Thai govt seeks to extradite lese majeste suspect from New Zealand

[Dumbastheycome]

Bragging a new passport while defying the law of country of origin could lead to the revocation of residency or citizenship. Countries such as N Z have such laws. A review of the original application for residency and eventual citizenship ( if in this case actual)might lead to revocation and deportation rather than extradition. Maybe Thai authorities are employing quite clever tactics rather than being foolish, stupid or myopic as has been suggested.

The LM question may be untenable to many but rhetoric suggesting/inciting violence or anti social behaviours ( if that was involved in the speech) are unwelcome in most places accepting new immigrants. Asylum would be unlikely because the Thai legal outcome would possibly be a prison term......not public persecution or death.

[HughJass]

theres no chance that NZ will deport him for such an offence....maybe they should re think the charges and say that he denied the Holocaust..that will probably work

[kiwikeith]

There is not a hope in hell of NZ agreeing to this. Similarly nor would Australia, Canada, UK, USA, any member of EU. Nor Japan. Their best chance for an extradition is if some 'fugitives' are in North Korea

If, Ponytail puller (caught in a restaurant pulling the waitress's ponytail ) John Key (PM NZ) allowed this, then the Thais should allow British police and lawyers and forensics investigate the murder of the 2 Brits that the scapegoats are charged with!

[Si Thea01]

I see this arose from a speech from a red stage in 2013.

Lets hope they start going carefully through all the speeches from various red stages and activating the stalled cases against all the red leaders who implicated themselves with their hate and violence filled speeches when they thought they were invincible and untouchable.

A Westerner defending the use of an outdated and draconian LM law as a political tool??

Lord have mercy......................

What's the difference between his support and you being a westerner, criticising? This is Thailand and it is their rule of law, so get over it, nothing you or others will say or do will help, but it is interesting how many things not suited to your way of thinking causes you blood pressure to rise. Maybe, if your nice, the Lord will show mercy.

[SABloke]

I sincerely hope N.Z. has the necessary balls to tell this regime where they can stick their archaic and repressive law......................

Some of the LM is something that would be highly illegal in every country....not only if it is about the King/President....I let it to your imagination what that might be.

But I have no idea what it was in this case. Other cases are known...

Not in my home country.

In the US, you can insult the head of State (the President) in the most explicit terms, 24 hours a day.

The repercussion will be that your friends may abandon you as a "whack job"; but there is no law against it as long as you do not make threats of violence.

I'm assuming that h90 was referring to threats of violence which as you both would be illegal.

It really is about time some people stopped hiding behind the monarchy and using it for their own ends. Since the king himself has stated that he has made mistakes and should be open to criticism, the LM laws and anyone who uses them against someone who makes statements critical of the king would seem to have contravened those laws as they are acting contrary to the wishes of the king.

The king spoke in very calculated and vague terms when he made the famous speech. If he really wanted 112 to be scrapped it would have happened a long time ago. Edited June 18, 2015 by SABloke

[mike324]

Singapore has some pretty tough laws against people criticizing the head of state and government. I wonder what people's views are regarding to that.

I don't like it. Why do you ask? Because you do like it?

Just a topic worth discussing, a society can progressive forward even with these types of laws in place. I don't think we need to repeat the "Freedom of speech" or "people's right to expressive themselves" we all know that, no need to go beat a dead horse. We are in a country where it doesn't work that way, so the best is to adapt. I know both countries are still quite different but at the same time the censorship is somewhat similar.

LM laws are abused by politicians and used against each other. I remember in the 90s, we hardly hear LM being used, it may pop up in the news a handful of times per year, nowadays it runs in the hundreds per year.

I think that LM cases runs so high is due to political parties using LM as a weapon to win votes, to sway people's views and perspectives of politics. If you do a little search online, you will see which party most folks who break the law are aligned too. I think if politicians stop using LM as a propaganda tool, we will have fewer arrests regarding this issue.

There are only a small group that are neutral and are really fighting for freedom of expression and rights with no political agenda.

What does breaking the LM achieve (freedom of expression, and basic rights aside) ?

[lostoday]

Singapore has some pretty tough laws against people criticizing the head of state and government. I wonder what people's views are regarding to that.

