Legal expert wonders if Yingluck, former ministers will avoid impeachment

[fobuff]

Impeachment... Impeachment... The military coup de facto impeached them all...

[smutcakes]

The ridiculous of trying to impeach an elected Govt for attempting to amend the constitution! When now the army have taken a unilateral decision to chuck the whole constitution in the bin! and rewritten it!

No, what is ridiculous is the fact that you are whining about what is going on, even though you and your rabid red flag waving buddies were warned time and time again that the good ship PTP was heading for the rocks and would soon sink, with the loss of all those on board.

Greed and corruption caused their downfall, and it could not have come any sooner.

You carry on about the constitution but you were ok with the fact they were trying to sneak the Amnesty Bill through in the middle of the night in their typical underhanded manner. Seems it is ok when the Shin regime breaks the rules, but pity help anyone else who does it.

You could not help sneak in the words "elected Govt", could you ? Which does not help your pitiful argument at all, simply reminds us that the people who put their faith in this den of thieves were let down, big time (at about 300 baht a vote !)

Get over it smutty, the horse you picked and put all your money on was a dud and the vet is about to put it down.

I just find the whole hypocrisy funny. PTP try to change an element of the constitution, no cannot do, completely illegal- but the junta come and chuck the whole thing in the bin and rewrite it- no problem. Trying to give amnesty, street protests, resulting in a coup, Junta give themselves amnesty- no problem.

Lack of transparency on all Govt things by PTP- mass corruption etc, NCPO don't provide any information- no problem. HSR horrific idea marred in corruption under PTP, Junta approve the same- no problem.

There are many more blindingly hypocritical things.

[Mango Bob]

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

And what good will impeaching her do? Another stupid move and waste of time by the Democrats.

I agree. Under the new constitution, no person can be a member of the National Legislative Assembly "being or having been a person holding any position in a political party within 3 years prior to the date of appointment as a member of the National Legislative Assembly."

So why waste time and money on impeachment?


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

I was unaware that there is a new constitution. Last I heard they were in the process of writing one.

As for the impeachment it serves the purpose of showing that none are exempt if they qualify.
That has been a big problem here in Thailand overlooking the law. It just encouraged the corrupt to continue on with it.

Impeach them all that is a message that even a red shirt could understand. Well most of them. Well most of them I think. Not sure now that I think of it if they are that bright.

It is an interim constitution.

How do you impeach someone from office who is no longer in office?


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Mike and John has not finger that out yet. but give them time they will come up with something in a few weeks that we can laugh at.

[Bernard Flint]

The ridiculous of trying to impeach an elected Govt for attempting to amend the constitution! When now the army have taken a unilateral decision to chuck the whole constitution in the bin! and rewritten it!

No, what is ridiculous is the fact that you are whining about what is going on, even though you and your rabid red flag waving buddies were warned time and time again that the good ship PTP was heading for the rocks and would soon sink, with the loss of all those on board.

Greed and corruption caused their downfall, and it could not have come any sooner.

You carry on about the constitution but you were ok with the fact they were trying to sneak the Amnesty Bill through in the middle of the night in their typical underhanded manner. Seems it is ok when the Shin regime breaks the rules, but pity help anyone else who does it.

You could not help sneak in the words "elected Govt", could you ? Which does not help your pitiful argument at all, simply reminds us that the people who put their faith in this den of thieves were let down, big time (at about 300 baht a vote !)

Get over it smutty, the horse you picked and put all your money on was a dud and the vet is about to put it down.

In the last major election several years ago in my area the Red Shirts were paying THB 500 for a vote and the Yellow Shirts THB 300. Guess who won?

When I first moved to Thailand and found out about the vote buying I was horrified. I've soften a bit on it now. In my home country, the USA, millions and millions of dollars are spent on elections all the time but the money goes to all sorts of media for political ads, special interest groups to help "get out the vote" and to volunteers who help with the grunt work of the campaign. My rationalization now is if a candidate is going to spend a lot of money on his/her campaign, why not just give it directly to the voters?

