Thaksin Accused Of Giving The License To Kill

[Plus]

Chownah, I added that HRW report as an attachment. If you browser does not properly display .pdf files, try right-click, sage target as - and then open it from your computer, Windows will probably do it automatically.

The file is not big, should take about a minute even on a dial up connection.

Scroll down to page 9, "Promotion of violence by government officials" to go straight into the "meat". It has enough references to keep you going for a year or so should you choose to double check everything.

thailand0704.pdf

[chownah]

[

If you plug your questions 1. through 4. into the websites provided above, you'll have your answer.

There IS physical evidence AND testimony regarding the Drug War. They ARE freely available on the public domain.

I doubt it. Don't want to waste my time searching for the needle in the pile of internet shit....especially since there are so many knowledgeable people her who claim to have already found the needle. Plus has given me a link and I had problems with it earlier....I'm about to try it again. If you have some links to help me find something then please post them here.

Chownah

[chownah]

PLus,

Thanks for the 'save target as' tip....its revolutionary. Now I'll read it and think about it a bit and then post my reactions.

Thanks again,

Chownah

[chownah]

Plus,

Well I have read the part of the report that you suggested but not the entire report...its really long and I read it slowly trying for good penetration of meaning and implication.

So far I would say that the report does more to show that Thailand was full of violent and corrupt officials than it does to show that Toxin should be held personally responsible for the crimes committed. Over and over again it was reported that people were placed on the black lists who were not drug affilitated but who had hassles with people of authority and these authorities put their enemies on the blacklists...we're talking local officials, not upper echelon people....should Toxin be held accountable for this? Was this his intent? I think not. Toxin's lack of oversight and control and his seeming unwillingness (or was it really inability) to regain control when things turned out badly are things he should be held accountable for. Once the ball got rolling it is an argueable point as to whether Toxin could have stopped it.

My take on the war on drugs is that it is true when the gov't says that the bulk of the deaths were caused by other drug dealers because there were a huge percentage of police and local gov't officials who were involved in the drug trade. Anyone who thinks that in Thailand there was a 5% meth use rate among males and this vast flow of money was not directed by police and local officials is a bit naive in my opinion.

Toxin was the head of gov't so he should have had the knowledge of what was happening and the opporunity to stop what was happening....I guess. But how are honest police supposed to stop the corrupt police from murdering people?...and likewise how was Toxin to do that once it got started?

Persecuting or prosecuting Toxin will not end the system that created this problem. Working to end corruption in the ranks of the police and local officials is the only way in my opinion.....good luck.

For me the bottom line is that what happened is a good reason why drugs should not be criminalized.....it only creates huges flows of illicit money which in the end causes corruption and the other nasty stuff that goes with it.

Chownah

[Plus]

Persecuting or prosecuting Toxin will not end the system that created this problem.

So? Should they leave him alone?

He set the policy. He demanded results. He punished those who didn't

"perform". It was top down approach. Of course without the support of the majority of the population and rotten police force it wouldn't be possible to kill thousands, but they didn't kill that much on their own, not until Thaksin ordered them to "solve the problem by any means possible".

It was a novel approach - to hold Thaksin responsible not for individual crimes, but for the whole policy. It hardly ever works, but the damage to reputation is irreparable. There's nothing worse than "escaped genocide charges in 3rd world courts" label. He can forget about tea with Blair if there are warrants issued.

[Johpa]

At the very least, mud will stick.

It's smoke and mirrors. The new government's popularity is waining and they are just deflecting the flack. All that is happening in Thailand has little to do with Thaksin and everything to do with the way the new government wants themselves to be portrayed, otherwise why would they have to setup their own PR agency?

I'm glad to see at least one other poster here who sees it all as just Thai politics as usual. Taksin has become the new bogeyman as people and political parties line up for the next election. Not that Taksin does not deserve to have become the new bogeyman, but Taksin is no longer the main issue.

[Plus]

How do you expect them to behave? Thaksin is gone, yesterday's news, they have to learn to live without him.

There are sectors that want him to be punished, and, in fact, this present government's survivial largely depends on how they will deal with Thaksin's legacy.

I don't quite understand what you guys want.

[ColPyat]

At the very least, mud will stick.

It's smoke and mirrors. The new government's popularity is waining and they are just deflecting the flack. All that is happening in Thailand has little to do with Thaksin and everything to do with the way the new government wants themselves to be portrayed, otherwise why would they have to setup their own PR agency?

