NACC: The case against former prime minister Yingluck is water tight

[IMA_FARANG]

In many cases against high profile politicians, both in Thailand and in other countries there is an obvious (to clear thinkers, not often to be found in Thailand on any political side) between the ones who investigate and prepare a case and the ones who have to prosecute it.

The ones who are responsible for preparing a case may have there own view about the person they are preparing a case against

But those responsible for bringing that case to trial may, even if they feel there is a justifiable case, realize that for political reasons they have no chance of successfully wining that case if it comes to trial due to the popularity of the alleged defendant.

Proving a case of criminal intent against Yingluck would be very difficult.

For one thing she is such a scatterbrain fluffhead, it would be hard to prove she meant to commit a crime, or simply was just incompetent in doing her duties.

In her case, there could be a serious doubt she was ever competent to perform her duties in the first place.

So it would be hard for prosecutor to be able to prove deliberate criminal activities ..... because she was too dumb to know what was actually going on in the first place.

That, after all, is exactly why "big brother" wanted her for his PM surrogate.

The other reason she would be hard to convict is that she is the "darling" of many of her party.

She could walk right up to many, steal their money right out of their pockets, and many would still say it "wasn't her fault, she is to pretty to be bad".

So it goes, in Thailand and in other countries also,

[Artisi]

Does this mean it is IP65 or above,or Thai equivilent to IP ratings ?

Might need a bit (or even a lot) of explaining for many posters.

[chainarong]

I would say let sleeping dogs lie, given enough rope they will hang themselves , like fishing really, can't help taking the bait.

[Elmer Gantry]

Does this mean it is IP65 or above,or Thai equivilent to IP ratings ?

Might need a bit (or even a lot) of explaining for many posters.

Let them eat cake ( Google it )

[Rimmer]

An inflammatory and dangerous post has been removed also the quoted replies to it

[The Deerhunter]

In many cases against high profile politicians, both in Thailand and in other countries there is an obvious (to clear thinkers, not often to be found in Thailand on any political side) between the ones who investigate and prepare a case and the ones who have to prosecute it.

The ones who are responsible for preparing a case may have there own view about the person they are preparing a case against

But those responsible for bringing that case to trial may, even if they feel there is a justifiable case, realize that for political reasons they have no chance of successfully wining that case if it comes to trial due to the popularity of the alleged defendant.

Proving a case of criminal intent against Yingluck would be very difficult.

For one thing she is such a scatterbrain fluffhead, it would be hard to prove she meant to commit a crime, or simply was just incompetent in doing her duties.

In her case, there could be a serious doubt she was ever competent to perform her duties in the first place.

So it would be hard for prosecutor to be able to prove deliberate criminal activities ..... because she was too dumb to know what was actually going on in the first place.

That, after all, is exactly why "big brother" wanted her for his PM surrogate.

The other reason she would be hard to convict is that she is the "darling" of many of her party.

She could walk right up to many, steal their money right out of their pockets, and many would still say it "wasn't her fault, she is to pretty to be bad".

So it goes, in Thailand and in other countries also,

The criminal charges have not come up yet. This charge was that she was negligent. Being a scatterbrain or fluffhead does not reduce her chances of also being negligent.

[gbswales]

..."failed to stop corruption" ...if that seriously is the basis of the case then they should not waste their time with it. Almost EVERY politician and senior official since the dawn of democracy in Thailand could be accused of that. Is it suggested that she profited personally from the rice scheme? If not then I dont really understand why she is any better or worse than those that went before her.

[SOTIRIOS]

.....'evidence' would be an 'uncountable noun'....

[tbthailand]

Sansern Poljiak is a royalist stouge through and through. The NACC is in the junta's pocket.

They'll get their case sorted out and they'll get a conviction. Doesn't matter how they do it.

[belg]

a lot of chance it will just slip away under a rug somewhere, or leak out to the sea

[kamahele]

Her only crime might have been being stupid. Can she go to jail for that? Not sure.

[khunken]

Sansern Poljiak is a royalist stouge through and through. The NACC is in the junta's pocket.

They'll get their case sorted out and they'll get a conviction. Doesn't matter how they do it.

This thread was quite interesting without the conspiracy cr*p which seems to be your forte.

The NACC is in no one's pocket as demonstrated by the parallel case being filed against Khunying Jaruvan. It is following the legal due process of the AG working with the NACC to make the case as watertight as possible.

