Public prosecutors agree to charge Yingluck in Supreme Court: NACC secretary general

[Lite Beer]

Public prosecutors agree to charge Yingluck in Supreme Court: NACC secretary general

BANGKOK: -- The secretary general of the National Anti-Corruption Commission said public prosecutors in a joint panel agreed Tuesday to charge former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra in the Supreme Court in the rice-pledging scheme.

NACC secretary general Sansern Promjiak said representatives in the joint panel of the NACC and the Office of the Attorney General agreed in the last meeting of the panel to file criminal charges against Yingluck in Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office.

Sansern said the public prosecutors would announce soon when to arraign Yingluck.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Public-prosecutors-agree-to-charge-Yingluck-in-Sup-30252311.html

-- The Nation 2015-01-20

[uty6543]

When will she run

[Wilsonandson]

Suspended sentence. They haven't got the balls.

[Showbags]

Fine timing with all the other scams being sorted and fixed over night....get the tat onto it

[Thai at Heart]

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

[dcutman]

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

Accessory to defraud the state?

[ratcatcher]

Suspended sentence. They haven't got the balls.

Who needs balls when you've got guns. This isn't a game.

[Wilsonandson]

Point taken ratcatcher but the whole world is watching this outcome, its major league news.

[JAG]

They don't care what the rest of the world thinks. They are desperate to keep power - they know this is their last chance saloon. She remains the most potent threat to the old guard and must be removed. They would prefer her in exile, this may be an attempt to force her to go. If she doesn't go then maybe they reckon they can get away with locking her away.

Edited January 20, 2015 by JAG

[Thai at Heart]

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

Accessory to defraud the state?

Well, first shouldn't they try to uncover that there was a systematic fraud and convict a boat load of people for all these accumulated monies supposedly nicked. Who have they convicted for defrauding the state? There has to be a fraud for someone to be an accessory.

The system lost money, but with little unprosecuted thievery so far. Its all accounted for, through the system. She didn't obtain any of it herself. The system was mandated by a legally elected government so cant have been illegal by definition.

Criminal financial negligence? That is more normally associated with damage in individuals rather than the state.

Causing financial damage to the state? Sounds all very nice. It has lots of google entries where it is enacted in Ghana and is now regularly used, for, guess what? Chasing political opponents.

http://www.modernghana.com/news/229976/1/law-on-wilfully-causing-financial-loss-to-the-stat.html

So, they will tie themselves in knots trying to pin this on her.

[tbthailand]

surprise surprise surprise

[dcutman]

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

Accessory to defraud the state?

Well, first shouldn't they try to uncover that there was a systematic fraud and convict a boat load of people for all these accumulated monies supposedly nicked. Who have they convicted for defrauding the state? There has to be a fraud for someone to be an accessory.

The system lost money, but with little unprosecuted thievery so far. Its all accounted for, through the system. She didn't obtain any of it herself. The system was mandated by a legally elected government so cant have been illegal by definition.

Criminal financial negligence? That is more normally associated with damage in individuals rather than the state.

Causing financial damage to the state? Sounds all very nice. It has lots of google entries where it is enacted in Ghana and is now regularly used, for, guess what? Chasing political opponents.

http://www.modernghana.com/news/229976/1/law-on-wilfully-causing-financial-loss-to-the-stat.html

So, they will tie themselves in knots trying to pin this on her.

Do you think the prosecutor is gonna have a go at this without serious evidence? Really?

Her commerce minister, Boonsong and his deputy and 19 others, has been indicted today as well. This scam started to unravel when wild claims of enormous G to G deals were being manufactured in mid 2012. What did Yingluck do about it when called on it?

She did nothing but go along defending the scam, and when finally forced to, had to sack Boonsong, a year later when it got just way to hot.

Edited January 20, 2015 by dcutman

[scorecard]

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

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

That seems to indicate that your imagination is very narrow and has no depth.

[scorecard]

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

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

Accessory to defraud the state?

Well, first shouldn't they try to uncover that there was a systematic fraud and convict a boat load of people for all these accumulated monies supposedly nicked. Who have they convicted for defrauding the state? There has to be a fraud for someone to be an accessory.

The system lost money, but with little unprosecuted thievery so far. Its all accounted for, through the system. She didn't obtain any of it herself. The system was mandated by a legally elected government so cant have been illegal by definition.

Criminal financial negligence? That is more normally associated with damage in individuals rather than the state.

Causing financial damage to the state? Sounds all very nice. It has lots of google entries where it is enacted in Ghana and is now regularly used, for, guess what? Chasing political opponents.

http://www.modernghana.com/news/229976/1/law-on-wilfully-causing-financial-loss-to-the-stat.html

So, they will tie themselves in knots trying to pin this on her.

"The system lost money, but with little unprosecuted thievery so far. Its all accounted for, through the system. She didn't obtain any of it herself. The system was mandated by a legally elected government so cant have been illegal by definition. "

How many people do you think will believe your spin.

'She didn't obtain any of it herself." You have any evidence on this categorical statement?

