Thai former PM Yingluck to face trial over rice scheme: court

[Si Thea01]

The military government seems intent on making the deposed PM a martyr.

Dragging out the persecution or prosecution, depending upon's one view, will keep her name in the news and build sympathy for her.

No good will come of this. It is a recipe for civil disorder and will undermine the current military rulers' position. The courts are not seen as impartial, nor free of political interference from the military regime. A conviction, which appears to be preordained, will be treated accordingly. I genuinely fear the consequences of this as I believe that the majority of Thais will not support it. Despite what many foreigners assume about Thai people, they still have a soft spot for her.

A martyr?. A martyr is someone who is killed because of their beliefs. nothing more, nothing less, so why are you using this word? To suggest the government will harm her and/or playing the sympathy card, as you have clearly expressed. Also. using the threat of civil disorder. Not as long as there is martial law but no doubt you're against that also but just remember who you are and stop stirring the pot. If you think her trail will undermine the governments position, then do some research, and you will see that the Thai people are waking up and are sick and tired of the trough dwellers, in all positions, and are happy to see all criminals, of all persuasions, brought to justice.

There are a number of things that I am concerned about in respect of certain laws introduced by the current government but I am not blind and understand why. Yet you condemn them no matter what and to suggest that harm may come to this women (martyred) through an intent of the current government is nothing but a fallacious statement. No one would wish any harm to come to her, just for her to be dealt with under Thai law and if she is acquitted fine, if found guilty, then so be it.

Neither I or anyone else on here have knowledge of the evidence against her, so why are some intent on spreading the holier than though scenario. Just remember, there have been many media releases, where, at no time has she ever provided any direct evidence as to her innocence. All she was able to say was that she did no wrong and "lifted the quality of life for rice farmers." If you believe that then you are totally disregarding all the media reports which outline her failures and the direct quotes attributed to her that have been reported by the media.

Being persecuted, no, just ordered to stand trail for negligence in respect of the rice scheme but then there are many, who are like thinkers, and have a one sided view. Let's not be blinded by falsehoods and misguided quotes. We do not need to be divisive, just let things progress and if she is acquitted, then fine, if not, then it can only be said that there was sufficient evidence available to run a successful prosecution. Can't wait for the posts if that happens.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Si Thea01

[MaxLee]

Thai former PM Yingluck to face trial over rice scheme: court

when will it be postponed again or put on hold????

[rametindallas]

Exactly my point, there is nothing on the internet, in the news or posted here that shows any illegal actions.

If spending B700 billion of other people's money with nothing to show for it is not a crime, I don't know what is.

Duke is a troll who just got active after joining seventeen months ago. Where has he been all this time? He never has anything thoughtful to say and just throws controversial comments out there.

[wprime]

The charge should be worded: Negligence to prevent the corruption of rice industry workers, government officials, police officers, military personnel, and politicians. That should cover the current case. Clearly the responsibility of the PM.

Also should add the following charges: Negligence to not operate the government at a budget surplus (the UN's should look into this kind of law too), implementing government programs that may cause a net loss, not causing the stock market increase enough, allowing the baht to devalue, allowing real estate property values to fall, allowing high unemployment levels, allowing to much disparity in wealth and not preventing the war in the south. Seems reasonable, right?

When will the Thai courts understand, you can never prove a negative (basic law). You have to prove an action was criminal…you can never have enough definitive proof for a non action and how it relates to a crime.

Negligence is provable.

A Negligent action is provable and must accompany intention for the damages. A negligent non-action case usually involves physical injury or loss of human life and requires high levels of proof.

You need to check your legal dictionary. Cases of negligence by non-action are possible in situations of responsibility. E.g. a babysitter is busy watching TV while the baby crawls into the pool, drowns and dies. A PM is in a position of responsibility.

Negligence by definition must not have intention to damage, if there is intention to damage it becomes a different offense. The intention in negligence is the action or inaction, not the consequence. They would need to prove that Yingluck willfully ignored the corruption rather than Yingluck intended to cause the corruption.

That being said, willfully ignoring corruption in Thailand is something most of the public service is probably guilty of.

