Thai Army sues Thaksin for linking coup to Privy Council

[millwall_fan]

Presumably if the army go ahead with this they will have to actually prove that there is no link between their coup and the privy council - prove that Thaksin's allegation was defamatory as it was untrue - which would be interesting to hear - or will they just rely on the fact that there is no independent judiciary or rule of law here?

You have that backwards...

The Thai Defamation laws do not require the plaintiff to prove but rather the defendant must prove :

1. That what they said was true

2. That there was an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said

So the overwhelming burden is on the defendant NOT the plaintiff.

This is why it is such a power weapon

Thank you to you and the others that have pointed out that even if the facts are true it can still be defamatory.

The main defence seems to be that there was "an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said"

I think that information that shows that the army and the Privy Council were colluding is in the overwhelming interest of the Thai people. The euphemism 'Ruling Elite' includes the army, privy council, the amaat, the judiciary and senior academics. The idea that the Privy council did not endorse the coup is laughable.

[rubl]

Good move, pressing him for a straight answer. That usually gets rid of him for a while...

"Umm, uhhh, umm proscratinate *some stomach turning uncle rubie comment*, please get back on topic"

Talking of procrastinating Smutty, how's your research progressing? Did you find that Forbes article on the Shin family wealth increasing by 450% during the Yingluck regimes period in office ? Remember that thread and discussion?

I would love to see that supposed article from Forbes. Why don't you post a link?

According to Forbes, which chronicles the estimated net worth of rich people worldwide, the period from the 2011 to 2015 rankings was indeed a good time to be a rich Thai.

The Thaksin family did well, increasing in the estimate from USD 600 million to USD $1.7 billion. (not 450%, but damn good)

But almost all the super rich in Thailand made excellent gains in that same period.

Kraisorn USD 460 to 700 mil

Boonchai USD 550 mil to 1.1 bil

Somporn 610 to 840 mil

Prasert 620 mil to 2.8 bil

And those are just the "bench warmers".

Up top...

Dhanin 7.4 to 14.4 bil

Chalerm (Chaleo) 5.0 to 9.6 bil

Charoen 4.8 to 13 bil

Chirathivat 4.3 to 12.3 bil

How did these tycoons do so well?

One major explanation is "a rising tide carries all boats". In 2010, many investors were not doing well as a result of the financial crises from 2007-2008. From 2011 onward, the situation much improved. So almost anyone with a decent investment portfolio came roaring back.

NYSE composite index: mid 2010, around 7,000 points. late 2014/early 2015, around 11,000 points.

No offence, but you stating these figures has about as much value as BB's without proper documentation.

[rubl]

Presumably if the army go ahead with this they will have to actually prove that there is no link between their coup and the privy council - prove that Thaksin's allegation was defamatory as it was untrue - which would be interesting to hear - or will they just rely on the fact that there is no independent judiciary or rule of law here?

You have that backwards...

The Thai Defamation laws do not require the plaintiff to prove but rather the defendant must prove :

1. That what they said was true

2. That there was an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said

So the overwhelming burden is on the defendant NOT the plaintiff.

This is why it is such a power weapon

Thank you to you and the others that have pointed out that even if the facts are true it can still be defamatory.

The main defence seems to be that there was "an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said"

I think that information that shows that the army and the Privy Council were colluding is in the overwhelming interest of the Thai people. The euphemism 'Ruling Elite' includes the army, privy council, the amaat, the judiciary and senior academics. The idea that the Privy council did not endorse the coup is laughable.

'ruling elite' suggests there are also 'non-ruling elite'. Probably those lovable democratic strongman in North and NorthEast, the Shinawatra elite and so?

BTW senior academics from Thammasat University might start a defamation case against you for being including in an euphemism, but they probably recognise a fool by his writings.

[greenchair]

morons.

BTW, is the military's not wanting to be associated with the privy council for a coup defaming the privy council?

Or should the privy council be suing Thaksin here?

Or is this just more stupid defamation cases among the rich and powerful? ....

Bingo. More coffee, please...

Where would some Thais be without defamation and LM so readily available ?

Out of prison and at home, taking care of their families.