I don't like it. Why do you ask? Because you do like it?

Just a topic worth discussing, a society can progressive forward even with these types of laws in place. I don't think we need to repeat the "Freedom of speech" or "people's right to expressive themselves" we all know that, no need to go beat a dead horse. We are in a country where it doesn't work that way, so the best is to adapt. I know both countries are still quite different but at the same time the censorship is somewhat similar.

LM laws are abused by politicians and used against each other. I remember in the 90s, we hardly hear LM being used, it may pop up in the news a handful of times per year, nowadays it runs in the hundreds per year.

I think that LM cases runs so high is due to political parties using LM as a weapon to win votes, to sway people's views and perspectives of politics. If you do a little search online, you will see which party most folks who break the law are aligned too. I think if politicians stop using LM as a propaganda tool, we will have fewer arrests regarding this issue.

There are only a small group that are neutral and are really fighting for freedom of expression and rights with no political agenda.

What does breaking the LM achieve (freedom of expression, and basic rights aside) ?

Recently I don't think anyone is breaking the law. The law is used to bop people who someone does not like and nothing to do with actual laws. That is what the NY times has written about it.

[a99az]

Forget about this little nobody. Extradite Thaksin, and make him face justice.

He can't travel as he has no Thai passports !!! Oop's

[Shawn0001]

I sincerely hope N.Z. has the necessary balls to tell this regime where they can stick their archaic and repressive law......................

Some of the LM is something that would be highly illegal in every country....not only if it is about the King/President....I let it to your imagination what that might be.

But I have no idea what it was in this case. Other cases are known...

What are you on about. In "every country". Are you sure?

Best to read up on the law if you are interested, if you did then it would be quite clear that "some of the LM" law would be illegal in all countries. The crime is defined as, "defaming, insulting or threatening the Thai monarch". Where is it legal to threaten the head of state? Perhaps you can enlighten us.

[lostoday]

Forget about this little nobody. Extradite Thaksin, and make him face justice.

He can't travel as he has no Thai passports !!! Oop's

He has passport from Montenegro. He was there last week to add pages because he takes a lot of vacations. A good Thaksin whack should be based on fact and then one can launch an attack. Try and keep up or you will be removed from the bashers club.

Edited June 18, 2015 by lostoday

[Shawn0001]

I see this arose from a speech from a red stage in 2013.

Lets hope they start going carefully through all the speeches from various red stages and activating the stalled cases against all the red leaders who implicated themselves with their hate and violence filled speeches when they thought they were invincible and untouchable.

A Westerner defending the use of an outdated and draconian LM law as a political tool??

Lord have mercy......................

What's the difference between his support and you being a westerner, criticising? This is Thailand and it is their rule of law, so get over it, nothing you or others will say or do will help, but it is interesting how many things not suited to your way of thinking causes you blood pressure to rise. Maybe, if your nice, the Lord will show mercy.

The west is associated with progression and freedom, we expect people from the west to bring with them these values as they have witnessed the benefits of a free society. That is the difference, one of expectation, but of course there are those who think they would prefer to live without some of the freedoms they were born into.

What I find interesting is that you attempt to vilify the poster just for posting whilst absurdly claiming that their blood pressure is rising. Where did that little b!tch fit come from?

[glenmohr]

I sincerely hope N.Z. has the necessary balls to tell this regime where they can stick their archaic and repressive law......................

Some of the LM is something that would be highly illegal in every country....not only if it is about the King/President....I let it to your imagination what that might be.

But I have no idea what it was in this case. Other cases are known...

What are you on about. In "every country". Are you sure?

Best to read up on the law if you are interested, if you did then it would be quite clear that "some of the LM" law would be illegal in all countries. The crime is defined as, "defaming, insulting or threatening the Thai monarch". Where is it legal to threaten the head of state? Perhaps you can enlighten us.

Perhaps Shawn the poster means that in "every other country" he / she means that the word threaten has a different meaning. The word threaten when translated into the Thai criminal code clearly takes on a different life. For example: in every western country you will see from time to time a politician leap to his/ her feet in the Houses of Parliament and shout "This government must resign". In a western country that is considered part of the political process and protected by freedom of speech, in Thailand that would be considered threatening the King's ministers and therefore Lese Majeste would apply. No country, that has LM laws, interprets their LM law in the same way Thailand does. In my country ( New Zealand) when a political activist threw accurately a wet T shirt which hit our Queen Elizabeth it was not considered " threatening" but a symbolic act drawing attention to past grievances. A wet T shirt does not really threaten anyone but that act would certainly come under LM in Thailand.