There were payments to yellow shirts to go to Bangkok

[chongtak]

Hopefully she will be crucified.

Sent from my Lenovo A3000-H using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[FangFerang]

A democrat is worried that his opposition might not be impeached, never mind the charges against Monk Suthep, AV and a host of yellows...this is supposed to be a red pogram, dammit, and nothing should stop the redistricting, the amnesty for the "right people" (like human trafficking boat captains) and the unfairness of it all just, darn it, does not exist,.

Why can't everyone just see how fair and progressive this is? Darn EU and US and GB -- all letter countries should be abolished anyway.

After all, all human rights abuses, election rigging (really, why so few muslims from the south in parliament) and lottery ticket corruptions that just go by should all be accepted as a way of doing business. It was always like that, since the 1960's, so all is well, smile, it's reconciliation, a harmony...

But what? No education for your children? You're a red.

What? No votes that count? You're a red.

Asking for a fair day in court? You are DEFINITELY a red, and not a bull heiress.

Back to the que, and I don't care if you starve to death while you're in line....

[fab4]

And what good will impeaching her do? Another stupid move and waste of time by the Democrats.

I do love the way you post without thinking, you need to remove the "mango" part of your name and just stick with the latter part, much more accurate for your posting history . . . "bob".

What good will impeachment do? Simple . . . it lets people know that crime and corruption is not acceptable in Thai society and it forces her to accept the responsibility (and hopefully consequences) for the mess this rice scam, amnesty bill, etc etc created.

I know, I know, it's all biased and politically motivated (in your eyes) . . . but to everyone else, it was blatant, arrogant, way over the top, "<deleted> you" thievery and corruption on all counts hidden under the guise of "democracy" (a word which needs to be explained in great depth to those that attempt to use it to excuse their misdeeds).

I know, I know, it's all biased and politically motivated (in your eyes) . . . but to everyone else, it was blatant, arrogant, way over the top, "<deleted> you" thievery and corruption on all counts hidden under the guise of "democracy" (a word which needs to be explained in great depth to those that attempt to use it to excuse their misdeeds).

Actually the impeachment attempt by the NACC has nothing to do with "thievery" or "corruption". It's a pathetic attempt to impeach 308 politicians and senators for having the effrontery to attempt to amend the constitution with respect to the election of Senators by making the Senate a fully elected body. Needless to say the party that brought this amendment to the attention of the Constitution Court in the first place was the hilariously misnamed "democrat" party, http://asiancorrespondent.com/118006/thailands-nacc-ruling-why-it-happened-and-what-it-means/.

Bearing in mind what has happened to the constitution recently, I shall look forward to "democrat party legal expert", Rames Ratanachaweng, expressing his concern about that.

Edited July 26, 2014 by fab4

[Tatsujin]

And what good will impeaching her do? Another stupid move and waste of time by the Democrats.

I do love the way you post without thinking, you need to remove the "mango" part of your name and just stick with the latter part, much more accurate for your posting history . . . "bob".

What good will impeachment do? Simple . . . it lets people know that crime and corruption is not acceptable in Thai society and it forces her to accept the responsibility (and hopefully consequences) for the mess this rice scam, amnesty bill, etc etc created.

I know, I know, it's all biased and politically motivated (in your eyes) . . . but to everyone else, it was blatant, arrogant, way over the top, "<deleted> you" thievery and corruption on all counts hidden under the guise of "democracy" (a word which needs to be explained in great depth to those that attempt to use it to excuse their misdeeds).

I know, I know, it's all biased and politically motivated (in your eyes) . . . but to everyone else, it was blatant, arrogant, way over the top, "<deleted> you" thievery and corruption on all counts hidden under the guise of "democracy" (a word which needs to be explained in great depth to those that attempt to use it to excuse their misdeeds).