[dukebowling]

Exactly my point, there is nothing on the internet, in the news or posted here that shows any illegal actions.

If spending B700 billion of other people's money with nothing to show for it is not a crime, I don't know what is.

Welcome to politics...

Edited March 20, 2015 by dukebowling

[dukebowling]

Exactly my point, there is nothing on the internet, in the news or posted here that shows any illegal actions.

If spending B700 billion of other people's money with nothing to show for it is not a crime, I don't know what is.

Duke is a troll who just got active after joining seventeen months ago. Where has he been all this time? He never has anything thoughtful to say and just throws controversial comments out there.

Sorry, didn't mean to upset you. Don't take it so personal.

Btw - feel free to check out my many insightful posts.

Edited March 20, 2015 by dukebowling

[dukebowling]

The charge should be worded: Negligence to prevent the corruption of rice industry workers, government officials, police officers, military personnel, and politicians. That should cover the current case. Clearly the responsibility of the PM.

Also should add the following charges: Negligence to not operate the government at a budget surplus (the UN's should look into this kind of law too), implementing government programs that may cause a net loss, not causing the stock market increase enough, allowing the baht to devalue, allowing real estate property values to fall, allowing high unemployment levels, allowing to much disparity in wealth and not preventing the war in the south. Seems reasonable, right?

When will the Thai courts understand, you can never prove a negative (basic law). You have to prove an action was criminal…you can never have enough definitive proof for a non action and how it relates to a crime.

Negligence is provable.

A Negligent action is provable and must accompany intention for the damages. A negligent non-action case usually involves physical injury or loss of human life and requires high levels of proof.

You need to check your legal dictionary. Cases of negligence by non-action are possible in situations of responsibility. E.g. a babysitter is busy watching TV while the baby crawls into the pool, drowns and dies. A PM is in a position of responsibility.

Negligence by definition must not have intention to damage, if there is intention to damage it becomes a different offense. The intention in negligence is the action or inaction, not the consequence. They would need to prove that Yingluck willfully ignored the corruption rather than Yingluck intended to cause the corruption.

That being said, willfully ignoring corruption in Thailand is something most of the public service is probably guilty of.

You need to separate Criminal and Civil. Your neglection example of the baby sitter is criminal - where there is bodily harm. Neglection in a civil matter meeds to be intentional. Willfully ignoring corruption would be impossible to prove…it won't matter though with the skewed justice system in place currently

Edited March 20, 2015 by dukebowling

[Phil Water]

If you check the history of my posts I said "when the rice scheme was first proposed that it was government getting involved in something they should not be involved in.

Now having said that I just do not get it when they say they are criminally going after Yingluck because of Dereliction of Duty. This witch hunt is all politics.

It you can get someone because of dereliction of duty then Obama would be servicing a very long sentence. And the fallout from this is very very bad

If there are good Thai people that can be a good leader as MP or Prime minister why in gods name would they want to run for office in Thai politics ?

A lot of you here on Thai visa react out of emotion not reality . Think about it are children running around school saying I want to be Prime Minister when I grow up

I think not .

That is a sad state of affairs

I raced to comment and realized that there were several pages already. Thinking - ok, I'll bite, and read some garbage before posting. Thank you for only having to read a few posts before finding yours. Refreshing... I could not say it any better than you sir about what was on my mind.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Phil Water

[Ricardo]

I like the way that you highlight the words that include vote buying etc.

Do you think that this is a red only policy?

Didn't Mark say that the yellows/democrats spent more on vote buying than the reds?

I lived in the south for many along year and I saw more corruption and vote buying there than I have seen in the north.

Where do you live? In the same yellow tower as a lot of people on here.

Once again I state " I am not a redshirt supporter " I like to read factual comments and not fiction from those with selective memories, either red or yellow, thank you

"Didn't Mark say that the yellows/democrats spent more on vote buying than the reds?"

I don't recall Abhisit ever saying that, although I sometimes do miss things due to being away traveling, do you have a source for it ? :

[oneday]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

I've never been quite clear on what they are trying to put her in jail for. If it's negligence then that certainly should not be a jail-able offense or most politicians around the world would be in jail. This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra.

