Jump to content

Yingluck must face rice scheme trial: Thai opinion


webfact

Recommended Posts

STOPPAGE TIME
Yingluck must face rice scheme trial

Tulsathit Taptim

BANGKOK: -- If I were Yingluck Shinawatra, I would come back to Thailand just to shut up those predicting I wouldn't. And risk spending considerable time in jail in the process?

Well, a dutiful return would establish some trust and credibility, and it's not like the rice scheme trial by the Supreme Court's political division would conclude three weeks from now or something like that.

Seriously, though, if I was innocent, I would fight to the death. In this era, the National Council for Peace and Order could still put Yingluck in jail if they wanted to, but if they were persecuting her, the whole world would know. It would be their words against her on the world stage. If they lied and she told the truth, activists, bloggers and international journalists would dissect the case to its microscopic elements.

Alleging that the rice-pledging scheme was plagued with corruption is one thing, saying she knowingly let it happen or even got involved in graft scams herself is quite another.

This is clearly a bigger deal than the share concealment scandal or the Ratchadaphisek land acquisition. The former took place before Thaksin Shinawatra became prime minister, and you could argue that the tactic of putting large amounts of stocks in nominees' accounts was not uncommon among Thai businesspeople. The land case, though, like the share case was in obvious violation of the law, but could simply be deemed a purchase of something that shouldn't have been bought.

Yingluck is accused of serious crimes that allegedly took place when she was in office.

This is a glaring distinction between her case and her big brother's. While the share concealment affected stock traders, the man on the street asked "So what?" The same went for the Ratchadaphisek land case. "That isn't a crime in our country," a former Western diplomat once told me, although he acknowledged that a Thai law was broken by the land purchase.

The rice scheme, according to the National Anti-Corruption Commission, spawned corruption "every step of the way". Yingluck backed the controversial programme to the hilt, dismissing vocal criticism and repeated warnings by respected economists that her government could collapse under the weight of rampant graft and massive fiscal losses.

The government failed to pay farmers who "sold" it their rice at highly inflated prices, and some farmers, who were not paid, killed themselves.

Suicides related to state policies are not new. But suicides related to state policies that should and could have been stopped a long time ago due to clear signs of corruption and fiscal dangers could be different. Yingluck's defence will be a highly delicate task.

First, it will have to defuse claims that corruption was widespread, and if it fails to do so, it will have to shield her from the crimes.

Yingluck chaired the all-powerful national rice committee and the rice-pledging scheme was her ruling party's main policy. All warnings were well documented, and so were her (and her brother's) repeated insistence that nothing was seriously wrong with the costly rice programme.

Either gross negligence or direct involvement in corruption, or both, could land her in jail. Her defence has previously tried to build an argument that there was no way she could backtrack on a policy that was something promised to the people in an election campaign and then formally declared to Parliament. That wouldn't be good enough. The prime ministerial duty of stopping or preventing corruption when he/she can overrides everything.

The trial, assuming that corruption in the rice scheme is a foregone conclusion, will feature a fight between a "She didn't know it" defence and "Of course, she did" prosecution. And what the Democrats tried to say during the last censure debate - allegations to which Yingluck and the Cabinet paid absolutely no attention - may come back to haunt her.

But the onus remains on the accusers. That's why Yingluck should come back if she believes she is innocent. If she was jailed for a little embezzlement here and there or a small fraudulent activity or two by those "downstream", Thailand's political strife would only intensify.

The NACC has accused her of allowing massive corruption to happen under her nose and being involved in some of the grafts herself, and now it will have to prove it. In short, the NACC must establish that corruption took place "upstream" and all the way down.

Here's hoping that, after ideological "values" nearly made Thais kill one another on a nasty scale, spawning hatred, hypocrisy and propagandas, legal evidence and facts will step in and speak up.

After all, what is politically and ideologically right or wrong is slippery. What is legally right or wrong is much less debatable.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Yingluck-must-face-rice-scheme-trial-30239757.html

nationlogo.jpg
-- The Nation 2014-07-30

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Yingluck is the cause that many farmers killed themselves. She will be charged for unintended man slaughters. Gen Prayuth is exactly opposite. He should be given another medal for returning happiness to the people.

Sorry, but I read on this forum that PTP and Yingluck discovered the farmers that killed themselves in desperation were fake farmers. I took that to mean the 20 odd corpses belonged to general nutcases that killed themselves solely to discredit the Yingluck administration, and had nothing to do with a rice scheme designed and engineered to enrich the offshore amart and it's onshore arselickers at the cost of the hardworking farmer and general taxpaying populus.

Perhaps your vocation should be fiction writing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the thought of spending time in a cockroach infested cell with a bucket for a toilet and 30 lice infested room mates will be enough to keep her overseas.

