Ms Yingluck asks PM for fairness in the civil litigation against her over the rice scheme

[Thai at Heart]

There is no accusation nor proof they made anything directly from this scheme.

They got elected with this blatant vote buy. Is that not a direct benefit?

Then she did nothing to reduce the mounting losses, despite being directly responsible, and lied about the extent of the losses. No culpability for that?

The statement was "provided more money to the Shins". I am not sure how u interpret that, but I take that as meaning they personally got money.

Maybe you can put a different spin on it for me.

Being elected provides numerous means to make more money. Or did you think they seek power to benefit the Thai people?

You didn't answer my question. I answered the statement with a fact. You have answered your question with a question.

The Shins are not accused of profiting directly from the scheme, much to the misunderstanding of dozens on here.

Until that changes, that are the facts of the matter.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Thai at Heart

[halloween]

They got elected with this blatant vote buy. Is that not a direct benefit?

Then she did nothing to reduce the mounting losses, despite being directly responsible, and lied about the extent of the losses. No culpability for that?

"Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra risks a backlash from farmers who helped put her in power after cutting guaranteed rice prices following criticism that the program put the country’s finances at risk.

The Cabinet on June 19 approved a 20 percent reduction in rice-purchase prices to help stem losses from the program.."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-24/yingluck-risks-farmer-ire-to-curb-fiscal-burden-southeast-asia

"In June 2013, the Prime Minister announced that beginning on July 1, the amount paid to farmers for pledging rice would be cut by 20%. (Murdoch, supra.) However, she reversed this decision when the announcement brought protesting farmers to the streets of Bangkok." http://www.loc.gov/lawweb/servlet/lloc_news?disp3_l205403656_text

What a wonderful piece of management, admitting change was needed, but refusing to implement it.

[halloween]

They got elected with this blatant vote buy. Is that not a direct benefit?

Then she did nothing to reduce the mounting losses, despite being directly responsible, and lied about the extent of the losses. No culpability for that?

The statement was "provided more money to the Shins". I am not sure how u interpret that, but I take that as meaning they personally got money.

Maybe you can put a different spin on it for me.

Being elected provides numerous means to make more money. Or did you think they seek power to benefit the Thai people?

You didn't answer my question. I answered the statement with a fact. You have answered your question with a question.

The Shins are not accused of profiting directly from the scheme, much to the misunderstanding of dozens on here.

Until that changes, that are the facts of the matter.

BS. they got elected through the rice scam, which allowed then to make money.

[Thai at Heart]

They got elected with this blatant vote buy. Is that not a direct benefit?

Then she did nothing to reduce the mounting losses, despite being directly responsible, and lied about the extent of the losses. No culpability for that?

The statement was "provided more money to the Shins". I am not sure how u interpret that, but I take that as meaning they personally got money.

Maybe you can put a different spin on it for me.

Being elected provides numerous means to make more money. Or did you think they seek power to benefit the Thai people?

You didn't answer my question. I answered the statement with a fact. You have answered your question with a question.

The Shins are not accused of profiting directly from the scheme, much to the misunderstanding of dozens on here.

Until that changes, that are the facts of the matter.

BS. they got elected through the rice scam, which allowed then to make money.

Well, we can keep making it up as we go along and guess they made money, but they aren't accused of that either.

[than]

the whole thing is a "farce". It's a political trial, no justice being expected

All corruption trials are a political trials because were the politicians who sins.

YL was aware of the consequence to support corruption : she played, she loose.

Now the only thing she must do close her mouth and accept the consequence of her act.

In all western countries a corruption politicians are always punish.... Only in the Red world corrupt a erect like an hero

In all Western countries, coup is high treason. Only in Bangkok, coup leaders are treated like hero.

Because there are hero .

[billd766]

the whole thing is a "farce". It's a political trial, no justice being expected

All corruption trials are a political trials because were the politicians who sins.

YL was aware of the consequence to support corruption : she played, she loose.

Now the only thing she must do close her mouth and accept the consequence of her act.

In all western countries a corruption politicians are always punish.... Only in the Red world corrupt a erect like an hero

In all Western countries, coup is high treason. Only in Bangkok, coup leaders are treated like hero.

