Prayut: Thai fugitive lese majeste suspect 'not a Thai'

[NCFC]

"Since he fled this country to another, it shows that he is no longer a Thai person, and he cannot stay in Thailand"

"Sometimes, it's hard for [other countries] to understand when it comes to extradition, because they don't have this law. Mostly, they use human rights laws. But our country's law is our country's law."

Makes one wonder what he really said in Thai rather than the shambolic blathering that KhaoSod says he said in their nonsensical English rendition.

Since you know different, why don't you tell us what he actually said?

[NCFC]

"he is no longer a Thai person, and he cannot stay in Thailand"

If he no longer can stay in Thailand how does that extradition work?

Perhaps Khao Sod's incompetent translator can help.

The important thing is that Prayut's comment admits that lese majeste violates human rights, read it again.

.This post deserves a thousand likes because it succinctly describes the root of Thailand's woes.

[bangon04]

They got already a new Passport from New Zealand.

So what now P. ? And i thought Kim is ridiculous.

even so... wouldn't be changing planes in Bangkok any time soon.....

[alocacoc]

In the meanwhile, our beloved Kim has created a drug that cures Aids, Ebola and MERS.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3131426/North-Korea-announces-created-wonder-drug-ginseng-cures-Aids-Ebola-MERS.html

[rijit]

If anyone saw the speech he made attacking the monarchy they would agree he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact. LM laws aside.

IMO ABSSOLUTELY 100% WRONG NO ONE IN THE WORLD SHOULD BE PERSECUTED FOR VOICING AN OPINION. slander or threatening people are totally diferent

rijit

[GinBoy2]

Just another thing for real countries to laugh at Thailand for.

I took the bait...What is the definition of a real country?

Well if we're now defining what makes a real country, rather than a laughing stock, ask the Gaming Community.

Not much reported in the press here (surprise surprise) but back in August they actually banned distributed of a video strategy game, Tropico 5, since it's theme, 'running a tropical military dictatorship' was considered a little too sensitive...at least for thin skinned Junta's!

Thankfully the game developers in the latest expansion pack took a leaf from John Oliver and decided to ridicule the ridiculous in various game options now naming Thailand specifically

Real governments in real countries aren't this stupid.

You may well be an ardent defender of the current regime, but when you defend the ridiculous you tar yourself with the same lunacy.

Stick to defending whats reasonable but quit the 'Tarik Aziz' blanket defense of patent nonsense

Edited June 21, 2015 by GinBoy2

[falangjim]

I think the whole point of Ekapop leaving the country was that he didn't care for being a Thai. Now he can live in New Zealand where there is freedom of speech and other civilities not afforded by his birth country. What a crybaby this PM is trying to extradite him. He left you. You didn't leave him. Get over it.

[ExPratt]

You didn't make any argument, you just stated your opinion. What you did do however, was encourage wagering which is against the law. End of story.

Goodness me my dear friend..Joining the dots was not your strong point in primary school hey?

If anyone saw the speech he made attacking the monarchy they would agree he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact. LM laws aside.

So to spell it out AGAIN!!! My argument is he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact despite the LM laws...

Do you honestly not see what I was saying or are you just trying to get your post count up?

If you could be arrested for bad taste in Thailand, there wouldn't be any Australians left here. Ok maybe 7%

[rijit]

You didn't make any argument, you just stated your opinion. What you did do however, was encourage wagering which is against the law. End of story.

Goodness me my dear friend..Joining the dots was not your strong point in primary school hey?

If anyone saw the speech he made attacking the monarchy they would agree he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact. LM laws aside.

So to spell it out AGAIN!!! My argument is he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact despite the LM laws...

Do you honestly not see what I was saying or are you just trying to get your post count up?

If you could be arrested for bad taste in Thailand, there wouldn't be any Australians left here. Ok maybe 7%

Ah could be a good law, just think no more russians !!!

rijit

[xylophone]

The UK doesn't currently have a LM law. Scotland used to have one, but not anymore.

The UK does have a law about offending people, but that applies to everyone, not just royalty.

