Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

[webfact]

STOPPAGE TIME
Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?
Tulsathit Taptim

BANGKOK: -- The clampdown on Yingluck Shinawatra is a shame. That is because - take away the coup, the political strife and the fact that whatever the outcome, what follows will definitely be messy - it could have been the right way to go. Corruption can never be uprooted unless the head is chopped off first, so to speak.

This is not to say that Yingluck is guilty or should go to jail. This is saying that every government leader should be subject to the same. If you risked being thrown behind bars just because your subordinates embezzled money or property or took bribes, you wouldn't sit and watch. You would be on guard around the clock. You would punish a minister at the first hint of a scandal. You wouldn't just transfer him or her to another ministry before the opposition could launch a censure motion.

Yingluck is being charged with negligence that allowed corruption to fester in the rice pledging scheme. That means her accusers don't need to prove that she was corrupt. All they need to do is prove that corruption plagued the rice programme and, as prime minister and chairperson of the national rice committee, Yingluck knowingly let it happen. If she is found guilty, she will be imprisoned.

Is that harsh? No, not at all. If a prime minister allows his or her subordinates to cheat, he or she deserves to be punished, too. It's a cover-up of a crime, pure and simple. If you cover up for a criminal, you are an accessory to the crime.

People are saying it's harsh because what's happening to Yingluck is an exception and not the rule. It's a pity that it took a vicious political divide, threats of civil war and a military intervention for us to have a semblance of what should have been a normal way of tackling corruption. In politics, great power should come with great responsibility, and threats of imprisonment should come with the territory.

Thailand's prime ministers have always been overprotective of their Cabinet members or those associated with them. The worst that ever happened to corrupt ministers was to be transferred out of the hot seat. There has never been genuine punishment or public condemnation from the prime ministers. On the one hand, that's understandable: it's bad public relations to admit that you picked a crook (or many crooks) to sit in your Cabinet. On the other hand, you endorse a system in which everybody protects everybody who is on the same side, and the rest is history.

The late Lee Kuan Yew advocated a system in which corrupt ministers were hunted down by graft-busters, and not moved around or shielded by the prime minister. Singapore's politics may have made it easy for that to happen, as its weak opposition was unlikely to significantly capitalise on corruption scandals. In Thailand, admitting that you handpicked a fraudster to serve as a minister can be equivalent to signing your own resignation.

But that should be the case, shouldn't it? First, it makes you choose your team wisely and carefully. Then it makes you act swiftly and justly at the first sniff of graft. Of course, you have the other option of sweeping it under the rug, but you will know you do that at your own peril.

Now, the big question. How can we, in a normal democratic system, put a prime minister on trial for crimes committed by others? This may be an integral part of Yingluck's defence, too. Her lawyers will first try to portray the rice pledging scheme as noble and clean, but if the prosecution can establish that the programme was marred by massive corruption, the lawyers will simply say she didn't know about it.

Repeated warnings against the scheme by economics experts may come into play at the Yingluck trial, but her lawyers can say that the warnings were not necessarily "evidence" that corruption had taken place. In other words, she may have been warned, but didn't know for certain that dirty money was going into the accounts of people in charge of the scheme. And without clear-cut evidence, how could she terminate a social programme that voters mandated her government to carry out? Most importantly perhaps, if nobody has been charged with "murder", how could someone be found guilty of being an accessory to the murder?

The proof and rebuttal regarding the "evidence" and her "knowledge" will be the highlight of the trial. The prosecution will face a major challenge, though, of explaining why no small fry were caught if the evidence of corruption was so damning. Yingluck's accusers can say that because of her negligence, the fraud got out of control and those involved managed to escape, but the prosecution will need strong evidence to back this claim. The accusers will have to prove that although the "murderer" has got away, the murder weapon has been found at the home of the "accessory".

Should Yingluck be put through all this? Yes, but on condition that what's happening becomes the standard for Thailand's fight against corruption. Without that condition, we don't stand a chance.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Is-taking-Yingluck-to-court-the-way-to-go-30257157.html


-- The Nation 2015-04-01

[cornishcarlos]

I think Yingluck has become a bit of a side show these days.

