Yingluck designates lawyer to hear charges

[Lite Beer]

Yingluck designates lawyer to hear charges

BANGKOK: -- Ex-premier Yingluck Shinawatra today designated her lawyer to formally hear charges imposed on her for paying compensation to political unrest victims between 2005-2010.

The National Anti-Corruption Commission accused her 34-member cabinet of malfeasances in office for the approval of compensation payment illegally.

Her lawyer Boonchaleo Dusadee met NACC officials briefly and submitted Ms Yingluck’s formal request seeking postponement of the date to give testimony and defend herself.

A NACC member Vichai vivitsevi said Ms Yingluck has the right to seek postponement of her testimony but it was up to the decision of the enquiry panel of the NACC to decide.

He said former cabinet ministers summoned to hear charges today included former prime ministers Yongyut Vichaidit, Chalerm Yoobamrung, Kittirst Na Ranong, and former ministers of PM’s Office , Voravat Uahapinyakul and Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Earlier in March, the NACC prepared complaints about compensation payments made to families of protesters who died during political unrest between 2005 and May 2010. Under the scheme, the families of protesters who were killed were given 7.5 million baht in compensation, an amount criticised by some as excessive.

According to The Nation, Yingluck’s critics accused her of having a conflict of interest in approving the payment, as many of the recipients were red shirts who supported her government.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/yingluck-designates-lawyer-to-hear-charges

-- Thai PBS 2015-06-09

[ramrod711]

Yingluck facing charges, will she tour Issan for a couple of months first? Will there be coffins burned in Bangkok, contaminated blood thrown on government agencies or threats to divide the country? I rather doubt it, which is why things are better than they were in the bad old days.

[zaphod reborn]

Well done Yingluck! Pay a lawyer to listen to criminal charges and file for a postponement. How about actually defending yourself for once, instead of crying that this is what the Thai people wanted?

Edited June 9, 2015 by zaphod reborn

[konying]

Well done Yingluck! Pay a lawyer to listen to criminal charges and file for a postponement. How about actually defending yourself for once, instead of crying that this is what the Thai people wanted?

Are you nuts?

Central has sale ending tomorrow. Need to go shopping. It's all about priorities

[jaidam]

Chalerm and Nalinee Taveesin summoned to hear charges. Great news. Nalinee - for the newbies - is the Shinawatra's go between with the Mugabes - think laundry woman. The appointment of Ms Taveesin as trade minister was such a slap in the face of democratic practice the USA threatened sanctions unless the grotesque Ms Taveesin was booted out. You would not usually think of the champions of democracy Shinawatras getting into bed with an anti-democratic monster like Big Bob but I suppose the Marange diamond mines and potential riches made Thaksin overlook the abject suffering of millions in his quest for a fast buck. Blood diamonds are just as beautiful as legal ones I guess.

I hope this above info does not cause any forum members undue distress. I do realize that it hurts to read links between Thaksin and Mugabe, probably because the swallowed PR bears no resemblance whatsoever with the facts. The image he presents is that he is one with the Mandelas of this world, the reality is only dumps like Arabian deserts, Uganda and Zimbabwe allow his entry.

[scorecard]

Her team:

- Yongyut Vichaidit,

- Chalerm Yoobamrung,

- Kittirst Na Ranong,

- Voravat Uahapinyakul and

- Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Total A list, most capable, highly and specifically knowledgeable, most honest and most sincere team possible.

Edited June 9, 2015 by scorecard

[clockman]

That is why Thai laws are farce! Anybody can be bought. There no role models, no enforceable laws. Totaly corrupt society.

[Cuchulainn]

Her team:

- Yongyut Vichaidit,

- Chalerm Yoobamrung,

- Kittirst Na Ranong,

- Voravat Uahapinyakul and

- Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Total A list, most capable, highly and specifically knowledgeable, most honest and most sincere team possible.

There's an "electric chair list" if ever I saw one!!!

[Bannum opinions]

In this case, pitting an elected Prime Minister against an agency with no electoral roots has to say something.

Under normal circumstances, decisions and policies of her government associated with this issue would be scrutinized at subsequent elections.

Anybody care to speculate how this issue would come out in an open and fair election.

