webfact Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Ex-ministers choose not to answer NLA's G2G queriesKRIS BHROMSUTHITHE NATIONSay their responses will affect the adjudication of their cases in courtBANGKOK: -- Former members of the ousted Pheu Thai-led government who were accused of fabricating the government-to-government (G2G) rice deals have decided not to attend a question-and-answer session with the National Legislative Assembly (NLA). The NLA is set to consider their impeachment.The accused include former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom, his then-deputy Poom Sarapol and former director of the Commerce Ministry's Foreign Trade Department Manus Soiploy,NLA vice president Surachai Liengboonlertchai quoted the accused as saying they would not attend the meeting because they believed that answering the NLA's questions would negatively affect their cases, which are due to be adjudicated by the Supreme Court's special department on political cases.The three are scheduled to deliver their final statements to NLA members on May 7, before the NLA votes on the following day as to whether the accused should be impeached.In response to Boonsong and Poom's accusation last week that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) had been hasty with the investigation and was politically motivated, NACC member Vicha Mahakhun said his decision to prosecute these individuals had nothing to do with politics. He also said that impeachment was an important process, because if impeached, they will be banned from politics for five years.He also insisted that Boonsong and Poom had falsely claimed that the two Chinese enterprises involved in the deal were representatives of the Beijing government. He said that though they were state enterprises, they had not been authorised by the Chinese government to buy rice from Thailand as part of a G2G programme.Also, no rice was actually exported to China under this scheme Vicha said, adding that the deal was designed to allow the Pheu Thai government's business allies to buy rice from "fake" Chinese firms at a price lower than the market price. The rice was then redistributed in the country, thus making huge profits for the firms, as well as bringing the market price down via oversupply.The NLA was set to ask Boonsong and Poom to provide evidence of the two Chinese state firms working as representatives of the Chinese government.NLA members were also to ask if Boonsong and Poom were aware that the rice that was supposed to be exported to China was in fact bought and distributed locally, thus bringing damage to the country.Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Ex-ministers-choose-not-to-answer-NLAs-G2G-queries-30259133.html-- The Nation 2015-05-01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 It was only a white lie 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
issanaus Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 It was only a white lie You mean a sackful of little white lies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trogers Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 They are so secret that the previous government either did not record them in government documents, or had the documents destroyed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 It was only a white lie You mean a sackful of little white lies A sackful to you and me but only a SA MALL one for a Thai politician and always for the good of the country never a personal bank account. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Say their responses will affect the adjudication of their cases in court Taking the fifth then. (you could pronounce it with a p an i and two esses) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Tatsujin Posted May 1, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2015 Again, that overriding "don't you know who I am, how dare you, we had the people's mandate to do what the hell we wanted to, I don't need to tell you anything" attitude rears it's very ugly little head. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucky11 Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 It seems that they are on their own in this forum as none of the reds are able to protect them. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 It was only a white lie You mean a sackful of little white lies Or several warehouses full of sacks of white rice lies ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyLew Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 It has been over a year now and these people must have known the G2G issue would be investigated yet they still have not got their stories straight. This can only point to guilt IMO 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FangFerang Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 The convenient lies being bandied about from both sides are laughable altogether. One group of idiots, the accused said " they would not attend the meeting because they believed that answering the NLA's questions would negatively affect their cases" AND The other group of idiots, the accusers, said, "his decision to prosecute these individuals had nothing to do with politics" and "The rice was then redistributed in the country, thus...bringing the market price down via oversupply" 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post slapout Posted May 1, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted May 1, 2015 the whole country knows they are guilty as sin. put them in jail until they can/ answer the questions asked of them. make sure they nor their family. cronies have access to their bank accounts, 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alwyn Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Again, that overriding "don't you know who I am, how dare you, we had the people's mandate to do what the hell we wanted to, I don't need to tell you anything" attitude rears it's very ugly little head. yeah, unfortunately for them they didn't have article 44 to support their actions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winstonc Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Again, that overriding "don't you know who I am, how dare you, we had the people's mandate to do what the hell we wanted to, I don't need to tell you anything" attitude rears it's very ugly little head. yeah, unfortunately for them they didn't have article 44 to support their actions your right they had thaksin on there side... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgmr Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Shouldn't the Supreme Court give it's verdict before any impeachment proceedings. Let JUSTICE be seen to be done before any political haranguing begins in an assembly where presumably political clout comes before justice. Rightly or wrongly everyone seems to be making judgement out of evidence that has been garnered by the prosecution without an equivalent response from the accused. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgmr Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 "there side"? or Off Side! Good game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now