People seem more interested in how much damage the new 'PM' is capable of inflicting on the country ??

Shame he will never be subject to the same courts as Yingluck

Edited April 1, 2015 by cornishcarlos

[WhizBang]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

Yes, absolutely. Until the high and mighty in this country are not only held accountable for their crimes and misdeeds, but also served harsh penalties, nothing will change.

But going after the high and mighty only represents the tip of the iceberg. The entire system, from top to bottom needs serious reform (including the military), and none moreso than the police and the rest of the judicial system.

Edited April 1, 2015 by WhizBang

[loppylugs1]

Anything to keep that woman in the headlines...one good looking woman

[waitforusalso]

Let's see...unprecedented political persecution of your opposition's leader after you have stolen power from them by force. Yeah, great move, very conciliatory!

[Robby nz]

Indeed all those who would engage in politics in the future should be shown that their actions or inactions are accountable to the law and not just to the people at the ballot box.

In any other occupation or business employee accountability is there, why should politicians be any different ? After all in spite of the high regard they hold themselves in they are employees of the people and the country.

In fact they should be held to even higher standards as they are, or should be, roll models to be looked up to and respected.

Respect should be earned by good deeds and not by fear, threats, intimidation or the granting of favors.

[tx22cb]

With the power to override the judiciary process, the PM can dispense with any trials and incarcerate her immediately. That would please one set of people.

Or, he could give her an immediate immunity from prosecution for any past deeds, which would please another set of people.

[waitforusalso]

Indeed all those who would engage in politics in the future should be shown that their actions or inactions are accountable to the law and not just to the people at the ballot box.

In any other occupation or business employee accountability is there, why should politicians be any different ? After all in spite of the high regard they hold themselves in they are employees of the people and the country.

In fact they should be held to even higher standards as they are, or should be, roll models to be looked up to and respected.

Respect should be earned by good deeds and not by fear, threats, intimidation or the granting of favors.

Indeed all those Thaksin/red leaning politicians, who would engage in politics in the future should be shown that their actions or inactions are accountable to the law and not just to the people at the ballot box.

[Robby nz]

Indeed all those who would engage in politics in the future should be shown that their actions or inactions are accountable to the law and not just to the people at the ballot box.

In any other occupation or business employee accountability is there, why should politicians be any different ? After all in spite of the high regard they hold themselves in they are employees of the people and the country.

In fact they should be held to even higher standards as they are, or should be, roll models to be looked up to and respected.

Respect should be earned by good deeds and not by fear, threats, intimidation or the granting of favors.

Indeed all those Thaksin/red leaning politicians, who would engage in politics in the future should be shown that their actions or inactions are accountable to the law and not just to the people at the ballot box.

You apparently believe they are worse than anyone else and are the only one who need to be reined in.

Me I prefer to be all inclusive.

[trogers]

I think our modern society would frown on bringing her directly to the gallows, though that's what some of her red shirts did to their oppositions. Shot them dead in broad daylight.

Edited April 1, 2015 by trogers

[rametindallas]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

How else are you going to put her behind bars for twenty years and confiscate all of her wealth they can find? Let her be a lesson to future Thaksin puppet governments; just because you are following orders, does not absolve you from the guilt of all the damage you have done to the country. Ms Yingluck, alone, was the absolute ONLY person in Thailand who could have prevented the loss of 700 billion Baht that now cannot be used to improve the economy or the education system or the lives of ordinary Thais. If there is only one person now in Thailand that deserves criminal charges, it is Thaksin's muppet/puppet baby sister, Yingluck. Seriously she has caused more damage than anyone in the history of Thailand. How can anyone with morals and a conscience suggest that the courts aren't necessarily the way to go. If not the courts, I suggest doing to her what they did to Mussolini and Ceausescu which is take her out and summarily execute her without a trial.

[JOC]

Feels a little strange to discuss the responsibilities of Yingluck in a situation, where article 44 is about to be invoked, giving absolute power to one man, who has already granted himself amnesty for any wrongdoings!!

[rubl]

With the power to override the judiciary process, the PM can dispense with any trials and incarcerate her immediately. That would please one set of people.