Actually the impeachment attempt by the NACC has nothing to do with "thievery" or "corruption". It's a pathetic attempt to impeach 308 politicians and senators for having the effrontery to attempt to amend the constitution with respect to the election of Senators by making the Senate a fully elected body. Needless to say the party that brought this amendment to the attention of the Constitution Court in the first place was the hilariously misnamed "democrat" party, http://asiancorrespondent.com/118006/thailands-nacc-ruling-why-it-happened-and-what-it-means/.

Bearing in mind what has happened to the constitution recently, I shall look forward to "democrat party legal expert", Rames Ratanachaweng, expressing his concern about that.

And once again fabbie you only tell the one side of the story that supports your views.

You failed to mention the "method" that they attempted to use to modify the Constitution which was underhanded, deceptive, devious and illegal.

Had PT done ANYTHING whilst in power that wasn't underhanded or downright illegal, we wouldn't be having these "discussions" now as I for one would have nothing to be upset about.

As it stands, I find fault with almost 90% of the way PT/Thaksin do things and it's long past time when they should ALL be held accountable for it.

[Tatsujin]

A democrat is worried that his opposition might not be impeached, never mind the charges against Monk Suthep, AV and a host of yellows...this is supposed to be a red pogram, dammit, and nothing should stop the redistricting, the amnesty for the "right people" (like human trafficking boat captains) and the unfairness of it all just, darn it, does not exist,.

Why can't everyone just see how fair and progressive this is? Darn EU and US and GB -- all letter countries should be abolished anyway.

After all, all human rights abuses, election rigging (really, why so few muslims from the south in parliament) and lottery ticket corruptions that just go by should all be accepted as a way of doing business. It was always like that, since the 1960's, so all is well, smile, it's reconciliation, a harmony...

But what? No education for your children? You're a red.

What? No votes that count? You're a red.

Asking for a fair day in court? You are DEFINITELY a red, and not a bull heiress.

Back to the que, and I don't care if you starve to death while you're in line....

You are such a drama queen lol

Do you need a list of all the bad things the red "elite" have done and got away with? Just to balance things in the sense of fairness ...

[Eric Loh]

And what good will impeaching her do? Another stupid move and waste of time by the Democrats.

I do love the way you post without thinking, you need to remove the "mango" part of your name and just stick with the latter part, much more accurate for your posting history . . . "bob".

What good will impeachment do? Simple . . . it lets people know that crime and corruption is not acceptable in Thai society and it forces her to accept the responsibility (and hopefully consequences) for the mess this rice scam, amnesty bill, etc etc created.

I know, I know, it's all biased and politically motivated (in your eyes) . . . but to everyone else, it was blatant, arrogant, way over the top, "<deleted> you" thievery and corruption on all counts hidden under the guise of "democracy" (a word which needs to be explained in great depth to those that attempt to use it to excuse their misdeeds).

I agree with Mango Bob and think his comments are ripe and sweet. I hope the NCPO will continue with this omission in the provisional constitution. To me impeaching anyone in the Yingluck administration for trying to amend the constitution by parties who ignored, violated and then discarded that very constitution is the epitome of hypocrisy.

Could be deliberate as a way for Prayuth to right some wrong by the Constitution Court. Surely he see that the separation of power has been blurred by the court. We can see all that very clearly.

[fab4]

And once again fabbie you only tell the one side of the story that supports your views.

You failed to mention the "method" that they attempted to use to modify the Constitution which was underhanded, deceptive, devious and illegal.

Had PT done ANYTHING whilst in power that wasn't underhanded or downright illegal, we wouldn't be having these "discussions" now as I for one would have nothing to be upset about.

As it stands, I find fault with almost 90% of the way PT/Thaksin do things and it's long past time when they should ALL be held accountable for it.

Whereas you provide a non partisan balanced commentary on all things Thaksin/PTP/UDD . The reason that I tell the one side of the story that supports my views is because that is what happened. If you can find anything in my post that can be disputed, please let everybody know.

