Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

NACC targets 38 ex-senators
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The national anti-graft agency decided yesterday to initiate impeachment proceedings against 38 former senators accused of violating the abolished 2007 Constitution by backing amendments that would have allegedly benefited them.

In a majority vote yesterday, the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) resolved to call on the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) to impeach the ex-senators in question, NACC secretary-general Sansern Poljieak said.

The NACC has decided to forward its investigation results and accompanying documents to the NLA for further action, Sansern added.

He said the NACC still had the power to seek the former senators' impeachment even though the 2007 Constitution was abolished after the coup.

The NACC had agreed to look into the case and had followed due process even before the coup, Sansern explained. Also, he added, the National Anti-Corruption Commission Act is still in force, which empowers the NACC to investigate the case.

Many of the targeted ex-senators had been elected from the provinces and some of them are now members of the NLA or the National Reform Council, including Direk Thuengfang.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NACC-targets-38-ex-senators-30247735.html

nationlogo.jpg
-- The Nation 2014-11-14

Posted (edited)

Many of the targeted ex-senators had been elected from the provinces and some of them are now members of the NLA or the National Reform Council, including Direk Thuengfang.

Hmmmm..... I could be wrong here, but wouldn't there be a slight hint of conflict of interest here?

Sounds quite insane, of course we all know the NLA will 'buddy up' to protect their colleagues.

What the hell are Thaksinites doing on the NLA anyway?

I thought these committees were supposed to be made up of non partisan figures????

This place is a shambles and will head back to yet another coup over the coming few years. This will not heal the country, it will create divisions just as much as there was before.

Edited by RustBucket
  • Like 2
Posted

Prosecuting anyone for violating the rules of an abolished constitution retroactively is didactically wrong, incorrect and absurd. It sets a very dangerous precedent that is highly questionable no matter who is being pursued. It seems that if constitutional charges had been filed before the abolition, then it would be a matter of due process. To retroactively seek to enforce an abolished legal writ is, frankly, insane and highly suspicious.

This logic allows the government, at any time, to pursue those who violated any law, constitutional or otherwise, for any reason and at any time retroactively, and at any length of time after said laws were struck down or abolished.

I spoke to a Thai lawyer about it, actually a Thai attorney and University lecturer, and this is what he said:

"They are making it up as they go along, and any convictions are unlikely to be upheld by subsequent governments. Even though the law now states that there are no appeals under the current government, that iron blanket will not last for any time, because it is being used to enforce a temporary law with a permanent injunction."

Wrong again.

Anyone who broke the law should (must) be answerable regardless of whether the law is changed after they broke it.

If they broke the law that was in place at the time of the criminal act they should be held responsible.

If the law on murder is changed it does not mean that previous murders did not take place.

Not to go after them in these instances would send a clear message to all future politicians that they could get away with anything they wanted by changing the law.

That was what the amnesty bill tried to do and that is what has led us to where we are today.

Posted

Prosecuting anyone for violating the rules of an abolished constitution retroactively is didactically wrong, incorrect and absurd. It sets a very dangerous precedent that is highly questionable no matter who is being pursued. It seems that if constitutional charges had been filed before the abolition, then it would be a matter of due process. To retroactively seek to enforce an abolished legal writ is, frankly, insane and highly suspicious.

This logic allows the government, at any time, to pursue those who violated any law, constitutional or otherwise, for any reason and at any time retroactively, and at any length of time after said laws were struck down or abolished.

I spoke to a Thai lawyer about it, actually a Thai attorney and University lecturer, and this is what he said:

"They are making it up as they go along, and any convictions are unlikely to be upheld by subsequent governments. Even though the law now states that there are no appeals under the current government, that iron blanket will not last for any time, because it is being used to enforce a temporary law with a permanent injunction."

Wrong again.

Anyone who broke the law should (must) be answerable regardless of whether the law is changed after they broke it.

If they broke the law that was in place at the time of the criminal act they should be held responsible.

If the law on murder is changed it does not mean that previous murders did not take place.

Not to go after them in these instances would send a clear message to all future politicians that they could get away with anything they wanted by changing the law.

That was what the amnesty bill tried to do and that is what has led us to where we are today.

By that definition, Prayuth and other members of the NCPO should also be prosecuted. Thanks for confirming you agree they should be prosecuted.

  • Like 1

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...