TDRI opposes NACC using its report as evidence in rice pledging case

[webfact]

TDRI opposes NACC using its report as evidence in rice pledging case



BANGKOK: -- The National Anti-Corruption Commission should not use the report on rice pledging scheme of Thailand Development and Research Institute as a piece of evidence in the former’s case against former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, said TDRI president Somkiat Tangkitvanich in a message he posted in his Facebook page today.

Mr Somkiat said that he felt the need to explain the role of the TDRI regarding its research report although his colleague, Mr Nipon Puapongsakorn, who did the research planned to make a clarification on the matter because debates in the social media referring the TDRI’s research report started to cause public confusion regarding TDRI’s role.

Personally, Mr Somkiat said he agreed with Mr Nipon that the rice pledging scheme was a problematic policy because it didn’t help the poor at the right cause of the problem; it destroyed the rice trading mechanism which worked just fine; and it caused widespread corruption that the NACC should find out the culprits for punishments.

However, he would like to make clear that TDRI is a policy research institute and its main duty is to conduct researches in order to bring about modifications to problematic policies. So the goal of the TDRI is different from the one of NACC which is to penalize those who corrupt or abuse their authority, he said.

As such, Mr Somkiat said that the NACC should not refer to TDRI’s research report as an “evidence” to be used in incriminating anybody because an evidence in academic aspect is different from an evidence to be used in a criminal or political case being investigated by the NACC.

The TDRI president said he believed the NACC was capable of finding their own evidences to be used in their case without having to refer to TDRI’s research report.

The TDRI’s report was cited by the Office of the Attorney-General as one of the three “incomplete” evidences in the NACC’s file case against Ms Yingluck prompting the office not to proceed with indicting her in the court for now until both the OAG and the NACC set up a joint committee to look at the case file.

(Photo : ThaiPBS file)

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/tdri-opposes-nacc-using-report-evidence-rice-pledging-case/


-- Thai PBS 2014-09-09

[tomacht8]

Personally, Mr Somkiat said he agreed with Mr Nipon that the rice pledging scheme was a problematic policy because it didn’t help the poor at the right cause of the problem; it destroyed the rice trading mechanism which worked just fine; and it caused widespread corruption that the NACC should find out the culprits for punishments.

What a windbag.

[Nickymaster]

There is clearly a deal in place. Yingluck will be left alone if the Shins leave Thailand alone.

[thequietman]

Clearly covering his ass as regards the Shins. He doesn't fancy disappearing any time soon.

[moe666]

Clearly covering his ass as regards the Shins. He doesn't fancy disappearing any time soon.

O please a few posters here are so full of it as if you know something others do not hehehehehe

[halloween]

Clearly worried about harassment and intimidation of researchers in their next project.

[DrLom]

In short, they're all shit scared of repercussions. Nobody will take responsibility on this one... including Prayuth himself.

[Nickymaster]

In short, they're all shit scared of repercussions. Nobody will take responsibility on this one... including Prayuth himself.

Prayuth doesn't need to take responsibility. He only wants things to move on.

[pisico]

Where did I hear that before? "Trust me but do not ask any questions."

Traditional transparency Thai style

[NongKhaiKid]

Our academic evidence is different which means we can write any ' expert ' crap we like and it can't be held up for examination.

[Old Man River]

Clearly covering his ass as regards the Shins. He doesn't fancy disappearing any time soon.

It has nothing to do with the Shins. He just doesn't want TDRI to get mixed up in lawsuits. They don't take on this responsibility. They are a think tank and are apolitical. They do research and draw conclusions.

For social media purposes I like to check out their website. IMHO, as it relates to Thailand, they are the best out there.

[Thai at Heart]

They should just put him on the stand to testify.

Of course, it is academic expert opinion and not "proof" per se.

[pookiki]

When I first saw the reference to the TRDI report in the news, I was a bit mystified. Khun Somkiat is correct, the TDRI is a 'think-tank' . The role and purpose of the Institute is to make policy recommendations and not to make findings whether a particular policy was lawful or not. I haven't read the report (if a translation is available) but I would imagine that the TDRI has criticized many policies in the past. Somkiat is trying to preserve the integrity of the organization -- that's all.

[Saraphee]

The report is in the public domain. It is there and can be used - the issue is as to it's accuracy and relevance. This can be debated in due process and may be proved or disproved.

Too late for the experts to sidestep now.

[sweatalot]

When I first saw the reference to the TRDI report in the news, I was a bit mystified. Khun Somkiat is correct, the TDRI is a 'think-tank' . The role and purpose of the Institute is to make policy recommendations and not to make findings whether a particular policy was lawful or not. I haven't read the report (if a translation is available) but I would imagine that the TDRI has criticized many policies in the past. Somkiat is trying to preserve the integrity of the organization -- that's all.

