NLA begins impeachment hearing of G2G rice scam



BANGKOK: -- The National Legislative Assembly today began impeachment hearing of former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom, his deputy and a former top official of the Foreign Trade Department accused of corruption involving the so-called fake G2G rice deal with China.

Boonsong, and deputy commerce minister Poom Sarapol and former director-general of the Foreign Trade Department Manas Soiploy were accused by the National Anti Corruption Commission (NACC).

Chairing the NLA meeting is its president Pornpetch Wichitcholachai.

NACC commissioner Vicha Mahakhun was first allowed to deliver the opening statement at 9.30 am while the three accused would be allowed to defend themselves afterwards.

Mr Vicha began the hearing by saying the three have committed serious crimes that had incurred enormous damages to the country’s rice market by collaborating in allowing two Chinese companies, unauthorised by the Chinese government, to seal bilateral contracts to buy Thai rice without having to bid.

Their acts grossly violated the Criminal Code, the Public Competitive Bidding Act and the Anti-Corruption Act.

But Boonsong flatly dismissed the accusation saying everything was done in good faith and with regard to the internet of farmers.

He said all stages taken followed the process of laws.

Bangkok Post reported that after the two sides finished giving their testimony, the NLA was to set up a seven-member committee to raise questions for them to answer and set the dates for the enquiry sessions.

The two sides are to deliver their closing statements on May 7 and the NLA will vote whether or not to impeach the three on May 8.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/nla-begins-impeachment-hearing-of-g2g-rice-scam


-- Thai PBS 2015-04-23

I try them for Economic Treason or sabotage, if there were such a charge. The inability to bring to justice those whose self-interest and greed so undermined the national well-being is something that must end. Take note Shinawatra clan.

Given the evidence, going right back to the no confidence debate in 2012, that is in the public arena it would certainly seem they have a case to answer.

It was estimated in one of the deals that someone made 20billion from rice that never moved from the warehouse it was stored in.

When confronted with that one in parliament Boonsong was reported to have replied that it was not his business what happened to rice after it had been sold.

NACC accuses former ministers of fabricating G2G rice scheme
KRIS BHROMSUTHI
THE NATION



BANGKOK: -- Claims of rice stockpiles being sold through government-to-government (G2G) scheme by the Yingluck Shinawatra administration were "total lies", National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) member Vicha Mahakhun told members of the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) yesterday.

The scheme, he said, played a key role in "one of the most scandalous corruption cases in Thai history".

However, former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom said the allegations were part of a political game by the NACC, claiming the commission had chosen to single out and annihilate a political group by using "double standards". He also accused the NACC of rushing the case through without taking into account important witnesses and evidence, which led to false conclusions.

The other two accused, former deputy commerce minister Poom Sarapol and former director of the Commerce Ministry's Foreign Trade Department Manus Soiploy, also said they had hard evidence to prove their innocence.

The NLA held a second meeting yesterday to deliberate on impeachment cases against public officials in relation to alleged corruption in the G2G scheme. The first meeting was held earlier this month.

At yesterday's meeting, which was chaired by NLA president Pornpetch Wichitcholchai, Vicha presented the case statement on NACC's behalf. Boonsong and Poom came armed with a team of 11 lawyers.

In the question-and-answer session, Vicha questioned the very existence of the Chinese government representatives who had engaged in the deal. He pointed out that Beijing had claimed that these "state enterprises" were not their representatives.

Vicha also asked why the companies Kwang-Tung Stationary and Hai-Narn Grain and Oil Industrial Trading - who the Pheu Thai-led government claimed were representatives of the Chinese government -sold the rice back to Thai local distributors. He backed this claim by saying local firms Nakorn-Luang Ka-Kao and Thai-Fah 2551 had both come forward to say they bought rice from the Chinese companies.

He also said documents issued by the Foreign Trade Department recording the so-called sale to China only accounted for a single ex-warehouse transaction. Vicha said the deal was in fact with North Korea and the transaction had to be cancelled because no payment was ever made.

"There was never any G2G deal because the rice was sold at less than market price and then redistributed in the country. This created an oversupply, pushing the price even lower," Vicha pointed out.

