NACC not hopeful of resolution with prosecutors in Yingluck case
The Sunday Nation

BANGKOK: -- Sansern rules out conducting more probe in rice-pledging case against ex-PM

National Anti-Corruption Commission secretary-general Sansern Poljieak has said the Office of the Attorney-General and the anti-graft agency are unlikely to jointly resolve the case involving the rice-pledging scheme against ex-prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

Sansern yesterday insisted the NACC would not investigate more people in the case after he said the Office asked it to spend more time probing the alleged government-to-government rice sales.

He was responding to a reaction from the Office's litigation department director-general Surasak Trirattrakul, calling on the NACC to plug the holes in the case by interviewing more witnesses.

Surasak said the Office wanted to see more evidence because the NACC report showed discrepancies in witness testimonies, which made it unclear as to whether the government-to-government rice sales took place.

Sansern said that would not happen because that investigation element was not related to the charge the NACC had filed against Yingluck.

He said the NACC report did not include this issue in the Yingluck case but included it in another graft case, against former Commerce Minister Boonsong Teriyapirom and former Deputy Commerce Minister Poom Sarapol over the scrapped rice-pledging scheme.

He said the NACC had accused Yingluck of dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme.

In October, the Finance Ministry reported that the estimated losses in the scheme were between Bt600-700 billion.

Sansern said the NACC would meet tomorrow to decide its next move.

He said it was not clear if the Office would indict Yingluck as recommended by the NACC but there was a high probability that both agencies would be unable to resolve the case together.

Whether she would be indicted or not would be announced when the agencies hold their last joint meeting, which was yet to be scheduled.

The state prosecution agency said it would not be able to complete the investigation this year.

According to due process, if both agencies disagree with the indictment decision in any case, they have to make that known officially.

If that happens in this case, the NACC would be able to directly file the case in the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders Court. It had previously stated it was prepared to do so.

The anti-graft agency and the public prosecutors failed for a third time in November to reach an agreement on whether a criminal case should be filed against Yingluck. That prompted speculation that the NACC might take the case to court on its own.

An NACC source said that if the Office continued to refuse to file a criminal case against Yingluck, it was likely the anti-graft agency would go down that route.

It has previously taken criminal cases against political-office holders to court without the state prosecutor's consent, including the one against Yingluck's older brother, former PM Thaksin Shinawatra

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NACC-not-hopeful-of-resolution-with-prosecutors-in-30249785.html

-- The Nation 2014-12-14

The NACC would appear to be correct in this one as they are not going after Yingluck for corruption only dereliction of duty which does not involve investigations into the G 2 G deals.

Those involve the ex commerce minister and his gang who are already facing charges.

Don't know if the OAG wants extra ammunition or is just looking for any way to avoid responsibility.

One thing I knew all along is that you all have your act together and one thing is for certain when it comes to incompetence in Thailand , don't look past the senior members of Government Departments , quite frankly you couldn't agree to organise a root at a girly bar in Pattaya.

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

The real goal here is to just get her and her party banned from politics for 5 years.

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

The real goal here is to just get her and her party banned from politics for 5 years.

If she is found guilty then without any doubt she and her party should be banned for life.

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

Why do you think the case is destined to fail.... 600 million bahts missing, thats a fact... she was warned time and time again that her ship was sinking but the Captain sailed right on... She has to accept the blame right on her chin... But she will only get a ban for 5 yrs when in fact she should go to prison for the damage she has done to Thailand. But prison will Never happen. She will run when the time is right... wait and see... Watch this space..!

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

Why do you think the case is destined to fail.... 600 million bahts missing, thats a fact... she was warned time and time again that her ship was sinking but the Captain sailed right on... She has to accept the blame right on her chin... But she will only get a ban for 5 yrs when in fact she should go to prison for the damage she has done to Thailand. But prison will Never happen. She will run when the time is right... wait and see... Watch this space..!

If she is found guilty then without any doubt she and her party should be banned for life.

