Graft buster rejects attorney’s request for more questioning before indicting Yingluck

BANGKOK: -- The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) today rejected the request by the Office of the Attorney-General to question more witnesses regarding the government-to-government rice deals before prosecuting former Premier Yingluck Shinawatra.

NACC secretary-gener Sansern Poljiak said he personally saw no need to have the NACC to question more witnesses regarding the G-to-G rice deal with China as the rice deal was not in the issue which it indicted Ms Yingluck and was not contained in its file case.

He said the NACC merely indicted her for negligence of duties when she showed no intention to stop damages caused by her rice-pledging scheme.

In fact the G-to-G rice deal is in another different case file which the NACC is investigating to indict the former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom, and his deputy Phoom Sarapol, he said.

He cast doubt on the OAG’s motive in seeking more questioning on which issue in the rice deal it wanted the NACC to investigate

He insisted that NACC will stand firm on its stance that it has completed questioning of all witnesses and investigated all evidences.

But if the OAG insisted that the NACC questions more on the rice deal, it would not do so because the deal was not in its case file.

The NACC spokesman went on saying that the latest action of the OAG indicated uncertainty if it would prosecute Ms Yingluck under the NACC’s request.

He said if the OAG stands firm on its position while the NACC also has a clear stand on the case, then both sides had come to a deadlock.

He said both sides will meet again next time to find a conclusion to it but has not yet scheduled the date to meet.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/graft-buster-rejects-attorneys-request-questioning-indicting-yingluck

-- Thai PBS 2014-12-13

I wonder how much this cost the boss.

I wonder how much this cost the boss.

AIRBORNE

He said the NACC merely indicted her for negligence of duties when she showed no intention to stop damages caused by her rice-pledging scheme.

Damages that she was well aware of, Kittirat told the press that the government could not afford to pay 15,000 baht per ton for rice, that it would reduce the price to 12,000 baht. When the farmers threatened to protest, the government backed down and continued to pay a price they knew was unsustainable. Yingluck was unwilling to face the music and allowed the country to lose billions. She is and was completely responsible for the loss, dereliction of duty indeed.

Dead in the water!!!

Another divorcee in the making, due to powers beyond beggaring belief.

Charge and send to military court, the entire bunch under martial law provisions. Hold ever blessed one in the slammer/brig while the court is in session (won't take long) and watch those who have also been involved in shinagans leave the country in in a panic.

When its all said and done just say april fool. You can add the members of the paniced crowd to the list of canidates for proscution and this ought to put the fear of the almighty into the big time criminals.and those small timers who stay up with Thai news.

There solved that precieved crises, maybe I should write a column for the rags they call newspapers here.

how long before we see the graft buster being investigated ?

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

Meanwhile in my universe Ms. Yingluck had been warned many times about the unsustanability of the RPPS. Ms. Yingluck went on record to acknowledge concerns from many sides and said to have all covered. Still losses increased. She was the one to propose the RPPS, help pass it through parliament, help supervise as chairwoman of the National Rice policy committee ( or whatever it's name). Etc., etc.

Just calling it negligent seem very friendly, at a cost to the taxpayer's of 700--/++ billion Baht.

The 'handouts' of the military seem to aim and reach directly the people they are meant for, seem at a reasonable level (all complain it's not enough) and positioned as subsidy. The 700 billion Ms. Yingluck lost was part of what was positioned as the 'self-financing' RPPS.

If the biggest gift of Thaksin to the poor is to make them realise the political power to get more free money on demand by voting, I think you mean the biggest disaster Thaksin heaped on this poor Thailand.

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

Well intended?

According to the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), the richest 20 per cent of rice farmers produced 42 per cent of the total rice supply in the market. Meanwhile, the poorest 2.59 million rice-growing households did not produce enough grain to even join the programme.

 That means the richest 20 percent were MORE prosperous. The poorest were still as poor as they were before the scheme started.

Granted all that, if the government's real intention was to help the farmers, why didn't they spend the tax money on things that would assist the sector towards sustainability, such as research and development, irrigation, transportation, financial management, cooperatives and agriculture education? These efforts have multiplier effects that have the power to eventually lift the poor farmers out of poverty.