The NACC member also accused the officials of doing nothing to prevent corruption or making any effort to organise fair bidding. "You have caused immeasurable damage to the country. You cannot deny responsibility because you had direct power in overseeing the G2G affair. If you detected any error, you should have fixed it. In reality, though, you did the opposite by committing [corruption], hiding and denying the corruption. You have severely violated the official code of ethics," he concluded.

'Double standards'

Boonsong, however, denied all the charges and even criticised the behaviour of Vicha, who played a key role in Yingluck's impeachment.

"This NACC official is prejudiced and engaged in improper conduct that demonstrates his personal bias against me by giving media interviews indicating that I'm guilty," he said.

The former minister went on to say that it was difficult for him to believe he will undergo a fair and legal deliberation process now that the case has been handed over to Vicha.

He claimed that NACC was using the same double standards against him as the ones it used against Yingluck's administration, in comparison to the Abhisit Vejjajiva government's rice scheme, which is still incomplete after five years.

He went on to say that the NACC had rushed the G2G case by refusing to investigate the buyers, who were representatives of the Chinese government. He added that these firms had sent the NACC official letters confirming the fact that they were state enterprises. He claimed that the rice-pledging scheme is being used for an artificial political discourse to discredit the Yingluck government.

"It's a shame that those against Pheu Thai turned the rice scheme into political discourse to bring down Yingluck's government, even though the scheme helped millions of farmers," he said.

Boonsong said the G2G system has been widely used in many countries and that Thailand too had engaged in it several times in the past.

Poom agreed, saying the G2G deal was beneficial to the country because the government did not want the stockpiled rice to degrade or rot and that releasing the whole lot through this deal was the best option.

He also pointed out that if the G2G deal had been delayed, the price of the rice would have dropped further and there would have been the additional cost of storage and tax. Plus, he said, it forged stronger ties with China.

The NLA will meet again next Thursday to pose questions to all sides.

The final statements will be presented on May 7, and the NLA will vote for or against impeachment the following day.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/NACC-accuses-former-ministers-of-fabricating-G2G-r-30258644.html


-- The Nation 2015-04-24

Let's hope justice is done here, will not hold my breath however.

If justice is done, what are the chances of recovering any of the revenue that was siphoned off?

This particular scam was the Daddy of all PTP scams... These corrupt ministers sold Thai rice to a supposedly G to G deal. And we are talking about millions of tons of high grade Thai rice. It was sold at Huge discount price ! The rice NEVER left the warehouses where it was stored. These ministers then had their cohorts re-sell this rice onto the normal rice market at between 3 and 4 times what the "G to G " had paid for it. Only after the rice had been sold in the open market did they have to pay for it.. So... without laying out any cash at all , these PTP men stole millions , if not billions of bahts from the hard working Thai taxpayers . And don't forget the commision cheques that went to the man in the desert. ! Oh... I forgot.... but those poor ministers did Not know what was going on..! Hmmmm................ Yinluck, who should I believe ?

Irrespective of what you may think about the G2G rice deal, and whether it was a huge scam, or a valid transaction that yielded poor results - if you have any attachment to concepts like due process, you should be dismayed by this proceeding.

Two main points.

1) The use of the term "impeachment" to describe this process is misleading at best. Impeachment is typically a process by which officials are judged and removed from office. These officials are already out of office.

2) The proper venue for these charges to be considered is a criminal court in which a (supposed) independent judge or jury can weigh the evidence. This proceeding is lacking in that basic mechanism for fairness.

Again, I'm not arguing guilt or innocence.

But this proceeding is a "show trial", reminiscent of communist China.

Carry on with your purge, gentlemen.

Irrespective of what you may think about the G2G rice deal, and whether it was a huge scam, or a valid transaction that yielded poor results - if you have any attachment to concepts like due process, you should be dismayed by this proceeding.

Two main points.

1) The use of the term "impeachment" to describe this process is misleading at best. Impeachment is typically a process by which officials are judged and removed from office. These officials are already out of office.