I'm glad to see at least one other poster here who sees it all as just Thai politics as usual. Taksin has become the new bogeyman as people and political parties line up for the next election. Not that Taksin does not deserve to have become the new bogeyman, but Taksin is no longer the main issue.

Not just one poster...

Yes, unfortunately it appears more and more that the government comes up with incredible and absolutely unfeasable plans, maybe to deflect from the reality that they have no feasable plan at all.

I am still waiting for an explanation of the new magic phrase "sufficiency economy", what it actually means in practical terms. The country cannot be just run by aspirations and pleasing rethorics.

I am getting the impression that governments in the west are increasingly worried what Thailand's future might be. It has been two months already, nothing has been done other than following TRT policies almost to the letter, and setting up of the usual commitees and panels. This is noted by the rest of the world.

[ColPyat]

Plus,

Well I have read the part of the report that you suggested but not the entire report...its really long and I read it slowly trying for good penetration of meaning and implication.

So far I would say that the report does more to show that Thailand was full of violent and corrupt officials than it does to show that Toxin should be held personally responsible for the crimes committed. Over and over again it was reported that people were placed on the black lists who were not drug affilitated but who had hassles with people of authority and these authorities put their enemies on the blacklists...we're talking local officials, not upper echelon people....should Toxin be held accountable for this? Was this his intent? I think not. Toxin's lack of oversight and control and his seeming unwillingness (or was it really inability) to regain control when things turned out badly are things he should be held accountable for. Once the ball got rolling it is an argueable point as to whether Toxin could have stopped it.

My take on the war on drugs is that it is true when the gov't says that the bulk of the deaths were caused by other drug dealers because there were a huge percentage of police and local gov't officials who were involved in the drug trade. Anyone who thinks that in Thailand there was a 5% meth use rate among males and this vast flow of money was not directed by police and local officials is a bit naive in my opinion.

Toxin was the head of gov't so he should have had the knowledge of what was happening and the opporunity to stop what was happening....I guess. But how are honest police supposed to stop the corrupt police from murdering people?...and likewise how was Toxin to do that once it got started?

Persecuting or prosecuting Toxin will not end the system that created this problem. Working to end corruption in the ranks of the police and local officials is the only way in my opinion.....good luck.

For me the bottom line is that what happened is a good reason why drugs should not be criminalized.....it only creates huges flows of illicit money which in the end causes corruption and the other nasty stuff that goes with it.

Chownah

You do make a few interesting points.

Yes, the killings happened.

Yes, the blacklists existed, in many villages they were even publically shown.

Yes, there were death squads.

Yes, there were silencing killings done by dirty police officers.

Yes, there were monks absolving police officers in public, such as Luang Por Khun, who said that killing drug dealers would not draw negative karma.

Yes, Thaksin made speaches to the effect that society has to be protected from worthless scum, bladabladablada.

Problem though is that there is no proof whatsoever that Thaksin himself has ordered thes killings. And nothing else would hold up in court. We only have circumstantial evidence and base our discussion regarding Thaksin's responsibility/guilt in legal terms on a lot of speculation.

Could Thaksin have stopped it?

I don't know. Previously i was of the opinion, but lately i am not so sure anymore. First, because TRT was not a monolithic organisation, and i wonder how much power Thaksin personally had in reality. Also, other powers were deeply involved in the drug war killings as well, have actively collaborated and/or sanctioned them.

Secondly, because social mechanics in Thailand do tend to brutalities, such massakers happened before, and in particular the killings of suspected communists were one in a very similar fashion.

The question you raise is a very important. The fault lies in the sytem, and how one wheel connects there to the other. Police corruption, poverty, migration, strong remnants of sakdina, the patron/client structures are all parts of it.

Edited November 20, 2006 by ColPyat

[Indifferent]

can't help to noitce thi .. and

seem like what Amercia BUSH is doing in the middle east .. is far worst then Taksin .

i am not speaking for anyone . or supporting anyone ..

but hey look .Thailand had less drug dealer .. after the killing in thailand ..

but look at Iraq .. There is more Death , rape , and murder . now in Middle 100 time more before BUSH Went in ..

Taksin would be happy that BUSH will be hangjing beside him .. if CRIME aginst HUmanity is what the world is Up to .

Not at all. It is just 100 times more publicised.

