Chaturon's passport fate will hit others, Prayut warns

[webfact]

POLITICS
Chaturon's passport fate will hit others, Prayut warns
THE NATION



Foreign minister demands answers from Foreign Ministry on passport revocation

BANGKOK: -- PRIME MINISTER Prayut Chan-o-cha said yesterday the government had revoked former education minister Chaturon Chaisaeng's passports because the senior Pheu Thai Party member faced so many cases and had done wrong so many times before.

And Chaturon is not alone, he said; "there are many others" who face having their passports terminated as well.

"If we don't have any rules, then we won't be able to move forward. I have nothing to lose, and I'd like everyone to remember what I say, what I do and what the country will gain," Prayut said.

Chaturon yesterday sought explanation from the Foreign Ministry's Consular Department about why his three passports, including the diplomatic one, had been revoked.

"I want a valid explanation. I have become a second-class citizen, with my travelling rights taken away. Of course, I'm being prosecuted, but as long as the cases are not yet over, I should not deserve such punishment," he said.

Chaturon is facing several charges, including failing to answer a summons from the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) in the immediate aftermath of the May 22 coup last year and being publicly critical of the junta-sponsored draft charter. He is currently being tried in military court for the first offence.

Prayut said Chaturon had been summoned more than 10 times to get him to stop publicly criticising the government and the military junta.

Meanwhile, Foreign Ministry spokesman Sek Wannamethee said the travel documents had been revoked at the request of the Royal Thai Police.

He said Chaturon could not travel as he faces arrest, and this falls within the scope of Articles 21 (2) and 23 (2) of the Foreign Ministry's 2005 regulation on passports. Hence, he said, the passports were revoked on August 19.

Article 21 (2) states that officials can refuse or revoke a person's passport if he faces criminal charges or is under pre-trial release or if the person is an alleged offender facing an arrest warrant.

Article 23 (2) states that the person in question is someone who cannot be granted a passport.

Chaturon told reporters after a meeting with the Consular Department's director-general Thongchai Chasawath that he was not wanted by an arrest warrant, but was out on bail while being tried in military court.

He also pointed out that he is still in the country, and cannot travel without the court's permission. Also, he said, since his case was with the military court, police had no authority to ask for the revocation of his passports.

"The Foreign Ministry claims that it made the decision in accordance with regulations, but its judgement was based on false information from the police," he said. "I urge the ministry to review its decision and provide a formal explanation to me in 15 days.

"PM Prayut made a senseless comment when he said my passports were revoked because I had done something wrong.

The Foreign Ministry's regulations on passports cannot be used as a law to punish people," he said, adding that the regulation had become a political tool to limit freedom of expression.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Chaturons-passport-fate-will-hit-others-Prayut-war-30268095.html


-- The Nation 2015-09-04

[jaidam]

He'd better grab Somyot's passport before he retires at the end of this month and flees the country. His logic defying input on some recent "perfect" cases require investigation by a highly competent accountant. Plus, unless he is 327 years old it is just not possible to save a billion baht on a civil servants salary.

[NOC]

Considering the state of the educational 'system' in the land of scams, Somyot has little room to criticize anyone.

[davehowden]

Turkish passport might be the solution?

[baboon]

One day the tide will turn on the chief buffalo and his cohorts and just watch him run with his tail between his legs.. but, but, but.. it was for the good of the country. Where's my section 44 power gone? Ammensity, ammensity...!

Oh, I don't know. If he were to order the killing of enough people, his punishment may be a directorship of a telecom company like Suchinda.

[Blackfalds]

Not sure what revoking passports gains for that side of the political divide.

It seems to me, they would encourage their opposites to leave the country, giving them a free-er and less adversarial manner to rule. It would serve their interests of eliminating political diversity.

It seems to me they would love it if Yingluck also went into self-imposed exile as did Thaksin, along with this Chaturon who they seem to fear.

They remain a political threat regardless how much they try to hound them via their judicial brethren. I think the intention of their activities in this regard are motivated by that objective.

Good for Yingluck to hang in there against this victor's justice. If I were her, I would refuse all forms of bail when they convict her of whatever self-serving reason they will conjure up. I would let them jail me. But they will avoid that I am sure...In jail, her political threat would only increase. They only want her removed from political activism under cover of the judiciary.

So to tamper with passport stuff doesn't make much sense when trying to rid themselves of political diversity that continues to confound them.

Edited September 4, 2015 by Blackfalds

[user82374298374]

Asian culture is big on zero-sum dominance games - if you can, you want to utterly destroy and humiliate your enemies publicly, any and every way you can. No win-win, it must be win-lose.

Only if you think they might be powerful enough to turn the tables do you let them go into exile. The smaller fish, you fry, publicly.

Edited September 4, 2015 by disambiguated

[toooa]

If you can't take a little criticism what does that say about the strength of your arguments?

"If we don't have any rules, then we won't be able to move forward" .... so backwards is the new forwards is it?

[phoenixdoglover]

My Section 44 trumps your Articles 21 (2) and 23 (2).

[Toscano]

The Junta should be thankful that Thaksin went into exile . Had he remained in Thailand and been sent to prison , he might more easily have governed the country from his prison cell .

The economy should take precedent over making an example of politicians who defy the present administration .

[Briggsy]

Chaturon has a political ideology. He is not a godfather with a regional power base, backed by thugs and funded by corruption and illegal activities like most Thai politicians.

If there is one thing that confuses and terrifies the elite, the military, the Thai aristocracy, it is politicians with ideologies. These guys are always singled out for the harshest restrictions.

Edited September 4, 2015 by Briggsy

[Melyn]

Four legs good. Two legs better

[metisdead]

Please use discretion in your references to the government. Phrases which can be considered as anti-coup will be removed. Referring to Thailand or the government as a dictatorship, military dictatorship or other such terms will be removed.

[Srikcir]

Chaturon has a legitimate greivance.

Articles 21 (2) and 23 (2) of the Foreign Ministry's 2005 regulation on passports relate to civil criminal justice - it has no connection with NCPO Directives. His "crime" was refusing to report to NCPO. Under the criminal penal code that is not a crime.

Prayut likes to attach civil penal code citations to junta directives to give the appearance that junta directives are synonomous with Thailand's penal code. Chaturon's crime is that he is on the wrong side of military power that SUBJORNS all Thai rights and liberties.

[khaowong1]

Three passports?