That is if one has any respect for the electorate of course. If prone to demonize them wholesale, this discussion would be moot.

But that would also place one clearly on the side of the anti-democrats.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Bannum opinions

[ChrisY1]

Well done Yingluck! Pay a lawyer to listen to criminal charges and file for a postponement. How about actually defending yourself for once, instead of crying that this is what the Thai people wanted?

Are you nuts?

Central has sale ending tomorrow. Need to go shopping. It's all about priorities

No.....the only sale she attends is when they have one at Hermes in Paris.....and as for shopping in Central.....!

[Baerboxer]

In this case, pitting an elected Prime Minister against an agency with no electoral roots has to say something.

Under normal circumstances, decisions and policies of her government associated with this issue would be scrutinized at subsequent elections.

Anybody care to speculate how this issue would come out in an open and fair election.

That is if one has any respect for the electorate of course. If prone to demonize them wholesale, this discussion would be moot.

But that would also place one clearly on the side of the anti-democrats.

Another newbie member for a nearly a week who wants to suggest that someone elected "can do anything they please" with no regard to laws, procedures, rules.

And the only consequence should be judgement in an election. Break the law, doesn't matter as long as your elected.

Hmmm. Sounds a familiar line. All charges against any Shin must be politically motivated because they were elected. Is there a law, anywhere in the world, in any country that says elected officials are immune from prosecution when breaking the law?

Guess why countries have checks and balances on their governments? Guess why Thaksin and clan want to remove them? Hope you manage to join the dots.

[Cuchulainn]

^^

Pity!!

[glenmohr]

In this case, pitting an elected Prime Minister against an agency with no electoral roots has to say something.

Under normal circumstances, decisions and policies of her government associated with this issue would be scrutinized at subsequent elections.

Anybody care to speculate how this issue would come out in an open and fair election.

That is if one has any respect for the electorate of course. If prone to demonize them wholesale, this discussion would be moot.

But that would also place one clearly on the side of the anti-democrats.

Another newbie member for a nearly a week who wants to suggest that someone elected "can do anything they please" with no regard to laws, procedures, rules.

And the only consequence should be judgement in an election. Break the law, doesn't matter as long as your elected.

Hmmm. Sounds a familiar line. All charges against any Shin must be politically motivated because they were elected. Is there a law, anywhere in the world, in any country that says elected officials are immune from prosecution when breaking the law?

Guess why countries have checks and balances on their governments? Guess why Thaksin and clan want to remove them? Hope you manage to join the dots.

Actually Mr Boxer, Bannum's opinions are not at all tainted or diminished by the fact that he seldom posts here. You resort to argumentum ad hominem, an old and divisive tactic. Attacking the messenger is always successful as long as the audience comprises small minded people.

For your information in mature societies the process involves an absence of vendetta after a leader is removed or retired. Think how the actions against Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton stopped after they left the presidency. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were not pilloried for taking the UK to war once they were out of office, even the sacked Gough Whitlam, former PM of Australia, was left in peace as was the case with the dictatorial Muldoon in New Zealand.

Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation.

I am very interested in the subject of law and pleased you mention the law. Is there any other country in the world where the act of overthrowing a popularly elected government by the use of force is not an act of treason ?

And finally, have you ever been to Thailand and stood beside a stop light that has turned a bright red colour??? I suspect you have a lot to learn about the law in Thailand where any rich person can commit murder while drunk driving a Ferrari and never do a day in jail. Have you asked a pair of young Burmese held in a South Thailand jail what they think of the laws of Thailand? Be reasonable and study the legal system of Thailand before rushing to print.

[halloween]

Can't attend yet, her second crop of mushrooms are ready for harvesting. And second crops are important enough to stop dam levels from being dropped when there's a flood on the way.

[Misterwhisper]

All you guys completely misunderstand that poor woman once again.

As always, Yingluck is just too busy to attend her hearing in person, because she has more pressing issues at hand.

This time around, and as reported in "news" a couple of weeks ago, she has gone into farming mushrooms in her garden shed. And since the mushroom harvesting period falls exactly on that hearing date, it ought to be postponed. There is no other choice. We all know how busy farmers are during harvesting time, don't we?