If the UK had a LM law then Spitting Image would never have been aired.

yes other laws like for hate speech, causing civil unrest, etc. If jokes about the royal family would be illegal they would have to jail half UK.

On the other hand...what did the British Queen ever do for the people and how many people would listen when she speaks something.....

Well for the last 60 odd years she has been an effective and well regarded monarch, who has acted as a non political head of state. She remains a well respected, well loved even, non political leader.

I thought hard about the term leader, because I know it can be translated as Fuhrer, and that does have unfortunate connotations. But then I thought " b*ll*cks", if he is going to have a pop at Her Majesty, why not?

"an effective and well regarded monarch". Are you sure about this?

If you haven't seen it yet, I suggest you take a look at Youtube and watch a documentary titled 'Unlawful Killing'. HMQ tried to ban this video because she felt it's content, if widely seen, would likely result in the abolition of the British monarchy. Having seen the video, I can fully understand her concerns.

Having seen that "documentary", for me, some of the most alarming aspects were the fact that it was proven (yes proven by documents uncovered a few years after the "inquest") that some of the key witnesses representing the "establishment" lied. Not to mention the fact that these very folk were given the titles of "Lord" after the event.

And also alarming is the fact that when the general public are asked what the verdict of the jury was after the inquest, they will almost certainly state accidental death, which is not what the jury found – – they found that Diana and Dodi were subjects of an "unlawful killing" however the royal control over the media has made sure that a bit of a whitewash has occurred.

I am definitely not anti-monarchy and viewed this documentary from a neutral perspective, however it is very difficult to do this when it is now known that key witnesses lied on behalf of the monarchy.

Wasn't the unlawful killing verdict simply because the driver was drunk and driving too fast whilst pursued by the paparazzi?

Don't want to distract from this thread as the subject is completely different, however that wasn't the final outcome.

Take a look at the doco and once you get past some of the "unnecessary anti-monarchy stuff" then there are some very disturbing facts which come to light..............maybe the subject of another thread here?

[Jonmarleesco]

'"At this moment, New Zealand has not given us any reply at all," ...' Well, there's a surprise.

'"Sometimes, it's hard for [other countries] to understand when it comes to extradition, because they don't have this law.' Oh, I think they understand; better than Prayut would like. Hence, their oft encountered reaction - or non-reaction - to a request.

[Arkady]

A very confused article which may be due to misquoting and/or poor translating but at face value it seems to raise some interesting legal issues.

Other sources quote the NZ govt as saying they had not received an extradition request. As is the case with Australia, NZ has no extradition treaty with Thailand but, as a former part of the British Empire, is still bound as a successor state to the Anglo-Siamese treaty of 1909. This treaty provides for extradition in the event that the offence would also be a criminal offence in the country receiving the extradition request. I have no idea what the suspect has done, neither do I condone it, but, it seems very unlikely that NZ would prosecute anyone for a similar offence against their own monarch (QE2).

The article suggests that the suspect is now no longer a Thai citizen. However, there has been no announcement in the Royal Gazette of his loss of Thai citizenship, either voluntary or involuntary, which means that he must legally still be a Thai citizen. If he has naturalized as a New Zealander, technically there may be a case to revoke his Thai citizenship under Section 22 of the Nationality Act:

Section 22. A person of Thai nationality who has been naturalized as an alien, or who has renounced Thai nationality, or whose Thai nationality has been revoked, shall lose Thai nationality.

However, there are no known cases of this having been done since the current 1965 Act came into effect, although the Interior Ministry attempted to put it into effect in the early 70s, apparently without success, as the Foreign Ministry, which accepts dual nationality, declined to cooperate. Certainly no attempt has been made to revoke Thaksin's Thai nationality, even though he has apparently naturalised as an alien several times already. Furthermore, the draft constitution prepared by the CDC would remove the ambiguity of the Nationality Act's Section 22 by making it impossible to revoke the nationality anyone who was born Thai.

[AZBill]

Sounds like a step up for this hardened criminal!

