Last push to save Yingluck from legal action

[Bluespunk]

"In a last ditch move to block the impeachment of Yingluck Shinawatra, Pheu Thai Party will today present what it believes to be the strongest legal points to convince the National Legislative Assembly that it is not conforming to tradition when it comes to impeachment."

If she's innocent why worry?

Or is the tradition they are really referring to the one where no one is liable for their criminality?

You cut and paste a piece of the article and your first comment is "if she's innocent why worry" Can you clear this up for me and point to the clip you've copied that says she is worried? Or in fact, anywhere in the article that says she is worried? It does seem logical to me that you cannot impeach or charge a person on a charter or law that doesn't exist though. Wouldn't you agree?

If there is nothing for her to worry about, then why is her party/lawyers kicking up such a fuss?

The actions of those desperately trying to avoid the upcoming proceedings tell us all she is worried, but luckily, according to your analysis, there is nothing she can be charged with or impeached for.

Lucky for her.

Mind you, if there is nothing to worry about....why all the fuss?

[Alwyn]

"In a last ditch move to block the impeachment of Yingluck Shinawatra, Pheu Thai Party will today present what it believes to be the strongest legal points to convince the National Legislative Assembly that it is not conforming to tradition when it comes to impeachment."

If she's innocent why worry?

Or is the tradition they are really referring to the one where no one is liable for their criminality?

You cut and paste a piece of the article and your first comment is "if she's innocent why worry" Can you clear this up for me and point to the clip you've copied that says she is worried? Or in fact, anywhere in the article that says she is worried? It does seem logical to me that you cannot impeach or charge a person on a charter or law that doesn't exist though. Wouldn't you agree?

If there is nothing for her to worry about, then why is her party/lawyers kicking up such a fuss?

The actions of those desperately trying to avoid the upcoming proceedings tell us all she is worried, but luckily, according to your analysis, there is nothing she can be charged with or impeached for.

Lucky for her.

Mind you, if there is nothing to worry about....why all the fuss?

Her lawyers are doing what they're paid to do BlueS, they are making sure it doesn't get to court (or trying to). There are so many cases that have been politically based (Abhisit for example) where people get rail-roaded I can understand why the lawyers are doing their job with due diligence. But is we had n ot read about here, would we have been any the wiser? Reporters ask their questions and lawyers respond. Not really making a fuss is it? More fuus being made about it here!

[Thai at Heart]

She might be guilty, but why she is the only guilty party in the last govt, is a very big stretch

It's just the Captain who's supposed to go down with the ship...

Now sometimes the outsider might observe that the Captain actually had no real knowledge or reasonable oversight opportunity, etc., etc., etc., But many actually don't think that about YL. 'Not the only guilty party for certain - that's too true. But in the minds of many she's the most culpable, and the great facilitator & enabler. Most of it couldn't have happened without her. But others of her party should be in the dock along with her, no doubt. (As far as I'm concerned, TS should be there as well, but why would you submit yourself to a hot stuffy courtroom when you could instead be enjoying your purloined billions in a deluxe penthouse suite in Dubai? I mean really. Even for family! Get real.)

That as well as you know is absolute tosh, particularly in the context of government. Its a nice euphemism to say "the buck stops here".

But there are literally hundreds of people in the chain from farmer to her who, if she is guilty many of whom are guilty too. Do you think she came up with the policy herself? Since when even is it illegal to have a policy that loses money.

My country funds the health service at the cost of billions to the country. Ask many Americans and they will say this is akin to communism. Just because something loses money, from a governmental does not make it illegal.

[than]

YL make nothing to stop corruption in this program, her lawyer said she had not enought time to prepare her defense, but all of her argument against this has been transfert to court NACC and NLA since month ago.....

She's guillty, she must be punish for cheating poor farmers

[chotthee]

YL make nothing to stop corruption in this program, her lawyer said she had not enought time to prepare her defense, but all of her argument against this has been transfert to court NACC and NLA since month ago.....

She's guillty, she must be punish for cheating poor farmers

She is super corrupted, with billions of Thai tax payers money.

She must pay back every cent she took from Thai tax payers.