And if it's not mushroom farming, next time it'll be something else that prevents her from hearing charges and defending herself. Look how skinny she is. Poor lass has hardly enough time to sit down for a proper meal... ah, the blight of the super-rich.

[ldiablo]

@glenmohr. Well put, that outta shut em up.

[webfact]

NACC Summons Yingluck for Crackdown Compensation Inquiry
By Khaosod English


Vicha Mahakhun, a director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), speaking to the press in Bangkok on 9 June 2015.

BANGKOK — Former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra has been ordered to report to Thailand's national anti-graft agency by 30 June to hear criminal charges over a government program that compensated victims of political violence.

Yingluck and members of her former Cabinet have been charged with ‘abuse of power’ for approving the program in 2012, which distributed 500 million baht to the families of those injured and killed in political unrest between 2005 and 2010.

Vicha Mahakhun, a director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), said today that Yingluck and the other ex-Ministers are required to appear before the commission and formally hear the charges before 30 June.

He told reporters that Yingluck tried to postpone the deadline indefinitely today, but her request was rejected because it was not submitted properly.

"The representative of Ms. Yingluck who submitted the letter requesting a postponement was merely a hired document courier, and not a person who formally received permission to act in legal matter on Ms. Yingluck's behalf," Vicha said. "Also, the letter says Ms. Yingluck requests a postponement, but she reserves the right not to disclose how long the postponement is. Since it is not clear, and there was no person who formally received permission from Ms. Yingluck to commit legal action on her behalf, the NACC holds that we have not received the request."

Yingluck will have 15 days to prepare her testimony after she reports to the NACC on 30 June, he said.

Source: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1433845614

-- Khaosod English 2015-06-09

[halloween]

Actually Mr Boxer, Bannum's opinions are not at all tainted or diminished by the fact that he seldom posts here. You resort to argumentum ad hominem, an old and divisive tactic. Attacking the messenger is always successful as long as the audience comprises small minded people.

For your information in mature societies the process involves an absence of vendetta after a leader is removed or retired. Think how the actions against Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton stopped after they left the presidency. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were not pilloried for taking the UK to war once they were out of office, even the sacked Gough Whitlam, former PM of Australia, was left in peace as was the case with the dictatorial Muldoon in New Zealand.

Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation.

I am very interested in the subject of law and pleased you mention the law. Is there any other country in the world where the act of overthrowing a popularly elected government by the use of force is not an act of treason ?

And finally, have you ever been to Thailand and stood beside a stop light that has turned a bright red colour??? I suspect you have a lot to learn about the law in Thailand where any rich person can commit murder while drunk driving a Ferrari and never do a day in jail. Have you asked a pair of young Burmese held in a South Thailand jail what they think of the laws of Thailand? Be reasonable and study the legal system of Thailand before rushing to print.

"Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation." Neither is leaders of a country committing blatant crimes in full public view and expecting not to be prosecuted for them. While Nixon may have committed crimes, I would really like you to specify the crimes the other leaders have committed.

As for treason, is it hard to understand that the "elected governments" involved in the last 2 coups had resigned. In the earlier, Thaksin was trying to unconstitutionally re-install himself, and with Yingluk there was an impasse with no obvious solution in sight.

[smutcakes]

Actually Mr Boxer, Bannum's opinions are not at all tainted or diminished by the fact that he seldom posts here. You resort to argumentum ad hominem, an old and divisive tactic. Attacking the messenger is always successful as long as the audience comprises small minded people.

For your information in mature societies the process involves an absence of vendetta after a leader is removed or retired. Think how the actions against Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton stopped after they left the presidency. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were not pilloried for taking the UK to war once they were out of office, even the sacked Gough Whitlam, former PM of Australia, was left in peace as was the case with the dictatorial Muldoon in New Zealand.

Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation.

I am very interested in the subject of law and pleased you mention the law. Is there any other country in the world where the act of overthrowing a popularly elected government by the use of force is not an act of treason ?

And finally, have you ever been to Thailand and stood beside a stop light that has turned a bright red colour??? I suspect you have a lot to learn about the law in Thailand where any rich person can commit murder while drunk driving a Ferrari and never do a day in jail. Have you asked a pair of young Burmese held in a South Thailand jail what they think of the laws of Thailand? Be reasonable and study the legal system of Thailand before rushing to print.

"Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation." Neither is leaders of a country committing blatant crimes in full public view and expecting not to be prosecuted for them. While Nixon may have committed crimes, I would really like you to specify the crimes the other leaders have committed.

As for treason, is it hard to understand that the "elected governments" involved in the last 2 coups had resigned. In the earlier, Thaksin was trying to unconstitutionally re-install himself, and with Yingluk there was an impasse with no obvious solution in sight.

Funny the differing approaches the army takes to controlling an impasse! between 2010 and 2014. Would a coup in 2010 not of ended the impasse in the exactly the same way.

[halloween]

Funny the differing approaches the army takes to controlling an impasse! between 2010 and 2014. Would a coup in 2010 not of ended the impasse in the exactly the same way.

2010 impasse? I don't remember a resigned government, or a country without leadership. I do recall quite a few mercenary activists calling for elections, then refusing them when offered.

[Baerboxer]

In this case, pitting an elected Prime Minister against an agency with no electoral roots has to say something.

Under normal circumstances, decisions and policies of her government associated with this issue would be scrutinized at subsequent elections.

Anybody care to speculate how this issue would come out in an open and fair election.

That is if one has any respect for the electorate of course. If prone to demonize them wholesale, this discussion would be moot.

But that would also place one clearly on the side of the anti-democrats.

Another newbie member for a nearly a week who wants to suggest that someone elected "can do anything they please" with no regard to laws, procedures, rules.

And the only consequence should be judgement in an election. Break the law, doesn't matter as long as your elected.

Hmmm. Sounds a familiar line. All charges against any Shin must be politically motivated because they were elected. Is there a law, anywhere in the world, in any country that says elected officials are immune from prosecution when breaking the law?

Guess why countries have checks and balances on their governments? Guess why Thaksin and clan want to remove them? Hope you manage to join the dots.

Actually Mr Boxer, Bannum's opinions are not at all tainted or diminished by the fact that he seldom posts here. You resort to argumentum ad hominem, an old and divisive tactic. Attacking the messenger is always successful as long as the audience comprises small minded people.

For your information in mature societies the process involves an absence of vendetta after a leader is removed or retired. Think how the actions against Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton stopped after they left the presidency. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were not pilloried for taking the UK to war once they were out of office, even the sacked Gough Whitlam, former PM of Australia, was left in peace as was the case with the dictatorial Muldoon in New Zealand.

Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation.

I am very interested in the subject of law and pleased you mention the law. Is there any other country in the world where the act of overthrowing a popularly elected government by the use of force is not an act of treason ?

And finally, have you ever been to Thailand and stood beside a stop light that has turned a bright red colour??? I suspect you have a lot to learn about the law in Thailand where any rich person can commit murder while drunk driving a Ferrari and never do a day in jail. Have you asked a pair of young Burmese held in a South Thailand jail what they think of the laws of Thailand? Be reasonable and study the legal system of Thailand before rushing to print.

And another one surfaces.

If you bothered to do as you suggest and do some research you'll note my comments regarding the Thai justice system and law enforcement agencies and its propensity to favor the rich on many discussion threads.

Nixon was impeached and removed for one dishonest act. AFAIK he wasn't charged with anything else. Clinton lied but got away with it. Mrs Thatcher and Mr. Blair have not been charged with any crimes AFAIK.

Yingluck and her illustrious brother have both been charged with numerous offences. One is about to undergo trials, the other chose to flee on conviction before sentence and become a fugitive and so far avoiding the other 15 charges.

What are you suggesting - they should simply be let off because they're rich, powerful? That contradicts your later statements regarding Ferrari drivers. Or are you suggesting politicians are above the law?

A politician in any country who acts like a common criminal deserves, if charged, prosecuted and convicted to be treated like one.

I note that certain posters using poorly constructed English spring up to defend the Shin clan whenever their alleged misdoings are about to be investigated and always claim it's political, not fair, revenge, biased etc etc. They don't deny the charges but try to divert the argument by challenging the validity of the legal system, and suggesting that the only remedy for governments who break the law is the ballot box.

Yingluck isn't an elected PM anymore by the way. She dissolved parliament and was then removed by a court from the caretaker role for breaking the law.