[millwall_fan]

Presumably if the army go ahead with this they will have to actually prove that there is no link between their coup and the privy council - prove that Thaksin's allegation was defamatory as it was untrue - which would be interesting to hear - or will they just rely on the fact that there is no independent judiciary or rule of law here?

You have that backwards...

The Thai Defamation laws do not require the plaintiff to prove but rather the defendant must prove :

1. That what they said was true

2. That there was an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said

So the overwhelming burden is on the defendant NOT the plaintiff.

This is why it is such a power weapon

Thank you to you and the others that have pointed out that even if the facts are true it can still be defamatory.

The main defence seems to be that there was "an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said"

I think that information that shows that the army and the Privy Council were colluding is in the overwhelming interest of the Thai people. The euphemism 'Ruling Elite' includes the army, privy council, the amaat, the judiciary and senior academics. The idea that the Privy council did not endorse the coup is laughable.

'ruling elite' suggests there are also 'non-ruling elite'. Probably those lovable democratic strongman in North and NorthEast, the Shinawatra elite and so?

BTW senior academics from Thammasat University might start a defamation case against you for being including in an euphemism, but they probably recognise a fool by his writings.

The epithet 'Ruling Elite' seems to be an acceptable way of describing the top echelons of Thai society without falling foul of the draconian Lese Majestie laws......I would love to be more specific, but the law precludes it. I would certainly include The Shinawatra family in the 'Ruling Elite' Why do you think they hate him SO much? He is one of them!

[candide]

I am puzzled. What exactly is tarnishing the army's reputation?

- Is it the fact that they staged a coup? For an army of a democratic country this would indeed be a bad image. But here?

- Is it the allegation that they worked with the Privy Counsel? How is this tarnishing anyone's reputation?

- Or is it the allegation that the Privy Counsel was involved in the coup? Such an allegation can only be detrimental to one's reputation

if the coup itself is considered as a bad thing.

or maybe the army doesn't know and it's nothing personal; they just like to sue.

Quite right! It's completely illogical!

You defame someone when you accuse him of doing something wrong!

But the army has staged the coup for the "wellness of the country", and presents it as very positive.

So eventually being accomplice of the coup could not be wrong (from the point of view of the army).

And still, the army is filing a defamation complaint, which may let understand that the coup could be wrong.

?????

[millwall_fan]

I am puzzled. What exactly is tarnishing the army's reputation?

- Is it the fact that they staged a coup? For an army of a democratic country this would indeed be a bad image. But here?

- Is it the allegation that they worked with the Privy Counsel? How is this tarnishing anyone's reputation?

- Or is it the allegation that the Privy Counsel was involved in the coup? Such an allegation can only be detrimental to one's reputation

if the coup itself is considered as a bad thing.

or maybe the army doesn't know and it's nothing personal; they just like to sue.

Quite right! It's completely illogical!

You defame someone when you accuse him of doing something wrong!

But the army has staged the coup for the "wellness of the country", and presents it as very positive.

So eventually being accomplice of the coup could not be wrong (from the point of view of the army).

And still, the army is filing a defamation complaint, which may let understand that the coup could be wrong.

?????

It is very important to the coup makers that they are not SEEN to be associated with the Privy Council and vice versa. That way the myth that the privy council and those they represent were impartial during the coup and only legalised it as a reaction to events, was perpetuated.

[Thai at Heart]

Presumably if the army go ahead with this they will have to actually prove that there is no link between their coup and the privy council - prove that Thaksin's allegation was defamatory as it was untrue - which would be interesting to hear - or will they just rely on the fact that there is no independent judiciary or rule of law here?

You have that backwards...

The Thai Defamation laws do not require the plaintiff to prove but rather the defendant must prove :

1. That what they said was true

2. That there was an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said

So the overwhelming burden is on the defendant NOT the plaintiff.

This is why it is such a power weapon

Thank you to you and the others that have pointed out that even if the facts are true it can still be defamatory.

The main defence seems to be that there was "an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said"

I think that information that shows that the army and the Privy Council were colluding is in the overwhelming interest of the Thai people. The euphemism 'Ruling Elite' includes the army, privy council, the amaat, the judiciary and senior academics. The idea that the Privy council did not endorse the coup is laughable.

'ruling elite' suggests there are also 'non-ruling elite'. Probably those lovable democratic strongman in North and NorthEast, the Shinawatra elite and so?