​Well intended….555555

In the words of Ed Rooney from "Ferris Buellers Day Off". Wake up and smell the coffee. It's a fool's paradise. The PTP were just leading the farmers down the primrose path.

If you want to see what well intended rice sustainability looks like then look up the Democratic's Finance ministers Korn Chatikavanji's venture. Using his own money (not tax payers money) he started an organic rice cooperative that is selling rice to businesses in Bangkok for over the 15 000 baht offered by the unelectable criminal fugitive that you mentioned. And guess what? thaksin didn't use his own money. He used the tax payers money for his scheme. What a swell guy..

Korn is so busy helping the poor farmers he has no time selling ice cream with pictures of thaksin on the label and that is the fundamental difference between the PTP and the Democrats. One uses the poor to serve their own agenda. The other silently helps the poor with no fan fair or recognition required.

I don't give the pigeon award out much…But you deserve it. See below.

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

Lets see...

Clearly the Indictment is for "dereliction of duty", not the G2G issue, and seems the NACC are confident they have enough evidence, I think everybody knows see went shopping rather than chair the meetings that it was her responsibility to do so.

Charge and send to military court, the entire bunch under martial law provisions. Hold ever blessed one in the slammer/brig while the court is in session (won't take long) and watch those who have also been involved in shinagans leave the country in in a panic.

When its all said and done just say april fool. You can add the members of the paniced crowd to the list of canidates for proscution and this ought to put the fear of the almighty into the big time criminals.and those small timers who stay up with Thai news.

There solved that precieved crises, maybe I should write a column for the rags they call newspapers here.

Disagree strongly but yes understand it would prehaps proceed quicker. While the "democracy is elections only and then lawlessly, corruptly and incompetently rip of the country ala Thaksin governance" crowd on here mindlessly rant on here about Martial Law and the Military Courts the reality is mostly the Junta is toeing to a clear legal line under the Martial Law Act between the Military and civilian courts. Yingluck and her Pheu Thai lot need to be processed through the civilian courts to maintain that legality regardless of how lengthy and also regardless that the potential charges may fall over.

She is blacker than the lone ace of spades in a short deck. for you non card players, that refers to the lone ace in play for the pot. In this case the pot was unlimited..

Give 'em a break guys. As most Thais have a problem with "tight deadlines" why assume the Office of the Attorney General is any different?

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

In this case it was the mismanagement which is the crime...

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

In this case it was the mismanagement which is the crime...

Just wondering if that is equivalent to the constitutional court declaring the Feb election null and void just because of a few thugs at the election booth or the EC refusing to hold election.

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

In this case it was the mismanagement which is the crime...

Just wondering if that is equivalent to the constitutional court declaring the Feb election null and void just because of a few thugs at the election booth or the EC refusing to hold election.

Only on Wednesdays and when it doesn't rain.

Now back to the NACC having collected enough information to let the NLA decide on impeachment on grounds of 'negligence' (aka the 700--/++ billion Baht subsidy as some have it).

Graftbuster

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

Lets see...

Clearly the Indictment is for "dereliction of duty", not the G2G issue, and seems the NACC are confident they have enough evidence, I think everybody knows see went shopping rather than chair the meetings that it was her responsibility to do so.

More precisely she's accused of "dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme". If she's accused of failing to stop corruption, then proof of corruption must be clearly established. Before judging her, and not after!

If the GtoG case is already included as an evidence by the NACC, then proof must be provided.

If it's not included, it is a fault by NACC not to include it. It can be a key element to prove that corruption has occured, and therefore to established that she failed to stop corruption.

They just don't have any evidence against her just accusations of mismangement which is not a crime.

The policy was well intended but badly administered and not really any different to the handouts from the military now. Isaan villagers know this and take the armies money now but will vote for who they want when next given the chance.

Other than free health care political power is Thaksins biggest gift to the poor farmers and now all sides have to pay them

In this case it was the mismanagement which is the crime...