And this Chowna dude. Please supply me links to posts that you have actually contributed in a positive way to a thread rather than just asked for evidence that a poster isn't telling porkies. I havn't seen any yet, but then again, I don't read every thread and I'm too lazy to search Thai visa for your name to find out.

[roamer]

"Problem though is that there is no proof whatsoever that Thaksin himself has ordered thes killings. And nothing else would hold up in court. We only have circumstantial evidence and base our discussion regarding Thaksin's responsibility/guilt in legal terms on a lot of speculation."

I beg to differ. Who has looked for the evidence ? Who has questioned those lower down the food chain who might be starting to sweat a little ? I doubt anyone ever expected a signed confession from the man himself, doesn't mean to say the truth isn't out there,

[sriracha john]

CASE 1: KILLED IN COFFIN SHOP

A man was shot point-blank in the head and arm at 6pm on February 11 at a coffin shop in Trang province's central market. Shot in front of many witnesses, two kilometres from home and just 300 metres from the police station, he died later at hospital.

The killing was reported as being related to drug trafficking, but the commission learned that no drugs were found on the man's body or at the scene.

Police detectives did not bother to check evidence or even collect the spent cartridges, which were eventually picked up and turned in to police by bystanders.

Despite the number of eyewitnesses, the investigation has made absolutely no progress. The commission said police had blacklisted the victim and his family as drug traffickers and searched their home six times before the shooting, but found no drugs or anything illegal and did not have enough evidence to prosecute the man on drug charges.

CASE 2: SHOT IN FRONT OF WIFE

Three bullets to the head and body left another man dead at 1pm on February 27 next to a central market in a southern province.

He was shot in front of his wife and other family members while he was fixing his motorcycle.

The killing reportedly sprang from conflicts over drug trafficking, but the commission learned that no drugs were found on the deceased or at the scene.

Again, the shooting took place in a crowded area.

District officials and police confirmed that the man had been blacklisted as a trafficker, but authorities were unable to gather enough evidence to prosecute.

Police investigations into that killing and three others in the same area - all said to be related to drugs - went nowhere. Assets seized in this case were later released to the family by the Anti-Money Laundering Office.

CASE 3: GUNNED DOWN AT HOME

A shirtless man was shot five times in the neck and body at 6pm on April 9 while sitting at his desk in the front room of his residential compound. Several neighbours were inside his house and witnessed the killing. Police said the murder was the result of drug conflicts and the victim had earlier been blacklisted.

Detectives and doctors sent to the scene removed his trousers and sent the body to a hospital for an autopsy and X-rays to seek ballistic traces.

The body was transferred to the hospital's morgue, where his underwear was removed and folded before being dumped into a garbage bin.

The whole process was witnessed by relatives and several hospital officials.

Police asked the relatives to leave the room, then summoned them back to tell them that they found more than 100 methamphetamine pills in a small plastic bag the same size as medicine packets used in hospitals.

They accused the relatives of trying to destroy evidence and claimed they were the ones who removed the trousers and underwear.

Doctors who took part in the autopsy testified, however, that police officers had taken off the trousers, while the underwear was removed by the hospital official who cleaned the body. The victim's relatives only assisted him, they said, adding that nothing had been found inside the underwear.

The X-rays, covering all parts of his body, found no trace of a drug packet.

Police have made no progress in investigating this or several other killings in the same district.

Police searched the house of the dead man but found nothing illegal.

They made a list of the man's property and asked the Anti-Money Laundering Office to conduct a probe of the assets.

CASE 4: SHOT WHILE DRIVING

On February 19, a man driving home from a district office was shot twice - once in the right shin and the other in the right side of the neck - just 500 metres from the district office. He was rushed to a nearby hospital while his car was towed to the district police station.

Police and an assistant district chief searched the car and claimed they found speed pills hidden in a hat inside the car. The search was carried out without the dead man's relatives present, even though police knew his family well.

Newspapers reported that he was killed because of drug conflicts.

The commission found that the man and his family had been included on the police blacklist of suspected drug traffickers. Police had earlier searched the man's car several times but always came up empty-handed.

When the government declared the war on drugs, senior district officials asked the man to leave his job with a local administrative organisation, but he refused.

The man said he used to take drugs but had been clean for a long time. He signed a document stating that he was a former drug user. A week before his death, district officials admitted that they lacked evidence to prosecute the man for trafficking.