[jdinasia]

Exactly my point, there is nothing on the internet, in the news or posted here that shows any illegal actions.

If spending B700 billion of other people's money with nothing to show for it is not a crime, I don't know what is.

Welcome to politics...

Agreed. Spending money is something all government does.

The trial is not about spending money. The trial is about negligence, specifically, the failure of the chair of the National Rice Policy Committee to oversee the program she was directly responsible for.

[jayboy]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

I've never been quite clear on what they are trying to put her in jail for. If it's negligence then that certainly should not be a jail-able offense or most politicians around the world would be in jail. This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra.

The present charade not about negligence or any other aspect of the ill advised rice price support policy.( I say ill advised not so much as to the subsidy objectives which are replicated in the US, Japan etc but about its implementation and abuse).In any event as any fule kno it's not about the scheme.It's about the eradication of the Shinawatra influence.Whether it will be successful remains to be seen but whatever happens the genie is out of the bottle - to deploy that rather overused metaphor.It is of course absurd to have taken Yingluck through the impeachment/criminal process yet that it what has happened.The wiser heads in the government know it to be counterrproductive (and plain wrong to boot) but for the moment the crazies are in the ascendent.The overall effect has been to increase the pressure in the cooker so Thailand's problem is not solved, merely postponed to return in a more toxic form in the future.Maybe sense and morality will prevail:I hope so.As for the ultras on this forum they remind me of the communists who persisted in their faith long after the brutalities of the Soviet Union were exposed.

[mikemac]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

I've never been quite clear on what they are trying to put her in jail for. If it's negligence then that certainly should not be a jail-able offense or most politicians around the world would be in jail. This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra.

..................."This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra."......................

Call it what you like, but I like it. The fact that the "untouchables" are not quite as untouchable as they thought they were.

Every time a Shin crime is mentioned the only defense the red crowd have is to rant and rave about the sin's of others. Sorry, but two wrongs don't make a right, and I don't care how many Abhisits and Sutheps go down as long as every darn Shin in the country (and overseas in "self imposed exile") goes down with them.

And oneday is throwing the "reconciliation" word around again, I see. Why don't you look up the true meaning of the word and realize once and for all it is not just about forgiving criminals who were caught out, for their past sins, there is much more to it than that.

[Plutojames88]

This will be their downfall ( one way or another) it won't gel internationally ...this guy might as well get the same Haircut as Kim ...because that will become their brand name if they jail her.

Some people here might not understand the judicial process ...but the US and Europe do

[rubl]

I am neither for or against, but it seems that the longer the General can stretch out the time to the "Next" election and try to gain popularity by going after Yingluck, which will fail. It would seem since her brother is out of reach, the General, I mean the government, is going after her for his crimes as well. A very poor example of an unbiased criminal justice system for all the world to see. Are his subordinates the appointed Judges and Prosecutors in the case?

Neither for nor against, but only sadly uninformed it would seem?

Ms. Yingluck asked for justice, a chance to explain herself. Well, she is getting that opportunity in the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders.

[rubl]

This will be their downfall ( one way or another) it won't gel internationally ...this guy might as well get the same Haircut as Kim ...because that will become their brand name if they jail her.

Some people here might not understand the judicial process ...but the US and Europe do

Correct. That's why people is the USA and Europe will understand that when Ms. Yingluck asks for justice and a chance to explain herself and she gets that opportunity in court normal procedures are followed. They may even stop wondering why Ms. Yingluck didn't provide answers before when asked.

[MikeN]

I think there was an extra comma put into the OP:

"As prime minister I was always honest and served the Thai people, who voted for my government" should be "served the Thai people who voted for my government" ....and to hell with the rest of you.

[rubl]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

I've never been quite clear on what they are trying to put her in jail for. If it's negligence then that certainly should not be a jail-able offense or most politicians around the world would be in jail. This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra.