[Thai at Heart]

A very confused article which may be due to misquoting and/or poor translating but at face value it seems to raise some interesting legal issues.

Other sources quote the NZ govt as saying they had not received an extradition request. As is the case with Australia, NZ has no extradition treaty with Thailand but, as a former part of the British Empire, is still bound as a successor state to the Anglo-Siamese treaty of 1909. This treaty provides for extradition in the event that the offence would also be a criminal offence in the country receiving the extradition request. I have no idea what the suspect has done, neither do I condone it, but, it seems very unlikely that NZ would prosecute anyone for a similar offence against their own monarch (QE2).

The article suggests that the suspect is now no longer a Thai citizen. However, there has been no announcement in the Royal Gazette of his loss of Thai citizenship, either voluntary or involuntary, which means that he must legally still be a Thai citizen. If he has naturalized as a New Zealander, technically there may be a case to revoke his Thai citizenship under Section 22 of the Nationality Act:

Section 22. A person of Thai nationality who has been naturalized as an alien, or who has renounced Thai nationality, or whose Thai nationality has been revoked, shall lose Thai nationality.

However, there are no known cases of this having been done since the current 1965 Act came into effect, although the Interior Ministry attempted to put it into effect in the early 70s, apparently without success, as the Foreign Ministry, which accepts dual nationality, declined to cooperate. Certainly no attempt has been made to revoke Thaksin's Thai nationality, even though he has apparently naturalised as an alien several times already. Furthermore, the draft constitution prepared by the CDC would remove the ambiguity of the Nationality Act's Section 22 by making it impossible to revoke the nationality anyone who was born Thai.

I am not sure there is any legal precedent to remove Thai citizenship anyway.

If they removed it, if he has a birth certificate they would have to reinstate it. It is rarely legal to remove someone's citizenship.

[rametindallas]

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it is not lawfully possible to do this, according to a UN Convention?!

...but hey, this is Thailand!

Article 15.

• (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
• (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality

Someone should point this out to the Myanmar government.

.

[rametindallas]

If anyone saw the speech he made attacking the monarchy they would agree he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact. LM laws aside.

But then that is a predictable 7%'er attitude towards Thai law and even more predictable is his attitude towards this. He cannot simply live in NZ, he has to stir and push the Junta which is a famous RS trait that follows breaking the law.

At the end of the day he broke the law and so he does the famous RS trick of running as fast as you can away from accountability.

So we have France, Dubai and now New Zealand as red shirt havens.

We should have bets on which country the next red shirt terrorist will hide in?

France can always be counted on to harbor the lowest of the low. They harbored a US citizen who murdered his ex-GF and stored her body in his closet for 18 months. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ira_Einhorn

.

[rametindallas]

If anyone saw the speech he made attacking the monarchy they would agree he should be arrested for poor taste and lack of tact. LM laws aside.

But then that is a predictable 7%'er attitude towards Thai law.

He broke it and so he does the famous RS trick of running as fast as you can away from accountability.

So we have France, Dubia and now New Zealand as red shirt havens.

We should have bets on which country the next red shirt terrorist will hide in?

You should also be arrested for encouraging members to illegally gamble, then. Yours is clearly also a predictable 7%'er attitude towards Thai law...

If that is your best rebuttal I automatically win the argument.

Thank you my dear friend for admitting defeat.

Never read the speech I gather.

You didn't make any argument, you just stated your opinion. What you did do however, was encourage wagering which is against the law. End of story.

djjaime writing, "We should have bets" is no different that National Police Chief General Somyot writing, "We should have casinos". You are grasping at straws and, as most of us know, straws are not much support. Since you didn't bother to respond to any of his pertinent points, you FAIL.

.

Edited June 22, 2015 by rametindallas

[rametindallas]

They got already a new Passport from New Zealand.

So what now P. ? And i thought Kim is ridiculous.

Since Thailand law doesn't allow dual citizenship, they have already renounced their Thai citizenship to become Kiwis. The PM's statement was superfluous.

.

[stickyrice2000]

A dinosaur law in a 21st Century era.