The killing took place the day the man was summoned to meet district officials. He was shot after leaving the district office. His relatives and district officials said the man had never been seen with the hat containing the drugs.

Police said no progress had been made in their investigation, or in two similar killings in the same district.

CASE 5: HUSBAND, WIFE DEAD

A man and wife were killed in their car in a northeastern province at 4:30am on March 28 after buying goods to sell at their rural home. After shooting the couple dead, the gunman kicked their neighbour, who was accompanying them, and chased him from the car. Newspapers reported that the couple were killed because of conflicts in drug trafficking.

With no relatives present, police searched the car and found 17 ya ba pills hidden behind the driver's seat.

Later that day, they searched the victims' house and seized assets.

The commission found that the couple had been blacklisted, but then told police that they had become suddenly rich from winning first prize in the government lottery. The police did not believe them.

They later travelled to Bangkok to obtain a certificate from the Government Lottery Office proving that they had won Bt6 million in 2000.

The police refused to believe them and argued that they used money from drug trafficking to buy the winning lottery ticket from the real winner.

The two had extended their remote home without telling neighbours that they had won the lottery for fear of being robbed.

Transaction records showed that the victims' account was only credited once with the lottery winnings, and since then they had withdrawn money from the account until only Bt2 million was left.

The commission also found that police searched the couple's house on March 14 but found nothing illegal. Police have made no progress in the investigation into the killings.

- The Nation

==============================================

“Washing your hands when you become very rich doesn’t mean you will be let off hook – the government is after you,” Thaksin warned.

- The Nation

--------------------

He was talking about those allegedly involved in drugs in the above comment in 2003... but it would certainly provide a nice self-assessment today. The main difference is that he's unlikely to be gunned down in a tea shop.

[sriracha john]

Legislature asked to act on 'silence killings'

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) will seek National Legislative Assembly (NLA) action over 38 alleged "silence killings" during the Thaksin Shinawatra war on drugs.

Commissioner Wasant Panich yesterday accused the Thaksin government of "doing nothing" about 38 specific killings it had investigated.

The commission found these deaths were of "innocent" people and were likely to have been what have become known as "silence killings".

The commission received 40 complaints stemming from the 2003 war on drugs. Its investigations found 38 involved innocent people with no drug-dealing history, Wasant said.

The NHRC reported its findings to the previous government but they were ignored, Wasant added. It would now seek action by the NLA.

Separately, a prominent human-rights lawyer encouraged the government to ratify the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC).

The coalition is a global network of more than 2,000 civil organisations advocating a fair, effective and independent International Criminal Court (ICC).

The ICC is the first permanent international judicial body capable of trying individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so.

Somchai Homlaor said ratification of the CICC would allow Thaksin to be tried for crimes against humanity for the many deaths during his anti-drugs crusade.

Somchai - who is chairman of the human rights committee of the Lawyers Council - said the 2003 war on drugs led to 2,500 extra-judicial deaths.

He added the Tak-Bai incident in the deep South in October 2004 was a crime against humanity, too. At least 85 people died.

The government could have Thaksin tried for these crimes if it became a CICC member. Membership would be retroactive to July 1, 2002, he said.

Once the Thai government became a member, the coalition's 103 other nations could seek Thaksin's indictment in a Thailand court for conspiracy in the murder of others.

"It's clear that Thaksin not only launched the [drugs] war but also reinforced it by the transfer or firing of police officers who failed to comply with this policy that led to many deaths," he said.

He encouraged the government to codify crimes against humanity and war crimes in Thai law to ensure Thaksin did not escape prosecution.

If the government feared disruption if the former prime minister was tried in this country, it could seek prosecution in the ICC at The Hague.

Conviction of crimes against humanity carries a maximum punishment of life in prison.

Following the drug-war deaths, police admitted they had killed several dealers in shootouts. The government added at the time that hundreds of other deaths were the result of criminals killing criminals.

Thammasat University law lecturer Surasak Likasitwatanakul said solid evidence of Thaksin's complicity would be required for a successful prosecution.

A case could still be made if there was proof that Thaksin made statements sanctioning killings.

Actions could be brought directly by relatives of the dead or they could ask public prosecutors to investigate and bring charges.

- The Nation

[lukamar]

CASE 1: KILLED IN COFFIN SHOP

CASE 2: SHOT IN FRONT OF WIFE

CASE 3: GUNNED DOWN AT HOME

.

