US envoy 'unaware' of ex-PM's asylum report
THE NATION February



Lawyer denies Yingluck is fleeing, says it's like she's 'under detention'

BANGKOK: -- THE US chargé d'affaires said yesterday he was unaware of reports that former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra was seeking asylum in the United States and declined to comment on the matter.

"I have not heard of any report about that. I am not going to comment on that issue," said Patrick Murphy, the top official at the US Embassy in Bangkok in the absence of an ambassador.

Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics. "As a friend, we simply want Thailand to succeed. Thailand's success and return to democracy is success for Southeast Asia and a success for global challenges. We are not taking sides at all," he said.

The US diplomat spoke to reporters after a meeting with Deputy Prime Minister Yongyuth Yutthawong to discuss bilateral cooperation. He repeated the US call for Thailand to return to democracy, restore civil liberties and end martial law "sooner rather than later".

Murphy and Yongyuth did not discuss reports about Yingluck seeking asylum during their meeting yesterday, they both told reporters.

Yingluck's lawyer Norawit Lalaeng yesterday accused the former PM's opponents of attempting to discredit her by spreading false rumours that she would flee the country before facing criminal charges in court next week. "If she had a plan to escape, she would not have publicly asked for permission to go abroad. The opposition is trying to make out that she wants to flee abroad in order to discredit her," Reuters quoted Norawit as saying.

Security officials appear to be monitoring Yingluck's recent movements although the government denied ordering security officials to keep a watch on her because of fear she might flee the country. Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwan had earlier said that the authorities simply wanted to ensure that Yingluck was safe and secure.

Prawit, who is also defence minister, said yesterday that Yingluck, as well as other VIPs in the country, were given increased security in order to prevent any untoward incident. "We all are afraid and do not want anything bad to happen," he said when asked if the government was worried about any third party.

However, Yingluck's lawyer Norawit said that in his opinion, the military's close monitoring of the ex-PM was more like a house arrest. "It's not direct detention but it's like an indirect detention. This is a violation of personal rights and a limitation of liberties," the lawyer said.

Yingluck, who now lives in her home city of Chiang Mai, reportedly cancelled her participation in a Valentine's Day school reunion after being followed by local military officers.

Her former schoolmates offered Yingluck words of encouragement through their group's Line chat room. Yingluck responded with the words, "Patience, my friend," according to a source.

Yingluck will be followed by military officers where ever she goes in the country as part of security measures for the former prime minister, Deputy Government Spokesman Maj-General Sansern Kaewkamnerd said yesterday. He denied this was a threat, saying that similar security measures were also in place for other VIPs, including the prime minister.

The National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) has not granted Yingluck's request to leave the country at a time when a court case is pending against her in connection with her government's rice-pledging programme.

The Office of the Attorney-General will submit a subpoena to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions on February 19, and it wants Yingluck to be present on that day. However, Yingluck's legal team has not decided whether to seek her presence before prosecutors, Norawit said.

Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha, who is also the NCPO leader, said on Tuesday night that public prosecutors had requested that the junta not allow Yingluck to leave the country while a court case against her was pending.

In a related development, the Army held a briefing for military attaches from 25 countries about Thailand's post-coup political situation, at Army headquarters yesterday. In an eight-point explanation, the Army stressed that progress was being made in accordance with the junta's road map for the country's return to democracy. The military attaches also were told that the impeachment and legal action against Yingluck were not politically motivated, NCPO spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvari said.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/US-envoy-unaware-of-ex-PMs-asylum-report-30253911.html


-- The Nation 2015-02-12

I very much doubt the US would go that far. Another article plucked from facebook

Probably just the Junta propaganda machine making statements on behalf of others as usual.

If she wanted political asylum, her high level advisors could arrange it through the US Embassy. She might qualify considering that she is pursued by a junta using martial law which the US considers illegal.

All she'd have to do is to walk into the embassy, but how she'd get out of there and travel I don't know.

Probably just the Junta propaganda machine making statements on behalf of others as usual.

Her nephew Oak is always making spurious, unfounded claims on his Facebook. A much more likely candidate for yet another one of his lies.

If she wanted political asylum, her high level advisors could arrange it through the US Embassy. She might qualify considering that she is pursued by a junta using martial law which the US considers illegal.

All she'd have to do is to walk into the embassy, but how she'd get out of there and travel I don't know.

No way would she qualify.

As the envoy has stated:

Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics.