[Mister Fixit]

His surname is Poljiak, not Promjiak. I know, I taught him English for 18 months. Lovely, delightful man.

Get it right, Nation journos

[djjamie]

I wonder if she will swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth or she will get someone to swear to tell it on her behalf.

Will she even go to court or get 4 ex PTP minsters to youtube the answers? Maybe she could Facebook her statements to the court. Even a controlled narrative with her reading from a prepared statement.

Some have said a few weeks ago she is brave, honorable, courageous and can hold her head high in facing her accusers because she did not run away. She stayed.

Going by that narrative a few weeks ago then if she DID run away logic would then dictate that she would therefor not be brave, not be honorable, not be courageous and cannot hold her head high? Or will the excuses "evolve" to suit the situation……again.

I look forward to something happening in the next few weeks…Not by yingluck, but on her behalf of course.

Edited January 20, 2015 by djjamie

[rametindallas]

This is very good news.

[seajae]

we all knew it was coming and expected it but I bet she is a bit surprised that they actually are going to charge her, my god not a shin, they are supposed to be gods arent they. Lets see what the evidence they produce is, dont think it will take much as she was too silly to realize she was in charge so therefore she has the furthest to fall. We might get to see a couple of shins in jail yet, this is going to be interesting

[surangw]

When will she run

already transfered her assets a long time ago

and her brother has her room all made up

[rubl]

They don't care what the rest of the world thinks. They are desperate to keep power - they know this is their last chance saloon. She remains the most potent threat to the old guard and must be removed. They would prefer her in exile, this may be an attempt to force her to go. If she doesn't go then maybe they reckon they can get away with locking her away.

somehow you seem to try to deflect from the RPPS disaster which did cost the State 700 billion Baht with the PM in charge unable (or unwilling) to explain.

[Wilsonandson]

Is there any cause for concern. Link http://phuketnewsonline.com/thai-officials-wary-of-potential-backlash-over-targeting-yingluck-shinawatra/local

[rubl]

Cant wait to see how they dress this up as criminal behaviour.

Accessory to defraud the state?

Well, first shouldn't they try to uncover that there was a systematic fraud and convict a boat load of people for all these accumulated monies supposedly nicked. Who have they convicted for defrauding the state? There has to be a fraud for someone to be an accessory.

The system lost money, but with little unprosecuted thievery so far. Its all accounted for, through the system. She didn't obtain any of it herself. The system was mandated by a legally elected government so cant have been illegal by definition.

Criminal financial negligence? That is more normally associated with damage in individuals rather than the state.

Causing financial damage to the state? Sounds all very nice. It has lots of google entries where it is enacted in Ghana and is now regularly used, for, guess what? Chasing political opponents.

http://www.modernghana.com/news/229976/1/law-on-wilfully-causing-financial-loss-to-the-stat.html

So, they will tie themselves in knots trying to pin this on her.

So, the State loses 700 billion Baht on a 'self-financing' scheme, the PM stated in parliament that she and only she was in charge and some here still sprout nonsense?

The very fact of 700 billion Baht loss on a self-financing scheme with various persons involved having gone on record that there wasn't a problem and still these questions? It would seem the people involved have done their best to pin it on themselves.

[Thai at Heart]

Do you think the prosecutor is gonna have a go at this without serious evidence? Really?

Her commerce minister, Boonsong and his deputy and 19 others, has been indicted today as well. This scam started to unravel when wild claims of enormous G to G deals were being manufactured in mid 2012. What did Yingluck do about it when called on it?

She did nothing but go along defending the scam, and when finally forced to, had to sack Boonsong, a year later when it got just way to hot.

I think they are going to have a wail of a time trying to prove that this is criminaly negligent without setting a precedent so bad, that it will criminalise any potentially failed future policy enacted by anyone. I don't like the fact that the country will spend 700bn baht more than they will recoup. But then,

Cost of Olympics to spiral to £24bn... TEN TIMES higher than 2005 estimate (and is it any wonder when we're forking out £335,000 for a single sculpture)

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2092077/London-2012-Olympics-cost-spiral-24bn--10-TIMES-higher-2005-estimate.html#ixzz3PNYHLJei

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

In December the head of the National Audit Office warned of the risk of the government exceeding its Olympics budget of £9.3billion.

Should Tony be up personally for the loss?

The G to G stuff was them floundering around to find buyers and trying to sure up the market to believe they could sell stuff...Which they couldn't. This criminalising of actions like this, is just an attempt at the coup de grace, and it will not work to clear the way for the Democrats to win the next election. Just watch, the payback if they criminalise this sort of stuff is going to be gruesome, but it will be painted as fair payback, because criminalising the PM for a policy failure is so arbitraty and by definition politically motivated, there isn't a PM who writes a subsidy or a bailout into law that could pass this test anywhere in the world. They are going to criminalise the spending of govenrment money which causes a loss to the government. Well this is by definition a political choice about how big and where money can appropriately be spent or not.