CASE 4: SHOT WHILE DRIVING

CASE 5: HUSBAND, WIFE DEAD

Don't quite get the drift of your post. If Thaksin was responsible for these deaths i would think it would be rather easy for the witnesses to finger him, he was the PM at the time and an easy to identify fellow. Maybe you or I did it, they didn't identify us either.

The fact remains that unless you have clear evidence that he handed direct orders to someone who is willing to testify against him, there is no case. He would only give that type of an order, if he gave it at all, to someone of a high rank in the police or the military and they won't say squat even if given immunity. A good lawyer could make the case that an over zealous subordinate took the comments out of context and ran with the ball and when it proved very popular Thaksin took the credit. Isn't that really what politicians do best, take credit for other peoples thinking and actions.

It is looking like the government is conducting a witch hunt and are willing to throw enough sand in the air praying that eventually some may fall on Thaksin and the TRT and they will be vindicated for their actions.

[chownah]

can't help to noitce thi .. and

seem like what Amercia BUSH is doing in the middle east .. is far worst then Taksin .

i am not speaking for anyone . or supporting anyone ..

but hey look .Thailand had less drug dealer .. after the killing in thailand ..

but look at Iraq .. There is more Death , rape , and murder . now in Middle 100 time more before BUSH Went in ..

Taksin would be happy that BUSH will be hangjing beside him .. if CRIME aginst HUmanity is what the world is Up to .

Not at all. It is just 100 times more publicised.

And this Chowna dude. Please supply me links to posts that you have actually contributed in a positive way to a thread rather than just asked for evidence that a poster isn't telling porkies. I havn't seen any yet, but then again, I don't read every thread and I'm too lazy to search Thai visa for your name to find out.

Here is a link that shows all of my posts. Have a look and if you want to discuss the style or content of my posts please send me a PM and I'd be happy to hear your views. If you can come up with a constructive way that I could contribute more positively I might even give it a try.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?ac...sult_type=posts

Chownah

[lukamar]

Here is a link that shows all of my posts. Have a look and if you want to discuss the style or content of my posts please send me a PM and I'd be happy to hear your views. If you can come up with a constructive way that I could contribute more positively I might even give it a try.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?ac...sult_type=posts

Chownah

How refreshing.. Someone that can actually supply a link to the information when asked without saying "search the internet"...

[hammered]

Many leaders through history have been held responsible for human rights abuses under their leadership even with little direct evidence linking them to it (the recently completed Saddam Hussein trial is an example) while others have gotten away with even worse with direct evidence linking them to the event (Sharons direct link to the Sahttila and Sabra massacres). These kind of cases are rarely legally sound and they are always about politics usually with the winner or dominant force using the case for their own reasons. This is probably a good reason to have any trial if it occurs at an international court, and the requests for the Thai government to recognize the international court are probably aimed at opening this as a possibility for Mr. Thaksin if there is evidence of direct involvement. The use of international courts also removes the case from the often emotionally charged locale.

[wpcoe]

Anyone who thinks that in Thailand there was a 5% meth use rate among males and this vast flow of money was not directed by police and local officials is a bit naive in my opinion.

Hmmmm. And, can you support that claim (accusation?) with public docmentation?

[sriracha john]

Many leaders through history have been held responsible for human rights abuses under their leadership even with little direct evidence linking them to it (the recently completed Saddam Hussein trial is an example) while others have gotten away with even worse with direct evidence linking them to the event (Sharons direct link to the Sahttila and Sabra massacres). These kind of cases are rarely legally sound and they are always about politics usually with the winner or dominant force using the case for their own reasons. This is probably a good reason to have any trial if it occurs at an international court, and the requests for the Thai government to recognize the international court are probably aimed at opening this as a possibility for Mr. Thaksin if there is evidence of direct involvement. The use of international courts also removes the case from the often emotionally charged locale.

Thank you for your very accurate appraisal of the situation.

[hammered]

Chang Noi has an interesting column on this matter with some prize quotes from Mr. Thaksin, The interior minister of the time and some policemen Bringing the Thaksin regime to account

Edited November 21, 2006 by hammered

[sriracha john]

Chang Noi has an interesting column on this matter with some prize quotes from Mr. Thaksin, The interior minister of the time and some policemen Bringing the Thaksin regime to account

Ex-PM:

"If they don’t stop, there is a chance they will be dealt with in every way, both life and limb"

Ex-Interior Minister:

“Tell them to stop selling drugs and leave the communities for good or they will be put behind bars or even ‘vanish without a trace’…. Who cares?”