2) The proper venue for these charges to be considered is a criminal court in which a (supposed) independent judge or jury can weigh the evidence. This proceeding is lacking in that basic mechanism for fairness.

Again, I'm not arguing guilt or innocence.

But this proceeding is a "show trial", reminiscent of communist China.

Carry on with your purge, gentlemen.

Thais use the Thai language not English and have a legal system uniquely Thai. It is what it is. They use the term translated as "impeachment" differently to how we would. It's not just about removing a person from office. Here it can be applied retrospectively to ban someone who has left office but when issues come to light.

They are also being charged in a criminal court.

It looks like their defense will be the usual - " it's not fair, what about him and those, it's political, it's being rushed through, your biased against me, your biased against the Shins and PTP, etc etc etc."

We hear this drivel and waffle form Yingluck, her ministers, those charged with them and all their lawyers. They always throw in the comment that they will defend this strongly and show evidence that they are innocent - then offer absolutely nothing except the usual BS.

Time the justice system here grew some balls and dealt with these issues in a proper way. Did they do as charged, is there evidence to support those charges, do they have evidence to offer in defense or mitigation. Period. All the BS about always being biased, persecuted, picked on, is nonsense.

If these are tried and found guilty in their criminal trial they should be dealt with harshly, and steps taken to recover any illegal gains. As should the directors, executives and managers of businesses and organizations complicit.

Irrespective of what you may think about the G2G rice deal, and whether it was a huge scam, or a valid transaction that yielded poor results - if you have any attachment to concepts like due process, you should be dismayed by this proceeding.

Two main points.

1) The use of the term "impeachment" to describe this process is misleading at best. Impeachment is typically a process by which officials are judged and removed from office. These officials are already out of office.

2) The proper venue for these charges to be considered is a criminal court in which a (supposed) independent judge or jury can weigh the evidence. This proceeding is lacking in that basic mechanism for fairness.

Again, I'm not arguing guilt or innocence.

But this proceeding is a "show trial", reminiscent of communist China.

Carry on with your purge, gentlemen.

Irrespective of what you may think this is not a trial, this is an impeachment procedure. A trial may follow, depending on the data gathered. Furthermore I'm a bit surprised you complain about the Nation description. Since when should articles in a local newspaper be of a quality to be admissible in a court of law?

Mind you I must admit never to have read the "Phoenix New Times" or looked at the "Fox 10 Phoenix" website

Given the evidence, going right back to the no confidence debate in 2012, that is in the public arena it would certainly seem they have a case to answer.

It was estimated in one of the deals that someone made 20billion from rice that never moved from the warehouse it was stored in.

When confronted with that one in parliament Boonsong was reported to have replied that it was not his business what happened to rice after it had been sold.

Is it any wonder that Thailand lost 600 billion baht when you have such 'quality' people as Yingluck, Chalerm, Mr 'white lies' Kittirat, Tarit and Boonsong in charge of the country, key ministries and departments?

The galling thing is that they were put there by Thaksin with the orders to get him his amnesty (they even failed dismally with that one) so it was all in vain.

Irrespective of what you may think about the G2G rice deal, and whether it was a huge scam, or a valid transaction that yielded poor results - if you have any attachment to concepts like due process, you should be dismayed by this proceeding.

Two main points.

1) The use of the term "impeachment" to describe this process is misleading at best. Impeachment is typically a process by which officials are judged and removed from office. These officials are already out of office.

2) The proper venue for these charges to be considered is a criminal court in which a (supposed) independent judge or jury can weigh the evidence. This proceeding is lacking in that basic mechanism for fairness.

Again, I'm not arguing guilt or innocence.

But this proceeding is a "show trial", reminiscent of communist China.

Carry on with your purge, gentlemen.

1).... Impeachment is not just to remove from office, but to ban them from re-entering politics for 5 years.

2).... The normal course of action is to impeach first and then file for a criminal case from the OAG.

The reason they do it this was is because in Thai law regarding politicians. A politician can not be held accountable in law for what they do while they are in office. They are immune from prosecution. However, an impeached politician CAN be held accountable for what they did while they were in office.

Go check that up, I am sure you will find that I am right.