[ExPratt]

As it is their law they have a right to seek extradition even if it's only for symbolic reasons, discourage Thai's at home from speaking freely and fleeing Being as nearly all countries do not have such laws and the regime in charge is a Military Junta , I would think the extradition request would have a very slim chance of success

[rubl]

Since we don't know what exactly was said and posting here what was said would be an LM offence in itself (plus a ban of course), it is difficult to say whether or not the 'offence' would be seen as such in NZ. If the offence came close to preaching revolution with a wee bit of red-shirt 'democratic' violence, the charge might stick in NZ.

It doesn't make any difference.The New Zealand government would not recognise the alleged offence anymore than it recognises voodoo or any other primitive behaviour.

Although the topic is a red-shirt I don't think you should go down to voodoo and other primitive behaviour. Neither I nor you (I assume) know the details of what the fugitive has said. A lot would be deemed no reason to extradite, some things would be though. If the red-shirt was threatening with violence and bloodshed the NZ government might consider extraditing a good thing. Keep in mind that after every new terror attack by anyone, even if totally unrelated, governments are under pressure regarding asylum and extradition.

At the risk of repeating myself it makes no difference what was said because free speech is respected in NZ.

Because of Thailand's undemocratic, repressive and vengeful government even a properly documented case citing terrorism would run into difficulties.

As to violence and bloodshed, since the Thai army has been the main exponent I agree there is a possible albeit remote risk of international arrest for the senior officers involved.

At the risk of repeating myself, 'freedom of speech' has reached it's limits in many countries. You cannot just say or write what you want, you may be jailed because of it.

BTW 2015-03-05

"New Zealand is spying indiscriminately on its allies in the Pacific region and sharing the information with the US and the other “Five Eyes” alliance states, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden"

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/05/new-zealand-spying-on-pacific-allies-for-five-eyes-and-nsa-snowden-files-show

Edited June 18, 2015 by rubl

[baboon]

^^

A free press using freedom of speech to expose possible abuses of freedom. Nice try, but no dice.

[Si Thea01]

I see this arose from a speech from a red stage in 2013.

Lets hope they start going carefully through all the speeches from various red stages and activating the stalled cases against all the red leaders who implicated themselves with their hate and violence filled speeches when they thought they were invincible and untouchable.

A Westerner defending the use of an outdated and draconian LM law as a political tool??

Lord have mercy......................

What's the difference between his support and you being a westerner, criticising? This is Thailand and it is their rule of law, so get over it, nothing you or others will say or do will help, but it is interesting how many things not suited to your way of thinking causes you blood pressure to rise. Maybe, if your nice, the Lord will show mercy.

The west is associated with progression and freedom, we expect people from the west to bring with them these values as they have witnessed the benefits of a free society. That is the difference, one of expectation, but of course there are those who think they would prefer to live without some of the freedoms they were born into.

What I find interesting is that you attempt to vilify the poster just for posting whilst absurdly claiming that their blood pressure is rising. Where did that little b!tch fit come from?

Has Joc engaged you to censor responses. You must be wearing his glasses. Attempted vilification, may I suggest the pot calling the kettle black, you hypocrite. Getting quite serious aren't we, I think Joc will understand a little sarcasm, he's not as thinned skinned as yourself and can take it as well as give it back.

[Trouble]

I sincerely hope N.Z. has the necessary balls to tell this regime where they can stick their archaic and repressive law......................

Some of the LM is something that would be highly illegal in every country....not only if it is about the King/President....I let it to your imagination what that might be.

But I have no idea what it was in this case. Other cases are known...

Not in my home country.

In the US, you can insult the head of State (the President) in the most explicit terms, 24 hours a day.

The repercussion will be that your friends may abandon you as a "whack job"; but there is no law against it as long as you do not make threats of violence.

Fortunately there is absolutely no comparison between Barack Obama and the most loved man in this country.

