Ousted Thai PM's impeachment hearing tests fragile calm

[scorecard]

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

Ousted Thai PM's impeachment poses dilemma for junta
Bangkok, Thailand | AFP |

BANGKOK: -- Ousted prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra arrived at Thailand's military-stacked legislature Friday for the start of impeachment proceedings that could see her banned from politics for five years and reignite the country's bitter divisions.

Yingluck, Thailand's first female premier and the sister of self-exiled former leader Thaksin Shinawatra, was dumped from office by a controversial court ruling shortly before the army seized power in a coup on May 22.

She faces impeachment over her administration's loss-making rice subsidy programme which -- while popular among her rural power base -- cost billions of dollars and was a driving force behind protests that toppled her government.

Analysts say the impeachment hearing is the latest attempt by Thailand's royalist elite to neuter the political influence of the Shinawatras, whose parties have won every election since 2001.

A guilty verdict from the junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly carries an automatic five-year ban from politics, but could also galvanise her family's 'Red Shirt' supporters to protest after months of silence under martial law.

A smiling Yingluck, dressed in a black suit and pink shirt, arrived at the hearing flanked by security and a handful of her party members.

Asked if she felt confident of being vindicated she replied: "Let's wait and see."

At the start of the hearing, National Anti-Corruption Commission commissioner Vicha Mahakhun said Yingluck stood accused of dereliction of duty "causing gross damage to the country".

A successful impeachment needs three-fifths of the 250-strong assembly to vote in favour. The a verdict is expected by the end of January.

Impeachment proceedings have already begun against the former parliament speaker -- a member of Yingluck's toppled government -- and the former senate speaker.

Prosecutors are also in the process of deciding whether Yingluck should face a separate criminal case over the rice subsidy scheme.

- Dilemma for junta -

Yingluck's supporters say the proceedings and the criminal charges are part of a wider campaign to cripple the Shinawatra clan and disempower their voters, who are drawn mainly from the poor but populous northern part of the country.

But the move is not without risks. A vote to impeach Yingluck could stir the Red Shirts to protest, ending months of relative calm since the army grabbed power and imposed martial law.

Thai politics expert Thitinan Pongsudhirak said the impeachment proceedings pose "a dilemma" for the junta and their supporters.

"On the one hand they want to see her disqualified from Thai politics," said Thitinan, who is director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

"But if they go all out against Yingluck -- by pushing for a ban or criminal charges -- they risk aggravating Thailand's political conflict by stirring up the pro-Thaksin camp."

Yingluck's billionaire brother Thaksin, who was deposed as premier in a 2006 coup, sits at the heart of Thailand's deep schism, despite living overseas to avoid jail for a graft conviction.

He is loathed by the Bangkok-centred establishment, its supporters in the south and among the judiciary and army, but still draws deep loyalty in the north and among the urban middle and working classes.

Since Thaksin swept to power in 2001, Shinawatra governments have been floored by two coups and bloodied by the removal of three other premiers by the kingdom's interventionist courts.

The Shinawatras' electoral dominance comes as concerns mount over Thailand's future once the reign of revered 87-year-old King Bhumibol Adulyadej ends.

The junta says Thailand needs a new constitution to end years of political turmoil and rid the kingdom of endemic corruption.

But critics say those crafting the charter are mainly anti-Thaksin figures seeking to erase his legacy and protect the interests of the elite, rather than create a robust political system to move the country forward.


-- (c) Copyright AFP 2015-01-09

How does one apply to be banned?

[Lovekorat]

One thing to consider of course is on what grounds the powers that be can impeach.

She was a democratically elected representative of the people.

The coup removed her, rightly or wrongly, dismantled the constitution as it stood and so they cannot impeach under the constitution as it no longer exists and as they have not introduced a new one so there is no legal framework.

Further this body running the country have no mandate from the people to act. How then can they impeach?

If they think that by banning her from politics the red shirts are going away then they are living in cuckoo land. They will provide another candidate who will win again.