Surely someone as VIP as YL would get better treatment, not that she's likely to see the inside of any kind of prison.

When Joseph Estrada, ex- president of The Philippines, was imprisoned for corruption there was an outcry at the special consideration he was receiving.

The Governor of the prison duly informed the media that all the little ' extras ' in his cell were bought by Estrada himself and he even paid the electricity bill for the air cons he had installed !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yingluck chaired the all-powerful national rice committee and the rice-pledging scheme was her ruling party's main policy. All warnings were well documented, and so were her (and her brother's) repeated insistence that nothing was seriously wrong with the costly rice programme.

Pretty much sums it up. It was a good ride while it lasted....now time to go visit my brother overseas.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Yingluck is the cause that many farmers killed themselves. She will be charged for unintended man slaughters. Gen Prayuth is exactly opposite. He should be given another medal for returning happiness to the people.

Sorry, but I read on this forum that PTP and Yingluck discovered the farmers that killed themselves in desperation were fake farmers. I took that to mean the 20 odd corpses belonged to general nutcases that killed themselves solely to discredit the Yingluck administration, and had nothing to do with a rice scheme designed and engineered to enrich the offshore amart and it's onshore arselickers at the cost of the hardworking farmer and general taxpaying populus.

Perhaps your vocation should be fiction writing.

But there have been better writers of fiction here on TV, eg those handful of posters with very rose tinted glasses who seem to be very quiet for the last month or so. Thank God I don't have to read any more of their lies and propoganda.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yingluck must face rice scheme trial: Thai opinion

in the happy thailand, does the thai people have the right to express their opinion..... freelywhistling.gif

If Yingluck is charged with dereliction of duty, malfeasance and other serious offences, it is up to the courts to decide her fate, not the Thai people, even though they are living in Happyland.

Her supporters may have opinions, as do her opposition, but ultimately it will be the legal system that makes a decision, not the polling booth (freely).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the facts. How many rich, hi-so or politicians in Thailand have EVER gone to prison? If she's found guilty, she might be SENTENCED to prison, but then it will be suspended, and pay a fine. Maybe a large one, but nothing she can't easily afford. And that will be the end of it. Banned for life from politics? I don't think she ever wanted to be in politics in the first place, so that might actually be a relief to her. But a "cockroach infested cell"? Ain't gonna happen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prime ministerial duty of stopping or preventing corruption when he/she can overrides everything.

Not in Thailand and not if your last name is Shinawatra.

Well she did override a number of things including the constitution court, the NACC, the OAG and all the advice given by the world bank and others as to the eventual outcome of the pledging scheme.

But....but; big brother always knows what's best !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The NACC has accused her of allowing massive corruption to happen under her nose and being involved in some of the grafts herself, and now it will have to prove it. In short, the NACC must establish that corruption took place "upstream" and all the way down".

Says it all. How will the NACC do a fair job when they already concluded there were corruption from the beginning. Almost like a mission from the start and they now have to prove it and fill up the blanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The NACC has accused her of allowing massive corruption to happen under her nose and being involved in some of the grafts herself, and now it will have to prove it. In short, the NACC must establish that corruption took place "upstream" and all the way down".

Says it all. How will the NACC do a fair job when they already concluded there were corruption from the beginning. Almost like a mission from the start and they now have to prove it and fill up the blanks.

Warnings were issued about this from day 1. The NACC has been investigating this for quite some time. Their investigation didn't just start this year.

Plus, there's always been corruption in these programs. Where there's smoke, there's fire. As the saying goes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holding the Prime Minister personally responsible for corruption within a government policy would set a fantastic principal.

I would guess they would have to start building a lot of luxury cells to house all the subsequent PMs. By logic, if they take down Yingluck, they would have to take down everyone else in the chain also to the perpetrator so I hope they are ready with a few hundred cells.

I mean, they have a theft at a warehouse. T

That chain starts at the warehouse gate, on upwards. Dozens of people.

I see this as the most dangerous case that they will embark upon. If it fails they look ridiculous. If it succeeds, it ends up being a rod for every Prime minister in the future.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holding the Prime Minister personally responsible for corruption within a government policy would set a fantastic principal.

I would guess they would have to start building a lot of luxury cells to house all the subsequent PMs. By logic, if they take down Yingluck, they would have to take down everyone else in the chain also to the perpetrator so I hope they are ready with a few hundred cells.

I mean, they have a theft at a warehouse. T

That chain starts at the warehouse gate, on upwards. Dozens of people.

I see this as the most dangerous case that they will embark upon. If it fails they look ridiculous. If it succeeds, it ends up being a rod for every Prime minister in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...