Yingluck designates lawyer to hear charges

[JAG]

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.

That he is new to this forum doesn't mean that he is not entitled to hold an opinion.

Because he does not froth with hatred at the very thought of the name Shinewatra doesn't mean that he is not entitled to hold an opinion.

Because he believes in the importance of elected government and prefers it to a self appointed military junta does not mean that he is not entitled to hold an opinion.

Of course the time may come when such opinions ( which have much in common with those I hold) will not be permitted, and all we will be able to read are sycophantic praise or hate filled obsessive raving. There is no shortage of that, quite a lot of it comes from you! Until that time, new or ancient, I hope we will keep on posting.

[Baerboxer]

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.

Marcos was a villain. He managed to escape justice much to the chagrin of many Filipinos. His wife and other family members are often linked with stories of corruption; in a country where corruption is still rife and certainly rivals other Asian nations.

Mandela was jailed for terrorist activities against a vile apartheid regime. When released and leading the country he was a shining example of reconciliation. He did not try to replace the white apartheid regime with a dictatorial extortionist regime of his own.

Thaksin was convicted of an offence, jumped bail and chose to be a fugitive rather than fight in the courts. (One of his puppet regimes, that he owned, was in power at the time). He faces 15 serious criminal charges. He spends a lot of money trying to persuade people he's innocent, never ever done anything wrong, and every charge and conviction should be wiped clean - zero the clock as he puts it. You saw the reaction of the Thai people when he tried to sneakily trick his amnesty whitewash into law.

Thaksin will probably never serve a day of his sentence, never be punished for bail jumping, never face any of those 15 other charges. He has more than enough money to live a very comfortable life - but greed, a thirst for power, and the desire to right his own fame in history won't allow him to.

Prayuth, Suthep, and Abhisit have not AFAIK been convicted of any crime so far. Only Thaksin really needs the amnesty, and maybe his sister will soon.

How many countries would tolerate a government that openly repeatedly lied, admitted it, broke the law and refused to accept court verdicts, and handed over control of the country to a non elected criminal fugitive who ran things by Skype?

Thailand needs a real justice system, with clear laws that are enforced impartially to all. Do you think a lying government headed by a fugitive criminal would deliver that? I don't know if the current government will - but they're more likely to than the previous gang.

[ldiablo]

@Halloween. There is quite a difference between a PM resigning on their own accord and being ordered by a court to step down.

[Baerboxer]

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

The NACC chairman says the procedures weren't followed. Either he's right and she's wrong or visa versa. Given PTP's lack of regard for following procedures, like voting for absent colleagues, sending the opposition home before voting etc etc, the NACC chair just might be right. We shall see.

What does impeachment have to do with it? A diversion? We all know that in Thailand that can be a retrospective action when the individual is no longer in office. It's not the same as in the West. So?

The NACC obviously feel they have the power to order her attendance. Is that within or outside their powers - we shall see. You claim the NACC make up the rules - based on what? Other departments comments as they play the game of pass the hot potato so familiar in Thailand.

[Baerboxer]

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.

Thank you GK - could you post a link to that fact so we can all read it please.

[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.

That he is new to this forum doesn't mean that he is not entitled to hold an opinion.

Because he does not froth with hatred at the very thought of the name Shinewatra doesn't mean that he is not entitled to hold an opinion.

Because he believes in the importance of elected government and prefers it to a self appointed military junta does not mean that he is not entitled to hold an opinion.

Of course the time may come when such opinions ( which have much in common with those I hold) will not be permitted, and all we will be able to read are sycophantic praise or hate filled obsessive raving. There is no shortage of that, quite a lot of it comes from you! Until that time, new or ancient, I hope we will keep on posting.

Talking of sycophantic praise, you normally quick on to layer it on for the Shins yourself.

We are all entitled to our views. Even those new avatars the spring up repeating the usual everything against the Shins is politically motivated, they're whiter than the driven snow, they never ever did anything wrong. What a joke!

