Criminal Court drops Yingluck's lawsuit against attorney-general

[webfact]

Criminal Court drops Yingluck's lawsuit against attorney-general



BANGKOK: -- The Criminal Court judge rejected Ms Yingluck’s lawsuit against the Attorney-General, Mr Trakul Vinijchaipark and his team of three state prosecutors, with reason that their action was legitimate.

The judge said they have performed their duties in accordance with legal procedures after the case was brought for prosecution by the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and they had to pursue the prosevution in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions.

The judge also dismissed her persecution charge against the attorney-general and the three prosecutors with reason that Ms Yingluck has not given evidence to support or explain how they persecuted her, but just claimed contents that appeared in news reports to charge them.

Ms Yingluck did not appear in the court room to hear the ruling. She was represented by her lawyer Sommai Koosap.

As The Nation reported, in her suit filed at the Criminal Court last month, she alleged that the attorney general and the three prosecutors violated Articles 83, 157 and 200 of the Criminal Code.

The suit alleged that the attorney general and public prosecutors indicted her without sufficient examination of information, evidences and witnesses.

She alleged that the attorney general filed a case which included additional accusations that were not originally stated in the case filed by the NACC.

The suit pointed out that the NACC case under the Criminal Code’s Article 157 did not include accusations regarding to corruption but the attorney general included these accusations.

The suit also alleged that during the court procedure, the public prosecutors also used materials that were not included in investigative reports of both NACC’s and joint committee between the NACC and public prosecutors.

The suit of the attorney general included additional 60,000 pages of information into the case, which should also be deemed illegal practice, Yingluck’s suit said.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/criminal-court-drops-yinglucks-lawsuit-against-attorney-general


-- Thai PBS 2015-10-06

[ezzra]

Yingluck is pretty much out of luck, now what? appeal? time will tell, we haven't heard and seen

the last of this story yet, not by a long shot....

[Squeegee]

Her enemies are so thick they cannot see that going after Yingluck is entrenching her support.

Yingluck has become far more than a proxy for her brother: she has a very different persona and where there is political support for Thaksin, there is a deep love for Yingluck.

[z42]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. <deleted>and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

[speedtripler]

She didn't personally steal the half a trillion baht and transfer it to her own personal account...

She is still guilty of gross negligence but not all of it

Apparently she didn't attend a single meeting when she was in charge of the rice scheme

It seems disproportionate that she gets 100% of the repayment debt but it would be impossible now to figure out who stole how much etc...

[AGareth2]

Jeanne d'Ark

[zaphod reborn]

Yingluck is pretty much out of luck, now what? appeal? time will tell, we haven't heard and seen

the last of this story yet, not by a long shot....

Yes, it's not over, because Yingluck merely filed a ridiculous collateral attack on some pre-trial rulings and procedures. The criminal case has just started its trial phase. It won't be over for probably a year. Then, if Yingluck remains in Thailand, she can file her appeal, assuming she is convicted. However, who knows what government will be running the country in a year, and if it is a PTP government, they are sure to dismiss whatever charges or convictions have been filed.

[speedtripler]

Yingluck is pretty much out of luck, now what? appeal? time will tell, we haven't heard and seen

the last of this story yet, not by a long shot....

Yes, it's not over, because Yingluck merely filed a ridiculous collateral attack on some pre-trial rulings and procedures. The criminal case has just started its trial phase. It won't be over for probably a year. Then, if Yingluck remains in Thailand, she can file her appeal, assuming she is convicted. However, who knows what government will be running the country in a year, and if it is a PTP government, they are sure to dismiss whatever charges or convictions have been filed.

Didnt the general revoke her passport already?

If not then these charges are another waste of time...

[krdowney]

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

[jaidam]

Poor lass must have forgotten the pastry box. Damned if you bring it, damned if you don't. Life is so unfair (when big bro is not in the hot seat).

[oldsailor35]

She might as well face it, she is not facing the "law of the land" but of the military coup body and the Democrat party. Outside of these two identities, no one will have a chance of winning anything concerning politics in a court case. It is all predetermined in their favour.