You may not have noticed Eric but Thailand is actually not a western country and western laws don't actually apply here in Thailand, no more than they do in China, Russia, the Middle East, North or South Africa, South America, India and many other places in the world.

Democracy to a greater or lesser extent is around in quite a few countries and quite a few countries have a coup on a fairly regular basis. Individuals like you and I and many others on TVF have chosen to live in Thailand, other expats choose different countries but a lot of expats don't get the same rights in the countries they choose as they came from.

You and I and everybody else on TVF can fill these electronic pages for years basically saying I am right and you are wrong, no you're not, yes I am but at the end of the day NO Thai people will take any notice of what we want for them, right or wrong because that actually believe that they have the right to choose the system they want or the system they get without any help from us.

We don't have the right to tell them what is right or wrong (in our eyes and thoughts) because it is not our country, it belongs to the Thai people.

[sawadee1947]

the whole thing is a "farce". It's a political trial, no justice being expected

All corruption trials are a political trials because were the politicians who sins.

YL was aware of the consequence to support corruption : she played, she loose.

Now the only thing she must do close her mouth and accept the consequence of her act.

In all western countries a corruption politicians are always punish.... Only in the Red world corrupt a erect like an hero

In all Western countries, coup is high treason. Only in Bangkok, coup leaders are treated like hero.

Because there are hero .

well, I hope Yingluck will manage to escape with her son from those heros....

[Wombat6]

since when are PM's financially liable for failed policy

let alone collective responsibility

I can see your point, since when has a PM ever been liable for failed policy.

But the world has never seen such an incompetent and inexperienced PM like this one. A woman who became PM of a country with zero political experience whatsoever, in fact. A PM who was merely a pretty puppet whose strings were pulled by an on-the-run convicted criminal, illegally running a government from a haven overseas.

A PM who spent lots of time racking up a record number of overseas trips under such guises as "trade missions" but were in fact shopping trips, and very little time attending to her actual duties.

She will never be charged with anything that includes the term "responsibility".

Well of course the old shopping trip myth gets trotted out from time to time but no one ever provides any examples, links, evidence, photos....

She made fewer trips than the present PM, although she was able to leave the hotel room to eat.

It seems to suit yor agenda to ask for proof of her activities on her many overseas trips. (I read somewhere that she made 53 trips.) I put it back to you....if she wasn't shopping, then what was she doing (for Thailand).?? When she went to the Maldives, the reason was given she went there to study their methods of water conservation....????

I would suggest that there are far better places in the world to study water Conservation, but of Course she wasn't there for a holiday ??

It sems that you would believe that she was on Parliamentary Business when she skipped Parliament to have a Private meeting with Business people in a Hotel or that she was too busy to attend Rice subsidy committee meetings or that she never evaded tax when she sold shares and the money went into Thaksins wifes bank account etc. etc. It seems like you have blinkers on when the subject of Yingluck arises.

[lvr181]

since when are PM's financially liable for failed policy

let alone collective responsibility

Because anyone with half a brain knew that her policy was not really financially viable (and she had been "warned" before hand) and she must accept responsibility for not paying the farmers. To many, the policy seemed to be about vote buying (not unusual with politicians anywhere) and failing to control some people using her policy for their own financial reward e.g. crooked dealings! The buck stops at the top and she was the top!

Other countries run agricultural subsidies that work, but unfortunately, it is not the Thai way to find out how successful policies work elsewhere and adapt them for use in Thailand.

Edited October 14, 2015 by lvr181

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed, this is not about Thaksin's wealth. A troll post and a reply removed as well.

[RWA]

since when are PM's financially liable for failed policy

let alone collective responsibility

Yes, you're correct. All real democratic governments have constitutions which immunize their president or PM from civil lawsuits for their failed policies. You can read Jones v. Clinton for an explanation of where immunity begins and ends for a president in a modern democracy. Thailand, however, doesn't fall into the category of "real democratic governments." No party has ever advocated for inserting an immunity clause into the Thai constitutions (and all its versions). Therefore, Yingluck is now suffering as the result of the lack of foresight of her brother, herself, of the PTP, of the PAD, and all their predecessors.

