BURNING ISSUE
Amnesty issue returns to haunt Thai politics once more
Atthayuth Butrsriphum

BANGKOK: -- Political amnesty has become a hot issue again. Once the idea was floated recently, it met with questions and mistrust as well as concern whether the country would slip back into political turmoil.

Thai society is still haunted by the political crisis and trouble unleashed after the failed attempt by the Pheu Thai-led coalition to push for enactment of a blanket amnesty - a crisis that eventually ended in the May 22 coup.

Now, the idea of granting amnesty to political offenders has been floated again by Anek Laothamthat, a former academic and a political party leader, currently a member of the National Reform Council and the Constitution Drafting Committee.

Anek reasoned that those on all sides who committed political offences from 2005 to 2014 now emphatically wanted to start a new life without being haunted by legal issues. He said these political offenders should not have to fight their cases after a new constitution is enacted.

As a result, he said, there should be a way out for them.

Anek said his version of a new amnesty bill would cover people from both sides who took part in protests and riots from 2005 until the coup in 2014. But the bill would not absolve those who caused death to others or who committed lese majeste offences.

So far, no one has seen the draft amnesty law and only Anek has mentioned it. He said the public should not discuss the amnesty issue too much, because it could lead to opposition that would eventually bog it down.

However, now that the idea has been floated, it has drawn reaction from many, including Worachai Hema, a red-shirt leader. He supported the idea because he once sponsored an amnesty bill for ordinary protesters, not demonstration leaders, and his plan was called the "middle-of-the-soi" bill. However, the House of Representatives at that time changed his bill to an "end-of-the-soi" bill during its second reading.

Of course, Worachai's stand won support from many red shirts because they had wanted non-leaders to be absolved by an amnesty law since before the political crisis. This stand by Worachai and the red shirts is tantamount to asking the other side whether it is still opposed to political amnesty.

Several members of the People's Democratic Reform Committee and the Democrats declined to express a clear-cut stand on the issue, saying they wanted to see the bill first. They also suggested that groups eligible for amnesty should be clearly defined - and the issue should be studied prudently to prevent another round of crises.

Nipit Intharasombat, a leading member of the Democrats, was the only one expressing opposition to the bill. He reasoned that individuals who deserved amnesty had already served their term and no longer needed to be absolved.

However, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha has indicated an amnesty bill would not be pursued at the moment. He said his government would first give priority to solving national problems.

"Those who committed wrongdoing must face the judicial process. Now, there is still a judicial process, isn't there?" Prayut asked.

"The Administrative Court, the Constitution Court, public prosecutors, police and the National Anti-Corruption Commission still exist. So they must be allowed to work," he said.

After all, an amnesty cannot be granted out of the blue. Society must first know the truth and the wrongdoers must first admit their guilt.

Most of all, the public still remembers how the Pheu Thai-led coalition changed the middle-of-the-soi bill to an end-of-the-soi amnesty bill during second reading - and many are still dissatisfied.

If all sides do not agree on the issue, amnesty may never be granted to anyone.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Amnesty-issue-returns-to-haunt-Thai-politics-once--30249121.html


-- The Nation 2014-12-04

He who must be obeyed said it won't be pursued at the moment which means it dead in the water!

Wasn't amnesty a big part of the reason behind illegally forcing out the previous government? This just goes to show that the truth behind the coup wasn't connected to policies. It was all about defending the perceived threat against establishment elites. All together now, Happy Birthday big man!

That was just a pretext. The first thing the coup leaders did was grant themselves amnesty in advance for any illegal action they might take. None of the yellow leaders protested.

What is the point in raising an issue if people cannot discuss it?

Truly the funniest part of Thailand. Grab power, and then grant yourself and all

the cronies amnesty. Hint. In the real world, if you break the law you face

punishment. Thailand seems to have broken that link for the powerful...

Nipit Intharasombat, a leading member of the Democrats, was the only one expressing opposition to the bill. He reasoned that individuals who deserved amnesty had already served their term and no longer needed to be absolved.

This a very good point.

"Those who committed wrongdoing must face the judicial process. Now, there is still a judicial process, isn't there?" Prayut asked.
"The Administrative Court, the Constitution Court, public prosecutors, police and the National Anti-Corruption Commission still exist. So they must be allowed to work," he said.

I agree 100%. Thailand lets so many things slide that no one takes laws seriously anymore. Giving amnesty only makes people take chances in the future with the hope that amnesty will save them from the punishment they deserve. If Thailand is not ready to enforce a particular law, then take it off the books as it is a useless law until it is enforced. From my experience/point of view, Thailand needs to be more strict and not less strict. Amnesty is now a dirty word in Thailand; best not to go there.