So who's talking Nonsense then ?

There is no need to be offensive or dismissive especially when you have no idea of what you are talking about

"Member of ASEAN" Hahahahahahaha,

If she wanted political asylum, her high level advisors could arrange it through the US Embassy. She might qualify considering that she is pursued by a junta using martial law which the US considers illegal.

All she'd have to do is to walk into the embassy, but how she'd get out of there and travel I don't know.

No way would she qualify.

As the envoy has stated:

Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics.

Although you are misguided in thinking the US doesn't take part in any countries politics you also seem to forget the US has already laid claim that her impeachment and criminal case are politically motivated in which case the US could use to justify granting political asylum. The army is justified in watching her as her family has proven to be a flight risk as well as considering the possibility she may flee with the US's help.

If she wanted political asylum, her high level advisors could arrange it through the US Embassy. She might qualify considering that she is pursued by a junta using martial law which the US considers illegal.

All she'd have to do is to walk into the embassy, but how she'd get out of there and travel I don't know.

No way would she qualify.

As the envoy has stated:

Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics.

I disagree. There is a difference between takings sides and granting a person political asylum. That is an individual matter.

"Yingluck's lawyer Norawit Lalaeng yesterday accused the former PM's opponents of attempting to discredit her by spreading false rumours that she would flee the country before facing criminal charges in court next week. "If she had a plan to escape, she would not have publicly asked for permission to go abroad. The opposition is trying to make out that she wants to flee abroad in order to discredit her," Reuters quoted Norawit as saying."

Why wouldn't she? It's what her brother did.

7 days to go, things are hotting up down the rumour mill.Are these rumors aimed at discrediting the former PM?

Wait and see what really happens on the 19th.

Off topic obfuscation posts and replies have been removed.

Just like the Thai people and many of TV commentators, the US seems to have forgotten (deliberately?) what this is all about. YT took all the plaudits when she was PM for the many good things (she alleged) her government did for the people of Thailand. Ipso facto, she should take responsibility for the corruption perpetrated under her watch. For anyone to say that the allegations are merely a Junta imposed excuse for retaliation obviously has forgotten about the thousands of tons of rice that went missing under her watch. Take a deep breath people.

Let her go to Dubai. End the divisions.

Just like the Thai people and many of TV commentators, the US seems to have forgotten (deliberately?) what this is all about. YT took all the plaudits when she was PM for the many good things (she alleged) her government did for the people of Thailand. Ipso facto, she should take responsibility for the corruption perpetrated under her watch. For anyone to say that the allegations are merely a Junta imposed excuse for retaliation obviously has forgotten about the thousands of tons of rice that went missing under her watch. Take a deep breath people.

There's a distinction that you and many others miss. A leader is responsible for actions and programmes that they design, implement, or sign off they sign off on. But you can't hold the leader responsible for poor implementation (unless they were aware of it and did nothing) or criminal activity of others 'on their watch' (again, unless they were aware of it).

Obama can be held responsible if Obamacare ends up costing people more money and this is something that could have been anticipated. He cannot be held responsible if a website doesn't work when it goes live (he's not a webmaster) or if some insurance companies or lower level bureaucrats scam the system.

YL can be held responsible for poor judgement in the design of the rice pledging scheme - she signed off on it, even if it was not her bright idea. But unless she was aware of lower-level people pilfering rice stores or didn't put in reasonable safeguards against it, she cannot be blamed for that. Leaders have a thousand things to do, and they have to empower and rely on others to take care of the details and implementation. That's where things often break down...

I hope she can escape from the real criminals.

I hope she can escape from the real criminals.

She will never be able to escape the clutches of her brother and his red loony party.

Quote : Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics.

I didn't realize that 'Murphy's law' was about lying through your teeth. One learns a thing a day, doesn't one ?

I hope she can escape from the real criminals.

No chance of that.

She's one of them. They're all family.

Enough of the bullshit and partisan rhetoric.

This lady never stops with her wounded victim bullshit and human rights rhetoric.

Yingluck is very fortunate that she is not in detention already bearing in mind the family history and the gravity of her offenses against the Thai people.

Personally I would lock both her and her spastic legal team up for a very long time.

I'm sure the USA is pleased so many Thais and foreigners think of the USA first when the discussoin centers on political asylum. It certainly has a well-known and long track record for such human rights.

