Jump to content

Former Thai Senate candidate Leena gets 5-year ban for breaking electoral law


webfact

Recommended Posts

Leena gets 5-year ban for breaking electoral law
THE NATION

30261018-01_big.jpg
Leena

BANGKOK: -- FORMER SENATE candidate Leena "Leena Jung" Jungjanja has received a five-year ban from politics after the Supreme Court's Election Division found her guilty of violating an election law during the Senate election in 2013.

The court read a verdict in a case in which the Election Commission sought an order to curb Leena's electoral rights for violating provisions 111, 112 and 113 of the Election of MPs and Senators Act 2007.

Leena violated the law by erecting election campaign signs across Bangkok that said "Get PTT back to Thais, use benzene Bt20 per litre, Leena Jung, number 3 Senate candidate".

The judges said senators do not have the responsibility to decide the price of fuel. They said Leena used the reference to the petrol price to solicit votes, and thus violated provision 123 of the act.

The court said the executive branch of government has the authority to make policies on the country's fuel or energy - not senators.

The court dismissed Leena's testimony that her election campaign signs left out a sentence that she would "propose legislation", saying it was her intention to do that.

It said Leena failed to provide this reason to the EC from the beginning so her testimony was deemed to be inconsistent with her earlier statements given to the EC.

Leena was not present when the court read the verdict. The ruling was posted at the court building.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Leena-gets-5-year-ban-for-breaking-electoral-law-30261018.html

nationlogo.jpg
-- The Nation 2015-05-27

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have convicted her of false advertising, a trend I approve of. How would PTPs election policies for 2010 have fared under the same scrutiny?

BTW could you be a little more discriminating in your choice of photos. I've had to delay breakfast for an hour after that one.

Edited by halloween
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't they find a more attractive photo of her? Maybe she's like Chavalit and is totally non-photogenic; in which case, my sympathies.

Regarding the judgment, it was her responsibility to check the signs BEFORE they go up and have them returned to the printer if they don't reflect "her intention". I have no sympathy for politicians who 'buy' votes with promises and get punished for it.

It is past time to get politicians' populist promises under control or else Thailand will face the fate of Greece where each successive government promised more than the previous government. Perhaps having a university or an independent, professional auditing firm check the figures on any politician's proposed populist policy program(s) and see if their plan to pay for the program is feasible.

By advertising that a vote for her would bring B20 benzine to Thailand, she was definitely going for the 'gullible' voting block which, in past elections, has proven to be a large percentage of the electorate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is highly ironic. The claim that petrol would drop to 20B/liter if the Shin elite were elected, while incorrect, is a lot more plausible/accurate than any of Thaksin's other wild pre-election claims. The Thais did not actually all become rich within 6 months of his electoral purchase did they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have convicted her of false advertising, a trend I approve of. How would PTPs election policies for 2010 have fared under the same scrutiny?

BTW could you be a little more discriminating in your choice of photos. I've had to delay breakfast for an hour after that one.

It's a bit late for your breakfast now, but perhaps this one is a little more palatable?post-9891-0-67788000-1432692060_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To promise voters cheap gasoline is in breach of the law, but to pay the rice farmers (or whoever pocketed the money) twice the world market price for their produce over an extended period of time, costing the taxpayers 700 billion baht, is considered okay??

Not only Yingluck but all her party member should face serious jail time for crimes committed against the Thai people!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have convicted her of false advertising, a trend I approve of. How would PTPs election policies for 2010 have fared under the same scrutiny?

BTW could you be a little more discriminating in your choice of photos. I've had to delay breakfast for an hour after that one.

It's a bit late for your breakfast now, but perhaps this one is a little more palatable?attachicon.gifLeena-Jang.jpg

Looking a little like Nabila from Storage Wars will look like (a decade after being buried).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have convicted her of false advertising, a trend I approve of. How would PTPs election policies for 2010 have fared under the same scrutiny?

BTW could you be a little more discriminating in your choice of photos. I've had to delay breakfast for an hour after that one.

It's a bit late for your breakfast now, but perhaps this one is a little more palatable?attachicon.gifLeena-Jang.jpg

Come on man, I just ate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, some of you guys, PTT is not the Phue Thai Party -- it's a petroleum company, the one with the red and blue flame for a logo.

Also, it's not false advertising. She implied she would work toward a goal, and the senate influences the executive branch like a hatter influences mad.