You, on the other hand insist that the impeachment was about corruption and thievery. I provided information which proves your statements were false. If you're going to make statements on this forum you better be prepared to back them up - if they are wrong statements, be prepared for people to question them, and that doesn't mean trying to twist out of it by coming up with new unrelated statements and posing them as questions.

[Tatsujin]

And once again fabbie you only tell the one side of the story that supports your views.

You failed to mention the "method" that they attempted to use to modify the Constitution which was underhanded, deceptive, devious and illegal.

Had PT done ANYTHING whilst in power that wasn't underhanded or downright illegal, we wouldn't be having these "discussions" now as I for one would have nothing to be upset about.

As it stands, I find fault with almost 90% of the way PT/Thaksin do things and it's long past time when they should ALL be held accountable for it.

Whereas you provide a non partisan balanced commentary on all things Thaksin/PTP/UDD . The reason that I tell the one side of the story that supports my views is because that is what happened. If you can find anything in my post that can be disputed, please let everybody know.

You, on the other hand insist that the impeachment was about corruption and thievery. I provided information which proves your statements were false. If you're going to make statements on this forum you better be prepared to back them up - if they are wrong statements, be prepared for people to question them, and that doesn't mean trying to twist out of it by coming up with new unrelated statements and posing them as questions.

I'm getting old and the memory is not as it should be, but unless I'm very mistaken you are the one shown to be consistently more incorrect in your postings than I ...

[WitawatWatawit]

fab4

"Actually the impeachment attempt by the NACC...."

Impeachment is a parliamentary process - nothing to do with the NACC.

Old Man River

"How do you impeach someone from office who is no longer in office?"

You do not "impeach someone from office". Removal from office is a punishment if found guilty and only IF IT IS decided by a parliamentary vote (as per Clinton). In other words, you do not have to be in office to be impeached. And there is no requirement for any kind of punishment if found guilty.

[Old Man River]

fab4

"Actually the impeachment attempt by the NACC...."

Impeachment is a parliamentary process - nothing to do with the NACC.

Old Man River

"How do you impeach someone from office who is no longer in office?"

You do not "impeach someone from office". Removal from office is a punishment if found guilty and only IF IT IS decided by a parliamentary vote (as per Clinton). In other words, you do not have to be in office to be impeached. And there is no requirement for any kind of punishment if found guilty.

Thanks.

That would mean it is up to the National Legislative Assembly, correct?

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[fab4]

Whereas you provide a non partisan balanced commentary on all things Thaksin/PTP/UDD . The reason that I tell the one side of the story that supports my views is because that is what happened. If you can find anything in my post that can be disputed, please let everybody know.

You, on the other hand insist that the impeachment was about corruption and thievery. I provided information which proves your statements were false. If you're going to make statements on this forum you better be prepared to back them up - if they are wrong statements, be prepared for people to question them, and that doesn't mean trying to twist out of it by coming up with new unrelated statements and posing them as questions.

I'm getting old and the memory is not as it should be, but unless I'm very mistaken you are the one shown to be consistently more incorrect in your postings than I ...

Like many things on here a lot of talk but no actual evidence provided to back up comments such as yours above. You are very mistaken in your belief.

[fab4]

fab4

"Actually the impeachment attempt by the NACC...."

Impeachment is a parliamentary process - nothing to do with the NACC.

Old Man River

"How do you impeach someone from office who is no longer in office?"

You do not "impeach someone from office". Removal from office is a punishment if found guilty and only IF IT IS decided by a parliamentary vote (as per Clinton). In other words, you do not have to be in office to be impeached. And there is no requirement for any kind of punishment if found guilty.

So sorry, what I should have said was the NACC were seeking impeachment charges for the 308 politicians and senators. There, that should satisfy the inner pedant of those on the forum who do not understand that the NACC wouldn't impeach anybody, that's up to the senate/NLA/GP.

By the way I wouldn't say that the impeachment process was nothing to do with the NACC - if the NACC didn't recommend that process it wouldn't happen, but that's just me being pedantic

[WitawatWatawit]

I just can't help the "inner pedant" in me -

You're wrong again:

"...if the NACC didn't recommend that process it wouldn't happen,..."