Unless of course there is a new constitution that does not allow anyone wearing red to vote.

This is not the answer and they are creating a confrontational situation.

[seajae]

"Greeting journalists with her smiling face, Ms Yingluck said confidently that she would be able to clear all doubts about the rice scheme and her duty." Does this mean she will explain why she never attended any of the meetings as the one in charge of it, never attended parliamentary sittings, kept running away when anyone criticized the scam, refused to accept there were any problems with it, never paid the farmers when she said she would etc etc. How stupid does one have to be to think that by being wealthy they can simply not do any of their responsibilities for the position they hold, she did absolutely nothing the whole time she was responsible and now claims she is innocent, how thick is this female, a jail cell would really suit, its time thais were taught wealth is not an excuse to do as you please.

[candide]

What is the legitimacy of an assembly appointed by an unaccountable junta, composed mainly of military and people near to PDRC and the Dems - and according to a constitution that doesn't exist any more-, to decide about the accountability of someone that is not any more PM?

[yellowboat]

One thing to consider of course is on what grounds the powers that be can impeach.

She was a democratically elected representative of the people.

The coup removed her, rightly or wrongly, dismantled the constitution as it stood and so they cannot impeach under the constitution as it no longer exists and as they have not introduced a new one so there is no legal framework.

Further this body running the country have no mandate from the people to act. How then can they impeach?

If they think that by banning her from politics the red shirts are going away then they are living in cuckoo land. They will provide another candidate who will win again.

Unless of course there is a new constitution that does not allow anyone wearing red to vote.

This is not the answer and they are creating a confrontational situation.

Well put. It just boggles the mind as to how "due process" is carried out in the land of smiles. More baffling are the westerners who stand behind the power grab and this sham impeachment .

[webfact]

Ousted Thai PM launches defiant impeachment defence
Bangkok, Thailand | AFP |

BANGKOK: -- Ousted Thai prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra launched a defiant defence Friday at the first hearing of impeachment proceedings that could see her banned from politics for five years and deepen the country's bitter divisions.

Yingluck, Thailand's first female premier and the sister of self-exiled former leader Thaksin Shinawatra, was dumped from office by a controversial court ruling shortly before the army seized power in a coup on May 22.

She faces impeachment by the military-stacked National Legislative Assembly over her administration's loss-making rice subsidy programme which -- while popular among her rural power base -- cost billions of dollars and was a driving force behind protests that toppled her government.

Analysts say the impeachment move is the latest attempt by Thailand's royalist elite to neuter the political influence of the Shinawatras, whose parties have won every election since 2001.

A guilty verdict from the assembly carries an automatic five-year ban from politics, but could also galvanise her family's 'Red Shirt' supporters to protest after months of silence under martial law.

Yingluck, dressed in a black suit and pink shirt, arrived at the hearing flanked by security and a handful of her party members.

"I ran the government with honesty and in accordance with all laws," she told the assembly, rejecting the allegation of dereliction of duty by the nation's anti-graft body that resulted in the impeachment bid.

"The rice pledging scheme... aimed to address the livelihood of rice farmers, their debts and falling rice prices," she said, describing it as part of the "social contract" which she claimed helped 1.8 million rice farmers.

She ended a detailed and impassioned defence by urging the assembly to "deliberate with virtue, without prejudice or a hidden political agenda".

A successful impeachment needs three-fifths of the 250-strong assembly to vote in favour. A verdict is expected by the end of January.

Prosecutors are also in the process of deciding whether Yingluck should face a separate criminal case over the rice subsidy scheme.

Yingluck's supporters say the proceedings and the criminal charges are part of a wider campaign to cripple the Shinawatra clan and disempower their voters, who are drawn mainly from the poor but populous northern part of the country.


-- (c) Copyright AFP 2015-01-09

[rubl]

700 billion Baht to help 1.8 million rice farmers.

How many of those rice farmers were in the group 'poor to basic', how many in 'large'?

How many Baht for the 10% of the population considered to be poor? How much for other type of farmers?