The Thais have their laws and the United States and United Kingdom etc, have theirs. End of.

Like to see what you are saying 10 years from now in reference to LM laws.

[rubl]

^^

A free press using freedom of speech to expose possible abuses of freedom. Nice try, but no dice.

Of course, of course, who believes Snowden anyway? Probably the Russians who suggest that the New Zealand Government is listening on to private conversations and telling the USA about them, while at the same time begging a Thai red-shirt to accept a passport?

Anyway, still don't have any indication in how far the LM charge covers 'real' LM or somewhat related stuff like 'eradicating democrats' and 'wipe out reactionars'. At least in conferring with the New Zealand government the Thai government has to give sufficient details for the NZ government to even start of possible extradition process.

ADD:

Freedom of Speech doesn't exclude being responsible for what you say or write. Even the E.C. concludes such, although indirectly.

2015-06-16

"Shock European court decision: Websites are liable for users’ comments

...

As such, Peter Micek, Senior Policy Counsel at Access, says the ECHR judgment has "dramatically shifted the internet away from the free expression and privacy protections that created the internet as we know it.""

http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2015/06/shock-european-court-decision-websites-are-liable-for-users-comments/

Edited June 19, 2015 by rubl

[jayboy]

Since we don't know what exactly was said and posting here what was said would be an LM offence in itself (plus a ban of course), it is difficult to say whether or not the 'offence' would be seen as such in NZ. If the offence came close to preaching revolution with a wee bit of red-shirt 'democratic' violence, the charge might stick in NZ.

It doesn't make any difference.The New Zealand government would not recognise the alleged offence anymore than it recognises voodoo or any other primitive behaviour.

Although the topic is a red-shirt I don't think you should go down to voodoo and other primitive behaviour. Neither I nor you (I assume) know the details of what the fugitive has said. A lot would be deemed no reason to extradite, some things would be though. If the red-shirt was threatening with violence and bloodshed the NZ government might consider extraditing a good thing. Keep in mind that after every new terror attack by anyone, even if totally unrelated, governments are under pressure regarding asylum and extradition.

At the risk of repeating myself it makes no difference what was said because free speech is respected in NZ.

Because of Thailand's undemocratic, repressive and vengeful government even a properly documented case citing terrorism would run into difficulties.

As to violence and bloodshed, since the Thai army has been the main exponent I agree there is a possible albeit remote risk of international arrest for the senior officers involved.

At the risk of repeating myself, 'freedom of speech' has reached it's limits in many countries. You cannot just say or write what you want, you may be jailed because of it.

BTW 2015-03-05

"New Zealand is spying indiscriminately on its allies in the Pacific region and sharing the information with the US and the other “Five Eyes” alliance states, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden"

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/05/new-zealand-spying-on-pacific-allies-for-five-eyes-and-nsa-snowden-files-show

You seem to be confused.Certainly most countries impose limits on free speech.For example there are penalties for inciting racial hatred.However in the case under discussion there is no such breach because in NZ , Thailand's laws on LM are not recognised and thus no crime has been committed.Even if the alleged LM crime was proven to have been expressed in intemperate and deeply offensive terms there would still be no possibility of extradition.

On a related point some defenders of LM point out that some European countries have a crime of holocaust denial.This is a fair point and I believe horrible though holocaust deniers are, it should not be a crime.In any event no country would be silly enough to seek extradition for a holocaust denier.

[rubl]

[

At the risk of repeating myself, 'freedom of speech' has reached it's limits in many countries. You cannot just say or write what you want, you may be jailed because of it.

BTW 2015-03-05

"New Zealand is spying indiscriminately on its allies in the Pacific region and sharing the information with the US and the other “Five Eyes” alliance states, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden"

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/05/new-zealand-spying-on-pacific-allies-for-five-eyes-and-nsa-snowden-files-show

You seem to be confused.Certainly most countries impose limits on free speech.For example there are penalties for inciting racial hatred.However in the case under discussion there is no such breach because in NZ , Thailand's laws on LM are not recognised and thus no crime has been committed.Even if the alleged LM crime was proven to have been expressed in intemperate and deeply offensive terms there would still be no possibility of extradition.