Ever heard of a parliamentary commission of inquiry? The ombudsman's office? Just to name two.

[fab4]

I just can't help the "inner pedant" in me -

You're wrong again:

"...if the NACC didn't recommend that process it wouldn't happen,..."

Ever heard of a parliamentary commission of inquiry? The ombudsman's office? Just to name two.

Look, the NACC recommended that the Senate looks into impeaching the politicians and Senators, not the parliamentary commission of inquiry nor the Ombudsmans Office, just to name two.

I was referring to the OP "they face indictment by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) on their attempt to amend the Constitution" . Does that mention the parliamentary commission of inquiry or the Ombudsmans Office? No, it doesn't. Am I wrong in my statement, No I'm not.

[metisdead]

Nonsense posts and replies have been removed. Stick to the topic rather than make comments on other members.

[Local Drunk]

All you Yellow Skirt genius here please answer this question. In history has any President or Prime Minister been impeached while not in office>

If you mean in the history of Thailand, then the answer is no. However, this is Thailand and precedents can be set by the by whoever has the power to set them. If the powers that be decide that the the ministers can be impeached, then it will happen.

[surangw]

probably will be iimpeached in absentia

[animatic]

It is ridiculous to try and impeach them for trying to amend the constitution, certainly.

But proper top do so for

ILLEGALLY trying to amend the constitution, using unconstitutional methods.

Knowing they were unconstitutional and doing it anyway.

Of course since they are no longer in office impeachment is unnecessary,

the Attorney General can just indict them as civilians, for actions they did when in office.

Edited July 26, 2014 by animatic

[djjamie]

Legal expert wonders if Yingluck, former ministers will avoid impeachment

Who funded the terrorist attacks again? Who lied to the people saying the rice scheme had no irregularities? Who pushed an amnesty bill against the majority of the population? Who was the boss of the previous "democratic" government yet was unelected and a criminal to boot? Did a farmer commit suicide when the Right Honorable Ahbisit was elected PM?

Not only should they not avoid impeachment, they should not avoid long long jail sentences. This is why reform is needed.

Why this ongoing banter? Go to the root cause and tell the 1 PRINCIPLE SUPPORTERS what I posted. This is why reform is needed.

They can't renege it. They hate facts. They hate the truth. They hate logic.

Some say I am repetitive. When some have a memory like a gold fish I need to be!

<EDIT> I am not referring to anyone on this forum…Toot, toot!

Edited July 26, 2014 by djjamie

[northernjohn]

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

Impeachment is for laying charges against people actually in office.

Out of office they are charged as citizens, even for crimes committed while in office.

that goes from the NACC or AMLO, or other investigative body like a grand jury,

and direct to Prosecutors office. From there it proceeds to court.

They seem to treat the word impeachment here as if it is a trial and conviction.

It is not. Nor is it something we should be worrying about in relation to former officials.

Charge them, bring them to court,

convict them and send them away, if the evidence is sufficient.

You are right. It now becomes a case for the courts not the senate. I had forgotten that it is impossible to impeach any one if they are not in office. Hopefully the courts will prosecute her to the full extent of the law and levy the maximum penalty on her. This would defiantly cause certain people to rethink if they want to be involved with the government any more. Or in the future. A strong clear easily understood warning to future graft seekers.

With the answers or non-answers on why impeach, I think we are now ready to move up a little bit and start the discussion on "why democracy?"

IMHO

Good point. Try Democracy or go back to the Parliamentary system. I kind of liked where the people in France got to choose the leader. If there is no clear winner they simply run an election between the two leading candidates. At least that is the way I remember the last election. Defiantly not in favor of a dictatorship. Surely there must be other options out there.

[northernjohn]

And what good will impeaching her do? Another stupid move and waste of time by the Democrats.

I do love the way you post without thinking, you need to remove the "mango" part of your name and just stick with the latter part, much more accurate for your posting history . . . "bob".