I always thought integrity means calling right what is right and wrong what is wrong

and calling a criminal a criminal

[Eric Loh]

Another snub after OAG refusal to accept the charge. The TDRI "evidence" is an intergal part of the NACC watertight charge. Even if the NACC decide to by pass the OAG all these snubs will have a bearing on the court accepting the charge. The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda.

[balford]

I smell a big fat rat here. Smells something like a TDRI/OAG show entitled 'Let's make a deal.'

Bob A. Relaxed in Lampang

[Halion]

Perhaps he is correct as they are only academics and we have all seen the quality of their work.

[bangrak]

Clearly covering his ass as regards the Shins. He doesn't fancy disappearing any time soon.

It has nothing to do with the Shins. He just doesn't want TDRI to get mixed up in lawsuits. They don't take on this responsibility. They are a think tank and are apolitical. They do research and draw conclusions.

For social media purposes I like to check out their website. IMHO, as it relates to Thailand, they are the best out there.

This is something apolitical, it is about graft and corruption and Justice must be served., so I disagree with the TDRI acting like a bunch of weasels and rejecting the paternity of the results of their own work, what to me seems quite 'political' from them. When a political party would be involved, it only makes the case(s) worse, as they are supposed to serve the nation, not themselves, and TDRI should be proud their work can contribute to a better Thailand, in reality, not just in their ivory tower!

[bangrak]

Another snub after OAG refusal to accept the charge. The TDRI "evidence" is an intergal part of the NACC watertight charge. Even if the NACC decide to by pass the OAG all these snubs will have a bearing on the court accepting the charge. The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda.

The TDRI evidence is there, it exists, it is documented, it is detailed, it is tangible, and, may I guess, it is damning for your clients. It is not because the TDRI would rather better like what they have been writing not to be used in front of the Courts, that it makes their conclusions less valid, is it? All the opposite IMO. And why are you all so afraid of the NACC pushing on? Haven't Yingluck and many other politicians and officials been declaring in turn not so long ago, with their right hand on the heart, that there was nothing wrong with the rice scheme? So?

[Baerboxer]

When I first saw the reference to the TRDI report in the news, I was a bit mystified. Khun Somkiat is correct, the TDRI is a 'think-tank' . The role and purpose of the Institute is to make policy recommendations and not to make findings whether a particular policy was lawful or not. I haven't read the report (if a translation is available) but I would imagine that the TDRI has criticized many policies in the past. Somkiat is trying to preserve the integrity of the organization -- that's all.

Looks more like he trying to keep everybody happy whilst staying out of any controversy. That's the problem with wanting to publish things, people expect to be able to reference the material.

[Baerboxer]

Another snub after OAG refusal to accept the charge. The TDRI "evidence" is an intergal part of the NACC watertight charge. Even if the NACC decide to by pass the OAG all these snubs will have a bearing on the court accepting the charge. The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda.

Of course they have an agenda - root out those responsible for corruption and provide evidence to the courts.

The former darling of Isaan knows that she's safe as long as her clan keep to the agreements that may or may not have already been made.

All those people who really went to protest against the Shin corruption and amnesty for Thaksin in the hope of seeing justice done will again be disappointed. Yet again no hiso Chinese-Thai from "a family" will be punished. Just a few minions for window dressing and then, on with the show.

[balford]

If it's an academic paper and it is publicly available then what is he banging on about other than trying to tin plate his and TDRI's backsides I suspect... Not us your honour they'll echo!

Bob A. Relaxed in Lampang

[ramrod711]

Personally, Mr Somkiat said he agreed with Mr Nipon that the rice pledging scheme was a problematic policy because it didnt help the poor at the right cause of the problem; it destroyed the rice trading mechanism which worked just fine; and it caused widespread corruption that the NACC should find out the culprits for punishments.

But, he doesn't want to be accountable. He doesn't want his phone number and address sent to the UDD. He wants to weasel out of his responsibility to stand behind his research. In other words, he feels threatened. The TDRI should receive no further government funding if they don't want to stand behind their published material, they should direct all their papers directly to the trash.

[MobileContent]

I think that TDRI stays out of is a clear signal that they don't want to be dragged into something which smells possible like a deal. I have always admired Ammar Siamwalla who has been with TDRI for as long I can think of Thailand and his reports has always been fair balanced. Mr. Siamwalla has been a very vocal critic of the Thaksin governments but he never stopped above.