[Baerboxer]

Actually Mr Boxer, Bannum's opinions are not at all tainted or diminished by the fact that he seldom posts here. You resort to argumentum ad hominem, an old and divisive tactic. Attacking the messenger is always successful as long as the audience comprises small minded people.

For your information in mature societies the process involves an absence of vendetta after a leader is removed or retired. Think how the actions against Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton stopped after they left the presidency. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were not pilloried for taking the UK to war once they were out of office, even the sacked Gough Whitlam, former PM of Australia, was left in peace as was the case with the dictatorial Muldoon in New Zealand.

Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation.

I am very interested in the subject of law and pleased you mention the law. Is there any other country in the world where the act of overthrowing a popularly elected government by the use of force is not an act of treason ?

And finally, have you ever been to Thailand and stood beside a stop light that has turned a bright red colour??? I suspect you have a lot to learn about the law in Thailand where any rich person can commit murder while drunk driving a Ferrari and never do a day in jail. Have you asked a pair of young Burmese held in a South Thailand jail what they think of the laws of Thailand? Be reasonable and study the legal system of Thailand before rushing to print.

"Revenge is a nasty business carried forward by nasty people and is not a regular practice in a civilised nation." Neither is leaders of a country committing blatant crimes in full public view and expecting not to be prosecuted for them. While Nixon may have committed crimes, I would really like you to specify the crimes the other leaders have committed.

As for treason, is it hard to understand that the "elected governments" involved in the last 2 coups had resigned. In the earlier, Thaksin was trying to unconstitutionally re-install himself, and with Yingluk there was an impasse with no obvious solution in sight.

Funny the differing approaches the army takes to controlling an impasse! between 2010 and 2014. Would a coup in 2010 not of ended the impasse in the exactly the same way.

Impasse between 2010 -2014?

Did you miss the 2011 election then?

[smutcakes]

Funny the differing approaches the army takes to controlling an impasse! between 2010 and 2014. Would a coup in 2010 not of ended the impasse in the exactly the same way.

2010 impasse? I don't remember a resigned government, or a country without leadership. I do recall quite a few mercenary activists calling for elections, then refusing them when offered.

Like in 2010, they stood down as was requested and called elections as per the law......funny the whole sms thing saying not to accept yet they are able to find text messages from uncle sms, but unable to track anything from TS which would undoubtedly be very beneficial for them...... you know Abhisit got a text that day to...... amazing really, would you like to speculate on the contents of that to?

[scorecard]

Her team:

- Yongyut Vichaidit,

- Chalerm Yoobamrung,

- Kittirst Na Ranong,

- Voravat Uahapinyakul and

- Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Total A list, most capable, highly and specifically knowledgeable, most honest and most sincere team possible.

First up we see the names of her highly capable team of that time.

Now:

"Vicha Mahakhun, a director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), said today that Yingluck and the other ex-Ministers are required to appear before the commission and formally hear the charges before 30 June.

He told reporters that Yingluck tried to postpone the deadline indefinitely today, but her request was rejected because it was not submitted properly.

"The representative of Ms. Yingluck who submitted the letter requesting a postponement was merely a hired document courier, and not a person who formally received permission to act in legal matter on Ms. Yingluck's behalf," Vicha said. "Also, the letter says Ms. Yingluck requests a postponement, but she reserves the right not to disclose how long the postponement is. Since it is not clear, and there was no person who formally received permission from Ms. Yingluck to commit legal action on her behalf, the NACC holds that we have not received the request." "

Now we learn that her wonderful and highly capable lawyers don't even know how to prepare or submit the appropriate legal documentation to the NACC.

No further comment...

[smutcakes]

Her team:

- Yongyut Vichaidit,

- Chalerm Yoobamrung,

- Kittirst Na Ranong,

- Voravat Uahapinyakul and

- Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Total A list, most capable, highly and specifically knowledgeable, most honest and most sincere team possible.

First up we see the names of her highly capable team of that time.

Now:

"Vicha Mahakhun, a director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), said today that Yingluck and the other ex-Ministers are required to appear before the commission and formally hear the charges before 30 June.