The present charade not about negligence or any other aspect of the ill advised rice price support policy.( I say ill advised not so much as to the subsidy objectives which are replicated in the US, Japan etc but about its implementation and abuse).In any event as any fule kno it's not about the scheme.It's about the eradication of the Shinawatra influence.Whether it will be successful remains to be seen but whatever happens the genie is out of the bottle - to deploy that rather overused metaphor.It is of course absurd to have taken Yingluck through the impeachment/criminal process yet that it what has happened.The wiser heads in the government know it to be counterrproductive (and plain wrong to boot) but for the moment the crazies are in the ascendent.The overall effect has been to increase the pressure in the cooker so Thailand's problem is not solved, merely postponed to return in a more toxic form in the future.Maybe sense and morality will prevail:I hope so.As for the ultras on this forum they remind me of the communists who persisted in their faith long after the brutalities of the Soviet Union were exposed.

The 'self-financing' RPPS which lost 700++ billion Baht was indeed a charade. Ms. yingluck asking for justice and a chance to explain herself while refusing to give clear answers before is another charade.

The recent flood of obfuscation seems to indicate that pro-Yingluck supporters are worried that Ms. Yingluck will not be able to explain to satisfaction how her 'self-financing' RPPS could lose 700++ billion Baht. I guess a few even lament the tendency of Ms. Yingluck while PM to go on television to state, statements which now can and will be used against her. Remember November, 2013 when she stood up in parliament during the censure debate and stated that she and only she was in charge of her cabinet and government? Well, with it goes responsibility.

If only they had made a 100 billion Baht reservation in the National Budget for a Rice Subsidy. That could have been defended. It seems though they just needed a scheme which would allow them to seem to help poor farmers while allowing their vote bringing backers to reap the reward for that.

[Baerboxer]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

Whatever anyone else did or didn't do isn't worth chicken shit. This case is about Yingluck and the way she managed her flagship rice financing scheme, to which she appointed herself chairperson.

She says on FB, or at least her ghost writers do, that she always acted honestly as PM.

Eric, do you believe that to be the case, that Yingluck always acted honestly, which means always told the truth too?

No it's not chicken shit. It's selective punishment. It's kangaroo court and a well laid out plan from the start to get rid of the Shin. I would also add double standard and bias courts. What will be fair will be the court verdict of not guilty or the corruption agencies pursue the other corruption filled schemes. Oh, by the way, I believe she acted honestly too. Of course you disagree and that's your prerogative. I have taken my stand.

So Eric - you've taken your stand and state quite openly that you believe Yingluck acted honestly and always told the truth.

How do you explain the considerable amount of lies she's told then?

[Baerboxer]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

I've never been quite clear on what they are trying to put her in jail for. If it's negligence then that certainly should not be a jail-able offense or most politicians around the world would be in jail. This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra.

The present charade not about negligence or any other aspect of the ill advised rice price support policy.( I say ill advised not so much as to the subsidy objectives which are replicated in the US, Japan etc but about its implementation and abuse).In any event as any fule kno it's not about the scheme.It's about the eradication of the Shinawatra influence.Whether it will be successful remains to be seen but whatever happens the genie is out of the bottle - to deploy that rather overused metaphor.It is of course absurd to have taken Yingluck through the impeachment/criminal process yet that it what has happened.The wiser heads in the government know it to be counterrproductive (and plain wrong to boot) but for the moment the crazies are in the ascendent.The overall effect has been to increase the pressure in the cooker so Thailand's problem is not solved, merely postponed to return in a more toxic form in the future.Maybe sense and morality will prevail:I hope so.As for the ultras on this forum they remind me of the communists who persisted in their faith long after the brutalities of the Soviet Union were exposed.

I agree this is part of a series attempting to remove the Shiniwattra family from politics. But they are not and have never been squeaky clean, remotely interested in democracy or in it for anything other than themselves. That's not suggesting others are different,

The difference is that in the past rich, elite, hiso, powerful families have always been untouchable - for corruption whilst in office, business frauds, even murders.

Now that seems to have changed, so someone has changed the rules of the game, quite significantly.

Where that will lead is debatable.

[scorecard]

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

This will be their downfall ( one way or another) it won't gel internationally ...this guy might as well get the same Haircut as Kim ...because that will become their brand name if they jail her.