[Thai at Heart]

So, the State loses 700 billion Baht on a 'self-financing' scheme, the PM stated in parliament that she and only she was in charge and some here still sprout nonsense?

The very fact of 700 billion Baht loss on a self-financing scheme with various persons involved having gone on record that there wasn't a problem and still these questions? It would seem the people involved have done their best to pin it on themselves.

It still doesn't confer criminal liability.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Thai at Heart

[rubl]

So, the State loses 700 billion Baht on a 'self-financing' scheme, the PM stated in parliament that she and only she was in charge and some here still sprout nonsense?

The very fact of 700 billion Baht loss on a self-financing scheme with various persons involved having gone on record that there wasn't a problem and still these questions? It would seem the people involved have done their best to pin it on themselves.

It still doesn't confer criminal liability.

Just liability as result of negligence not enough for you?

[NeverSure]

They don't care what the rest of the world thinks. They are desperate to keep power - they know this is their last chance saloon. She remains the most potent threat to the old guard and must be removed. They would prefer her in exile, this may be an attempt to force her to go. If she doesn't go then maybe they reckon they can get away with locking her away.

somehow you seem to try to deflect from the RPPS disaster which did cost the State 700 billion Baht with the PM in charge unable (or unwilling) to explain.

I don't know which is true. You and I have long posted the same number gleaned from a plethora of news reports - at least 700 billion baht.

After that I don't know what to think about what will happen. Would the junta rather see her do a runner and be done with her? They appear to be moving beyond negligence which would result in her not being able to run for office for 5 years. These new allegations sound like prison time to me.

I think there is a massive purge here of those who aren't in favor, but I think both shirt colors are corrupt. I'm not allowed to use any specificity beyond that.

Is it possible that some are unhappy about who got the corruption money, rather than being truly indignant that there was corruption? I think both shirt colors are corrupt.

Edited January 20, 2015 by NeverSure

[englishoak]

So, the State loses 700 billion Baht on a 'self-financing' scheme, the PM stated in parliament that she and only she was in charge and some here still sprout nonsense?

The very fact of 700 billion Baht loss on a self-financing scheme with various persons involved having gone on record that there wasn't a problem and still these questions? It would seem the people involved have done their best to pin it on themselves.

It still doesn't confer criminal liability.

Just liability as result of negligence not enough for you?

They could and probably should convict half of Thailand's civil servants for negligence, in fact you could say in politics regardless of party here its almost a pre requisite.

[binjalin]

common cowardly kicking a girl when she's down - proud of that are we??? Thailand first female PM?

it is NORMAL to subsidize agricultural output - you want REAL losses the EU lose BILLIONS a year to subsidize EU agricultural policy you noobs

It's NOT about that it's about ........................................ (censored) why you concentrate on the red herring but not he REAL issues *sigh*

[Thai at Heart]

So, the State loses 700 billion Baht on a 'self-financing' scheme, the PM stated in parliament that she and only she was in charge and some here still sprout nonsense?

The very fact of 700 billion Baht loss on a self-financing scheme with various persons involved having gone on record that there wasn't a problem and still these questions? It would seem the people involved have done their best to pin it on themselves.

It still doesn't confer criminal liability.

Just liability as result of negligence not enough for you?

I don't think she should be held liable by a court. In fact, her liability should have been judged by the electorate. Being useless isn't a crime. Having policies that cost the country money isnt a crime, least of all to be judged by a blatently partisan group put in power by a coup. This just doesn't pass scrutiny in my eyes.

[rubl]

They don't care what the rest of the world thinks. They are desperate to keep power - they know this is their last chance saloon. She remains the most potent threat to the old guard and must be removed. They would prefer her in exile, this may be an attempt to force her to go. If she doesn't go then maybe they reckon they can get away with locking her away.

somehow you seem to try to deflect from the RPPS disaster which did cost the State 700 billion Baht with the PM in charge unable (or unwilling) to explain.

I don't know which is true. You and I have long posted the same number gleaned from a plethora of news reports - at least 700 billion baht.

After that I don't know what to think about what will happen. Would the junta rather see her do a runner and be done with her? They appear to be moving beyond negligence which would result in her not being able to run for office for 5 years. These new allegations sound like prison time to me.

I think there is a massive purge here of those who aren't in favor, but I think both shirt colors are corrupt. I'm not allowed to use any specificity beyond that.

Is it possible that some are unhappy about who got the corruption money, rather than being truly indignant that there was corruption? I think both shirt colors are corrupt.

Both sides have their black sheep. Which side most depends on ones preference only I think.

Still whether just 'negligence' or 'negligence induced corruption' or 'criminal behaviour' doesn't really matter much in the sense that with the 'accused side' more-or-less shouting 'political ploy' the politicians involved think they can get off. If this country is to evolve politicians must be held accountable. Following more and more other people can be held accountable. Till a situation is reached where it's deemed normal to do politics and business in a transparent, accountable manner.

Reforms will only be successful when binding to all even if that means those who asked will feel sorry they did so. IMHO.