Pity that it just doesn't fit with your warped way of thinking.

[ezzra]

Water tight is good if she was accused of mismanaging water, but this case is about rice,

and therefor it should be rice tight, not even one rotten grain will pass trough...

[Halion]

Makes little difference in this country as to whether or not a case is watertight or not. The determining factors will be wealth and influence. So much for equality for all and a sense of democratic judicial intervention. The players have changed but the plot remains the same.

They will drag this out until they feel that it outside the public radar.

If this regime truly wishes to show that it is sincere in it's manifesto of improvement then a good starting point would be to drop the full weight of the law on those responsible for one of the biggest scandals to hit Thailand in the past 50 years.

[Eric Loh]

Watertight and difference of opinion said Khun Sansern and this guy sits as secretary general of NACC. The OAG statement is clear as light and simple enough for all laymen to understand. Can't be watertight when the OAG state that there are insufficient evidence and it is a official rejection, not an opinion. A lame excuse only hurt the credibility of the NACC which is in a dump at the moment.

[rickirs]

If one measure of her guilt is that Ms Yingluck had the power to stop the rice pledging scheme after it was passed by the House, then Democrat Ministers in the House and the Senate should also be charged similarily. Witness from 2013-2014 the Democrat leaders AFTER they withdrew from government in their use of the power of complaints brought to the NACC and the Courts against the Yingluck regime to effectively hold her and her ministers accountable for improper decisions.

PTP political opposition was just as derelict (if the charges were to be believed) and passive complicity in the execution of the rice program as was the PTP. NACC would seem derelict in its duties not to also charge the Democrats if it is politically nuetral.

[sweatalot]

They are wracking their brains trying to come up with some trumped up reason to prosecute and send her to jail. Yinluck is the Aung San Suu Kyi of Thailand, fighting for the rights and freedom of the Thai people. This totalitarian military dictatorship will make sure she is charged with something, they fear her and so they should. 90% of the population love her and will follow her until freedom and democracy is back in the hands of the people.

You 're serious?

[sweatalot]

Mr. Sansern's assets just rose by 200 million baht, me thinks.

I guess you mean the assets of the Attorney General??

[khunken]

If one measure of her guilt is that Ms Yingluck had the power to stop the rice pledging scheme after it was passed by the House, then Democrat Ministers in the House and the Senate should also be charged similarily. Witness from 2013-2014 the Democrat leaders AFTER they withdrew from government in their use of the power of complaints brought to the NACC and the Courts against the Yingluck regime to effectively hold her and her ministers accountable for improper decisions.

PTP political opposition was just as derelict (if the charges were to be believed) and passive complicity in the execution of the rice program as was the PTP. NACC would seem derelict in its duties not to also charge the Democrats if it is politically nuetral.

Your convoluted 'logic' is hilarious.

It's extremely doubtful that any of the charges refer to the implementation of the rice scheme. The Dems opposed the scheme as oppositions tend to do and they never had any power to stop it - only file investigation requests with the relevant agencies, which they did.

The negligence was 'no corruption' when there was, allowing party supporters to benefit and failing to organise sufficient funds for pledged rice when they resigned. The latter causing extreme hardship & even suicide on some farmers.

Check out the thread on Khunying Jaruvan to see how the legal process works neutrally.

[Benmart]

A Thai matter for Thais to address.

[BigC]

Thank god I am not prime minister of Thailand

[halloween]

Thank god I am not prime minister of Thailand

I'll second that motion.

[Mango Bob]

The NACC is trying to save face with these remarks. If the case was so water tight why was it returned. They rush to get this case to the courts as fast as the could without regards of the accused rights.

[Docno]

Just this week, I was doing a job analysis with focus groups of prosecutors in another country. They highlighted the judgement required to go ahead with a case and the importance of getting everything 'right' at the start ... they definitely don't want to initiate court proceedings without having the case tight and fully prepared.

It was from this perspective that I read the following in the OP: "As for the point that there was only one page of evidence of rice pledging corruption from Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), the NACC secretary-general explained that, in fact, the TDRI had a bunch of research about the alleged corruption in the rice pledging scheme and the NACC only presented just one page of the reports as a sample and the OAG was welcomed to glance through them."

Just bizarre, especially given the prominence and importance of the case. Legal bureaucracies are used to working (and producing) lengthy documents. To provide a single page of evidence from a supposedly longer report is, in fact, bizarre in the extreme. Raises questions about the judgement and competence of some of the people in the NACC.