Elected governments don't repeatedly lie, break laws, threaten courts and refuse to accept verdicts. And most certainly they don't hand over the government to a criminal fugitive who wasn't elected and represents only himself.

The Shins were no champions of freedom of speech, Thaksin and the Yingluck government tried to suppress any opposition.

The usual tactic of accusing all who can and do see through the Shin PR baloney as being avid Junta supporters is beneath you JAG. Or are you so desperate now as more and more comes to light and more and more can see through the Shin pantomime?

[scorecard]

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

The NACC chairman says the procedures weren't followed. Either he's right and she's wrong or visa versa. Given PTP's lack of regard for following procedures, like voting for absent colleagues, sending the opposition home before voting etc etc, the NACC chair just might be right. We shall see.

What does impeachment have to do with it? A diversion? We all know that in Thailand that can be a retrospective action when the individual is no longer in office. It's not the same as in the West. So?

The NACC obviously feel they have the power to order her attendance. Is that within or outside their powers - we shall see. You claim the NACC make up the rules - based on what? Other departments comments as they play the game of pass the hot potato so familiar in Thailand.

' Make up the rules...'. Well there's a case to say that the paymaster is the ultimate example of 'make up the rules'.

He (and his then wife and their lawyers) knew well that he would break a serious law if he signed on behalf of Thailand to authorize a family member (his family) to buy valuable state assets at bargain prices. (Note: state assets really means the common joint property of all Thai people.)

He knew the law and his then wife is a very experience business woman and it's just not possible she didn't know the appropriate laws (and in any case ignorance of the law is no excuse) but he decided he would ignore the law and blatantly break the law.

He make up new rules to suit himself, without hesitation and with no conscience.

[glenmohr]

Talking to a German man the other day, he told me Winston Churchill should have been hung as a war criminal.

Actually hard to think of any national leader who is/was not a criminal, Certainly Abhisit and Suthep engaged in criminal activity, namely murder of unarmed demonstrators, they have been accused of murdering some others who were armed, but the tally by international studies put the unarmed portion at 85 persons .

Whether someone is a criminal or not is a matter of opinion. I say that in the context of Churchill, but guess if you are German you would see it differently and I respect that difference .

In that scenario, to the provincial Thais the Chinawats are heroes and the Bangkok elite are villains and vice versa. But I do wish that the posters here who are opposed to democracy would have enough honesty to say so instead of camouflaging their views with never ending attacks on Shinawatras who do not deserve to be martyrs or the heroes of democracy.,

[Bannum opinions]

Edited June 9, 2015 by Bannum opinions

[Bannum opinions]

Previous posting made in error...Still trying to figger this thing out.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Bannum opinions

[ratcatcher]

Talking to a German man the other day, he told me Winston Churchill should have been hung as a war criminal.

Actually hard to think of any national leader who is/was not a criminal, Certainly Abhisit and Suthep engaged in criminal activity, namely murder of unarmed demonstrators, they have been accused of murdering some others who were armed, but the tally by international studies put the unarmed portion at 85 persons .

Whether someone is a criminal or not is a matter of opinion. I say that in the context of Churchill, but guess if you are German you would see it differently and I respect that difference .

In that scenario, to the provincial Thais the Chinawats are heroes and the Bangkok elite are villains and vice versa. But I do wish that the posters here who are opposed to democracy would have enough honesty to say so instead of camouflaging their views with never ending attacks on Shinawatras who do not deserve to be martyrs or the heroes of democracy.,

Had Churchill been accused and sentenced at an international war criminal court, he may have been hanged. Hung is what donkeys are.

As it was, Churchill with the aid of the USA and the other allies, put an end to the Nazi machine.

Perhaps your friend the German lost family in the Dresden bombing?

Abhisit and his colleagues were the government of the time. He did not engage in criminal activity or murder.

By the same token Thaksin Shinawatra murdered no-one in his war on drugs.