We know corruption took place at the rice pledging scam but I bet my balls YS will be not found guilty. The NACC should have gone after the ministers, rice mills and warehouses and not only focused on Yingluck.

Furthermore NACC should have asked for a report from NIDA and they would have gladly accepted it to be used against YS but not Thailand's prestige TDRI.

[scorecard]

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

Eric Loh, on 09 Sept 2014 - 13:40, said:

Another snub after OAG refusal to accept the charge. The TDRI "evidence" is an intergal part of the NACC watertight charge. Even if the NACC decide to by pass the OAG all these snubs will have a bearing on the court accepting the charge. The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda.

1. The OAG didn't 'refuse to accept the charge', they want a joint committee to look at it further.

2. 'The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda'.

Or perhaps it's just possible that the NACC will gain kudos for their attempts to bring corruption, dereliction of duty, etc., to the attention of the public, and to press charges and to see that appropriate punishment (if the case is ultimately proven) happens.

No charges because that might look like NACC has an agenda is just not appropriate. If their case is ultimately rejected so be it.

Pushing for charges and providing evidence (which it seems needs to be discussed /clarified further) and achieving, if appropriate, punishment for high level folks (actually any folks) can only be in the best future interests of Thailand and all Thais and cements the credibility of the NACC.

Also it starts to make a few people (hopefully a lot of people) think a lot more before they line up at the trough.

Also it starts to make a few more people realize the rotten agenda of immoral folks who form parties (get rich quick clubs) with no hesitation. And it makes those 'clubs' look more clearly what they really are and highlights even more that these clubs have zero thoughts or policies in terms of development and moral opportunities for the broad populace.

Keep in there NACC.

Edited September 9, 2014 by scorecard

[Eric Loh]

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

Eric Loh, on 09 Sept 2014 - 13:40, said:

Another snub after OAG refusal to accept the charge. The TDRI "evidence" is an intergal part of the NACC watertight charge. Even if the NACC decide to by pass the OAG all these snubs will have a bearing on the court accepting the charge. The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda.

1. The OAG didn't 'refuse to accept the charge', they want a joint committee to look at it further.

2. 'The more the NACC pursue this case, the perception will increase that they have an agenda'.

Or perhaps it's just possible that the NACC will gain kudos for their attempts to bring corruption, dereliction of duty, etc., to the attention of the public, and to press charges and to see that appropriate punishment (if the case is ultimately proven) happens.

No charges because that might look like NACC has an agenda is just not appropriate. If their case is ultimately rejected so be it.

Pushing for charges and providing evidence (which it seems needs to be discussed /clarified further) and achieving, if appropriate, punishment for high level folks (actually any folks) can only be in the best future interests of Thailand and all Thais and cements the credibility of the NACC.

Also it starts to make a few people (hopefully a lot of people) think a lot more before they line up at the trough.

Also it starts to make a few more people realize the rotten agenda of immoral folks who form parties (get rich quick clubs) with no hesitation. And it makes those 'clubs' look more clearly what they really are and highlights even more that these clubs have zero thoughts or policies in terms of development and moral opportunities for the broad populace.

Keep in there NACC.

It has been 15 years since the NACC was set up to made Thailand corruption free. Yet this 15 years, our CPI has never moved beyond the CPI 2.79 to 3,60 range (0 being most corrupt). They are supposed to be our impartial and independent guardians but have been less than impartial on may occasions.

If the NACC role is to scrutinize the politician, who scrutinize the NACC. Who are they accountable to? They don't even have to report their assets.

[Thai at Heart]

Research like this shouldn't be used to convict politicians. It is open to political abuse.

Better they get hard proof of the specific actions of Yingluck than using general opinion of the effects of her policy.

[Old Man River]

I think that TDRI stays out of is a clear signal that they don't want to be dragged into something which smells possible like a deal.

I agree on the possibility of a deal, but deals aside, TDRI took a similar stance in 2012 as it related to its research.

In a BP article it was reported that one of the Dem.'s had put on his FB page that NIDA, TDRI and the NESBD were going to launch a campaign against the rice pledging scheme. TDRI responded by saying they would be willing to supply technical info in support of NIDA, whose stance they agreed with, but they didn't want to engage in a conflict with the government as rice pledging was part of its platform.

[joebrown]

Research like this shouldn't be used to convict politicians. It is open to political abuse.

Better they get hard proof of the specific actions of Yingluck than using general opinion of the effects of her policy.

Come on!! What do TDRI get paid for? They produce reports based on their own research. What you are saying is that they should be able to absolve themselves of any accountability ie we can say what we like but it can't be used as any form of truth or evidence in court of law. You'll be suggesting next that TDRI should be able to sue the NACC for defamation!