Good points, as usual, made by Chang Noi. (oddly enough the direct link didn't work for me, but was viewable by going to http://www.geocities.com/changnoi2/ first, then selecting the 13 Nov entry).

The only real disagreement I have in his points is about having the court proceedings in Thailand, while I think The Hague might be better suited for the purpose in terms of transparency and objectivity.

[chownah]

Anyone who thinks that in Thailand there was a 5% meth use rate among males and this vast flow of money was not directed by police and local officials is a bit naive in my opinion.

Hmmmm. And, can you support that claim (accusation?) with public docmentation?

Yes. It came from the link that Plus provided earlier...the text is as follows:

".............

By 2002, an estimated 2.4 percent of Thais aged twelve to sixty-five,

including 4.5 percent of males, were using methamphetamines.

..........."

That article sited the following reference to support this statement:

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific, Amphetamine Type

Stimulants in East Asia and the Pacific: Analysis of 2003 Regional ATS Questionnaire: Regional and National

Overviews of ATS and Other Drug Trends and Related Data Collection Systems: Final Report (Bangkok:

UNODC, April 2004), p. 80, table 50.

Chownah

P.S. I recommend that people check out the link that Plus provided.

Chownah

[Plus]

They don't need to find direct orders from Thaksin to charge him. Chang Noi mentioned "incitement to murder", for example.

In fact lower rank policemen who did all the dirty jobs will argue in their defence that they followed a policy that came down through a chain of command, and so they are more likely to acquited without direct evidence and witness accounts.

It's not about legal issues, however, it's about political will.

[ColPyat]

Many leaders through history have been held responsible for human rights abuses under their leadership even with little direct evidence linking them to it (the recently completed Saddam Hussein trial is an example) while others have gotten away with even worse with direct evidence linking them to the event (Sharons direct link to the Sahttila and Sabra massacres). These kind of cases are rarely legally sound and they are always about politics usually with the winner or dominant force using the case for their own reasons. This is probably a good reason to have any trial if it occurs at an international court, and the requests for the Thai government to recognize the international court are probably aimed at opening this as a possibility for Mr. Thaksin if there is evidence of direct involvement. The use of international courts also removes the case from the often emotionally charged locale.

Yes, Saddham was convicted. I haven't followed the case not very closely, but i am under the impression that there was evidence in the case he was convicted for. I believe the case they have chosen was a particular case they were clear that they would get the evidence. I haven't seen Saddham being tried for the gas attacks against the Kurds, which had far more victims. Most likely because there the evidence was in fact flimsy (i have even read reports which say that it was not Saddham but the Iranians who did that).

The problem is that to convict Thaksin in a court you have to prove that he has given the order to kill directly, beyond reasonable doubt. That would mean that someone close to Thaksin will have to testify, and/or give evidence that this was so.

Statements made in public speaches can be interpreted any way.

People make their own conclusion on Thaksin's giult based on emotionally charged arguments. That though does not work in a court. In a trial, especially when done by an international court, all possible circumstances and connections have to come out in the open, and there is a very high possibility that some things we are not allowed to debate might come out that are better left buried very deep.

Nothing is as simple as people are made to believe.

I personally believe that the present drugwar investigations are mainly aimed at destroying Thaksin's reputation, at trying to respond to foreign criticisms regarding human rights violations, and showing the rest of the world that this government means to be better than the previous. But i don't think that the aim is a trial with convictions, at least not at high level convictions.

I somewhat hope to be proved wrong, but it would be a huge surprise as there are many precedents of this here in Thailand.

[Grover]

I'm not sure if in the end they will find Thaksin guilty or not guilty of these serious allegations. I do think he is at least partly responsible for the situation. Some people might argue a small part, some might argue a large part. But, considering the evidence we have now, it would be a brave person indeed to say he was not responsible in any way or part for the killings.

[hammered]

Many leaders through history have been held responsible for human rights abuses under their leadership even with little direct evidence linking them to it (the recently completed Saddam Hussein trial is an example) while others have gotten away with even worse with direct evidence linking them to the event (Sharons direct link to the Sahttila and Sabra massacres). These kind of cases are rarely legally sound and they are always about politics usually with the winner or dominant force using the case for their own reasons. This is probably a good reason to have any trial if it occurs at an international court, and the requests for the Thai government to recognize the international court are probably aimed at opening this as a possibility for Mr. Thaksin if there is evidence of direct involvement. The use of international courts also removes the case from the often emotionally charged locale.