These men, acting in positions of power, ordered the various police and military actions. Thaksin ordered a police crackdown and we all know what happened.

I live in a lower north province and I can assure you TS is no local hero around here., neither is Sister Champignon.

[LannaGuy]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

[scorecard]

Talking to a German man the other day, he told me Winston Churchill should have been hung as a war criminal.

Actually hard to think of any national leader who is/was not a criminal, Certainly Abhisit and Suthep engaged in criminal activity, namely murder of unarmed demonstrators, they have been accused of murdering some others who were armed, but the tally by international studies put the unarmed portion at 85 persons .

Whether someone is a criminal or not is a matter of opinion. I say that in the context of Churchill, but guess if you are German you would see it differently and I respect that difference .

In that scenario, to the provincial Thais the Chinawats are heroes and the Bangkok elite are villains and vice versa. But I do wish that the posters here who are opposed to democracy would have enough honesty to say so instead of camouflaging their views with never ending attacks on Shinawatras who do not deserve to be martyrs or the heroes of democracy.,

...honesty...

Well you need to take your own medicine. 65 posts and you wanna play the old story about opposed to the shins automatically means opposed to democracy.

The shins are absolutely not the champions of democracy and never have been all the 12 + years they have been on the political scene, in fact just the opposite, they made ground on developing a dictatorship and at the same time made ground to create a scenario whereby elections could never remove them.

You need to be honest. And get a tune.

[mango66]

looks like she have dont a strong spine to go to the court,

but spending tax payers money for red devils,

and make travells on peoples tax money for campaining elections, she had no problem !!

[Baerboxer]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

And what is your criteria for considering someone noble pray tell?

[Baerboxer]

Talking to a German man the other day, he told me Winston Churchill should have been hung as a war criminal.

Actually hard to think of any national leader who is/was not a criminal, Certainly Abhisit and Suthep engaged in criminal activity, namely murder of unarmed demonstrators, they have been accused of murdering some others who were armed, but the tally by international studies put the unarmed portion at 85 persons .

Whether someone is a criminal or not is a matter of opinion. I say that in the context of Churchill, but guess if you are German you would see it differently and I respect that difference .

In that scenario, to the provincial Thais the Chinawats are heroes and the Bangkok elite are villains and vice versa. But I do wish that the posters here who are opposed to democracy would have enough honesty to say so instead of camouflaging their views with never ending attacks on Shinawatras who do not deserve to be martyrs or the heroes of democracy.,

Ask your German friend which nation plunged the world into two wars due to their very undemocratic nature, invented unrestricted submarine warfare, the bombing of civilians,and then took up the taking and murdering of civilian hostages as an established practice, and of course organized that little indiscretion known as the Holocaust.

Seeing as how Hitler and most of his cronies were insane they would probably have executed millions more had they won.

Being a criminal is a matter of law, not opinion. Can you think of a Thai former PM who was convicted by law, jumped bail despite his solemn promise and faces many more charges should he return?

The Shinawattra are not democratic, have no interest in democracy and certainly couldn't give a fig for anyone but themselves. Do you consider a government that openly hands control and power over to a non elected fugitive criminal, who actually pays them all a salary democratic?

The Shin PR would love you to believe the Shins are adored by the poor masses. They ain't. Not anymore. Many have woken up to their lies and see through the crap.

If the Shins were in power and lost an election then you would see just how much they value democracy.

[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.

Thank you GK - could you post a link to that fact so we can all read it please.

You are the one making the claim that the former PM's behaviour is illegal, that it is wrong. As such, the onus is on you to cite the law which forbids the activity. I'll help you out. Start with the Criminal Procedure Code พระราชบัญญัติให้ใช้ประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอาญา พุทธศักราช ๒๔๗๗. The Act was updated in 2548, but this was in respect to changing the role of the Supreme Court and ministerial agencies.

Next, go to the 3rd section. As per 172, the procedure states that an accused need not attend the proceedings. The only time an accused is required to be present is at the start so that the court can verify the identity of the accused. This measure is intended to protect the accused.