Or, he could give her an immediate immunity from prosecution for any past deeds, which would please another set of people.

Or, he can leave the courts alone without interference which of course would annoy TVF posters.

[rubl]

Feels a little strange to discuss the responsibilities of Yingluck in a situation, where article 44 is about to be invoked, giving absolute power to one man, who has already granted himself amnesty for any wrongdoings!!

May feel strange, but that's the topic. There are other topics where you can concentrate on fearing your fear and believes regarding article 44

[seajae]

doesnt matter who is at the helm when there is corruption costing the country billions and they refuse to do anything about it they need to be put on trial. YL knew there was corruption, she was shown and told time after time about it but simply ignored the warnings or refused to accept them. Being thaksins puppet is no excuse, by refusing to do anything about the corruption she has mired herself in with it, the only way this country can ever move forward is to start hitting those that are powerful and rich with jail time and massive fines for their part in the corruption, this goes for all thais equally but it is unlikely to happen as none of the rich and powerful want to lose face or be held responsible for what they do.

Edited April 1, 2015 by seajae

[JAG]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

How else are you going to put her behind bars for twenty years and confiscate all of her wealth they can find? Let her be a lesson to future Thaksin puppet governments; just because you are following orders, does not absolve you from the guilt of all the damage you have done to the country. Ms Yingluck, alone, was the absolute ONLY person in Thailand who could have prevented the loss of 700 billion Baht that now cannot be used to improve the economy or the education system or the lives of ordinary Thais. If there is only one person now in Thailand that deserves criminal charges, it is Thaksin's muppet/puppet baby sister, Yingluck. Seriously she has caused more damage than anyone in the history of Thailand. How can anyone with morals and a conscience suggest that the courts aren't necessarily the way to go. If not the courts, I suggest doing to her what they did to Mussolini and Ceausescu which is take her out and summarily execute her without a trial.

Spoken like a true believer in the rule of law!

Jackboots pinching a bit this morning are they?

Moreover, if you believe that any of that 700 Billion Baht which you assert she was responsible for being salted away would otherwise have gone anywhere near ordinary Thai people you're even more deluded than normal!

[klauskunkel]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

Where else would you take her? To dinner?

[MaxLee]

Still not on trial??? LOL

[scorecard]

I used to have some respect for the writings of this journalist, not any more. In fact I expect better from people who have better and broader education and should be looking at the bigger and longer-term picture when they write on such subjects.

The last few paragraphs of this article are without logic.

It's like a company which doesn't get anywhere near achieving it's business goals and at the end of the year the owner / BOD asks the CEO to explain himself/herself.

The CEO responds by saying 'You can't blame me, our marketing and sales manager is incompetent, blame him/her not me.'

[scorecard]

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

With the power to override the judiciary process, the PM can dispense with any trials and incarcerate her immediately. That would please one set of people.

Or, he could give her an immediate immunity from prosecution for any past deeds, which would please another set of people.

Or, he can leave the courts alone without interference which of course would annoy TVF posters.

Especially those who look for every slight opportunity to twist things into a negative.

[rubl]

Still not on trial??? LOL

It's a disgrace indeed, but even the elite need to wait till the day set by a court. In Ms. Yingluck's case, she's required to go to the Supreme Court for Political Office Holders on the 19th of May, 2015, to hear and acknowledge charges, to plead innocence and to have her legal team ask for bail. Being elite and therefor unlikely to flee the country she'll get bail. Probably only with condition to ask for permission if she wants to eat noodles in Singapore, take her son to DisneyWorld, things like that.

[rubl]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

How else are you going to put her behind bars for twenty years and confiscate all of her wealth they can find? Let her be a lesson to future Thaksin puppet governments; just because you are following orders, does not absolve you from the guilt of all the damage you have done to the country. Ms Yingluck, alone, was the absolute ONLY person in Thailand who could have prevented the loss of 700 billion Baht that now cannot be used to improve the economy or the education system or the lives of ordinary Thais. If there is only one person now in Thailand that deserves criminal charges, it is Thaksin's muppet/puppet baby sister, Yingluck. Seriously she has caused more damage than anyone in the history of Thailand. How can anyone with morals and a conscience suggest that the courts aren't necessarily the way to go. If not the courts, I suggest doing to her what they did to Mussolini and Ceausescu which is take her out and summarily execute her without a trial.