Some people here might not understand the judicial process ...but the US and Europe do

What rubbish.

[soalbundy]

Just out of curiosity. Did the scheme give the poor farmers a better standard of living? Begs the question because what i have read is she paid them double what they would have got at market prices. I have never read any reports of Suthep Thaugsuban giving the palm farmers double the market price when they where forced to sell it all to him at rock bottom prices which then made his palm oil refinery monopoly billions. Still i suppose it OK to lose money when it goes in the right pockets.

She didn't increase our living standard and we are still owed for one harvest and the price for rice is on the floor, politicians are like economists, they don't know sh*t.

[soalbundy]

I know of a better punishment for her, force her to live as a rice farmer for 5 years, in their sort of house and with their sort of income,she might learn a little humility.

[harvardsum]

How do you put someone on trial when she has not finished her term of office? Or created her legacy to be judged against? While I am not supporting Ms Yingluck, I wonder what is different between what she was doing and that of successive governments in Japan, France, etc which subsidize their farmers in a way that the final produce has to be bought by their public and others at grossly inflated prices. I think Ms Yingluck is a surprisingly shrewd politician who hopes to leverage an existing tried formula, while the rest are just dumb (too engrossed with living in their ivory towers). In a country plagued by corruption, often it is the poor and downtrodden who are the most honest in the land not because they are morally impeccable or incorruptible, but rather they lack the power and influence to act corruptly.

And for Ms Yingluck to 'redistribute' the wealth of the land in an admittedly self-serving fashion, is really not as bad as it looks. Of course she is not a modern-day Robin Hood (some may choose to call her even Robin Loot, for others it may be Robin Good), but any attempt to tamper with a democratic institution will have a long term cost which will return to roost. The best is to discredit her, criminalize all such bad hustings practices and schemes, negotiate for an admission of gross error from her, then send her packing from the political theatre for a good 5, 10 years. Any other outcome will only stoke the fires of retaliation and vengeance.

[jayboy]

If there is anything that will guarantee no reconciliation it's taking YL to trail over this. It's vindictive and misguided.

I refuse to believe she profited from any of this or ever had any intention to profit from it...why would she...she already has enough money. I also will not believe she did anything with malicious intent and those are the only reasons she should be found guilty if either of those two can be proved beyond any doubt. She might be blamed for poor judgement, for being naive, for not listening or not acting fast enough or just not being very bright, but none of those are jail-able offenses. This is simply an out-of-control, rabid government out to get Thaksin anyway they can and if that means putting his sister in jail in lieu of him then that is what they will do.

The charge is negligence and not corruption. There are no evidence connecting her to corruption. If negligence was the charge, then there are a laundry list of past PMs that have schemes mired in corruption. The Thai Khen Khaeg which cost 1.49T B by Ahbisit, Chuan's Phuket land corruption and even Chavalit financial crisis debacle were result of negligence. The Supreme Court has the responsibility to accept the case and the verdict will tell if this is another purge attempt on the Shins or if proper due process of law was practiced, rule her not guilty.

I've never been quite clear on what they are trying to put her in jail for. If it's negligence then that certainly should not be a jail-able offense or most politicians around the world would be in jail. This is pure vindictive revenge against someone with the name Shinawatra.

The present charade not about negligence or any other aspect of the ill advised rice price support policy.( I say ill advised not so much as to the subsidy objectives which are replicated in the US, Japan etc but about its implementation and abuse).In any event as any fule kno it's not about the scheme.It's about the eradication of the Shinawatra influence.Whether it will be successful remains to be seen but whatever happens the genie is out of the bottle - to deploy that rather overused metaphor.It is of course absurd to have taken Yingluck through the impeachment/criminal process yet that it what has happened.The wiser heads in the government know it to be counterrproductive (and plain wrong to boot) but for the moment the crazies are in the ascendent.The overall effect has been to increase the pressure in the cooker so Thailand's problem is not solved, merely postponed to return in a more toxic form in the future.Maybe sense and morality will prevail:I hope so.As for the ultras on this forum they remind me of the communists who persisted in their faith long after the brutalities of the Soviet Union were exposed.