[marcusd]

Not being involved in the PTP , red shirts or Shinawtra family fortunes , one wonders if it is in the national interest or helping reconciliation to continue legal action, you will have the same problem when the country goes into election mode and what's the bet , repercussions will follow, the ruling elite have hijacked the agenda , so it stands to reason a revamp PTP with big backing, lots of rice farmers and disgruntled country people , the PTP will be voted back in, I would be hammering for the relevant Ministers , Department heads and advisors to see what really happened in the failed rice scheme.

What I think is being missed here is that SHINS are part of the RULING Elite. Look at the wealth? they cannot be amongst the poor and impoverished?

[tim armstrong]

If I come back in a second life I want to be a defense lawyer for the PTP. They are busier than a one armed brick layer in Baghdad and one can see why when they represent the people they do.

Would that be people trying to get a fair deal from the courts on the basis they are innocent until proven guilty?

Or is that concept out of the window nowadays?

THat is not a universally held legal principle, as in France and French influenced New World countries. I'm not sure about Thailand. Cambodia adopts the French principle.

[scorecard]

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

"In a last ditch move to block the impeachment of Yingluck Shinawatra, Pheu Thai Party will today present what it believes to be the strongest legal points to convince the National Legislative Assembly that it is not conforming to tradition when it comes to impeachment."

If she's innocent why worry?

Or is the tradition they are really referring to the one where no one is liable for their criminality?

What about Suthep? Is he going to get away with all the trouble and interference with peoples livelihood, and damaging Thailands tourist industry he caused?

Have you been hiding under a rock ???? This subject has already been flogged to death and has nothing to do withe the topic.

You must have been hiding under a rock about a year ago when Suthep was doing his damage, also, just about every thread on Thaivisa has posters that may go slightly off topic, so get over it.

'damage'. Well your entitled to your opinion of course.

Others would say he was leading an important and valid protest against a well funded, ruthless, no morals corrupt dictatorship.

Edited November 5, 2014 by scorecard

[NoshowJones]

Mr Scorecard, if anyone wants a government out, they should do it at the ballot box.

[Robby nz]

Why has Thailand never attempted to arrest this "fugitive" through Interpol and other means. In reality he is not a fugitive, but an exiled man.

He is indeed a fugitive from the law and a coward as well for he ran from a conviction and sentence that he could have stayed and appealed.

Why did he run ? He knew very well he was guilty and couldn't stand the loss of face.

Now there are several more criminal cases waiting to be heard against him so without the amnesty he was denied by the people, the only way he will ever get back to this country is in a box.

I think you will find the when The Dems were in power they did try to get him arrested, they also cancelled his Thai passport.

Guess who gave it back and made him the defacto PM when they got into power ?

I see nowhere that the lawyers have ever made any claim that Yingluck is innocent, all their attempts at defense appear to be contesting whether the law has a right to bring her to justice.

I am sure that they and she know as well as the rest of us (excepting a few) that she was negligent in the job she took on herself as chair of the rice policy committee.

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

So does this apply to the current regime, who found it necessary to grant themselves an amnesty for violations under the old law? It seems that the precedent has already been set. Or is this different because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You may not have noticed but what caused all the trouble and the protests was the fact that the Yingluck Govt attempted to grant themselves and he brother amnesty for all crimes over a 4 year period... They failed because the people would not accept them absolving themselves from all their crimes.

See the difference ?

So now the time has come for the crimes of the Thaksin proxy rich elite administration to be revealed and hopefully punished, for these crimes are mainly against the people and the country.

Or do you not believe this because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

[55Jay]

The NLA is also scheduled to proceed with the impeachment charges against Yingluck next Wednesday.

Offer her a deal, if her brother will return to face charges, she walks, free and clear. I imagine Thaksins reply to be something along the line of; Sorry sis, but my ego will not allow me to face a trial, bon voyage!

She should just pull a Suthep and not show up.

[rubl]

So, last push from some distracting.

Ms. Yingluck may never get the chance to clear her name. Pity really and an injustice in itself!

BTW you guys should try to make your story more consistent. Some said Ms. Yingluck more-or-less asked the senate to reject the 'blanket amnesty bill'

Not distracting, rubl, just countering some propaganda.