Social Contract? Like in "vote for me, I hand out loads of money" ?

[ezzra]

If she dose that and 'clear' her, than someone, very high up should take her place

and face the music...

[Cuchulainn]

...........cripple the Shinawatra clan ...........

Music to my ears. If I bought a sledgehammer, could we do it for real?

[bkkjames]

AFP bias come out very clear in that lot.

The whole thing is about accountability of politicians to the country and the people, they must do the job they were elected to do and if they don't or cant do it they have no right to be in the job.

Same as any other business or profession, incompetent doctors, builders, electricians and pilots can and are dumped from their jobs. Why not politicians ?

That one sector will be unhappy if this occurs should not be a factor in any decision and if that sector would make trouble because the law is being applied and they cant accept that decision then that puts them outside the law.

But there is a mechanism for dumping unpopular politicians.It is called a general election.That remedy is not now open to the Thai people.

You mean let the people decide whether or not a politician should be punished for their corruption? So if the majority of the electorate vote for a certain person that person will be above the law?

Don't confuse him.

[Jimbolai]

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

I wonder how you impeach someone who is not in power. I think it would be adequate to prosecute her for dereliction of duty. There is enough evidence to convict and few people would argue that the charge is in line with her job performance. Perhaps I missed something, but I haven't seen anything that proves corruption that she benefited from. Having her gone from politics is a worthy goal in my opinion, but the charges should be fair.

How can any charge be fair when the charges are presented by an unelected, albeit, temporary, dictatorship?

[Jimbolai]

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

...........cripple the Shinawatra clan ...........

Music to my ears. If I bought a sledgehammer, could we do it for real?

Lets use democratic elections or call it a farce.

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

As long as there is no accountability for wrong doings, whether by politicians or protesters, then there will never be calm in this country. We will see the same cycle of corruption and power struggles until people are truly brought to justice and set an example for the next bunch of greedy power hungry parasites, as well as future generations.

[jayboy]

AFP bias come out very clear in that lot.

The whole thing is about accountability of politicians to the country and the people, they must do the job they were elected to do and if they don't or cant do it they have no right to be in the job.

Same as any other business or profession, incompetent doctors, builders, electricians and pilots can and are dumped from their jobs. Why not politicians ?

That one sector will be unhappy if this occurs should not be a factor in any decision and if that sector would make trouble because the law is being applied and they cant accept that decision then that puts them outside the law.

But there is a mechanism for dumping unpopular politicians.It is called a general election.That remedy is not now open to the Thai people.

You mean let the people decide whether or not a politician should be punished for their corruption? So if the majority of the electorate vote for a certain person that person will be above the law?

Don't confuse him.

He's confused himself.The people do not decide whether a politician should be punished for corruption; that is a matter for the courts.But at least the people have the option to remove politicians at elections if they are corrupt or indeed for any other reason.Nobody is above the law and certainly not elected officials or politicians.

In Thailand among the "good people" there is a perception that all politicians are corrupt and that it is better for government be provided by those who know best, ie the "good people".The courts are pliable and politically oriented.Current priorities are to rig the constitution so that elections will always produce the "right" result.Meanwhile the country enjoys a military government of generals on tiny salaries but generally huge wealth.They can never be voted out of office but will exit in their own good time.

[Nickymaster]

AFP bias come out very clear in that lot.

The whole thing is about accountability of politicians to the country and the people, they must do the job they were elected to do and if they don't or cant do it they have no right to be in the job.

Same as any other business or profession, incompetent doctors, builders, electricians and pilots can and are dumped from their jobs. Why not politicians ?

That one sector will be unhappy if this occurs should not be a factor in any decision and if that sector would make trouble because the law is being applied and they cant accept that decision then that puts them outside the law.

But there is a mechanism for dumping unpopular politicians.It is called a general election.That remedy is not now open to the Thai people.

You mean let the people decide whether or not a politician should be punished for their corruption? So if the majority of the electorate vote for a certain person that person will be above the law?

Don't confuse him.

