RICE-PLEDGING SCHEME
Prosecutors, anti-graft agency still at odds over Yingluck case
The Nation

Sansern

BANGKOK: -- Some issues agreed upon; NACC, OAG lawyers differ on interrogating more witnesses

The anti-graft agency and public prosecutors failed for a third time yesterday to reach agreement on whether a criminal case should be filed against former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra in relation to her government's controversial rice-pledging scheme.

This repeated failure has prompted speculation that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) might decide to take a case against Yingluck itself to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.

An NACC source said that without a clear conclusion from the meeting between senior prosecutors from the Office of the Attorney-General (OAG) and NACC officials, it was likely that the anti-graft agency would take the case to court if the prosecutors continue to refuse to do so.

The NACC has previously taken criminal cases against political-office holders to court without the Attorney General's consent, including the one against Yingluck's older brother, former PM Thaksin.

The anti-graft agency has called on the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) to impeach Yingluck for dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to end the corruption-plagued rice-pledging scheme, which is estimated to have cost the state at least Bt600 billion.

Both sides met for about three hours yesterday at the NACC headquarters in Nonthaburi to discuss the case.

After yesterday's meeting, Deputy Attorney General Vudhibhongse Vibulyawongse said no conclusion had been reached, though both sides could agree on certain issues. For instance, he said, the NACC had agreed to question some more defence witnesses as requested by the prosecutors.

Vudhibhongse explained that the prosecutors wanted the NACC to interrogate more than 10 new witnesses, but the NACC had only agreed to question some of them.

"We want all witnesses to be interrogated," he said.

The Deputy Attorney General said he did not think the NACC could take the case to court right now, as the Attorney General's Office had still not made a decision on the case. He said the NACC should wait for a decision first.

NACC secretary-general Sansern Poljieak, who also attended yesterday's meeting, said later the anti-graft agency could not agree to all the prosecutors' requests due to certain legal limitations.

He explained that the prosecutors did not agree with the NACC's argument and it appeared that both sides had different views about the same law.

"We must have another meeting. Now it seems like we're going around in circles and getting nowhere," Sansern said.

He added that the NACC was confident that it had sufficient evidence and grounds to impeach Yingluck, though a further meeting on the case had yet to be scheduled.

NACC president Panthep Klanarongran said the anti-graft agency would give prosecutors additional documents, but it would not interrogate more witnesses as requested.

"There is sufficient information from the existing witnesses," he said.

Meanwhile, in response to whether taking criminal action against Yingluck would revive political conflicts, Army chief General Udomdej Sitabutr said yesterday that the rule of law should be respected and he believed righteousness would prevail in the end.

He said he believed the government would try to please all sides involved and did not think the premier would condone the persecution of anybody.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Prosecutors-anti-graft-agency-still-at-odds-over-Y-30247305.html

-- The Nation 2014-11-08

The case is on life support and last rites being administered .

Strange though when Ying asked for more witnesses to defend her case she was denied but this lot insist that all witnesses must be interveiwed .

And the general is right when he's says righteousness will prevail in the end.

Just wait for the next election.

Seems like we are going around in circles he said ...............soon to disappear like the yuselm bird

The case is on life support and last rites being administered .

Strange though when Ying asked for more witnesses to defend her case she was denied but this lot insist that all witnesses must be interveiwed .

And the general is right when he's says righteousness will prevail in the end.

Just wait for the next election.

I'm going into Politics if all the voters are as naive as you are ... I'll just follow the "Thaksin" model of pretending to care for the poor and downtrodden whilst systematically raping and pillaging as much as I possibly can then skipping out of town when the going gets too hot and installing my sister as a puppet figurehead who gets the vote because (actually I'm not sure about that part) ...

My voting platform will consist of offering every farmer in Thailand 150,000,000 baht cash as long as they vote for me, there won't be any need to actually produce anything (no rice, no rubber, no nothing), just sign over the land deeds and you'll get the cash (maybe). Oh, taxes might have to go up a touch just to cover the "payments" (losses), but the voters have been ok with that before so I'm sure I'll be able to pull the wool over their eyes once more and convince them that it's in their best interests as it goes against the "establishment", and they love that shit.

After all, if they accepted the personal loss of 15,000 baht for every man, woman and child in Thailand recently, then I'm sure this scheme of mine will go down well. See you in Dubai soon!

EDIT: apologies for mentioning the man who is not to be mentioned.

After yesterday's meeting, Deputy Attorney General Vudhibhongse Vibulyawongse said no conclusion had been reached, though both sides could agree on certain issues. For instance, he said, the NACC had agreed to question some more defence witnesses as requested by the prosecutors.

It would be nice if he just had the guts to say "we are not going to send her to jail, if you want to prosecute her, you do it". I think she should be in jail, but it isn't going to happen, never does. Impeach her, give her a ban so that she can be just like the rest of the family. To continue this farce makes the whole country look bad.

"We must have another meeting. Now it seems like we're going around in circles and getting nowhere," Sansern said.

"In the next meeting we will go the other way around and see where that leads us." Samsen added.

After yesterday's meeting, Deputy Attorney General Vudhibhongse Vibulyawongse said no conclusion had been reached, though both sides could agree on certain issues. For instance, he said, the NACC had agreed to question some more defence witnesses as requested by the prosecutors.

It would be nice if he just had the guts to say "we are not going to send her to jail, if you want to prosecute her, you do it". I think she should be in jail, but it isn't going to happen, never does. Impeach her, give her a ban so that she can be just like the rest of the family. To continue this farce makes the whole country look bad.

Until they start banning/prosecuting all corrupt politicians/police/civil servants/army by persecuting just one family in a sea of corruption they are just going to continue boosting the support of the shins.

Just lock her up please. And same with the rest of that lot. It's junta time after all.

Just lock her up please. And same with the rest of that lot. It's junta time after all.

Seems only logical to me that all witnesses brought forth by both sides should be interviewed. Don't these bozos do a thorough investigation. I can't imagine a grand jury in the USA not hearing all witnesses presented by all sides before deciding to indict a person.

Part of the deal is that Yingluck doesn't do time and the government don't go after her brother. In return Mr T does not order the UDD terrorists back out with their M79's.

Thai politics still stinks. The country needs a good lesson in right and wrong. I think many of us are beginning to suspect nothing has changed and the 'coup - mass corruption - coup' cycle is just doing another turn.

An off topic post has been removed.

There is of course the possibility that a witness called into open court may disclose information and implicate persons who are currently outside and expected to avoid the net of anticipated prosecution.......then what to do gentlemen?

For instance, he said, the NACC had agreed to question some more defence witnesses as requested by the prosecutors.

This has to be the strangest thing. Why do they have to answer anything. Why should they help the prosecution make s case?

^{if the other powers to be don,t act,then the ones above are just waiting to come in it seems.don,t seem how she can be let off with what she done}

Seems only logical to me that all witnesses brought forth by both sides should be interviewed. Don't these bozos do a thorough investigation. I can't imagine a grand jury in the USA not hearing all witnesses presented by all sides before deciding to indict a person.

They are trying to bury this with needless witnesses to stall for time! Very obvious!!

Wicked!