Just wondering if that is equivalent to the constitutional court declaring the Feb election null and void just because of a few thugs at the election booth or the EC refusing to hold election.

Only on Wednesdays and when it doesn't rain.

Now back to the NACC having collected enough information to let the NLA decide on impeachment on grounds of 'negligence' (aka the 700--/++ billion Baht subsidy as some have it).

Guess it is different folk different stroke, confirming what we always know. Don't you read that the NACC stated that they have enough information and will not bow to OAG request for more.

More precisely she's accused of "dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme". If she's accused of failing to stop corruption, then proof of corruption must be clearly established. Before judging her, and not after!

If the GtoG case is already included as an evidence by the NACC, then proof must be provided.

If it's not included, it is a fault by NACC not to include it. It can be a key element to prove that corruption has occured, and therefore to established that she failed to stop corruption.

The G2G deal doesn't really have anything to do with the rice scheme does it?

More precisely she's accused of "dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme". If she's accused of failing to stop corruption, then proof of corruption must be clearly established. Before judging her, and not after!

If the GtoG case is already included as an evidence by the NACC, then proof must be provided.

If it's not included, it is a fault by NACC not to include it. It can be a key element to prove that corruption has occured, and therefore to established that she failed to stop corruption.

The G2G deal doesn't really have anything to do with the rice scheme does it?

Obviously, it is related to the accusation of "failing to stop corruption".

Now if the OAG has some doubts about this event, it's better to clear it before judgment and not after.

(nice try )

More precisely she's accused of "dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme". If she's accused of failing to stop corruption, then proof of corruption must be clearly established. Before judging her, and not after!

If the GtoG case is already included as an evidence by the NACC, then proof must be provided.

If it's not included, it is a fault by NACC not to include it. It can be a key element to prove that corruption has occured, and therefore to established that she failed to stop corruption.

The G2G deal doesn't really have anything to do with the rice scheme does it?

Obviously, it is related to the accusation of "failing to stop corruption".

Now if the OAG has some doubts about this event, it's better to clear it before judgment and not after.

(nice try )

The accusation is "failing to stop corruption in the rice scheme".

The deal isn't part of the rice scheme.

More precisely she's accused of "dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme". If she's accused of failing to stop corruption, then proof of corruption must be clearly established. Before judging her, and not after!

If the GtoG case is already included as an evidence by the NACC, then proof must be provided.

If it's not included, it is a fault by NACC not to include it. It can be a key element to prove that corruption has occured, and therefore to established that she failed to stop corruption.

The G2G deal doesn't really have anything to do with the rice scheme does it?

Obviously, it is related to the accusation of "failing to stop corruption".

Now if the OAG has some doubts about this event, it's better to clear it before judgment and not after.

(nice try )

The accusation is "failing to stop corruption in the rice scheme".

The deal isn't part of the rice scheme.

It may be that Vicha changed his mind about it....He clearly related both

"Commissioner Vicha Mahakhun said Thursday that the NACC had, on several occasions, warned the government about the lack of transparency in the rice deals but all of them were ignored and no attempt was done to mitigate the loss.

Ms Yingluck, he said, will be probed for alleged negligence of duty in accordance with Article 157 of the Criminal Code.

http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/pm-yingluck-probed-connection-fake-rice-deal

Anyway, IF it's not mentionned in the current accusation, the better for Yingluck. However I suspect that it is mentioned in the accusation file as example of corruption case that she failed to prevent....

In this case it was the mismanagement which is the crime...

Just wondering if that is equivalent to the constitutional court declaring the Feb election null and void just because of a few thugs at the election booth or the EC refusing to hold election.

Only on Wednesdays and when it doesn't rain.

Now back to the NACC having collected enough information to let the NLA decide on impeachment on grounds of 'negligence' (aka the 700--/++ billion Baht subsidy as some have it).

Guess it is different folk different stroke, confirming what we always know. Don't you read that the NACC stated that they have enough information and will not bow to OAG request for more.

Didn't you read that the case forwarded by the NACC was about 'negligence' and the case the OAG argues about is one of graft?