Prayuth has two options in attempting to recover for the financial loss resulting from the failure to properly administer and monitor the rice pledge scheme, proceed in civil court or seek an administrative order. The difference is that in civil court, the current government becomes the plaintiff, and in the administrative court, Yingluck has the burden of contesting the order in court as the plaintiff.

Note that Yingluck's liability is not premised on initiating the scheme, but failing to address irregularities and massive losses which were not part of the scheme as it was legislated by parliament. As such, the scheme became undemocratic and unconstitutional, because it was not being administered in the way that the law required it to be.

It's obvious she can keep all these legal wars going for years. Her lawyers can file lawsuits, objections, appeals, etc. She will have plenty of time to run off to Dubai when it gets close to actually having to serve any time in jail. For now, it's a battle of damages (money verdicts), and I'm sure she has off-shored most of her ill-gotten gains by now, as have her cohorts in this fraudulent scheme.

Very well said!!! Thank you

[RWA]

Perhaps the General should ask Yingluck for a little fairness and bring back the millions in tax payers money she bunged into her Brothers bank account while she was in charge of the country's funds. Fair deal i would say !

YESSSSS!!!!

let's be FAIR now!

[Soutpeel]

since when are PM's financially liable for failed policy

let alone collective responsibility

Yes, you're correct. All real democratic governments have constitutions which immunize their president or PM from civil lawsuits for their failed policies. You can read Jones v. Clinton for an explanation of where immunity begins and ends for a president in a modern democracy. Thailand, however, doesn't fall into the category of "real democratic governments." No party has ever advocated for inserting an immunity clause into the Thai constitutions (and all its versions). Therefore, Yingluck is now suffering as the result of the lack of foresight of her brother, herself, of the PTP, of the PAD, and all their predecessors.

Prayuth has two options in attempting to recover for the financial loss resulting from the failure to properly administer and monitor the rice pledge scheme, proceed in civil court or seek an administrative order. The difference is that in civil court, the current government becomes the plaintiff, and in the administrative court, Yingluck has the burden of contesting the order in court as the plaintiff.

Note that Yingluck's liability is not premised on initiating the scheme, but failing to address irregularities and massive losses which were not part of the scheme as it was legislated by parliament. As such, the scheme became undemocratic and unconstitutional, because it was not being administered in the way that the law required it to be.

It's obvious she can keep all these legal wars going for years. Her lawyers can file lawsuits, objections, appeals, etc. She will have plenty of time to run off to Dubai when it gets close to actually having to serve any time in jail. For now, it's a battle of damages (money verdicts), and I'm sure she has off-shored most of her ill-gotten gains by now, as have her cohorts in this fraudulent scheme.

Very well said!!! Thank you

Thank you 3 times ?

[fasteddie]

She won't get any fairness from this bunch of traitors, after all she and her bruv gave the people ideas above their station and the fascists aren't having any of that.

[mikemac]

She won't get any fairness from this bunch of traitors, after all she and her bruv gave the people ideas above their station and the fascists aren't having any of that.

I may not agree with what you say but I love the way you phrase it !

[Wombat6]

She won't get any fairness from this bunch of traitors, after all she and her bruv gave the people ideas above their station and the fascists aren't having any of that.

Ideas that didn't work !! Who would want them in thei right mind. Her and bruv also tried to sneak an amnesty bill through Parliament.....didn't work also and was a contributing factor in their downfall. The people who you call Traitors and fascists are the ones who are gradually getting Thailand back on its' feet,.....maybe you are possibly filled with so much anger that you are blind. Surely you wouldnt like people back in power who only think about lining their own pockets as well as their mates. Who is the traitor to the Thai People ?? I would suggest the Shin Clan should be included in your answer

[fasteddie]

She won't get any fairness from this bunch of traitors, after all she and her bruv gave the people ideas above their station and the fascists aren't having any of that.