I agree this is part of a series attempting to remove the Shiniwattra family from politics. But they are not and have never been squeaky clean, remotely interested in democracy or in it for anything other than themselves. That's not suggesting others are different,

The difference is that in the past rich, elite, hiso, powerful families have always been untouchable - for corruption whilst in office, business frauds, even murders.

Now that seems to have changed, so someone has changed the rules of the game, quite significantly.

Where that will lead is debatable.

It's not just the intent to remove the family, in itself an easy task if one is prepared to steamroller over an elected government, suborn the courts and ban free speech.The greater objective is to remove their influence - a rather harder task.

I agree all politicians tend to be self serving.Thaksin was not an admirable man though whether he was much worse than other politicians is debatable.His significance was that for no doubt ignoble motives he undermined the grip of a small number of unelected groups.

The Thai people recognised that hence the stream of election victories for parties influenced by him.Even a rigged constitution and delayed polls won't do anything but delay the time when the Thai people will choose their leadership rather than being bullied in one direction by self appointed "good" people.In that sense whatever his personal fate Thaksin has already won.In their hearts the old elites already know this - so we are at the early stages of a compromise agreement.

[mikemac]

Just out of curiosity. Did the scheme give the poor farmers a better standard of living? Begs the question because what i have read is she paid them double what they would have got at market prices. I have never read any reports of Suthep Thaugsuban giving the palm farmers double the market price when they where forced to sell it all to him at rock bottom prices which then made his palm oil refinery monopoly billions. Still i suppose it OK to lose money when it goes in the right pockets.

She didn't increase our living standard and we are still owed for one harvest and the price for rice is on the floor, politicians are like economists, they don't know sh*t.

I agree soalbundy............don't mention the Shins in my wife's home village in Surin, it is a dirty word. Last time I was there, for the last harvest, everyone was angry about the prices they received for their crop and blamed Yingluck's government directly for it.

Some posters prove their ignorance every time they post and I doubt if they have any direct dealings with struggling rice farmers.

Trying to shift the spotlight to the Sutheps and Abhisits is never going to erase the Shin's crimes, but it makes the red fans feel better.

[rixalex]

The present charade not about negligence or any other aspect of the ill advised rice price support policy.( I say ill advised not so much as to the subsidy objectives which are replicated in the US, Japan etc but about its implementation and abuse).In any event as any fule kno it's not about the scheme.It's about the eradication of the Shinawatra influence.Whether it will be successful remains to be seen but whatever happens the genie is out of the bottle - to deploy that rather overused metaphor.It is of course absurd to have taken Yingluck through the impeachment/criminal process yet that it what has happened.The wiser heads in the government know it to be counterrproductive (and plain wrong to boot) but for the moment the crazies are in the ascendent.The overall effect has been to increase the pressure in the cooker so Thailand's problem is not solved, merely postponed to return in a more toxic form in the future.Maybe sense and morality will prevail:I hope so.As for the ultras on this forum they remind me of the communists who persisted in their faith long after the brutalities of the Soviet Union were exposed.

It's funny that you mention about people persisting in faith. I recall at the beginning of Yingluck's political "career", if we can call it that, the stoic defensive job you did on her behalf, against the tide of all of the, "she will just be a puppet", "she isn't really all that bright", "she isn't capable of public speaking", "she has no leadership qualities", "she isn't actually at all interested in reconciliation, just interested in trying to win a pardon for her brother through the back door" comments.

All those criticisms and predictions you staunchly argued against, usually dismissing them as being born out of either ignorance, sexism or the ongoing Shinawatra persecution campaign, or all three.

Now, it could be argued that the defensive job you did then wasn't because you are a Shinawatra / red shirt sympathizer, but rather just because you are a man who likes to give people the benefit of the doubt and a fair crack of the whip before you start writing them off. I certainly do recall, in support of that idea, you suggesting people give her time to prove herself one way or the other first, and i certainly thought that suggestion was reasonable enough, if not perhaps the product of extremely wishful thinking when considering all the evidence we had at our disposal even at that early stage.