On a related point some defenders of LM point out that some European countries have a crime of holocaust denial.This is a fair point and I believe horrible though holocaust deniers are, it should not be a crime.In any event no country would be silly enough to seek extradition for a holocaust denier.

Now skipping all denigrating remarks to avoid confusion.

LM is an easy label which can covers aspects which in themselves would be seen as criminal in other countries as well. If the accused of this topic had spoken about the 'need to rid the country of these or those, with violence if need be' that would fall under the part of 'criminal' and not be allowed to hid under 'freedom of speech'.

So, we're still at "we don't know what was said". With the Thai government now consulting with the NZ government at least TH needs to explain to NZ what it is about and NZ will tell TH if an official extradition request should be tried or not. Of course, even when NZ says that TH may try, there's still no guarantee.

[Shawn0001]

Has Joc engaged you to censor responses. You must be wearing his glasses. Attempted vilification, may I suggest the pot calling the kettle black, you hypocrite. Getting quite serious aren't we, I think Joc will understand a little sarcasm, he's not as thinned skinned as yourself and can take it as well as give it back.

Pointing out that you have little b!tch fits all over here whilst weakly trying to detract from this by claiming hypocricy is not attempting to vilify you, it is just a fact. Do you actually have anything of substance to bring to the debate or is it all just going to be little b!tchy comments?

[jayboy]

[

At the risk of repeating myself, 'freedom of speech' has reached it's limits in many countries. You cannot just say or write what you want, you may be jailed because of it.

BTW 2015-03-05

"New Zealand is spying indiscriminately on its allies in the Pacific region and sharing the information with the US and the other “Five Eyes” alliance states, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden"

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/05/new-zealand-spying-on-pacific-allies-for-five-eyes-and-nsa-snowden-files-show

You seem to be confused.Certainly most countries impose limits on free speech.For example there are penalties for inciting racial hatred.However in the case under discussion there is no such breach because in NZ , Thailand's laws on LM are not recognised and thus no crime has been committed.Even if the alleged LM crime was proven to have been expressed in intemperate and deeply offensive terms there would still be no possibility of extradition.

On a related point some defenders of LM point out that some European countries have a crime of holocaust denial.This is a fair point and I believe horrible though holocaust deniers are, it should not be a crime.In any event no country would be silly enough to seek extradition for a holocaust denier.

Now skipping all denigrating remarks to avoid confusion.

LM is an easy label which can covers aspects which in themselves would be seen as criminal in other countries as well. If the accused of this topic had spoken about the 'need to rid the country of these or those, with violence if need be' that would fall under the part of 'criminal' and not be allowed to hid under 'freedom of speech'.

So, we're still at "we don't know what was said". With the Thai government now consulting with the NZ government at least TH needs to explain to NZ what it is about and NZ will tell TH if an official extradition request should be tried or not. Of course, even when NZ says that TH may try, there's still no guarantee.

No you are wrong.LM is very specific even though as almost everybody agrees much abused in practise.My comments on the NZ Govt reaction remain beyond doubt.Even if the alleged offence was made in the violent terms you suggest there would still be no possible chance of extradition.If the Thais could demonstrate that someone had actually participated in a terrorist offence that is a different matter altogether, but it would be nothing to do with LM.

I think this has been explained to you sufficiently now.If you can't grasp the point you never will.In short if an LM extradition request is made, it doesn't matter what was alleged to be said.It will be dismissed out of hand.If a major crime has been committed ( ie a major crime also under NZ law) extradition would be considered.

Frankly the Thais have undermined their own position by invoking a measure which is regarded by other countries as barbaric.

[glenmohr]

To try and illustrate Jay Boy's post:

Mr Ekapob is likely to be:

1) A real little prick.

2). An eternal trouble maker.

3) A probable communist.

4) Related by marriage to a now disgraced former member of the Royal Family.

All of the above are against Thai Laws with particular reference to LM.

None of the above are against NZ Law.

[Si Thea01]

Has Joc engaged you to censor responses. You must be wearing his glasses. Attempted vilification, may I suggest the pot calling the kettle black, you hypocrite. Getting quite serious aren't we, I think Joc will understand a little sarcasm, he's not as thinned skinned as yourself and can take it as well as give it back.