[zaphod reborn]

Yingluck is pretty much out of luck, now what? appeal? time will tell, we haven't heard and seen

the last of this story yet, not by a long shot....

Yes, it's not over, because Yingluck merely filed a ridiculous collateral attack on some pre-trial rulings and procedures. The criminal case has just started its trial phase. It won't be over for probably a year. Then, if Yingluck remains in Thailand, she can file her appeal, assuming she is convicted. However, who knows what government will be running the country in a year, and if it is a PTP government, they are sure to dismiss whatever charges or convictions have been filed.

Didnt the general revoke her passport already?

If not then these charges are another waste of time...

Since when are you required to have a passport to enter and leave Thailand? Did you miss the memo about the immigration officers on the Cambodian border?

If Yingluck is found guilty of criminal neglect with respect to corruption in her administration, she faces a 10 year prison sentence. I'm not sure why you think that is a waste of time, unless you support the PTP immunizing its party members from criminal charges when the party returns to power. So much for rule of law.

[oldsailor35]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

She didn't personally steal the half a trillion baht and transfer it to her own personal account...

She is still guilty of gross negligence but not all of it

Apparently she didn't attend a single meeting when she was in charge of the rice scheme

It seems disproportionate that she gets 100% of the repayment debt but it would be impossible now to figure out who stole how much etc...

She should have given a few parcels of government owned land to her friends like Suthep did as that is acceptable in the eyes of the Dems and the General.

[oldsailor35]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

According to the "Mob" in control right now, if your name is Shinawatra, you are guilty of everything, no proof needed.

[zaphod reborn]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

Correct, that's because those countries have constitutions which provide executive immunity for exercise of government functions. See Jones v. Clinton. Thailand has no such immunity in any of its constitutions. All parties have had a go at writing constitutions and government immunity has never been included in any of those. Blaming it on the junta is quite foolish and demonstrates your lack of understanding of western systems of constitutional law.

[speedtripler]

Yingluck is pretty much out of luck, now what? appeal? time will tell, we haven't heard and seen

the last of this story yet, not by a long shot....

Yes, it's not over, because Yingluck merely filed a ridiculous collateral attack on some pre-trial rulings and procedures. The criminal case has just started its trial phase. It won't be over for probably a year. Then, if Yingluck remains in Thailand, she can file her appeal, assuming she is convicted. However, who knows what government will be running the country in a year, and if it is a PTP government, they are sure to dismiss whatever charges or convictions have been filed.

Didnt the general revoke her passport already?

If not then these charges are another waste of time...

Since when are you required to have a passport to enter and leave Thailand? Did you miss the memo about the immigration officers on the Cambodian border?

If Yingluck is found guilty of criminal neglect with respect to corruption in her administration, she faces a 10 year prison sentence. I'm not sure why you think that is a waste of time, unless you support the PTP immunizing its party members from criminal charges when the party returns to power. So much for rule of law.

Someone with her money could go by a private jet never mind sneak over the border into Cambodia

But I don't see the point in jumping through all these hoops if she can fly to dubai anytime

If she losses, she can appeal, lose again, appeal to supreme Court and if it's going badly after years of wasted money she can still use her parachute to jump out before the crash

She will never do a single day in jail, never mind ten years...

[oldsailor35]

Yingluck is pretty much out of luck, now what? appeal? time will tell, we haven't heard and seen

the last of this story yet, not by a long shot....

Yes, it's not over, because Yingluck merely filed a ridiculous collateral attack on some pre-trial rulings and procedures. The criminal case has just started its trial phase. It won't be over for probably a year. Then, if Yingluck remains in Thailand, she can file her appeal, assuming she is convicted. However, who knows what government will be running the country in a year, and if it is a PTP government, they are sure to dismiss whatever charges or convictions have been filed.

Didnt the general revoke her passport already?

If not then these charges are another waste of time...

Since when are you required to have a passport to enter and leave Thailand? Did you miss the memo about the immigration officers on the Cambodian border?