Spoken like a true believer in the rule of law!

Jackboots pinching a bit this morning are they?

Moreover, if you believe that any of that 700 Billion Baht which you assert she was responsible for being salted away would otherwise have gone anywhere near ordinary Thai people you're even more deluded than normal!

So, one way or another those 700 billion Baht would have reached the 'right' people only as Ms. Yingluck stated in her answers to the NLA ?

[jayboy]

Feels a little strange to discuss the responsibilities of Yingluck in a situation, where article 44 is about to be invoked, giving absolute power to one man, who has already granted himself amnesty for any wrongdoings!!

May feel strange, but that's the topic. There are other topics where you can concentrate on fearing your fear and believes regarding article 44

He was simply pointing out a relevant contrast and the massive hypocrisy.Educated and thoughtful people generally often think in compare and contrast terms.I think mods are well aware of when to intervene if it looks as though a topic is being derailed, and you need not take it on yourself to provide unsolicited guidance.

[JAG]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

How else are you going to put her behind bars for twenty years and confiscate all of her wealth they can find? Let her be a lesson to future Thaksin puppet governments; just because you are following orders, does not absolve you from the guilt of all the damage you have done to the country. Ms Yingluck, alone, was the absolute ONLY person in Thailand who could have prevented the loss of 700 billion Baht that now cannot be used to improve the economy or the education system or the lives of ordinary Thais. If there is only one person now in Thailand that deserves criminal charges, it is Thaksin's muppet/puppet baby sister, Yingluck. Seriously she has caused more damage than anyone in the history of Thailand. How can anyone with morals and a conscience suggest that the courts aren't necessarily the way to go. If not the courts, I suggest doing to her what they did to Mussolini and Ceausescu which is take her out and summarily execute her without a trial.

Spoken like a true believer in the rule of law!

Jackboots pinching a bit this morning are they?

Moreover, if you believe that any of that 700 Billion Baht which you assert she was responsible for being salted away would otherwise have gone anywhere near ordinary Thai people you're even more deluded than normal!

So, one way or another those 700 billion Baht would have reached the 'right' people only as Ms. Yingluck stated in her answers to the NLA ?

I can't comment on her answers because I haven't read them.

I am suggesting that irrespective of whatever regime was in power, if there was 700 billion being spent, little or none of it would have been spent on "ordinary people".

[h90]

I think Yingluck has become a bit of a side show these days.

People seem more interested in how much damage the new 'PM' is capable of inflicting on the country ??

Shame he will never be subject to the same courts as Yingluck

I am not seeing him inflecting some harm. Actually he cleaned up a lot mess already......

[JOC]

Is taking Yingluck to court the way to go?

Where else would you take her? To dinner?

I wouldn't mind!!

[JOC]

In the name of reconciliation let's make a deal!!

The day that Sondhi Limthongkul (remember the PAD guy) starts to serve his 20 year sentence is the day Yingluck is going to jail!!

Sounds fair??

[redandyellow]

I think taking her into a hotel room is the way to go. Maybe she's 40 by now... That's okay

[lucky11]

I think Yingluck has become a bit of a side show these days.

People seem more interested in how much damage the new 'PM' is capable of inflicting on the country ??

Shame he will never be subject to the same courts as Yingluck

For what can I ask. For graft-busting, taking National park land back, making improvements in all areas and setting the conditions so that proper 'free and fair' elections can be held in 2016!!

I would like to see his charge sheet.

[JOC]

I think Yingluck has become a bit of a side show these days.

People seem more interested in how much damage the new 'PM' is capable of inflicting on the country ??

Shame he will never be subject to the same courts as Yingluck

For what can I ask. For graft-busting, taking National park land back, making improvements in all areas and setting the conditions so that proper 'free and fair' elections can be held in 2016!!

I would like to see his charge sheet.

There will never be a charge sheet for Mr P, since he has already granted himself amnesty.

Just in case.....................