He's confused himself.The people do not decide whether a politician should be punished for corruption; that is a matter for the courts.But at least the people have the option to remove politicians at elections if they are corrupt or indeed for any other reason.Nobody is above the law and certainly not elected officials or politicians.

In Thailand among the "good people" there is a perception that all politicians are corrupt and that it is better for government be provided by those who know best, ie the "good people".The courts are pliable and politically oriented.Current priorities are to rig the constitution so that elections will always produce the "right" result.Meanwhile the country enjoys a military government of generals on tiny salaries but generally huge wealth.They can never be voted out of office but will exit in their own good time.

And you are definitely confused.

[jayboy]

AFP bias come out very clear in that lot.

The whole thing is about accountability of politicians to the country and the people, they must do the job they were elected to do and if they don't or cant do it they have no right to be in the job.

Same as any other business or profession, incompetent doctors, builders, electricians and pilots can and are dumped from their jobs. Why not politicians ?

That one sector will be unhappy if this occurs should not be a factor in any decision and if that sector would make trouble because the law is being applied and they cant accept that decision then that puts them outside the law.

But there is a mechanism for dumping unpopular politicians.It is called a general election.That remedy is not now open to the Thai people.

You mean let the people decide whether or not a politician should be punished for their corruption? So if the majority of the electorate vote for a certain person that person will be above the law?

Don't confuse him.

He's confused himself.The people do not decide whether a politician should be punished for corruption; that is a matter for the courts.But at least the people have the option to remove politicians at elections if they are corrupt or indeed for any other reason.Nobody is above the law and certainly not elected officials or politicians.

In Thailand among the "good people" there is a perception that all politicians are corrupt and that it is better for government be provided by those who know best, ie the "good people".The courts are pliable and politically oriented.Current priorities are to rig the constitution so that elections will always produce the "right" result.Meanwhile the country enjoys a military government of generals on tiny salaries but generally huge wealth.They can never be voted out of office but will exit in their own good time.

And you are definitely confused.

Good argument.I can see you have thought through the issues carefully and are able to articulate your thoughts clearly.

[Thrilla]

Well put. It just boggles the mind as to how "due process" is carried out in the land of smiles. More baffling are the westerners who stand behind the power grab and this sham impeachment .

Or the Westerners who defend the Shinawatras.

I'll mark you down as 'for' corruption

[waitforusalso]

As long as there is no accountability for wrong doings, whether by politicians or protesters, then there will never be calm in this country. We will see the same cycle of corruption and power struggles until people are truly brought to justice and set an example for the next bunch of greedy power hungry parasites, as well as future generations.

& wrong doings by the military?

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

As long as there is no accountability for wrong doings, whether by politicians or protesters, then there will never be calm in this country. We will see the same cycle of corruption and power struggles until people are truly brought to justice and set an example for the next bunch of greedy power hungry parasites, as well as future generations.

& wrong doings by the military?

Yes, wrong doings by everyone!!! Or are you so biased that you think only the military should be held accountable?

[scorecard]

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

One thing to consider of course is on what grounds the powers that be can impeach.
She was a democratically elected representative of the people.
The coup removed her, rightly or wrongly, dismantled the constitution as it stood and so they cannot impeach under the constitution as it no longer exists and as they have not introduced a new one so there is no legal framework.
Further this body running the country have no mandate from the people to act. How then can they impeach?
If they think that by banning her from politics the red shirts are going away then they are living in cuckoo land. They will provide another candidate who will win again.
Unless of course there is a new constitution that does not allow anyone wearing red to vote.
This is not the answer and they are creating a confrontational situation.

Well put. It just boggles the mind as to how "due process" is carried out in the land of smiles. More baffling are the westerners who stand behind the power grab and this sham impeachment .

Sham impeachment? Wrong!

[scorecard]

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

Ousted Thai PM's impeachment poses dilemma for junta
Bangkok, Thailand | AFP |

BANGKOK: -- Ousted prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra arrived at Thailand's military-stacked legislature Friday for the start of impeachment proceedings that could see her banned from politics for five years and reignite the country's bitter divisions.