What good will impeachment do? Simple . . . it lets people know that crime and corruption is not acceptable in Thai society and it forces her to accept the responsibility (and hopefully consequences) for the mess this rice scam, amnesty bill, etc etc created.

I know, I know, it's all biased and politically motivated (in your eyes) . . . but to everyone else, it was blatant, arrogant, way over the top, "<deleted> you" thievery and corruption on all counts hidden under the guise of "democracy" (a word which needs to be explained in great depth to those that attempt to use it to excuse their misdeeds).

"Crime and corruption is not acceptable in Thai society"

Really? What presumptuous pomposity.

Crime and corruption has always been acceptable in Thai culture-- and that is changing selectively and one-sidedly. The new wave is that crime and corruption are only acceptable from some sectors. Any calls for military prosecution of human traffickers in military uniform? No. Any call for dissolving the three big distributors of lottery tickets (who are partly military owned)? No

Take the media scandal for another example. Reporters were found to have accepted money from the mighty CP corporation. The CP people never denied giving them money, they said they "were not bribes, we just gave it to them". And, the "report that was leaked was distorted and exaggerated".

So, responding to cries for transparency, the junta appointed a board...comprised...of the companies accused.

Get off your high horse, or maybe it is not your horse that is high.

Well done - you have brought the discussion to a new level of idiocy.

Crime and corruption are not acceptable in any society that has a rule of law with appropriate punishments depending on the level.

Yes, there have been surveys (rarely ever accurate or large enough) to pretend that the population accepts corruption by a majority. There has never even been a survey to claim that crime is acceptable.

You cannot even get your facts right about the media accepting money. There's no law against it, so the best case against it is 'legal corruption'. The junta are not involved at all - it is the Press Council who are investigating it as it is the Thai media who are in the 'dock'.

Now to the Op.

It would be a first for Thailand to have a real impeachment trial by the new senate when it is functioning again. IMO the rice scam is covered by the NACC but the illegal moves within parliament - amnesty bill by deceit, not following the CC rules for a constitutional amendment, and MP being caught on video voting for others. All these offences were either allowed or supported by YL.

When it comes to surveys being in favor of corruption. The questions asked are probably along the lines of do you think it is OK to slip the BIB 200 baht to get out of a no helmet ticket.

As opposed to

Do you think it is OK to borrow 2.2 billion baht and stick it in the governments pockets and expect the people to bay it back for the next 52 years. Some how I have a hard time believing that was one of the questions.

[animatic]

Impeachment is for laying charges against people actually in office.

Out of office they are charged as citizens, even for crimes committed while in office.

that goes from the NACC or AMLO, or other investigative body like a grand jury,

and direct to Prosecutors office. From there it proceeds to court.

They seem to treat the word impeachment here as if it is a trial and conviction.

It is not. Nor is it something we should be worrying about in relation to former officials.

Charge them, bring them to court,

convict them and send them away, if the evidence is sufficient.

You are right. It now becomes a case for the courts not the senate. I had forgotten that it is impossible to impeach any one if they are not in office. Hopefully the courts will prosecute her to the full extent of the law and levy the maximum penalty on her. This would defiantly cause certain people to rethink if they want to be involved with the government any more. Or in the future. A strong clear easily understood warning to future graft seekers.

With the answers or non-answers on why impeach, I think we are now ready to move up a little bit and start the discussion on "why democracy?"

IMHO

Good point. Try Democracy or go back to the Parliamentary system. I kind of liked where the people in France got to choose the leader. If there is no clear winner they simply run an election between the two leading candidates. At least that is the way I remember the last election. Defiantly not in favor of a dictatorship. Surely there must be other options out there.

Yes I also like the French run off of best two if no one gets 50.0x % outright.

Of course that is direct election of a president by the electorate,

The legislature still chooses the PM by themselves.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Edited July 27, 2014 by animatic

[belg]

impeach ? yingluck? she is in paris, nothing to impeach except her shopping