He told reporters that Yingluck tried to postpone the deadline indefinitely today, but her request was rejected because it was not submitted properly.

"The representative of Ms. Yingluck who submitted the letter requesting a postponement was merely a hired document courier, and not a person who formally received permission to act in legal matter on Ms. Yingluck's behalf," Vicha said. "Also, the letter says Ms. Yingluck requests a postponement, but she reserves the right not to disclose how long the postponement is. Since it is not clear, and there was no person who formally received permission from Ms. Yingluck to commit legal action on her behalf, the NACC holds that we have not received the request." "

Now we learn that her wonderful and highly capable lawyers don't even know how to prepare or submit the appropriate legal documentation to the NACC.

No further comment...

A little rich given the back and forth of a recent case between the NACC and a Govt department, not to mention a recent police case, but whichever fits for you.... The NACC make up the rules and they still cannot get it right....

[glenmohr]

To Messrs Halloween and Boxer.

To try and put my point more clearly.

I am saddened by the vendetta against defeated politicians that exists in Thailand and does not occur in other countries I am familiar with.

Ferdinand Marcos had been a brilliant lawyer. I believe as President of Philippines he broke the laws and the constitution. With his great legal mind he pointed out that as President he was the law. However if you research Philippine's politics today you will see 3 members of his direct family in powerful political positions. Ferdinand himself was allowed to die in peace. There have been legal cases against the family, still on going, but there has been no vendetta of a personal nature and they are free to engage in politics in spite of the fact that the current president's father may have been murdered on Marcos' orders. The Philippines gets on with it, the Thai's do not. The best example of all is Nelson Mandela who made peace with his former jailors.

In the above context Thailand may take several more generations to get an Aquino or a Mandela or similar. The first small step would be a general amnesty for Prayuth, Thaksin, Suthep, Abhisit and Yingluck. Nobody in Thailand today would agree to this but this is what it will take to get the show on the road. Infighting at the level exhibited in Thailand is very harmful for the economy.

[Baerboxer]

Her team:

- Yongyut Vichaidit,

- Chalerm Yoobamrung,

- Kittirst Na Ranong,

- Voravat Uahapinyakul and

- Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Total A list, most capable, highly and specifically knowledgeable, most honest and most sincere team possible.

First up we see the names of her highly capable team of that time.

Now:

"Vicha Mahakhun, a director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), said today that Yingluck and the other ex-Ministers are required to appear before the commission and formally hear the charges before 30 June.

He told reporters that Yingluck tried to postpone the deadline indefinitely today, but her request was rejected because it was not submitted properly.

"The representative of Ms. Yingluck who submitted the letter requesting a postponement was merely a hired document courier, and not a person who formally received permission to act in legal matter on Ms. Yingluck's behalf," Vicha said. "Also, the letter says Ms. Yingluck requests a postponement, but she reserves the right not to disclose how long the postponement is. Since it is not clear, and there was no person who formally received permission from Ms. Yingluck to commit legal action on her behalf, the NACC holds that we have not received the request." "

Now we learn that her wonderful and highly capable lawyers don't even know how to prepare or submit the appropriate legal documentation to the NACC.

No further comment...

A little rich given the back and forth of a recent case between the NACC and a Govt department, not to mention a recent police case, but whichever fits for you.... The NACC make up the rules and they still cannot get it right....

Some people / departments will do anything to avoid responsibility for actually doing their job. The OAG's wonderful decision to not prosecute Thaksin for his involvement as "he was out of the country" when he recorded the offending videos was creative; as was Tharit's reinvention of the definition of perjury in his decision not to prosecute Yingluck which he announced the day she took office as the supposed PM. Something with being ok to lie in court as a witness if you're not the one on trial.

Looks like lots like to make up the rules as they go along. Whereas the NACC actually try to do their job.

So, in this case, your find it perfectly acceptable for Yingluck to send a courier with a letter asking for a postponement but reserving the right not to say how long she would like the postponement for.

A little rich for sure. Bit like her big brother promising to come back from the Olympics, but reserving the right not to say when.........

[geriatrickid]

Well done Yingluck! Pay a lawyer to listen to criminal charges and file for a postponement. How about actually defending yourself for once, instead of crying that this is what the Thai people wanted?