What you think should happen is irrelevant - the judiciary doesn't consult with you. What *will* happen is the usual 5 year ban, if she is found culpable.

Which is all the time the current govt needs, anyway.

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

Why do you think the case is destined to fail.... 600 million bahts missing, thats a fact... she was warned time and time again that her ship was sinking but the Captain sailed right on... She has to accept the blame right on her chin... But she will only get a ban for 5 yrs when in fact she should go to prison for the damage she has done to Thailand. But prison will Never happen. She will run when the time is right... wait and see... Watch this space..!

"...600 million bahts missing, thats a fact."

It would be, Bakseeda, if you'd added on another comma and three zeros.

Yingluck's personal wealth exceeds 600 million baht.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/776250-thai-rice-pledging-schemes-cause-682-billion-baht-loss/

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Yinglucks-assets-rose-by-Bt50m-NACC-30226088.html

"She will run when the time is right... wait and see..."

Run for office or run for the border?

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

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

Why do you think the case is destined to fail.... 600 million bahts missing, thats a fact... she was warned time and time again that her ship was sinking but the Captain sailed right on... She has to accept the blame right on her chin... But she will only get a ban for 5 yrs when in fact she should go to prison for the damage she has done to Thailand. But prison will Never happen. She will run when the time is right... wait and see... Watch this space..! alt=giggle.gif>

The only place that 600 million baht was missing was from the marketplace. The Yingluck Government bought the rice at the market price and over the term during which it was stockpiled, the market price actually dropped further. No question that in hindsight the government's purchase price was too high. And it's no question that the Junta honored the Yingluck government's inflated purchase price by borrowing the 600 million baht shortfall and paying off the farmers. Maybe the Junta should also be banned for 5 years from any role in government or worse punishment.

Recently Gen. Prayuth has created a rubber pledge program wherein the government will create rubber futures at more than 200% of today's market price even against his cabinet's advice that such future price will not happen in the near term. History repeats itself.

Over 30 days ago the NACC threatened to prosecute the case itself if it couldn't resolve its differences with the OAG within a 30-day period. That time is up. NACC needs to either go on its own to prosecute the case or move on to its next case. The NACC has indicated that if it prosecutes the case it will have to bring in attonerys to represent it in court - NACC has no standing before the court to try a case itself! And I've not seen any reference as to whether its has ever gone directly to court for one of its cases.

it would seemmore efficient from a judicial perspective that the NACC be organized UNDER the OAG rather than as a parallel judiciary organization. And in fact there has been discussion in the NRC to remove NACC's as an Independenct Organization. NACC's handling of the Yingluck case provides reformers with cause to consider such a reform.

Over 30 days ago the NACC threatened to prosecute the case itself if it couldn't resolve its differences with the OAG within a 30-day period. That time is up. NACC needs to either go on its own to prosecute the case or move on to its next case. The NACC has indicated that if it prosecutes the case it will have to bring in attonerys to represent it in court - NACC has no standing before the court to try a case itself! And I've not seen any reference as to whether its has ever gone directly to court for one of its cases.

it would seemmore efficient from a judicial perspective that the NACC be organized UNDER the OAG rather than as a parallel judiciary organization. And in fact there has been discussion in the NRC to remove NACC's as an Independenct Organization. NACC's handling of the Yingluck case provides reformers with cause to consider such a reform.

OAG is the legal counsel and adviser for the government and acts on their behalf before the courts. They have stated insufficient evidences. What chance does the NACC have in court when the government legal agency have made such profound statement. Even the TDRI have distance themself from the NACC. Not wise for the NACC to act on their own.

This is another example of NACC's insincerity. In the OP, it is clearly stated: "He said the NACC had accused Yingluck of dereliction of duty for failing to stop corruption and massive losses in the scheme.". So she is accused of having let corruption happen and not having stopped it.