If you wish to query the consistency of "stories" I suggest you reply to those you believe are guilty of doing so. I made no claim on anybody's behalf about Yingluck's alleged requests of the Senate so I'm not really sure of what you are talking about - not for the first time.

So, back to pseudo modding for you, rubl............................

You're not sure what I'm talking about, but still you always seem to feel a need to reply to my posts with nonsense, misunderstanding and accusations of hypocracy?

Must be all those cups of coffee.

Anyway, a last push, from Pheu Thai that is, some posters here are more obdurate.

[Robby nz]

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

You must have been hiding under a rock about a year ago when Suthep was doing his damage, also, just about every thread on Thaivisa has posters that may go slightly off topic, so get over it.

'damage'. Well your entitled to your opinion of course.

Others would say he was leading an important and valid protest against a well funded, ruthless, no morals corrupt dictatorship.

No No he definitely did damage but the damage was all to the PT administration and their supporters are extremely bitter about that.

He outthought and outmaneuvered then at every step of the way and their only answer was violence and killing.

It should be noted however that the people were on the streets protesting, and not only in BKK, well before Suthep stepped up as a leader, heck there were even grass roots reds in the far north protesting against the amnesty bill, although for a slightly different reason..

But that's only a PT supporters diversion for they really have no answer as to why Yingluck should no be held responsible for the rice pledging scheme.

[Robby nz]

The NLA is also scheduled to proceed with the impeachment charges against Yingluck next Wednesday.

Offer her a deal, if her brother will return to face charges, she walks, free and clear. I imagine Thaksins reply to be something along the line of; Sorry sis, but my ego will not allow me to face a trial, bon voyage!

She should just pull a Suthep and not show up.

But Suthep, but Suthep the same old tripe from a PT supporter.

You should be careful when you post like that considering the number of times Yingluck ignored the OAG when he demanded she answer him over Thaksins illegally issued passport, could it be she has set a precedent ?

[brucec64]

Why has Thailand never attempted to arrest this "fugitive" through Interpol and other means. In reality he is not a fugitive, but an exiled man.

He is indeed a fugitive from the law and a coward as well for he ran from a conviction and sentence that he could have stayed and appealed.

Why did he run ? He knew very well he was guilty and couldn't stand the loss of face.

Now there are several more criminal cases waiting to be heard against him so without the amnesty he was denied by the people, the only way he will ever get back to this country is in a box.

I think you will find the when The Dems were in power they did try to get him arrested, they also cancelled his Thai passport.

Guess who gave it back and made him the defacto PM when they got into power ?

I see nowhere that the lawyers have ever made any claim that Yingluck is innocent, all their attempts at defense appear to be contesting whether the law has a right to bring her to justice.

I am sure that they and she know as well as the rest of us (excepting a few) that she was negligent in the job she took on herself as chair of the rice policy committee.

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

So does this apply to the current regime, who found it necessary to grant themselves an amnesty for violations under the old law? It seems that the precedent has already been set. Or is this different because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You may not have noticed but what caused all the trouble and the protests was the fact that the Yingluck Govt attempted to grant themselves and he brother amnesty for all crimes over a 4 year period... They failed because the people would not accept them absolving themselves from all their crimes.

See the difference ?

So now the time has come for the crimes of the Thaksin proxy rich elite administration to be revealed and hopefully punished, for these crimes are mainly against the people and the country.

Or do you not believe this because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You don't have a problem with that? Either amnestys are ok or not ok. I personally don't think amnestys should be granted. The only difference is that Yingluck was not granted an amnesty but the current regime was. I don't have an issue with past or current governments being held accountable for crimes. The current regime seems to be headed down a very familiar path, but have a built-in amnesty for past, present and future crimes. And you still don't have an issue with that?

I don't buy into your argument into why all this occured. I will agree the Nov 2013 amnesty bill was a catalyst for protests, but the government stepped down, and would have let the people decide. Events after the point of the blocked election were staged events to justify a coup.

Seems your ethics allows for crimes to be absolved if done by parties you support. That type of situational ethics is a very slippery slope.

[Robby nz]

Yingluck’s lawyers petition NLA speaker

BANGKOK: -- A team of lawyers of former premier Yingluck Shinawatra today submitted a petition to the speaker of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) seeking his role to halt the deliberation of a request to remove her from premiership status, over her negligence to prevent the rice pledging scheme from incurring more damages to the country.