Pointing out that you have little b!tch fits all over here whilst weakly trying to detract from this by claiming hypocricy is not attempting to vilify you, it is just a fact. Do you actually have anything of substance to bring to the debate or is it all just going to be little b!tchy comments?

Your debating skills are excellent and I see that your two posts contain an enormous amount of substance relating to the subject, so it would be unkind of me to criticise one who has such a vast knowledge, and an amiable disposition to boot.

[jacky54]

There is no way New Zealand is going to let themselves be bullied by an illegal military junta into handing over a person accused of this outdated, oppressive and ludicrous law. NZ is a civilized democracy that believes in free speech and justice, Thailand is anything but.

[rubl]

[

At the risk of repeating myself, 'freedom of speech' has reached it's limits in many countries. You cannot just say or write what you want, you may be jailed because of it.

BTW 2015-03-05

"New Zealand is spying indiscriminately on its allies in the Pacific region and sharing the information with the US and the other “Five Eyes” alliance states, according to documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden"

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/05/new-zealand-spying-on-pacific-allies-for-five-eyes-and-nsa-snowden-files-show

You seem to be confused.Certainly most countries impose limits on free speech.For example there are penalties for inciting racial hatred.However in the case under discussion there is no such breach because in NZ , Thailand's laws on LM are not recognised and thus no crime has been committed.Even if the alleged LM crime was proven to have been expressed in intemperate and deeply offensive terms there would still be no possibility of extradition.

On a related point some defenders of LM point out that some European countries have a crime of holocaust denial.This is a fair point and I believe horrible though holocaust deniers are, it should not be a crime.In any event no country would be silly enough to seek extradition for a holocaust denier.

Now skipping all denigrating remarks to avoid confusion.

LM is an easy label which can covers aspects which in themselves would be seen as criminal in other countries as well. If the accused of this topic had spoken about the 'need to rid the country of these or those, with violence if need be' that would fall under the part of 'criminal' and not be allowed to hid under 'freedom of speech'.

So, we're still at "we don't know what was said". With the Thai government now consulting with the NZ government at least TH needs to explain to NZ what it is about and NZ will tell TH if an official extradition request should be tried or not. Of course, even when NZ says that TH may try, there's still no guarantee.

No you are wrong.LM is very specific even though as almost everybody agrees much abused in practise.My comments on the NZ Govt reaction remain beyond doubt.Even if the alleged offence was made in the violent terms you suggest there would still be no possible chance of extradition.If the Thais could demonstrate that someone had actually participated in a terrorist offence that is a different matter altogether, but it would be nothing to do with LM.

I think this has been explained to you sufficiently now.If you can't grasp the point you never will.In short if an LM extradition request is made, it doesn't matter what was alleged to be said.It will be dismissed out of hand.If a major crime has been committed ( ie a major crime also under NZ law) extradition would be considered.

Frankly the Thais have undermined their own position by invoking a measure which is regarded by other countries as barbaric.

"I think this has been explained to you sufficiently now.If you can't grasp the point you never will."

Oh, I did grasp the point. You just stick to the LM label and I can only hope the Thai government is a wee bit more pragmatic and explains the actual charges after which the NZ administration may tell their Thai counterparts a definite no, a possible no, give it a try.

[rubl]

To try and illustrate Jay Boy's post:

Mr Ekapob is likely to be:

1) A real little prick.

2). An eternal trouble maker.

3) A probable communist.

4) Related by marriage to a now disgraced former member of the Royal Family.

All of the above are against Thai Laws with particular reference to LM.

None of the above are against NZ Law.

None of the above is relevant. We have

5. an (alleged) agitator who during a public speech said --blanked on purpose-- and --blanked on purpose--

Now we are not allowed to repeat here what he said, but the Thai administration can tell their NZ counterparts and explain why it's against Thai laws what was said in public. The NZ administration can take it from there.

Of course, with a few posters so adamant in declaring nothing was said that was really wrong and the NZ Government wouldn't do anything anyway, one may wonder what was really said. The level of verbal nonsense suggests some really damning statements.

[lostoday]

To try and illustrate Jay Boy's post:

Mr Ekapob is likely to be:

1) A real little prick.

2). An eternal trouble maker.

3) A probable communist.