She was banned for a 2007 law that was eliminated by the 2009 charter, which was eliminated by the junta -- so she was literally banned by the enforcement of a law that does not exist.

Earlier, she had lampooned the junta, hilariously by Thai accounts (so there was probably lots of "scooby doo" sound effects), and in 2009 uncovered corruption in the senate (but no charges were filed). She did however get assaulted by a man who threw fish sauce in her the face, coincidentally of course, the next week, just prior to her tv show. Also, no charges were filed.

Subsequently they barred her from the NRC meeting, held her elsewhere at the Officer's club until Prayuth finished his speech.

Its part of the red shirt pogram. She was one of the only PTP senators from Bangkok -- and a thorn they plucked from their china-scented bottoms using junta tweezers.

They claimed she changed her story, and the court changed their story. The original charge was that she advertised, and that violated the election laws, but some genius reminded them that their friends had also advertised, so they cooked up a new accusation and sent it via the Prayuth Postage Paypal Center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for the EC members to be charged with violating the 2007 Constitution for allowing a second national election voting day when 10% of Thai voters were originally blocked by the PDRC from their voting venues.

Because of the EC actions, the entire national election was ruled null and void by the Constitutional Court. EC members should be banned from holding any federal office for five years as well. But coincidentally the nullification of the election delayed the next election until May that then followed with the military coup. So maybe the NCPO has a conflict of interest in having justice served to all equally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite an extraordinary ruling for the law to interpret, just how do they interpret the latest round of shamoozal, being in power without an elected representative, if you are going to throw stones in glass houses make sure the glass is thick. coffee1.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for the EC members to be charged with violating the 2007 Constitution for allowing a second national election voting day when 10% of Thai voters were originally blocked by the PDRC from their voting venues.

Because of the EC actions, the entire national election was ruled null and void by the Constitutional Court. EC members should be banned from holding any federal office for five years as well. But coincidentally the nullification of the election delayed the next election until May that then followed with the military coup. So maybe the NCPO has a conflict of interest in having justice served to all equally.

They have a conflict but I don't think it is interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not familiar with the minute details of Thai law but on the basis of what has been posted this looks like a good call.

Any pre-election advertising should be fair, reasonable and accurate. It should be based on credible costings and estimates and should be deliverable.

Like most other countries I have lived in previously it has become a bit of a joke where the contesting parties have promised "the world" during the canvassing, only to renege and deliver something totally different after the election. The memory of various Australian Liberal Prime Ministers asserting that they "have a mandate" still haunts me to this day, it was used as shallow justification for cuts to social spending and increases of tax that would disproportionately impact on the poorer in society.

My point is it is not a specifically Thai problem or issue, but where a large proportion of the voting electorate are largely uneducated and not politically savvy, they must be protected from inaccurate and manipulative advertising. The party concerned were both skilled and ruthless when it came to using the media over the years, they invested heavily to ensure the people received the message they wanted them to hear, this cannot be allowed to happen again!

In a perfect world here in Thailand (and in many other countries) all parties would be required to substantiate and cost their promises prior to an election, that will not be easy but a start had to be made somewhere with this particular case being as good as any...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To promise voters cheap gasoline is in breach of the law, but to pay the rice farmers (or whoever pocketed the money) twice the world market price for their produce over an extended period of time, costing the taxpayers 700 billion baht, is considered okay??

Not only Yingluck but all her party member should face serious jail time for crimes committed against the Thai people!!

So would physically preventing an election by intimidating voters and seizing government building be breaking electoral laws? And yet your hero Suthep walks away without a glance in his direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it's an awful photo, you don't post "nice" photos of someone in whose discredit you are colluding. (Manipulative Photo Editing 1.1)

Credit to ratcatcher for seeking to apply some balance.

Edited by Enoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How pathetic, the establishment has been down on her for years including some 'up themselves ' English speaking Thai journalists who've referred to her as 'low class' in the English dailys.

It's because of people like her, Thailand needs appointed senators and not elected ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it's an awful photo, you don't post "nice" photos of someone in whose discredit you are colluding. (Manipulative Photo Editing 1.1)

Credit to ratcatcher for seeking to apply some balance.

Perhaps the difference in the photos is due to elapsed time, and the former is more current? I look really nice in my baby photos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...