Postponements and delays are precluded, i.e. in the absence of an exclusion they are allowed. It is not unusual to request a delay or postponement. believe the common characteristic in the Thai courts is that between 70% and 80% of all trials are postponed. (That's the common citation.)

[cookee68]

Sure Yingluck have as long as you want, because it will takes years to get to court, then if, and I mean if found guilty you will get bail appeal, and die of old age before it ever reaches the appeals court

[glenmohr]

Talking to a German man the other day, he told me Winston Churchill should have been hung as a war criminal.

Actually hard to think of any national leader who is/was not a criminal, Certainly Abhisit and Suthep engaged in criminal activity, namely murder of unarmed demonstrators, they have been accused of murdering some others who were armed, but the tally by international studies put the unarmed portion at 85 persons .

Whether someone is a criminal or not is a matter of opinion. I say that in the context of Churchill, but guess if you are German you would see it differently and I respect that difference .

In that scenario, to the provincial Thais the Chinawats are heroes and the Bangkok elite are villains and vice versa. But I do wish that the posters here who are opposed to democracy would have enough honesty to say so instead of camouflaging their views with never ending attacks on Shinawatras who do not deserve to be martyrs or the heroes of democracy.,

...honesty...

Well you need to take your own medicine. 65 posts and you wanna play the old story about opposed to the shins automatically means opposed to democracy.

The shins are absolutely not the champions of democracy and never have been all the 12 + years they have been on the political scene, in fact just the opposite, they made ground on developing a dictatorship and at the same time made ground to create a scenario whereby elections could never remove them.

You need to be honest. And get a tune.

Honesty is critical, I agree with you Scorecard. What I said was that " Shinawatras do not deserve to be the heroes of democracy". The unintended consequence of your vendetta against them has turned them into martyrs.

[glenmohr]

Talking to a German man the other day, he told me Winston Churchill should have been hung as a war criminal.

Actually hard to think of any national leader who is/was not a criminal, Certainly Abhisit and Suthep engaged in criminal activity, namely murder of unarmed demonstrators, they have been accused of murdering some others who were armed, but the tally by international studies put the unarmed portion at 85 persons .

Whether someone is a criminal or not is a matter of opinion. I say that in the context of Churchill, but guess if you are German you would see it differently and I respect that difference .

In that scenario, to the provincial Thais the Chinawats are heroes and the Bangkok elite are villains and vice versa. But I do wish that the posters here who are opposed to democracy would have enough honesty to say so instead of camouflaging their views with never ending attacks on Shinawatras who do not deserve to be martyrs or the heroes of democracy.,

Had Churchill been accused and sentenced at an international war criminal court, he may have been hanged. Hung is what donkeys are.

As it was, Churchill with the aid of the USA and the other allies, put an end to the Nazi machine.

Perhaps your friend the German lost family in the Dresden bombing?

Abhisit and his colleagues were the government of the time. He did not engage in criminal activity or murder.

By the same token Thaksin Shinawatra murdered no-one in his war on drugs.

These men, acting in positions of power, ordered the various police and military actions. Thaksin ordered a police crackdown and we all know what happened.

I live in a lower north province and I can assure you TS is no local hero around here., neither is Sister Champignon.

Thank you for your correction Ratcatcher, I was trying to quote the German who I met in the back and beyond of Cambodia. You are perfectly correct to say Churchill was hung although not many histories relate to the quality of the hanging or whether it was like a donkey. We do know he did not hang around Dresden too often. It would be nice to hang out with you sometimes.

[soundman]

Inflammatory post and reply in poor taste have been removed.

[LannaGuy]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

And what is your criteria for considering someone noble pray tell?

The way she has conducted herself with quiet dignity has been quiet astounding. She is being hounded by the military junta yet remains calm and almost serene. She was not a good PM and we don't want Khun Shin back but she, and her Ministers, should receive Parliamentary Privilege and not be sent to the pack. UNLESS she has committed a criminal act such as corruption and if this is the case arrest her and try her with all the EVIDENCE.