The request to remove her was made to the NLA by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) after finding her guilty of negligence in supervising the rice scheme.

The NLA sets November 12 to deliberate the NACC’s removal call.

Leading the team to petition is former Pheu Thai party spokesman Prompong Nopparit.

Prompong made clear that today’s petition to the NLA is not a political-motivated movement but an exercise of civil right to defend the right of the former premier as some NLA members still do not stay neutral but make inappropriate comments.

He voiced concern that the deliberation might not be transparent.

A lawyer Anek Khamchum said the November 12 schedule for deliberation should be put off to allow enough time for Ms Yingluck as she has just returned from abroad and has not given the NACC’s case file involving the charge to study and defend herself.

He said the former premier was concerned about the removal as it could deprive her right if she is to be banned from politics for five years if the NLA deliberates the request under the environment which neutrality of some NLA remain sceptical.

He said the NLA should allow her to produce her information as she has the right to contend any unclear legal disputes in the case.

(Photo : Thai PBS File)

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/yinglucks-lawyers-petition-nla-speaker/

-- Thai PBS 2014-11-05

Isnt that fella in the photo supposed to be serving a prison term ?

[55Jay]

The NLA is also scheduled to proceed with the impeachment charges against Yingluck next Wednesday.

Offer her a deal, if her brother will return to face charges, she walks, free and clear. I imagine Thaksins reply to be something along the line of; Sorry sis, but my ego will not allow me to face a trial, bon voyage!

She should just pull a Suthep and not show up.

But Suthep, but Suthep the same old tripe from a PT supporter.

You should be careful when you post like that considering the number of times Yingluck ignored the OAG when he demanded she answer him over Thaksins illegally issued passport, could it be she has set a precedent ?

So your response is, "But Yingluck, but Yingluck"?

I think Suthep would roundly disagree with our assertion that he followed a precedent set by Yingluck.

[Robby nz]

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

So does this apply to the current regime, who found it necessary to grant themselves an amnesty for violations under the old law? It seems that the precedent has already been set. Or is this different because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You may not have noticed but what caused all the trouble and the protests was the fact that the Yingluck Govt attempted to grant themselves and he brother amnesty for all crimes over a 4 year period... They failed because the people would not accept them absolving themselves from all their crimes.

See the difference ?

So now the time has come for the crimes of the Thaksin proxy rich elite administration to be revealed and hopefully punished, for these crimes are mainly against the people and the country.

Or do you not believe this because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You don't have a problem with that? Either amnestys are ok or not ok. I personally don't think amnestys should be granted. The only difference is that Yingluck was not granted an amnesty but the current regime was. I don't have an issue with past or current governments being held accountable for crimes. The current regime seems to be headed down a very familiar path, but have a built-in amnesty for past, present and future crimes. And you still don't have an issue with that?

I don't buy into your argument into why all this occured. I will agree the Nov 2013 amnesty bill was a catalyst for protests, but the government stepped down, and would have let the people decide. Events after the point of the blocked election were staged events to justify a coup.

Seems your ethics allows for crimes to be absolved if done by parties you support. That type of situational ethics is a very slippery slope.

One amnesty has been granted the other was not, get over it.

It was Thaksin who was pushing for a coup for he thought he could bring out his reds and start a civil war.

Go back and see who was talking coup and civil war, not to mention a separate state , in almost every speech from the reds and PT.

As usual he didn't care who got killed or injured as long as he got his way, but the general was one step ahead, the headquarters of insurgents (Kohn kaen model) was raided immediately, the head was cut off the snake.

As a PT supporter you have a cheek to talk of ethics, go look at their actions over their time in office and tell us if you can find anything ethical, not an easy job. And the ethics of the rice pledging scheme ?

[fab4]

So, last push from some distracting.

Ms. Yingluck may never get the chance to clear her name. Pity really and an injustice in itself!

BTW you guys should try to make your story more consistent. Some said Ms. Yingluck more-or-less asked the senate to reject the 'blanket amnesty bill'

Not distracting, rubl, just countering some propaganda.