The idea of an amnesty is to gain something. An amnesty for illegal guns, gets the guns back out the hands of people who shouldn't have them. An amnesty for late payment of fines gets money into the coffers that would never have got there.

The type of amnesty floated here is simply to get high ranking people off crimes they knowingly did. The country gains nothing at all. In fact, it harms the country by setting a precedent of no consequences for crimes if you are a politician. There's no incentive for future law abiding.

Charge the lot of them, sentence the guilty ones. Make them pay/serve their sentences.On both sides of the political colour wheel, of course.

He said the public should not discuss the amnesty issue too much, because it could lead to opposition that would eventually bog it down.

Discussion and opposition, what democracy should be, but it shouldn't happen here. Ridiculous, amnesty for people that demonstrated peacefully and lawfully, those that committed criminal acts should be sent to trial. Let the judges decide who gets amnesty, one case at a time.

Wasn't amnesty a big part of the reason behind illegally forcing out the previous government? This just goes to show that the truth behind the coup wasn't connected to policies. It was all about defending the perceived threat against establishment elites. All together now, Happy Birthday big man!

There wasn't a lot of opposition to the idea of giving amnesty to ordinary protesters. Even the Democrats supported the idea.

The opposition was giving amnesty to protest leaders and especially for corruption cases, particularly Thaksin.

Truly the funniest part of Thailand. Grab power, and then grant yourself and all

the cronies amnesty. Hint. In the real world, if you break the law you face

punishment. Thailand seems to have broken that link for the powerful...

In the "real world" there aren't coups. Can you name a successful coup leader that then surrendered to authorities to be arrested?

It would appear that K. Anek has had some pressure applied to him.........he'll need to be wary or may find himself on the outside......

The problem with Thai politics is that there are so many that just flaunt the laws......friends in high places, patronage, payments......this has been the usual way to get out of situations......

Prayuth is 100% right......hopefully he'll keep to his word and not relent......

As we found out last time.....more than 25000 people face legal action, which this knob, Anuk, wants to release from those charges!

Investigate this Anek Laothamthat fella thoroughly and see how many millions he has stashed in his banks

and safes, look for artefacts and land's deeds, and only when you find nothing out of place,

only than people should listen to what he have to say, just listen...

Yeah, shove your crimes all under the carpet and get on with your life.

Wasn't amnesty a big part of the reason behind illegally forcing out the previous government? This just goes to show that the truth behind the coup wasn't connected to policies. It was all about defending the perceived threat against establishment elites. All together now, Happy Birthday big man!

Wasn't amnesty a big part of the reason behind illegally forcing out the previous government?

Why begin your post with two blatant lies? First of all, the PM was relieved of her position for illegally transferring high ranking civil service personnel for personal gain (nepotism) and non of the procedures used to oust her were illegal. By the time the military stepped in, what was left of the caretaker government didn't have a plan to successfully hold nation-wide elections and their mandated time to do so had run out. Technically, it had nothing to do with amnesty.

This just goes to show that the truth behind the coup wasn't connected to policies.

Since your premise was a lie, it shows nothing of the sort.

It was all about defending the perceived threat against establishment elites.

No, it was all about real threats to civilian and government authority. There were deadly attacks against protesters, bombs and grenade attacks on government offices (GLO), TV stations, military posts and installations. There was loud talk of succession by Reds in the North and many war weapons stockpiled (as proved my the many seizures in subsequent raids). Thailand was on the brink of a civil war instigated and funded by Thaksin Shinawatra because he was butthurt over being evicted from his illegal hold on the PM's office in 2006. After his crooked election was annulled (because his party got caught blatantly cheating) and his time as caretaker PM ran out, Thaksin left government house and Police General Chitchai Wannasathit took his place as caretaker PM on the 23rd of May 2006. Then, 48 days later and without any legal authority, Thaksin waltzes back into government house and declares himself PM. Since no one in government could/would challenge him, there he stayed, illegally, for another 119 days. It took the army to remove him. I will keep posting the true history every time one of you posts provable lies. You are entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts. There is no excuse for you to be ignorant of history with the advent of the Internet. I don't really mind that you are ignorant but I do mind you spread your ignorant beliefs as truth on this forum. You've already fooled hugh2121 into believing your nonsense. You offend me.

All together now, Happy Birthday big man!

Your insincerity and sarcasm is duly noted.

As of now there have been thirteen posts about this issue, fourteen including this post. The PM has told us not to discuss this issue too much. I am reporting all of you and myself for flouting this fair, impartial and selfless directive.

Shame on us.