If Yingluck is found guilty of criminal neglect with respect to corruption in her administration, she faces a 10 year prison sentence. I'm not sure why you think that is a waste of time, unless you support the PTP immunizing its party members from criminal charges when the party returns to power. So much for rule of law.

You don't seem to understand. The coup was and still is an illegal action and that this so called government really has no legal power, so how can they bring imaginary criminal charges and expect them to remain set in concrete

[scorecard]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

All been discussed many times before.

As always total avoidance of comment about gross dereliction of duty.

Next...

[Basil B]

Her enemies are so thick they cannot see that going after Yingluck is entrenching her support.

Yingluck has become far more than a proxy for her brother: she has a very different persona and where there is political support for Thaksin, there is a deep love for Yingluck.

What support???

Can not even mobilise rent a mob these days...

Her only supporters are the greedy lawyers who get paid win or lose.

[Skywalker69]

Jeanne d'Ark

Sigh!!!

[Skywalker69]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

She didn't personally steal the half a trillion baht and transfer it to her own personal account...

She is still guilty of gross negligence but not all of it

Apparently she didn't attend a single meeting when she was in charge of the rice scheme

It seems disproportionate that she gets 100% of the repayment debt but it would be impossible now to figure out who stole how much etc...

She should have given a few parcels of government owned land to her friends like Suthep did as that is acceptable in the eyes of the Dems and the General.

But...but...but... Suthep.

[oneday]

That outcome was expected in this corrupt, ONE-SIDED system, but that's the way to fire back at 'em YL.

Edited October 6, 2015 by oneday

[krdowney]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

Correct, that's because those countries have constitutions which provide executive immunity for exercise of government functions. See Jones v. Clinton. Thailand has no such immunity in any of its constitutions. All parties have had a go at writing constitutions and government immunity has never been included in any of those. Blaming it on the junta is quite foolish and demonstrates your lack of understanding of western systems of constitutional law.

Very good points. I've never looked at the specific constitutional frameworks. But I don't feel that you have contradicted me. I am not surprised that none of the 19 (I think) Thai constitutions have had executive immunity, but I als do not believe any Thai PM has ever been penalized to such an extent for failed or even corrupt policies--and Thai history is full of failed and corrupt policies. So I was not trying to make a point about the legality of it, but the magnitude of the punishment.

And as you have gathered, I am not an expert in Western Constitutions, sorry. And you have taught me an important point that I keep with me. But this is not a constitutional law forum, so calling me "foolish" was completely unnecessary. It does not speak well of a person with your knowledge to make fun of people you don't agree with. Thanks.

Edited October 6, 2015 by krdowney

[stoffel45]

Her enemies are so thick they cannot see that going after Yingluck is entrenching her support.

Yingluck has become far more than a proxy for her brother: she has a very different persona and where there is political support for Thaksin, there is a deep love for Yingluck.

So, Squeegee, Yingluck should just get away with anything because she is a Shinawatra?

Or is it because her brother's rice scheme to enrich himself and his supporters backfired - and resulted in the suicides of several people?

I think the "deep love" for Yingluck is purchased.

The very word Shinawatra smells in the nostrils of all decent Thais.

[krdowney]

The replies fall mainly into anti-Shinawatra or the anti-Junta camps, which is understandable given the present politics. But both sides are corrupt, and the Democrats too. The issue is not who is right (none) but how to stop the cycle of tit for tat that is running Thailand straight into the sewer.

[Bignose]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

According to the "Mob" in control right now, if your name is Shinawatra, you are guilty of everything, no proof needed.

What other government on this earth would not only allow, but would indeed organize for a convicted criminal to take part in high level government meetings via Skype when major decisions are being made?

You punish "heads of government" when they have been grossly incompetent, when literally hundreds of billions of Thai Baht have been siphoned off to the connected and quoted. This didn't happen by accident or by chance, this was an organized effort to take the money from the poor of this country and transfer it to the wealthy, for the ex PM to now plead ignorance and innocence is laughable.