If you wish to query the consistency of "stories" I suggest you reply to those you believe are guilty of doing so. I made no claim on anybody's behalf about Yingluck's alleged requests of the Senate so I'm not really sure of what you are talking about - not for the first time.

So, back to pseudo modding for you, rubl............................

You're not sure what I'm talking about, but still you always seem to feel a need to reply to my posts with nonsense, misunderstanding and accusations of hypocracy?

Must be all those cups of coffee.

Anyway, a last push, from Pheu Thai that is, some posters here are more obdurate.

I understood the accusation about distracting , hence my reply to counter that false accusation. The rest of your post is just gibberish. The hypocrisy claims on this and other posts refer to your constant harping on about being off topic whilst doing the very same thing yourself and are therefore legitimate.

[northernjohn]

In reality I would think the Shins are very far from finished.

The general is trying to prevent mention of Thaksin and all things like this do is keep the clan in the limelight.

And I am sure they still have millions of followers which is a thorn in the side of the "interveners".

Keep them out of the media and it's possible it may have some effect bit I doubt it!

To bed honest with you I believe the Shinawatra reign of corruption is a thing of the past. We hear things in Thailand about him sitting back and telling his supporters to do nothing to just play along.

Why do you suppose he would do that? He is out of the country and their is no way he will be staying in a country that would send him back. What has he to lose. Other than the money he pay's the fools on his payroll. could it be that he realizes he need not be in Thailand to end his life. I recall a while back where he would not go to Tachelat (sorry about the spelling) in Miramar for fear of an assassination. That city is adjacent to Mai Sai a red shirt stronghold. Now we have black shirts coming out of hiding and facing charges. I think he realizes for his health he best sit back and enjoy the sand.

As for Yingluck not sure if impeaching her is the correct way to go. She defiantly has paid for and deserves punishment perhaps a stint in Jail but that would just rouse sympathy for her. Maybe a deal where she joins her brother. Defiantly needs some thing to let future politicians know there is no free ride if they are caught.

This is only my opinion.

Edited November 5, 2014 by northernjohn

[RustBucket]

At the end of the day, she is as guilty as sin and must be punished. Failure to do so will undermine the 'so called' reforms completely.

Tens of millions want her to face the music, not only for the sake of punishment, but also to send a strong message that times are changing. Politicians will need to pull themselves together or face similar.

No punishment, then there may as well just scrap the reforms, reinstate the old constitution and hold an election immediately and wait for the civil war.

[Baerboxer]

"In a last ditch move to block the impeachment of Yingluck Shinawatra, Pheu Thai Party will today present what it believes to be the strongest legal points to convince the National Legislative Assembly that it is not conforming to tradition when it comes to impeachment."

If she's innocent why worry?

Or is the tradition they are really referring to the one where no one is liable for their criminality?

Oh I don't know, perhaps the tradition that is most prevalent here is that of Junta vs Shinawatra - they might as well make it a precedent........................

No, I'm guessing the one they want to enshrine and for others to uphold is no politician is ever accountable for their criminal actions while in office...i.e amnesty anyone?

Oh, the Amnesty Bill that was rejected by the Senate as part of the checks and balances of the constitution? That one?

Or amnesties that have actually been implemented like Section 309 of the 2007 Constitution and Section 48 of the 2014 Interim constitution where no military coup leader has ever been accountable for overthrowing the democratic regime of government in Thailand?

I'm sorry, what was your point again..............................

The amnesty bill was voted for and approved by 310 PTP supporting MP's. The mass demonstrations caused its rejection in the Senate. Even Ms. Yingluck at one point called on the Senate to reject it.

She then lied, yet again, and said all the versions of the amnesty bill had been killed. But, the one with the amendment to whitewash her brother wasn't killed was it? PTP were clinging on to power at all costs so they could write it into law when it was returned to parliament without any further reference to the Senate.

So much for the checks and balances.

[Thai at Heart]

Why has Thailand never attempted to arrest this "fugitive" through Interpol and other means. In reality he is not a fugitive, but an exiled man.

He is indeed a fugitive from the law and a coward as well for he ran from a conviction and sentence that he could have stayed and appealed.

Why did he run ? He knew very well he was guilty and couldn't stand the loss of face.