The problem though with that theory of you simply being an even-handed man who likes to give all a chance, is that now here we are, however many years on from that start point, with each and every one of those criticisms and predictions having been proven over-overwhelmingly to be true, and yet here you are, still stoically putting up a defense on her behalf.

Of course there is, as there has to be, some acceptance by you of her and her government's failings, but still, the overwhelming thrust of it all is that she has done little wrong and is simply being persecuted by all those nasty anti-Shinawatra forces who seek to bring her and her good family down.

Prime evidence of this thrust is the way in the above you have made the comparison of subsidy programs in other countries with the RPPS, when you i am sure know full well why such comparisons are extremely misleading.

The RPPS wasn't a subsidy, and that is the key point here. Glossing over the fact as if it is some sort of a small detail is akin to a thief glossing over the fact that he stole a car rather than bought it.

Edited March 20, 2015 by rixalex

[rubl]

How do you put someone on trial when she has not finished her term of office? Or created her legacy to be judged against? While I am not supporting Ms Yingluck, I wonder what is different between what she was doing and that of successive governments in Japan, France, etc which subsidize their farmers in a way that the final produce has to be bought by their public and others at grossly inflated prices. I think Ms Yingluck is a surprisingly shrewd politician who hopes to leverage an existing tried formula, while the rest are just dumb (too engrossed with living in their ivory towers). In a country plagued by corruption, often it is the poor and downtrodden who are the most honest in the land not because they are morally impeccable or incorruptible, but rather they lack the power and influence to act corruptly.

And for Ms Yingluck to 'redistribute' the wealth of the land in an admittedly self-serving fashion, is really not as bad as it looks. Of course she is not a modern-day Robin Hood (some may choose to call her even Robin Loot, for others it may be Robin Good), but any attempt to tamper with a democratic institution will have a long term cost which will return to roost. The best is to discredit her, criminalize all such bad hustings practices and schemes, negotiate for an admission of gross error from her, then send her packing from the political theatre for a good 5, 10 years. Any other outcome will only stoke the fires of retaliation and vengeance.

I'm obviously supporting Ms. Yingluck because like her I want justice and for her the opportunity to explain herself in court. Pity really she decided to obfuscate with the NLA before.

Now as to the RPPS, unlike subsidies which need reservations in the National Budget, this was a 'self-financing' scheme. THe day before it started officially her hand-picked Minister of Finance "little while lies" Kittirat stated the scheme only needed a state bank provided funds of 440 billion Baht to do initial pay-outs from and then money would come back again from sales ( of the rice). By September 2013 Ms. Yingluck and her government 'admitted' to possibly upto 320 billion Baht losses, but to have everything under control till December 2013 when suddenly she wanted to borrow 130 billion Baht more. In total the BAAC was still waiting for 750 billion Baht from the government in November 2014.

Now as for wealth redistributing, the idea was to help poor farmers. Most have not been reached though and although a Harvardsum may understand the 'trickle down' concept, that was not planned for with the RPPS, at least not officially.

Of for negotiating for an admission of gross error, Ms. Yingluck has declined to admit much and her answers to the NLA only stressed how well her scheme had worked. The scheme has a tremendous loss, Ms. Yingluck has gone on record as being in charge, listening, helping, etc., etc. Why would the Court need to negotiate with her? Why would the Court need to discredit her? Why would the Court need to criminalise what is already described as criminal in Laws?

You somehow seem to suggest we skip the justice part and just condemn Ms. Yingluck. Don't you believe in justice? Shouldn't we give Ms. Yingluck a chance to explain herself?

Edited March 20, 2015 by rubl

[jayboy]

Rixalex. I actually agree with much of what you say.Her government was not impressive and she clearly wasn't up to it.I confess that I do admire her some of her personal qualities.

But I feel we are at cross purposes.I hold no brief for the RPPS and it had many flaws.My point is the treatment of Yingluck is prompted by almost totally different considerations.If you talk to well placed supporters of the current regime they don't even bother to deny it.

[mikemac]

@ jayboy - Did you ever consider for one minute, that Yingluck may be receiving the treatment she deserves ? And all the admirable personal qualities in the world won't change that ?