Ideas that didn't work !! Who would want them in thei right mind. Her and bruv also tried to sneak an amnesty bill through Parliament.....didn't work also and was a contributing factor in their downfall. The people who you call Traitors and fascists are the ones who are gradually getting Thailand back on its' feet,.....maybe you are possibly filled with so much anger that you are blind. Surely you wouldnt like people back in power who only think about lining their own pockets as well as their mates. Who is the traitor to the Thai People ?? I would suggest the Shin Clan should be included in your answer

Sneak? is that what you call the business of a democratically elected government? putting bills through parliament is what they are absolutely entitled to do. Amnesty bills are all the rage in thailand, without them many coup leaders would have to have been held to account and the army would never let that happen. All this fuss about some bloke who flogged cheap shares to his mrs, do you really think that's worth the destruction of democracy? No, it's just a smokescreen to further the agenda of the elitist fascist right, swallowed hook line and sinker by their gullible sympathisers. If and when, and it's a big if, this treacherous putz returns free democratic elections to the people, there will be an amnesty bill otherwise Prayut, Prem and their cronies will all face the firing squad.

So which squeaky clean country do you come from where politicians don't line theirs and their friends pockets? It's certainly not the UK or USA, or any other capitalist country for that matter, for that is exactly what they do. Thailand under Pheu Thai and all it's other guises was a thriving economy and for a change the ordinary people were seeing some benefits, and that's where the trouble lays, the snouts at the trough were not willing to share.

[halloween]

Sneak? is that what you call the business of a democratically elected government? putting bills through parliament is what they are absolutely entitled to do. Amnesty bills are all the rage in thailand, without them many coup leaders would have to have been held to account and the army would never let that happen. All this fuss about some bloke who flogged cheap shares to his mrs, do you really think that's worth the destruction of democracy? No, it's just a smokescreen to further the agenda of the elitist fascist right, swallowed hook line and sinker by their gullible sympathisers. If and when, and it's a big if, this treacherous putz returns free democratic elections to the people, there will be an amnesty bill otherwise Prayut, Prem and their cronies will all face the firing squad.

So which squeaky clean country do you come from where politicians don't line theirs and their friends pockets? It's certainly not the UK or USA, or any other capitalist country for that matter, for that is exactly what they do. Thailand under Pheu Thai and all it's other guises was a thriving economy and for a change the ordinary people were seeing some benefits, and that's where the trouble lays, the snouts at the trough were not willing to share.

I once knew a bloke everyone called "Lightning". Do they call you "Fast" for the same reason?

[Thai at Heart]

There are dozens of businesses in Thailand that enjoy monopoly or oligopoly business granted by government license or legal protection which milk the Thai populous all the way to the bank.

Do you think the Shinawatra invented this business model?

I did not invent armed robbery either but I am sure if I was busted doing it I would still be found guilty.

Your latest excuse for this seedy regime is quite possibly the worst I have heard yet !

Not at all. You talked as though the Shinawatra were exclusive in their apparently unique nefarious plans to make money from their business. I simply pointed out, that the ultimate way to make money in Thailand is to have a govt maintained monopoly.

There are dozens of very powerful political families who have created billions for themselves by exactly the same activity. He had a phone company, some have banks, others construction, and the list goes on and on.

You can't hold only one accountable when the same is going on elsewhere in the Thai economy day after day.

[scorecard]

There are dozens of businesses in Thailand that enjoy monopoly or oligopoly business granted by government license or legal protection which milk the Thai populous all the way to the bank.

Do you think the Shinawatra invented this business model?

I did not invent armed robbery either but I am sure if I was busted doing it I would still be found guilty.

Your latest excuse for this seedy regime is quite possibly the worst I have heard yet !

Not at all. You talked as though the Shinawatra were exclusive in their apparently unique nefarious plans to make money from their business. I simply pointed out, that the ultimate way to make money in Thailand is to have a govt maintained monopoly.

There are dozens of very powerful political families who have created billions for themselves by exactly the same activity. He had a phone company, some have banks, others construction, and the list goes on and on.

You can't hold only one accountable when the same is going on elsewhere in the Thai economy day after day.

Think about your last paragraph again. Your very wrong.

Ultimately you seem to support the notion that because other have done wrong nobody can be punished.

The real bottom line, as many of your TV adversaries have said to you (and others ) thousand of times, all folks / companies / families / gangs etc., should be punished for their transgressions, regardless of their family names, their connections, their under the table payments, their color or whatever.

If you do support the notion that " ...because other have done wrong nobody can be punished", then there is no point in trying to discuss with you.

Edited October 20, 2015 by scorecard

[metisdead]

Off topic posts about Thaksin have been removed.