Yes, Saddham was convicted. I haven't followed the case not very closely, but i am under the impression that there was evidence in the case he was convicted for. I believe the case they have chosen was a particular case they were clear that they would get the evidence. I haven't seen Saddham being tried for the gas attacks against the Kurds, which had far more victims. Most likely because there the evidence was in fact flimsy (i have even read reports which say that it was not Saddham but the Iranians who did that).

The problem is that to convict Thaksin in a court you have to prove that he has given the order to kill directly, beyond reasonable doubt. That would mean that someone close to Thaksin will have to testify, and/or give evidence that this was so.

Statements made in public speaches can be interpreted any way.

People make their own conclusion on Thaksin's giult based on emotionally charged arguments. That though does not work in a court. In a trial, especially when done by an international court, all possible circumstances and connections have to come out in the open, and there is a very high possibility that some things we are not allowed to debate might come out that are better left buried very deep.

Nothing is as simple as people are made to believe.

I personally believe that the present drugwar investigations are mainly aimed at destroying Thaksin's reputation, at trying to respond to foreign criticisms regarding human rights violations, and showing the rest of the world that this government means to be better than the previous. But i don't think that the aim is a trial with convictions, at least not at high level convictions.

I somewhat hope to be proved wrong, but it would be a huge surprise as there are many precedents of this here in Thailand.

Saddam was not directly linked to any killings at his trial and Human Rights Watch have declared the verdict unsound. It is a good example of why international courts are the best places to try ex-leaders. It is also an example of the political nature of all these cases. Those who do not like Saddam support even a highly questionable process while those who like Saddam claim it is unfair with much justification but cannot resist the might is right reality. These show trials are never about law and justice when held in the country of one who used to govern them.

I agree it is highly unlikely that the government will bring charges against Mr. Thaksin although if they do they will probably be incitement charges rather than those requiring direct links. On the other hand if the government ratify the international court then that will leave Mr. Thaksin having to be wary of where he goes to avoid being Pinocheted if an individual starts a case in a sympathetic country.

By the way, a case into the gassing of the Kurds will raise issues of who supplied the chemical weaponry, which could embarrass a western government or two. Another good reason to hold a show trial in Iraq rather than open trial in an international court, and even in a closed Iraqi court omething could leak out. However, I am drifting well off of subject here.

[Siripon]

I believe the Iraq government insisted on a trial in Iraq, having been humiliated by the American invasion, they wanted the satisfaction of him being tried by his fellow countrymen, otherwise the government could be accused of further kowtowing to foreign powers. It was a question of pride. Thaksin being tried for human rights abuses is an extraordinary, mindboggling scenario that is hard to grasp, yet the coup leaders must prove to the public that the Thaksin regime was a systematic exploitation of the Thai people and nation.

Corruption is one issue, abuse of the Thai people is certainly another.

The last constitution established a human rights commission but unfortunately gave it no teeth, if the present junta could remedy that they would win kudos from the Thai Left.

[Briggsy]

I think you'll find that Saddam Hussein is currently on trial for his role in the Anfal campaign i.e. the gassing of the Kurds. He has already been found guilty on a separate charge of a massacre of Shias.

[Briggsy]

Who recalls Potjaman meeting Prem a few weeks ago? The meeting was facilitated by an army general who has a foot in both camps, a relative married into the Damapong family and he is a close aide of Prem. This is why there will be no trial for crimes against humanity for the war on drugs.

Can you imagine how many people had to be involved at all levels. All the influential families have strings and connections linking them to everybody else. It's not like Iraq or Rwanda.

I've absolutely no doubt that this was a horrendous crime but so was Oct 1973 and Oct 1976 and 1992 and Tak Bai, etc. The top eschelons will make some conciliatory noises and then close ranks. The best the innocent victims can hope for is a compensation payment and less state-sponsored violence for a while.

I hope there is a trial but it would be an amazing first in a pattern of sweep it under the carpet cases.

[Plus]

I will repeat myself, but I think one should look at precedents established during Rwanda trials, not Saddam Hussein's.

Some radio broadcasters and newspaper editors there were convicted for incitement to genocide among other charges.

They, for example, published blacklists with names of people who were later killed by militias.