Now there are several more criminal cases waiting to be heard against him so without the amnesty he was denied by the people, the only way he will ever get back to this country is in a box.

I think you will find the when The Dems were in power they did try to get him arrested, they also cancelled his Thai passport.

Guess who gave it back and made him the defacto PM when they got into power ?

I see nowhere that the lawyers have ever made any claim that Yingluck is innocent, all their attempts at defense appear to be contesting whether the law has a right to bring her to justice.

I am sure that they and she know as well as the rest of us (excepting a few) that she was negligent in the job she took on herself as chair of the rice policy committee.

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

Just because a law (constitution) has been changed does not mean that a crime committed under the old law should not be prosecuted, if she is allowed to escape on these grounds what sort of a precedent does it set for all others who committed crime under the old constitution (law) ?

So does this apply to the current regime, who found it necessary to grant themselves an amnesty for violations under the old law? It seems that the precedent has already been set. Or is this different because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You may not have noticed but what caused all the trouble and the protests was the fact that the Yingluck Govt attempted to grant themselves and he brother amnesty for all crimes over a 4 year period... They failed because the people would not accept them absolving themselves from all their crimes.

See the difference ?

So now the time has come for the crimes of the Thaksin proxy rich elite administration to be revealed and hopefully punished, for these crimes are mainly against the people and the country.

Or do you not believe this because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

Hahaha. Hilarious concept particularly from the perspective of the fact that this would automatically criminalise anyone holding a coup.

Just because the crime happened under and old constitution doesn't mean it can't be prosecuted under a new one.

Absolutely bloody hilarious. Bring it on, prosecute all the old coup makers for breaking a law under a previous constitution.

But but but......

[rubl]

So, last push from some distracting.

Ms. Yingluck may never get the chance to clear her name. Pity really and an injustice in itself!

BTW you guys should try to make your story more consistent. Some said Ms. Yingluck more-or-less asked the senate to reject the 'blanket amnesty bill'

Not distracting, rubl, just countering some propaganda.

If you wish to query the consistency of "stories" I suggest you reply to those you believe are guilty of doing so. I made no claim on anybody's behalf about Yingluck's alleged requests of the Senate so I'm not really sure of what you are talking about - not for the first time.

So, back to pseudo modding for you, rubl............................

You're not sure what I'm talking about, but still you always seem to feel a need to reply to my posts with nonsense, misunderstanding and accusations of hypocracy?

Must be all those cups of coffee.

Anyway, a last push, from Pheu Thai that is, some posters here are more obdurate.

I understood the accusation about distracting , hence my reply to counter that false accusation. The rest of your post is just gibberish. The hypocrisy claims on this and other posts refer to your constant harping on about being off topic whilst doing the very same thing yourself and are therefore legitimate.

False accusation? What do you think you're doing now? Why do you always need to come with 'hypocrisy', 'pseudo mod' and so? You wrote you posted interesting stuff provoking replies. Well then except that some of the necessary corrections are a bit off topic. I always try to get back on topic which your replies seldem let me do directly.

So last push, Yingluck innocent. At times I almost believe it

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/world/asia/thaksin-shinawatra-of-thailand-wields-influence-from-afar.html?pagewanted=all

[Robespiere]

At the end of the day, she is as guilty as sin and must be punished. Failure to do so will undermine the 'so called' reforms completely.

Tens of millions want her to face the music, not only for the sake of punishment, but also to send a strong message that times are changing. Politicians will need to pull themselves together or face similar.

No punishment, then there may as well just scrap the reforms, reinstate the old constitution and hold an election immediately and wait for the civil war.

Half a dozen yellow peanuts on TVF does not equal "tens of millions".

[Robby nz]

The NLA is also scheduled to proceed with the impeachment charges against Yingluck next Wednesday.

Offer her a deal, if her brother will return to face charges, she walks, free and clear. I imagine Thaksins reply to be something along the line of; Sorry sis, but my ego will not allow me to face a trial, bon voyage!

She should just pull a Suthep and not show up.

But Suthep, but Suthep the same old tripe from a PT supporter.

You should be careful when you post like that considering the number of times Yingluck ignored the OAG when he demanded she answer him over Thaksins illegally issued passport, could it be she has set a precedent ?

So your response is, "But Yingluck, but Yingluck"?