I think Thailand is a Co-Dependant nation. I can not fathom the reasoning re: amnesty almost constantly. It's like "oh poor things won't like jailllllllllllll let's not be mean." :-(

Hey I think if ya can't do the time don't do the crime. But how often does anyone receive punishment here in Lack of Sanctions (LOS)?

"Now, there is still a judicial process, isn't there?"

yes, tightly under your control!

Isn't the discussion is about POLITICAL amnesty, not criminal amnesty. Amnesty proposed by the Yingluck regime seemed to go beyond mere political amnesty and potentially could have included criminal amnesty.The current proposal made clear one could get political amnesty and still be convicted for a criminal offense. Separate and distinct processes are involved - a political process and a judicial process. The amnesty proposal does not affect the judicial process. The benefit of political amnesty is one can be involved in political party activities and run for election. Obviously, if one is convicted for a criminal offense the person cannot be a party supporter/leader or elected in any case.

Taken broadly, many of the PDRC and Democrat supporters and leaders involved in the 2013/2014 protests as much as PTP supporters and leaders in past protests would benefit from political amnesty. I see nothing haunting about the proposal.

Edited December 4, 201411 yr by rickirs

Wasn't amnesty a big part of the reason behind illegally forcing out the previous government? This just goes to show that the truth behind the coup wasn't connected to policies. It was all about defending the perceived threat against establishment elites. All together now, Happy Birthday big man!

Wasn't amnesty a big part of the reason behind illegally forcing out the previous government?

Why begin your post with two blatant lies? First of all, the PM was relieved of her position for illegally transferring high ranking civil service personnel for personal gain (nepotism) and non of the procedures used to oust her were illegal. By the time the military stepped in, what was left of the caretaker government didn't have a plan to successfully hold nation-wide elections and their mandated time to do so had run out. Technically, it had nothing to do with amnesty.

This just goes to show that the truth behind the coup wasn't connected to policies.

Since your premise was a lie, it shows nothing of the sort.

It was all about defending the perceived threat against establishment elites.

No, it was all about real threats to civilian and government authority. There were deadly attacks against protesters, bombs and grenade attacks on government offices (GLO), TV stations, military posts and installations. There was loud talk of succession by Reds in the North and many war weapons stockpiled (as proved my the many seizures in subsequent raids). Thailand was on the brink of a civil war instigated and funded by Thaksin Shinawatra because he was butthurt over being evicted from his illegal hold on the PM's office in 2006. After his crooked election was annulled (because his party got caught blatantly cheating) and his time as caretaker PM ran out, Thaksin left government house and Police General Chitchai Wannasathit took his place as caretaker PM on the 23rd of May 2006. Then, 48 days later and without any legal authority, Thaksin waltzes back into government house and declares himself PM. Since no one in government could/would challenge him, there he stayed, illegally, for another 119 days. It took the army to remove him. I will keep posting the true history every time one of you posts provable lies. You are entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts. There is no excuse for you to be ignorant of history with the advent of the Internet. I don't really mind that you are ignorant but I do mind you spread your ignorant beliefs as truth on this forum. You've already fooled hugh2121 into believing your nonsense. You offend me.

All together now, Happy Birthday big man!

Your insincerity and sarcasm is duly noted.

It is good to see the 'History of Thaksin' being earnestly recorded. Since the current country manager has already said that this period will be expunged from Thailand's history books, I guess it can be posted on wikipedia for those that give a toss.

Isn't the discussion is about POLITICAL amnesty, not criminal amnesty. Amnesty proposed by the Yingluck regime seemed to go beyond mere political amnesty and potentially could have included criminal amnesty.The current proposal made clear one could get political amnesty and still be convicted for a criminal offense. Separate and distinct processes are involved - a political process and a judicial process. The amnesty proposal does not affect the judicial process. The benefit of political amnesty is one can be involved in political party activities and run for election. Obviously, if one is convicted for a criminal offense the person cannot be a party supporter/leader or elected in any case.

Taken broadly, many of the PDRC and Democrat supporters and leaders involved in the 2013/2014 protests as much as PTP supporters and leaders in past protests would benefit from political amnesty. I see nothing haunting about the proposal.

Maybe nothing haunting but probably incredibly daunting. Since most of the criminal acts referred to were either conducted or enabled by standing politicians, elected AND otherwise, someone would have to be appointed to define the rather fuzzy demarcation between what would be a 'political' crime (with the notional wrist slap) and a 'judicial' one (with the notional jail term and eventual pardon).

So far I don't see anyone willing to commit suicide through being the lucky one making those calls (but the revenue streams would be pretty good while it lasted).