But there are many other nations throughout the world that honor political asylum, both democractic and "neo-democratic" (ie., kingdoms and oligarchies) countries. Switzerland, Sweden, and Canada are also among the best known for asylum seekers. The right of asylum is enshrined in the UN Convention and in the EU Charter. However, as Julian Assange can attest, getting asylum at an embassy may not be the best solution. And as John Snowden might attest, seeking asylum at a foreign nation's immigration gate is no guarantee to entry.

The best thing for a developing democracy in Thailand is for Yingluck to remain in the country. If people think Thaksin has been a political thorn in the side of the elitist, Yingluck will become a martyr for democracy and crusader against usurpers of Thai sovereignty. Her every word and action will be followed by the public. She will become an Aung San Suu Kyi protegee. The Junta can only hope she leaves the country permanently.

If she wanted political asylum, her high level advisors could arrange it through the US Embassy. She might qualify considering that she is pursued by a junta using martial law which the US considers illegal.

All she'd have to do is to walk into the embassy, but how she'd get out of there and travel I don't know.

No way would she qualify.

As the envoy has stated:

Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics.

She qualifies under the Geneva Convention.

"a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion"

All countries which are a party to the Geneva Conventions are legally bound to accept her if she manages to get there.

Just like the Thai people and many of TV commentators, the US seems to have forgotten (deliberately?) what this is all about. YT took all the plaudits when she was PM for the many good things (she alleged) her government did for the people of Thailand. Ipso facto, she should take responsibility for the corruption perpetrated under her watch. For anyone to say that the allegations are merely a Junta imposed excuse for retaliation obviously has forgotten about the thousands of tons of rice that went missing under her watch. Take a deep breath people.

There's a distinction that you and many others miss. A leader is responsible for actions and programmes that they design, implement, or sign off they sign off on. But you can't hold the leader responsible for poor implementation (unless they were aware of it and did nothing) or criminal activity of others 'on their watch' (again, unless they were aware of it).

Obama can be held responsible if Obamacare ends up costing people more money and this is something that could have been anticipated. He cannot be held responsible if a website doesn't work when it goes live (he's not a webmaster) or if some insurance companies or lower level bureaucrats scam the system.

YL can be held responsible for poor judgement in the design of the rice pledging scheme - she signed off on it, even if it was not her bright idea. But unless she was aware of lower-level people pilfering rice stores or didn't put in reasonable safeguards against it, she cannot be blamed for that. Leaders have a thousand things to do, and they have to empower and rely on others to take care of the details and implementation. That's where things often break down...

So on the 19th she has the opportunity to defend her position. If that position is not defendable, ensuring she remains present is paramount. Only her own advocates claim a pseudo house detenion. What problem can there be with tax payed paid minders? Yet to see claims they are interfering in movements or activities in realistic terms.

Just like the Thai people and many of TV commentators, the US seems to have forgotten (deliberately?) what this is all about. YT took all the plaudits when she was PM for the many good things (she alleged) her government did for the people of Thailand. Ipso facto, she should take responsibility for the corruption perpetrated under her watch. For anyone to say that the allegations are merely a Junta imposed excuse for retaliation obviously has forgotten about the thousands of tons of rice that went missing under her watch. Take a deep breath people.

There's a distinction that you and many others miss. A leader is responsible for actions and programmes that they design, implement, or sign off they sign off on. But you can't hold the leader responsible for poor implementation (unless they were aware of it and did nothing) or criminal activity of others 'on their watch' (again, unless they were aware of it).

Obama can be held responsible if Obamacare ends up costing people more money and this is something that could have been anticipated. He cannot be held responsible if a website doesn't work when it goes live (he's not a webmaster) or if some insurance companies or lower level bureaucrats scam the system.

YL can be held responsible for poor judgement in the design of the rice pledging scheme - she signed off on it, even if it was not her bright idea. But unless she was aware of lower-level people pilfering rice stores or didn't put in reasonable safeguards against it, she cannot be blamed for that. Leaders have a thousand things to do, and they have to empower and rely on others to take care of the details and implementation. That's where things often break down...

most leaders have a thousand things to do. This particular one only had a thousand things to buy with her countless shopping trips.

You forget. She made herself responsible by her own words claiming that she was in total control and by other comments to this effect

"Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics."

Mr. Murphy might want to check again with his boss POTUS Obama.

