little doubt that our ex PM is guilty of grand malfeasance and she did gain personally if not through kickbacks then through nepotism. You can polish a horse turd but it is still a horse turd.

[animatic]

" ...Nevertheless, turning a blinded eye to corruption and being negligent in one's duties are not the same things. If Yingluck was somehow directly involved in the corruption at any stage of the process, how exactly did she personally benefit? ...

The rice scheme was never meant to line Yinglucks pockets. So looking at it in a cash transfer basis will reveal nothing.

This was an exercise in feudal power politics and spreading the wealth to several levels subservient lackeys in exchange for their working towards the liege lord Thaksin's goals. Controlling the country , by wresting power from all other hands.

How did she benefit?

Because the Shin Clan benefited by an increase of Power and Face, till they over reached , yet again.

The rice scheme was rushed in, in the face of an impending flood crisis to pay off the rice mafia network for delivering the last election. And continued because the flood prevented big enough paybacks.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[spidermike007]

"Prosecutors must show fairness as well as undeniable evidence if we're to avoid further anguish in the streets"

Actually the courts need to act in accordance with the rule of law, and not be swayed by media or public opinion like this.

Also, in the first post it read: Prosecutors claim there was corruption at every step of the process and say the programme cost the country more than Bt870 billion.

My question is, are these the same prosecutors who accept a bribe, any chance they get, to let rich people off the hook? The same ones who accepted the money from the Red Bull heir, to make his case go away? The same ones who live accept payments every day of their lives?

I am not saying prosecuting the Yingluck would be a bad thing. But, if you are going to clean up Thailand, and start bringing about justice, the best place to start would be to arrest, and convict the filthy prosecutors and judges, who are directly responsible for making this one of the most corrupt nations on earth.