If she is guilty of not managing everything perfectly (give me a leader who has?) then which world leader could throw the first stone? the normal procedure is press exposure or another form of exposure then let the voters decide at the ballot box not the witch-hunt by the Military Junta as here.

[glenmohr]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

And what is your criteria for considering someone noble pray tell?

The way she has conducted herself with quiet dignity has been quiet astounding. She is being hounded by the military junta yet remains calm and almost serene. She was not a good PM and we don't want Khun Shin back but she, and her Ministers, should receive Parliamentary Privilege and not be sent to the pack. UNLESS she has committed a criminal act such as corruption and if this is the case arrest her and try her with all the EVIDENCE.

If she is guilty of not managing everything perfectly (give me a leader who has?) then which world leader could throw the first stone? the normal procedure is press exposure or another form of exposure then let the voters decide at the ballot box not the witch-hunt by the Military Junta as here.

Excellent post Lanna Guy. If one studies the history over the last 200 or so years in mature societies we see a pendulum effect at work, a few years of left wing and then a few years of right wing and so it goes on back and forth. A bad leader is replaced by an average one and an average one is replaced by a another bad one and so it goes on. But because of the system no one gets too upset and the people let nature take its course. A dictatorship has no time limit, no checks and balances and the rules change at the whim of the dictator. Some posters say TS is not popular in my village nor in my brother in laws village down the road. Surely that can be illustrated and endorsed by holding an election every now and then?? Independent studies have shown that vote buying did not affect the end result in the last Thailand elections. Where the rural coalition paid the voters they tended to vote Pheu Thai. In regions where the Democrats paid voters they tended to vote Pheu Thai. In Thailand it is called vote buying, in the west it is called advertising. As Lanna Guy so rightly says " Show me the leader who is qualified to cast the first stone"

[Baerboxer]

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.

Thank you GK - could you post a link to that fact so we can all read it please.

You are the one making the claim that the former PM's behaviour is illegal, that it is wrong. As such, the onus is on you to cite the law which forbids the activity. I'll help you out. Start with the Criminal Procedure Code พระราชบัญญัติให้ใช้ประมวลกฎหมายวิธีพิจารณาความอาญา พุทธศักราช ๒๔๗๗. The Act was updated in 2548, but this was in respect to changing the role of the Supreme Court and ministerial agencies.

Next, go to the 3rd section. As per 172, the procedure states that an accused need not attend the proceedings. The only time an accused is required to be present is at the start so that the court can verify the identity of the accused. This measure is intended to protect the accused.

Postponements and delays are precluded, i.e. in the absence of an exclusion they are allowed. It is not unusual to request a delay or postponement. believe the common characteristic in the Thai courts is that between 70% and 80% of all trials are postponed. (That's the common citation.)

Are the NACC a court? Is this a trial?

[Nobb]

Hear lawyers names are Doey, Screwum , and How!

[Baerboxer]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

And what is your criteria for considering someone noble pray tell?

The way she has conducted herself with quiet dignity has been quiet astounding. She is being hounded by the military junta yet remains calm and almost serene. She was not a good PM and we don't want Khun Shin back but she, and her Ministers, should receive Parliamentary Privilege and not be sent to the pack. UNLESS she has committed a criminal act such as corruption and if this is the case arrest her and try her with all the EVIDENCE.

If she is guilty of not managing everything perfectly (give me a leader who has?) then which world leader could throw the first stone? the normal procedure is press exposure or another form of exposure then let the voters decide at the ballot box not the witch-hunt by the Military Junta as here.

Dignity - like the repeated lies she told and promises she made?

Parliamentary privilege applies to what's said in parliament. That MP's cannot be held legal responsible for comments they make during parliamentary proceedings. On the rare occasions Yingluck attended parliament, and even rarer occasions she spoke, she was entitled to whatever parliamentary privilege rules apply in Thailand.