What do you propose? That she not retain the services of a defense lawyer to defend against the politically motivated charges? How do you propose she defend against the bullies? She is defending herself, just as defendants in your own country do. Defendants need not appear in court for all of a trial's proceedings, particularly when technical or procedural issues are discussed. This is most likely no different than the procedure that happens in your own country.

The former elected PM has not cried that this is what the Thai people wanted, so why make a false statement? Are you a pathological liar?

The compensation process is consistent with Thai procedure. We may not agree with it, but it has been in place for some time. Compensation for victims of crime even for the families of injured or deceased accused(s) is not something unusual in many western countries. In this case, the deceased were not even convicted of any crimes.

Edited June 9, 2015 by geriatrickid

[smutcakes]

Her team:

- Yongyut Vichaidit,

- Chalerm Yoobamrung,

- Kittirst Na Ranong,

- Voravat Uahapinyakul and

- Mrs Nalinee Thawisin.

Total A list, most capable, highly and specifically knowledgeable, most honest and most sincere team possible.

First up we see the names of her highly capable team of that time.

Now:

"Vicha Mahakhun, a director of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), said today that Yingluck and the other ex-Ministers are required to appear before the commission and formally hear the charges before 30 June.

He told reporters that Yingluck tried to postpone the deadline indefinitely today, but her request was rejected because it was not submitted properly.

"The representative of Ms. Yingluck who submitted the letter requesting a postponement was merely a hired document courier, and not a person who formally received permission to act in legal matter on Ms. Yingluck's behalf," Vicha said. "Also, the letter says Ms. Yingluck requests a postponement, but she reserves the right not to disclose how long the postponement is. Since it is not clear, and there was no person who formally received permission from Ms. Yingluck to commit legal action on her behalf, the NACC holds that we have not received the request." "

Now we learn that her wonderful and highly capable lawyers don't even know how to prepare or submit the appropriate legal documentation to the NACC.

No further comment...

A little rich given the back and forth of a recent case between the NACC and a Govt department, not to mention a recent police case, but whichever fits for you.... The NACC make up the rules and they still cannot get it right....

Some people / departments will do anything to avoid responsibility for actually doing their job. The OAG's wonderful decision to not prosecute Thaksin for his involvement as "he was out of the country" when he recorded the offending videos was creative; as was Tharit's reinvention of the definition of perjury in his decision not to prosecute Yingluck which he announced the day she took office as the supposed PM. Something with being ok to lie in court as a witness if you're not the one on trial.

Looks like lots like to make up the rules as they go along. Whereas the NACC actually try to do their job.

So, in this case, your find it perfectly acceptable for Yingluck to send a courier with a letter asking for a postponement but reserving the right not to say how long she would like the postponement for.

A little rich for sure. Bit like her big brother promising to come back from the Olympics, but reserving the right not to say when.........

Is it legally acceptable to send a lawyer to answer the charges or ask for a postponement? If so then she is well within her rights to do so...if not she is not.

Talking of reinvention, should we talk about impeachement and how that is done?

In fact i would ask you answer whether it is legally necessary for her to be there? Tell me please, you speak with such authority on the matter, you are no doubt versed in the necessities of Thai legal requirements. lol

[geriatrickid]

Some people / departments will do anything to avoid responsibility for actually doing their job. The OAG's wonderful decision to not prosecute Thaksin for his involvement as "he was out of the country" when he recorded the offending videos was creative; as was Tharit's reinvention of the definition of perjury in his decision not to prosecute Yingluck which he announced the day she took office as the supposed PM. Something with being ok to lie in court as a witness if you're not the one on trial.

Looks like lots like to make up the rules as they go along. Whereas the NACC actually try to do their job.

So, in this case, your find it perfectly acceptable for Yingluck to send a courier with a letter asking for a postponement but reserving the right not to say how long she would like the postponement for.

A little rich for sure. Bit like her big brother promising to come back from the Olympics, but reserving the right not to say when.........

A defendant is not obliged to specify a time period for a postponement. A suggestion can sometimes be made. However, the sole authority who can decide on that period of time is the court. Why then do you ridicule the former PM's legal counsel to do something outside of the normal practice and to tell the court what he seeks? If he had done that, you would be the first to criticize.