If you accuse someone of letting corruption happen, corruption musty be established by proofs. At least, it's the case in sound judicial systems, i.e. in the countries we come from. That has always been the position of OAG: "The NACC dossier just stated that corruption took place at every stage, without giving details, such as where, when, how, and who. Also, they failed to explain how the accused was involved." (http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Yingluck-gets-some-respite-in-rice-case-30242578.html).

The NACC hastily established a case during the protests, in order to provide support to the anti-government movement. The problem is that this case has been based on assumptions, not proofs. It is not surprising that when they try to pass it to the judicial system, the judicial system asks for proofs, not allegations.

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

The real goal here is to just get her and her party banned from politics for 5 years.

Someone moved the goal posts.

I love to read grandiose statements predicated on "in our own countries this wouldn't happen" or "here's what would happen in our own countries" - I'm laughing too hard to formulate a cogent response, not that any were needed.

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

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

Why do you think the case is destined to fail.... 600 million bahts missing, thats a fact... she was warned time and time again that her ship was sinking but the Captain sailed right on... She has to accept the blame right on her chin... But she will only get a ban for 5 yrs when in fact she should go to prison for the damage she has done to Thailand. But prison will Never happen. She will run when the time is right... wait and see... Watch this space..! alt=giggle.gif>

The only place that 600 million baht was missing was from the marketplace. The Yingluck Government bought the rice at the market price and over the term during which it was stockpiled, the market price actually dropped further. No question that in hindsight the government's purchase price was too high. And it's no question that the Junta honored the Yingluck government's inflated purchase price by borrowing the 600 million baht shortfall and paying off the farmers. Maybe the Junta should also be banned for 5 years from any role in government or worse punishment.

Recently Gen. Prayuth has created a rubber pledge program wherein the government will create rubber futures at more than 200% of today's market price even against his cabinet's advice that such future price will not happen in the near term. History repeats itself.

And the US gives farmers more than 600 billion a year in agricultural subsidies but that's ok. Should all lawmakers there resign over the loss of taxpayers money?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-20/farmers-may-reap-subsidy-boom-on-record-crops.html

double post.

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

This action by the NACC is destined to fail......IMO, YL can continue her overseas shopping excursions without worry...........

Why do you think the case is destined to fail.... 600 million bahts missing, thats a fact... she was warned time and time again that her ship was sinking but the Captain sailed right on... She has to accept the blame right on her chin... But she will only get a ban for 5 yrs when in fact she should go to prison for the damage she has done to Thailand. But prison will Never happen. She will run when the time is right... wait and see... Watch this space..! alt=giggle.gif>

The only place that 600 million baht was missing was from the marketplace. The Yingluck Government bought the rice at the market price and over the term during which it was stockpiled, the market price actually dropped further. No question that in hindsight the government's purchase price was too high. And it's no question that the Junta honored the Yingluck government's inflated purchase price by borrowing the 600 million baht shortfall and paying off the farmers. Maybe the Junta should also be banned for 5 years from any role in government or worse punishment.

Recently Gen. Prayuth has created a rubber pledge program wherein the government will create rubber futures at more than 200% of today's market price even against his cabinet's advice that such future price will not happen in the near term. History repeats itself.

No, the PTP bought rice at almost double the market price depending on the year, that is why they can't sell them. The 600 million baht missing is from the state not market place. Junta has to follow through with the promise from the state to pay farmers back, that was all they did, making good on government contracts. Now if the rubber deal does fall through, then we have something to talk about.

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

If she is found guilty then without any doubt she and her party should be banned for life.

What you think should happen is irrelevant - the judiciary doesn't consult with you. What *will* happen is the usual 5 year ban, if she is found culpable.

Which is all the time the current govt needs, anyway.

Well sorry to upset you.

Given the evidence available I have an opinion, like many others, and I will express my opinion whether you like it or not.

Given the evidence available I have an opinion, like many others, and I will express my opinion whether you like it or not.

That's nice for you - it still doesn't change the fact that your opinion is irrelevant, but by all means, enjoy barking up that tree ;-)