4) Related by marriage to a now disgraced former member of the Royal Family.

All of the above are against Thai Laws with particular reference to LM.

None of the above are against NZ Law.

None of the above is relevant. We have

5. an (alleged) agitator who during a public speech said --blanked on purpose-- and --blanked on purpose--

Now we are not allowed to repeat here what he said, but the Thai administration can tell their NZ counterparts and explain why it's against Thai laws what was said in public. The NZ administration can take it from there.

Of course, with a few posters so adamant in declaring nothing was said that was really wrong and the NZ Government wouldn't do anything anyway, one may wonder what was really said. The level of verbal nonsense suggests some really damning statements.

How high an official does one have to be in Thailand to know what he said? Can that person convey what he said to an official in NZ? Is there some kind of official secrets act that NZ must sign to discuss what he said he said? How high up does the NZ official have to be to listen to what he said he said? And what happens if the Kiwi leaks the information to the media? Will he be extradited to along with the media and all the folks who have listened to that perticular media?

If the purpose is not to let anyone know what he said he said and if what he said he said is leaked to the NZ media then I would imagine it would make big news in the international news and everyone will be talking about what he said he said.

Is this wise? Or is this perhaps the alleged perpertratoss purpose to gain natinal attention to what he said he said. Everybody will be talking about it except, of course, on Thai visa.

[glenmohr]

To try and illustrate Jay Boy's post:

Mr Ekapob is likely to be:

1) A real little prick.

2). An eternal trouble maker.

3) A probable communist.

4) Related by marriage to a now disgraced former member of the Royal Family.

All of the above are against Thai Laws with particular reference to LM.

None of the above are against NZ Law.

None of the above is relevant. We have

5. an (alleged) agitator who during a public speech said --blanked on purpose-- and --blanked on purpose--

Now we are not allowed to repeat here what he said, but the Thai administration can tell their NZ counterparts and explain why it's against Thai laws what was said in public. The NZ administration can take it from there.

Of course, with a few posters so adamant in declaring nothing was said that was really wrong and the NZ Government wouldn't do anything anyway, one may wonder what was really said. The level of verbal nonsense suggests some really damning statements.

How high an official does one have to be in Thailand to know what he said? Can that person convey what he said to an official in NZ? Is there some kind of official secrets act that NZ must sign to discuss what he said he said? How high up does the NZ official have to be to listen to what he said he said? And what happens if the Kiwi leaks the information to the media? Will he be extradited to along with the media and all the folks who have listened to that perticular media?

If the purpose is not to let anyone know what he said he said and if what he said he said is leaked to the NZ media then I would imagine it would make big news in the international news and everyone will be talking about what he said he said.

Is this wise? Or is this perhaps the alleged perpertratoss purpose to gain natinal attention to what he said he said. Everybody will be talking about it except, of course, on Thai visa.

I am hungry, give me bread,

That is what he said he said,

Now the Thais want him bled,

Others want him dead,

but he is not wanted by the Fed,

for saying what he said he said,

Time to have a zed

and forget what he said he said,

[jayboy]

To try and illustrate Jay Boy's post:

Mr Ekapob is likely to be:

1) A real little prick.

2). An eternal trouble maker.

3) A probable communist.

4) Related by marriage to a now disgraced former member of the Royal Family.

All of the above are against Thai Laws with particular reference to LM.

None of the above are against NZ Law.

None of the above is relevant. We have

5. an (alleged) agitator who during a public speech said --blanked on purpose-- and --blanked on purpose--

Now we are not allowed to repeat here what he said, but the Thai administration can tell their NZ counterparts and explain why it's against Thai laws what was said in public. The NZ administration can take it from there.

Of course, with a few posters so adamant in declaring nothing was said that was really wrong and the NZ Government wouldn't do anything anyway, one may wonder what was really said. The level of verbal nonsense suggests some really damning statements.

Nobody has speculated what was said except you.But you have been told repeatedly that it doesn't matter from the point of view of the NZ reaction what was said.Yet you fantasise irrelevantly about Thai officials explaining to NZ officials the damning nature of the content which confirms you are unable to grasp the nature of the issue.As already patiently explained to you if an extraditable offence has been committed then the Thai authorities could make an application under a separate heading.But LM won't cut it.