[tbthailand]

Sansern Poljiak is a royalist stouge through and through. The NACC is in the junta's pocket.

They'll get their case sorted out and they'll get a conviction. Doesn't matter how they do it.

This thread was quite interesting without the conspiracy cr*p which seems to be your forte.

The NACC is in no one's pocket as demonstrated by the parallel case being filed against Khunying Jaruvan. It is following the legal due process of the AG working with the NACC to make the case as watertight as possible.

Pity that it just doesn't fit with your warped way of thinking.

yes, my warped way of thinking.

you have proven that your way of thinking is 'flatline'

The NACC is is part of the anti-democratic apparatus of so-called 'independent' institutions which like the EC and along with the courts played their roles in destroying what little semblance of democracy has existed since the 2006 coup.

But it hardly matters. Even Yingluck is a side show for the junta. They have only one goal.

[JAG]

Sansern Poljiak is a royalist stouge through and through. The NACC is in the junta's pocket.

They'll get their case sorted out and they'll get a conviction. Doesn't matter how they do it.

I'm not so sure that the Junta really want a conviction. A significant proportion of the Thai electorate, particularly in the North and North East regard Yingluck as the latest in a series of Prime Ministers who they have elected, and who have been forced from office by the Bangkok interests - the Yellows. Yingluck offered the electorate the chance to have their say, through a perfectly constitutional election, which was prevented, in an entirely unconstitutional manner by those same Yellows. Yingluck is popular with many who have, so far, acquiesced with the Junta forming a government. Banging her up on somewhat dubious charges may well focus opposition to the Junta. She shows no interest in going into exile. I suspect that they will leave her alone.

Incidentally, why do so many here who so energetically demand that Yingluck should be held responsible as PM for the rice subsidy fiasco, and punished accordingly, not demand that the same protocols be applied to Abhisit and Suthep with regard to the 2010 shootings?

[Showbags]

I bet she said thankyou more than 3 times...

[khunken]

Sansern Poljiak is a royalist stouge through and through. The NACC is in the junta's pocket.

They'll get their case sorted out and they'll get a conviction. Doesn't matter how they do it.

This thread was quite interesting without the conspiracy cr*p which seems to be your forte.

The NACC is in no one's pocket as demonstrated by the parallel case being filed against Khunying Jaruvan. It is following the legal due process of the AG working with the NACC to make the case as watertight as possible.

Pity that it just doesn't fit with your warped way of thinking.

yes, my warped way of thinking.

you have proven that your way of thinking is 'flatline'

The NACC is is part of the anti-democratic apparatus of so-called 'independent' institutions which like the EC and along with the courts played their roles in destroying what little semblance of democracy has existed since the 2006 coup.

But it hardly matters. Even Yingluck is a side show for the junta. They have only one goal.

Well if you bothered to look at the Khunying Jaruvan thread you would see that they have brought a case against an anti-Thaksin individual in an almost identical fashion legally speaking.

Did you look at it or is it too embarrassing to your prejudice? You need an open mind to read it - I have.

The independent institutions were the sole protectors against PTP's above the law attitude. Anything they did against the PTP was 'anti-democratic', 'elitist' or even 'fascist' according to those like yourself who don't understand checks and balances. Any case seen as pro-PTP was praised. Double standards? Never.

That little semblance of democracy (which I agree with) was because of PTP's total disregard for parliament and even less regard for anything other than an amnesty for their 'dear leader'.

[Robby nz]

The NACC is trying to save face with these remarks. If the case was so water tight why was it returned. They rush to get this case to the courts as fast as the could without regards of the accused rights.

Hear we go again more twists.

The case has not been returned to the NACC.

The OAG is now going to get together with the NACC to ensure there are no holes in the case that they will be responsible for prosecuting.

If they did not believe there was a case to answer they would not be doing this, instead they would have rejected the NACC report.

Once again, there was no rush, this has been under investigation since the first no confidence debate when the Dems took the evidence they presented in the house to the NACC.

It appears that those years of investigation have lead the NACC to the conclusion that Yingluck is guilty of negligence in her role as chair of the rice policy committee and PM.

She has had chances to defend herself and will have more once the case gets to court.

[moe666]

The usual automatic responses of the robots who post here, do you guys ever read the OP and then compose an answer to what is actually printed.