I think Suthep would roundly disagree with our assertion that he followed a precedent set by Yingluck.

This is topic is about Yingluck cant you get that through your thick red head.

[mikemac]

At the end of the day, she is as guilty as sin and must be punished. Failure to do so will undermine the 'so called' reforms completely.

Tens of millions want her to face the music, not only for the sake of punishment, but also to send a strong message that times are changing. Politicians will need to pull themselves together or face similar.

No punishment, then there may as well just scrap the reforms, reinstate the old constitution and hold an election immediately and wait for the civil war.

Half a dozen yellow peanuts on TVF does not equal "tens of millions".

Please identify these "Half a dozen yellow peanuts" so we know who you are actually flaming.

[55Jay]

But Suthep, but Suthep the same old tripe from a PT supporter.

She should just pull a Suthep and not show up.

You should be careful when you post like that considering the number of times Yingluck ignored the OAG when he demanded she answer him over Thaksins illegally issued passport, could it be she has set a precedent ?

So your response is, "But Yingluck, but Yingluck"?

I think Suthep would roundly disagree with our assertion that he followed a precedent set by Yingluck.

This is topic is about Yingluck cant you get that through your thick red head.

PT Supporter. Red head. I'm none of that, simply made a backhanded comment, not even to you mind, invoking the apparently radio active word "Suthep" and something he did. Twice. And you have a fit over it.

You need a holiday. Or a Quaalude.

Edited November 6, 2014 by 55Jay

[blaze]

Not being involved in the PTP , red shirts or Shinawtra family fortunes , one wonders if it is in the national interest or helping reconciliation to continue legal action, you will have the same problem when the country goes into election mode and what's the bet , repercussions will follow, the ruling elite have hijacked the agenda , so it stands to reason a revamp PTP with big backing, lots of rice farmers and disgruntled country people , the PTP will be voted back in, I would be hammering for the relevant Ministers , Department heads and advisors to see what really happened in the failed rice scheme.

What I think is being missed here is that SHINS are part of the RULING Elite. Look at the wealth? they cannot be amongst the poor and impoverished?

They are part of a new financial elite-- NOT of the ruling elite-- If they had been part of the ruling elite- be assured, there would not have been two coups to dislodge them.

There is a difference between 'elite' and 'establishment'.

All this discussion about the legal aspects of the case are comical-- in fact there is only one law that will apply- and that is 'all court cases must serve to bring happiness to the people.'

And to his credit, Prayuth is aware that the sino thais of Bangkok do not make up 'the people'.

Thais like their soaps- and a pretty woman hounded into possible prison by a cruel army led regime doesn't make for a happy ending-- Prayuth knows that.

She will walk.

[Robby nz]

So does this apply to the current regime, who found it necessary to grant themselves an amnesty for violations under the old law? It seems that the precedent has already been set. Or is this different because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

So they have granted themselves amnesty therefore are immune to prosecution under the old law.

You may not have noticed but what caused all the trouble and the protests was the fact that the Yingluck Govt attempted to grant themselves and he brother amnesty for all crimes over a 4 year period... They failed because the people would not accept them absolving themselves from all their crimes.

See the difference ?

So now the time has come for the crimes of the Thaksin proxy rich elite administration to be revealed and hopefully punished, for these crimes are mainly against the people and the country.

Or do you not believe this because you happen to support this side and different ethics apply?

Hahaha. Hilarious concept particularly from the perspective of the fact that this would automatically criminalise anyone holding a coup.

Just because the crime happened under and old constitution doesn't mean it can't be prosecuted under a new one.

Absolutely bloody hilarious. Bring it on, prosecute all the old coup makers for breaking a law under a previous constitution.

But but but......

So you think that that if a crime is committed against the law that is in place at the time it is committed, then the law is changed the crime has no longer been committed.

This isn't about coup makers it is about Yingluck not doing the job she took on herself and whether she should be held accountable for not doing that job.

As yet she has been formally charged with nothing, and her lawyers (including one who is on a jail sentence) are trying to keep it that way by saying that even though she may have done something wrong under the law of the time what she did then is not covered by the law now.

Well that does not hold water, if she broke the law then, she still broke the law regardless of any changes.