November 14, 2014; "US President Barack Obama urged Myanmar Friday to hold 'free, fair and inclusive' elections as he threw his weight behind a bid by opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi to change a constitution that bars her from the presidency....Speaking at a joint news conference he warned Myanmar's reforms since shedding outright military rule in 2011 were by "no means complete or irreversible" and called for "free, fair and inclusive" elections in the nation, where Ms Suu Kyi and her party are set to contest crucial polls next year."

Perhaps most shocking is the Junta's naivety to think that every nation will suppress their own freedom of expression for the sake of the Junta's agenda. Obviously, nations like the USA have always been very vocal.

Let her go to Dubai. End the divisions.

Right, like Takky running away to Dubai ended his influence and meddling back here in Thailand. Keep her here and make her accountable for the laws she broke. Set an example for all future politicians so we can try and put a dent in corruption and begin to change the culture of these criminals doing what they want because they think they are untouchable.

Just like the Thai people and many of TV commentators, the US seems to have forgotten (deliberately?) what this is all about. YT took all the plaudits when she was PM for the many good things (she alleged) her government did for the people of Thailand. Ipso facto, she should take responsibility for the corruption perpetrated under her watch. For anyone to say that the allegations are merely a Junta imposed excuse for retaliation obviously has forgotten about the thousands of tons of rice that went missing under her watch. Take a deep breath people.

There's a distinction that you and many others miss. A leader is responsible for actions and programmes that they design, implement, or sign off they sign off on. But you can't hold the leader responsible for poor implementation (unless they were aware of it and did nothing) or criminal activity of others 'on their watch' (again, unless they were aware of it).

Obama can be held responsible if Obamacare ends up costing people more money and this is something that could have been anticipated. He cannot be held responsible if a website doesn't work when it goes live (he's not a webmaster) or if some insurance companies or lower level bureaucrats scam the system.

YL can be held responsible for poor judgement in the design of the rice pledging scheme - she signed off on it, even if it was not her bright idea. But unless she was aware of lower-level people pilfering rice stores or didn't put in reasonable safeguards against it, she cannot be blamed for that. Leaders have a thousand things to do, and they have to empower and rely on others to take care of the details and implementation. That's where things often break down...

There are facts that you and many others miss.. possible corruption in the system was brought to her attention many times other the course of the scheme. The possibility of the rice being spoiled while in storage was graphical brought to Parliaments attention when a Democrat MP produced a bag of rotten rice and pictures from numerous storage facilities. What did Yingluck's administration do? Try and prosecute the MP for theft of the bag!

If Yingluck can read English, which we are reliable informed she can. Then she would have known all this, even if her government colleagues hadn't said a word.. we knew!

If she wanted political asylum, her high level advisors could arrange it through the US Embassy. She might qualify considering that she is pursued by a junta using martial law which the US considers illegal.

All she'd have to do is to walk into the embassy, but how she'd get out of there and travel I don't know.

No way would she qualify.

As the envoy has stated:

Murphy also reiterated that the United States does not take sides in Thai politics.

She qualifies under the Geneva Convention.

"a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion"

All countries which are a party to the Geneva Conventions are legally bound to accept her if she manages to get there.

There is a major difference between persecution and prosecution, just as there is between political opinion and theft.

I'm sure the USA is pleased so many Thais and foreigners think of the USA first when the discussoin centers on political asylum. It certainly has a well-known and long track record for such human rights.

But there are many other nations throughout the world that honor political asylum, both democractic and "neo-democratic" (ie., kingdoms and oligarchies) countries. Switzerland, Sweden, and Canada are also among the best known for asylum seekers. The right of asylum is enshrined in the UN Convention and in the EU Charter. However, as Julian Assange can attest, getting asylum at an embassy may not be the best solution. And as John Snowden might attest, seeking asylum at a foreign nation's immigration gate is no guarantee to entry.

The best thing for a developing democracy in Thailand is for Yingluck to remain in the country. If people think Thaksin has been a political thorn in the side of the elitist, Yingluck will become a martyr for democracy and crusader against usurpers of Thai sovereignty. Her every word and action will be followed by the public. She will become an Aung San Suu Kyi protegee. The Junta can only hope she leaves the country permanently.

Comparing Yingluk with Aung Sang Suu Kyi is totally outrageous, sort of like comparing Richard Clayderman to Mozart.

I very much doubt the US would go that far. Another article plucked from facebook

Only if she has something to offer. If there is a good chance that a family member will come back and hand out candies she might get it.