[rametindallas]

The illusion that this government is somehow recognised let alone respected is ridiculous .

This draconian law is akin to Neo Nazi desires to request Jews in Israel be handed over for saying things they don't like.

There is no authority ...no moral grounds ...and it's as insidious

And decent countries that doesn't pay homage( like children) won't dream of compliance....and further respect people's right to freedom of speech

Hyperbolic, much?

.

[rametindallas]

Fear is the goal

Fear is the goal of the Thaksin-backed Red Shirts but fortunately, Prayut put a stop to that and brought peace to Thailand. Thanks for the set-up.

.

[rametindallas]

I think for every coup LM should be filed against the generals that were involved in the coup.

Go right ahead. The process is as easy as going to your local police station and making a complaint. Good luck with that. 555

.

[rametindallas]

One quote comes into my mind regarding attempts to reason with djjamie: "Don’t argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience", and I would add "and give them an opportunity to have a 35xx post count and be called advanced members" ;-)

Member for nearly 6 years and you use your 18th post to slander djjamie? At least he participates in the forum. Yes, sometimes he gets a little hyperbolic but his posts are reasoned and he is NOT a troll. Where have you been all these years? Anyway, glad you're finally participating though I wish you had something more constructive to say about the OP. You djjamie haters can pm each other and discuss him amongst yourselves; this thread is not about djjamie but is about a statement the PM made.

.

[rametindallas]

"Since he fled this country to another, it shows that he is no longer a Thai person, and he cannot stay in Thailand," Gen. Prayuth said

Hmmm, ok. Well then, using that same logic, should the same not be applied to Thaksin?

But seriously, does no Thai have their mouth connected to their brain?

Don't you follow the news? Thaksin is a citizen of Montenegro and no longer has any Thai passports. It is against the law for Thai citizens to have dual citizenship; even for the exalted (in his own mind) Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra.

.

[rametindallas]

Many countries, including the UK, have LM laws on their law books, most of them do not use them as political weapons.

The Junta's insistence of pursuing their idealogical opponents on LM charges only enhances the victim's claim for asylum. The reason they are not getting a reply from countries like New Zealand is the folk whose job it is to reply have not stopped laughing at the request.

Well there ya go ! I am 79 yrs old and did'nt know until now that UK has a LM law, in fact , until i came to Los had never heard of it.

Regarding LM in the Netherlands: Dutch Activist Faces Trial Over Profanity-Laced Tirade Against King http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/world/europe/dutch-prosecuting-abulkasim-al-jaberi-over-insults-to-king-willem-alexander.html?_r=0

It's not just Thailand. Why can't some people show respect?

.

[Basil B]

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it is not lawfully possible to do this, according to a UN Convention?!

...but hey, this is Thailand!

Article 15.

• (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
• (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a15

Item(1) is inappropriate as he has more than one nationality.

Item(2) is a little more complicated and consideration must be given to the definition of the word "arbitrarily" and the process of law used to cancel this persons citizenship of Thailand.

This article is there to prevent any country making someone stateless.

IMHO dual citizenship should be abolished, A person should have the right to citizenship based on certain internationally agreed rules, that is their primary citizenship which can nether be removed, any other citizenship awarded to them by any other country would be secondary and could be cancelled.

[Thai at Heart]

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that it is not lawfully possible to do this, according to a UN Convention?!

...but hey, this is Thailand!

Article 15.

• (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
• (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a15

Item(1) is inappropriate as he has more than one nationality.

Item(2) is a little more complicated and consideration must be given to the definition of the word "arbitrarily" and the process of law used to cancel this persons citizenship of Thailand.

This article is there to prevent any country making someone stateless.

IMHO dual citizenship should be abolished, A person should have the right to citizenship based on certain internationally agreed rules, that is their primary citizenship which can nether be removed, any other citizenship awarded to them by any other country would be secondary and could be cancelled.

No one has said he has obtained NZ nationality. Removing it arbitrarily because he did obtain a second nationality might also drag quite a few very very senior pooyais into a similar legal position.

Removing a citizenship is a very rare thing.