Yingluck, Thailand's first female premier and the sister of self-exiled former leader Thaksin Shinawatra, was dumped from office by a controversial court ruling shortly before the army seized power in a coup on May 22.

She faces impeachment over her administration's loss-making rice subsidy programme which -- while popular among her rural power base -- cost billions of dollars and was a driving force behind protests that toppled her government.

Analysts say the impeachment hearing is the latest attempt by Thailand's royalist elite to neuter the political influence of the Shinawatras, whose parties have won every election since 2001.

A guilty verdict from the junta-appointed National Legislative Assembly carries an automatic five-year ban from politics, but could also galvanise her family's 'Red Shirt' supporters to protest after months of silence under martial law.

A smiling Yingluck, dressed in a black suit and pink shirt, arrived at the hearing flanked by security and a handful of her party members.

Asked if she felt confident of being vindicated she replied: "Let's wait and see."

At the start of the hearing, National Anti-Corruption Commission commissioner Vicha Mahakhun said Yingluck stood accused of dereliction of duty "causing gross damage to the country".

A successful impeachment needs three-fifths of the 250-strong assembly to vote in favour. The a verdict is expected by the end of January.

Impeachment proceedings have already begun against the former parliament speaker -- a member of Yingluck's toppled government -- and the former senate speaker.

Prosecutors are also in the process of deciding whether Yingluck should face a separate criminal case over the rice subsidy scheme.

- Dilemma for junta -

Yingluck's supporters say the proceedings and the criminal charges are part of a wider campaign to cripple the Shinawatra clan and disempower their voters, who are drawn mainly from the poor but populous northern part of the country.

But the move is not without risks. A vote to impeach Yingluck could stir the Red Shirts to protest, ending months of relative calm since the army grabbed power and imposed martial law.

Thai politics expert Thitinan Pongsudhirak said the impeachment proceedings pose "a dilemma" for the junta and their supporters.

"On the one hand they want to see her disqualified from Thai politics," said Thitinan, who is director of the Institute of Security and International Studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

"But if they go all out against Yingluck -- by pushing for a ban or criminal charges -- they risk aggravating Thailand's political conflict by stirring up the pro-Thaksin camp."

Yingluck's billionaire brother Thaksin, who was deposed as premier in a 2006 coup, sits at the heart of Thailand's deep schism, despite living overseas to avoid jail for a graft conviction.

He is loathed by the Bangkok-centred establishment, its supporters in the south and among the judiciary and army, but still draws deep loyalty in the north and among the urban middle and working classes.

Since Thaksin swept to power in 2001, Shinawatra governments have been floored by two coups and bloodied by the removal of three other premiers by the kingdom's interventionist courts.

The Shinawatras' electoral dominance comes as concerns mount over Thailand's future once the reign of revered 87-year-old King Bhumibol Adulyadej ends.

The junta says Thailand needs a new constitution to end years of political turmoil and rid the kingdom of endemic corruption.

But critics say those crafting the charter are mainly anti-Thaksin figures seeking to erase his legacy and protect the interests of the elite, rather than create a robust political system to move the country forward.


-- (c) Copyright AFP 2015-01-09

What's the process to get AFP banned?

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

Great job of removing all doubt Ying!! I have not had any doubts about how corrupt you and your family are for a long time now. Let's hope you get what you deserve, but I will not hold my breath for it.

[Tatsujin]

Love the verbiage of the reporting, makes her sound like a real hero fighting against the evil empire, rather than just another bloodsucking member of a clan who put themselves above all.

I didn't see it mentioned, but did we get the tears this time? Or do those only turn on when she's in public?

[sweatalot]

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

...........cripple the Shinawatra clan ...........

Music to my ears. If I bought a sledgehammer, could we do it for real?

Lets use democratic elections or call it a farce.

Yes. Democratic elections. Truly democratic. With informed voters. No bribes. No corruption.