BTW senior academics from Thammasat University might start a defamation case against you for being including in an euphemism, but they probably recognise a fool by his writings.

The epithet 'Ruling Elite' seems to be an acceptable way of describing the top echelons of Thai society without falling foul of the draconian Lese Majestie laws......I would love to be more specific, but the law precludes it. I would certainly include The Shinawatra family in the 'Ruling Elite' Why do you think they hate him SO much? He is one of them!

He is nouveau elite.

[JAG]

You have that backwards...

The Thai Defamation laws do not require the plaintiff to prove but rather the defendant must prove :

1. That what they said was true

2. That there was an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said

So the overwhelming burden is on the defendant NOT the plaintiff.

This is why it is such a power weapon

Thank you to you and the others that have pointed out that even if the facts are true it can still be defamatory.

The main defence seems to be that there was "an over whelming need/ benefit to society that required them to say what they said"

I think that information that shows that the army and the Privy Council were colluding is in the overwhelming interest of the Thai people. The euphemism 'Ruling Elite' includes the army, privy council, the amaat, the judiciary and senior academics. The idea that the Privy council did not endorse the coup is laughable.

'ruling elite' suggests there are also 'non-ruling elite'. Probably those lovable democratic strongman in North and NorthEast, the Shinawatra elite and so?

BTW senior academics from Thammasat University might start a defamation case against you for being including in an euphemism, but they probably recognise a fool by his writings.

The epithet 'Ruling Elite' seems to be an acceptable way of describing the top echelons of Thai society without falling foul of the draconian Lese Majestie laws......I would love to be more specific, but the law precludes it. I would certainly include The Shinawatra family in the 'Ruling Elite' Why do you think they hate him SO much? He is one of them!

They hate him because he is an existential threat to their primacy and wealth.

They hate him because of the people he has enlisted in support of his bid for power. In doing so he is the first politician who has considered the previously ignored rural poor, and delivered even a proportion of campaign promises to them. He has let that particular genie out of the bottle, and although much of the effort of the current junta is concentrated on trying to stuff it back into the bottle that is a hopeless cause.

I don't think that they give a monkeys about his corruption. To them it is a way of life, and he is probably no more corrupt than many of them are.

But in actually letting the people have a say, and believe that what they said mattered, he committed the unforgivable sin. They hate him because they are terrified, and know that sooner or later, their rule is going to be over.

[mark131v]

They hate him because he is an existential threat to their primacy and wealth.

They hate him because of the people he has enlisted in support of his bid for power. In doing so he is the first politician who has considered the previously ignored rural poor, and delivered even a proportion of campaign promises to them. He has let that particular genie out of the bottle, and although much of the effort of the current junta is concentrated on trying to stuff it back into the bottle that is a hopeless cause.

I don't think that they give a monkeys about his corruption. To them it is a way of life, and he is probably no more corrupt than many of them are.

But in actually letting the people have a say, and believe that what they said mattered, he committed the unforgivable sin. They hate him because they are terrified, and know that sooner or later, their rule is going to be over.

And there you have it bang on!!!

Why do you think the great leader and his mindless cohorts are showing their complete paranoia about the bogeyman?? why all this absolute drivel about stripping old ranks and passports, they are terrified of him and they are terrified that their time at the trough may be getting short

It's great watching this bunch of hypocrites squirm but unfortunately I think the damage they have done to the country is going to take a long time to heal and I think there is going to be plenty pain coming, I hope I am wrong but I think it is inevitable

Edited September 1, 2015 by mark131v

[fasteddie]

Given Prem is the real boss in Thailand, can't see how the army can win on this one, OH, of course, bent courts, my bad.

[Inn Between]

I'm not defending the Shinawatras, but it's quite clear that the General and the more powerful elitists who have put him in his position of power sees them as a constant threat to their power, so there's an obvious barrage of legal and media attacks aimed at demonizing them. I suspect they won't be finished until the whole clan is stripped of their citizenship and living outside the country.

I completely agree with something Mark131v said about the General and his rich cronies not giving a rat's ass about corruption -- there will always be corruption, and this isn't about that at all. Got to keep the peasants down, you know.

Edited September 2, 2015 by Inn Between