Parliamentary privilege does not mean you can break any laws you fancy and get away with it. Nor should it.

I absolutely agree voters decide if a particular government manages well or not. And the law decides whether people break the law or not.

The two things are not mutually exclusive. Politicians who break laws should be dealt with through the legal system according to the law. Nothing to do with parliamentary privilege protecting what they say in parliament or being voted out for mismanagement.

[Baerboxer]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

And what is your criteria for considering someone noble pray tell?

The way she has conducted herself with quiet dignity has been quiet astounding. She is being hounded by the military junta yet remains calm and almost serene. She was not a good PM and we don't want Khun Shin back but she, and her Ministers, should receive Parliamentary Privilege and not be sent to the pack. UNLESS she has committed a criminal act such as corruption and if this is the case arrest her and try her with all the EVIDENCE.

If she is guilty of not managing everything perfectly (give me a leader who has?) then which world leader could throw the first stone? the normal procedure is press exposure or another form of exposure then let the voters decide at the ballot box not the witch-hunt by the Military Junta as here.

Dignity - like the repeated lies she told and promises she made?

Parliamentary privilege applies to what's said in parliament. That MP's cannot be held legal responsible for comments they make during parliamentary proceedings. On the rare occasions Yingluck attended parliament, and even rarer occasions she spoke, she was entitled to whatever parliamentary privilege rules apply in Thailand.

Parliamentary privilege does not mean you can break any laws you fancy and get away with it. Nor should it.

I absolutely agree voters decide if a particular government manages well or not. And the law decides whether people break the law or not.

The two things are not mutually exclusive. Politicians who break laws should be dealt with through the legal system according to the law. Nothing to do with parliamentary privilege protecting what they say in parliament or being voted out for mismanagement.

[Baerboxer]

A noble woman struck by the JackBoot of the Military Junta

you don't believe it? amazing...

And what is your criteria for considering someone noble pray tell?

The way she has conducted herself with quiet dignity has been quiet astounding. She is being hounded by the military junta yet remains calm and almost serene. She was not a good PM and we don't want Khun Shin back but she, and her Ministers, should receive Parliamentary Privilege and not be sent to the pack. UNLESS she has committed a criminal act such as corruption and if this is the case arrest her and try her with all the EVIDENCE.

If she is guilty of not managing everything perfectly (give me a leader who has?) then which world leader could throw the first stone? the normal procedure is press exposure or another form of exposure then let the voters decide at the ballot box not the witch-hunt by the Military Junta as here.

Excellent post Lanna Guy. If one studies the history over the last 200 or so years in mature societies we see a pendulum effect at work, a few years of left wing and then a few years of right wing and so it goes on back and forth. A bad leader is replaced by an average one and an average one is replaced by a another bad one and so it goes on. But because of the system no one gets too upset and the people let nature take its course. A dictatorship has no time limit, no checks and balances and the rules change at the whim of the dictator. Some posters say TS is not popular in my village nor in my brother in laws village down the road. Surely that can be illustrated and endorsed by holding an election every now and then?? Independent studies have shown that vote buying did not affect the end result in the last Thailand elections. Where the rural coalition paid the voters they tended to vote Pheu Thai. In regions where the Democrats paid voters they tended to vote Pheu Thai. In Thailand it is called vote buying, in the west it is called advertising. As Lanna Guy so rightly says " Show me the leader who is qualified to cast the first stone"

The Shins and the Dems aren't left vs right wing in a Western sense. The Shins aren't socialists. They are a very rich elite family (look up their family history) who want to advance their clan at the expense of other similar rich elites.

Did you notice how the Shins didn't support or want democratically elected provincial governors whilst they did want an elected senate, with very few restraints?

Any thoughts why that may be?

[glenmohr]

Baer Boxer, you are one angry man, that is not good for your health, take care.

[maidee]

she was in power in 2005 ?

was i asleep for a decade ?