[sweatalot]

Great job of removing all doubt Ying!! I have not had any doubts about how corrupt you and your family are for a long time now. Let's hope you get what you deserve, but I will not hold my breath for it.

Yes. Let's hope she gets what she deserves.

[Eric Loh]

If the NACC only based the case on evidences from the Dem Party and TDRI as reported, they have a weak case and enough for the NLA to dismiss the case. The NACC has not conducted a thorough investigation and only obtain limited information extraction from Dem and TDRI. Their biggest mistake is not considering information from more witnesses to form an objective prosecution.

[Baerboxer]

Convict her and the speakers will galavanize their supporters and hardened their resolve to support Thaksin. May even win over some neutrals who are sick of the Dem, continuous power grab and disruption of their life and economy. International opinions will also be negative. Discharge the cases, PT will be stronger and win the next election. No wonder Thaksin is keeping a low profile and told his supporters to behave. He should be happy either way the cases will end.

Unless of course the Thai people are sick of the Shin lies, cheating and self enrichment schemes.

The PTP grip ain't so strong, especially now the income streams have been reduced and some are being seen to face the consequences of their corruption.

[Eric Loh]

Convict her and the speakers will galavanize their supporters and hardened their resolve to support Thaksin. May even win over some neutrals who are sick of the Dem, continuous power grab and disruption of their life and economy. International opinions will also be negative. Discharge the cases, PT will be stronger and win the next election. No wonder Thaksin is keeping a low profile and told his supporters to behave. He should be happy either way the cases will end.

Unless of course the Thai people are sick of the Shin lies, cheating and self enrichment schemes.

The PTP grip ain't so strong, especially now the income streams have been reduced and some are being seen to face the consequences of their corruption.

You may be right if the Shins are the only politicians that lies, cheat and corrupt in Thailand.

[Baerboxer]

If the NACC only based the case on evidences from the Dem Party and TDRI as reported, they have a weak case and enough for the NLA to dismiss the case. The NACC has not conducted a thorough investigation and only obtain limited information extraction from Dem and TDRI. Their biggest mistake is not considering information from more witnesses to form an objective prosecution.

Have you read all the evidence?

The scheme was a shambles, billions remain unaccounted for, the poor received very little, there appears to have been no proper accounting, warning including from international organizations were rebuffed, people who raised concerns were transferred and/or intimidated, one senior red shirt leader's wife's company seems involved in export fraud connected with false export deals, and the Chair of the rice policy committee, although self appointed, never attended one meeting but was quick to confirms there were no issues, problems, losses, poor quality or anything wrong with the scheme when previously challenged.

All the above is common knowledge, in the public domain. I have not seen what additional evidence has been presented to the NLA. But based on the evidence that is publicly available Eric do you believe there were no problems in the scheme and that Yingluck carried out her associated duties efficiently, effectively and in accordance with the oaths she swore when taking up office? A yes or no will suffice.

[Baerboxer]

Convict her and the speakers will galavanize their supporters and hardened their resolve to support Thaksin. May even win over some neutrals who are sick of the Dem, continuous power grab and disruption of their life and economy. International opinions will also be negative. Discharge the cases, PT will be stronger and win the next election. No wonder Thaksin is keeping a low profile and told his supporters to behave. He should be happy either way the cases will end.

Unless of course the Thai people are sick of the Shin lies, cheating and self enrichment schemes.

The PTP grip ain't so strong, especially now the income streams have been reduced and some are being seen to face the consequences of their corruption.

You may be right if the Shins are the only politicians that lies, cheat and corrupt in Thailand.

Good that you finally admit that the Shins lies and cheat and are corrupt. Well done in breaking your cycle of denial!

As I've said many times the lack of a real, genuine, political party that has the people's interests at heart and is not self serving is a massive problem for Thailand. What choice do they have? The old guard elite who run things for themselves, or the Shins, newer elite who run things for themselves, or the local provincial based power brokers who have their own parties who sell out to the highest bidders?

Good luck with the reforming.