As for "discourages anyone from participating in the political system" that is exactly what is required, if they are hell bent on plundering the national coffers, if their first priority is lining their own pockets then who needs them in office?

​It seems too many on this forum want to quote about democracy and legal procedures while conveniently forgetting what happened in this country, this country was headed for a financial precipice. It was being mismanaged by a corrupt and narcissistic government that cared not for the people who voted for them.

Drag them all through the courts and give them an opportunity to prove their "innocence" Maybe then the general masses who voted for them will see them as they truly are...

Edited October 6, 2015 by Bignose

[ginjag]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

She didn't personally steal the half a trillion baht and transfer it to her own personal account...

She is still guilty of gross negligence but not all of it

Apparently she didn't attend a single meeting when she was in charge of the rice scheme

It seems disproportionate that she gets 100% of the repayment debt but it would be impossible now to figure out who stole how much etc...

She should have given a few parcels of government owned land to her friends like Suthep did as that is acceptable in the eyes of the Dems and the General.

But...but...but... Suthep.

Old Sailor, Replying to you is pointless, trying to find anything like debate---on right and wrongs --out of the question as you reply from PRE WRITTEN answers--not dissimilar to Yinglucks ---when she happened to have the decency of being in the country---let alone chairing RICE---and being defense Minister and out the country----PTP were a joke, and now this illegal government as you call it have to clean things up.

[krdowney]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

I'm not sure what your nation or it's legal system is, but in most Rule of Law nations you don't monetarily punish heads of state for fiscal losses for failed policies. George W Bush comes to mind as a good counter example. Doing so is disproportionate and unjust, and discourages anyone from participating in the political system. This is exactly what the Junta wants, you do understand. By making any challenge to political dominance entail prohibitive risk is a big gain for outright authoritarian control.

According to the "Mob" in control right now, if your name is Shinawatra, you are guilty of everything, no proof needed.

What other government on this earth would not only allow, but would indeed organize for a convicted criminal to take part in high level government meetings via Skype when major decisions are being made?

You punish "heads of government" when they have been grossly incompetent, when literally hundreds of billions of Thai Baht have been siphoned off to the connected and quoted. This didn't happen by accident or by chance, this was an organized effort to take the money from the poor of this country and transfer it to the wealthy, for the ex PM to now plead ignorance and innocence is laughable.

As for "discourages anyone from participating in the political system" that is exactly what is required, if they are hell bent on plundering the national coffers, if their first priority is lining their own pockets then who needs them in office?

​It seems too many on this forum want to quote about democracy and legal procedures while conveniently forgetting what happened in this country, this country was headed for a financial precipice. It was being mismanaged by a corrupt and narcissistic government that cared not for the people who voted for them.

Drag them all through the courts and give them an opportunity to prove their "innocence" Maybe then the general masses who voted for them will see them as they truly are...

All I am saying is that US$14 billion is not just a conviction, it's throwing down a gauntlet which just makes things worse. This country need rule of law, and military strong men do not promote that too well.

[darren84310]

Aside from a few jaw droppingly bizarre rulings it seems like the courts in 2015 have started to rule pretty sensibly on a number of matters, this latest one in keeping with the trend. Yingluck is guilty as sin and all these detractions from the business at hand simply point even more clearly at her guilt.

The only wrong thing about this whole mess is that it'll take decades to play out. Criminal in itself really

She didn't personally steal the half a trillion baht and transfer it to her own personal account...

She is still guilty of gross negligence but not all of it

Apparently she didn't attend a single meeting when she was in charge of the rice scheme

It seems disproportionate that she gets 100% of the repayment debt but it would be impossible now to figure out who stole how much etc...

You said it yourself... 'she didn't attend a single meeting while in charge of the rice scheme.'... That more than anything else makes her liable, and how many people do you think Hitler actually killed by himself during WW2.

[FangFerang]

So, all you arm chair tacticians think that getting your favorite team to make a martyr out of Yingluk is a great idea?

For god's sake, read a history book. Better yet, make it a Thai history book edited by Rush Limbaugh and published by Fox News. I'm sure you like a lot of fiction with your fact.