Prawit says evidence substantial to sue former Chiang Mai mayor



BANGKOK: -- Deputy Prime Minister Gen Prawit Wongsuwan says the police have substantial evidence to prosecute the chief executive officer of Chiang Mai Provincial Administrative Organisation (PAO) Boonlert Buranupakorn over a recent dissemination of mails with distorted content of the draft constitution.

Comment from the retired general but now in charge of national security came after he was asked about the latest order invoked by the prime minister under Section 44 of the interim charter to terminate the duty of the Chiang Mai PAO chief officer, former mayor of Chiang Mai, without pay pending investigation of the mails.

Gen Prawit said police have substantial evidence to charge him.

He said an investigation committee has been appointed to probe into the mails.

He said he did not care about critics of the action against the officer adding evidence obtained are apparent to charge him.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/prawit-says-evidence-substantial-sue-former-chiang-mai-mayor/

-- Thai PBS 2016-07-27

So wi Prat said "...he did not care about critics..." when asked about yu Prat's latest order (invoked under Section 44) suspending Boonlert Buranupakorn from his job over attempted distribution of letters that we're told "distort" the draft charter content.

Meanwhile, according to a report in The Nation (http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Top-Chiang-Mai-official-suspended-in-draft-probe-30291488.html), CDC chairman Meechai Ruchupan is quoted as saying "...We think it is not fair to distort content of the draft to mislead the public...If the charter draft is rejected, the reform procedures will be in disarray...''.

And here's me thinking that reconciliation in Thailand wasn't happening!

You would think the two Prats (yu and wi) could have at least waited until Boonlert returned from his overseas trip before sacking him - this is going to spoil the rest of his holiday!

Another PTP ally is in trouble. A new mafia group fall, it's time to pay for it crime

So wi Prat said "...he did not care about critics..." when asked about yu Prat's latest order (invoked under Section 44) suspending Boonlert Buranupakorn from his job over attempted distribution of letters that we're told "distort" the draft charter content.

Meanwhile, according to a report in The Nation (http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Top-Chiang-Mai-official-suspended-in-draft-probe-30291488.html), CDC chairman Meechai Ruchupan is quoted as saying "...We think it is not fair to distort content of the draft to mislead the public...If the charter draft is rejected, the reform procedures will be in disarray...''.

And here's me thinking that reconciliation in Thailand wasn't happening!

You would think the two Prats (yu and wi) could have at least waited until Boonlert returned from his overseas trip before sacking him - this is going to spoil the rest of his holiday!

If the new draft charter is rejected we will just draft another one essentially the same. You will eventually eat your porridge hot or cold.

Is this the former Mayor who owns Ornsirin real estate company?

Is this the former Mayor who owns Ornsirin real estate company?

yes

Why broadcast to the world we have evidence to prosecute?

Just kick your a..e in gear and get on with it.

The Thai authorities love to broadcast their intentions before they do anything why?

Why broadcast to the world we have evidence to prosecute?

Just kick your a..e in gear and get on with it.

The Thai authorities love to broadcast their intentions before they do anything why?

...they certainly go soft on their own people.

Why broadcast to the world we have evidence to prosecute?

Just kick your a..e in gear and get on with it.

The Thai authorities love to broadcast their intentions before they do anything why?

I suppose it's because it often saves them from the trouble of actually doing anything. If they can scare somebody into complying with their wishes it's easier than actually going into a court and presenting "evidence" which the judge might laugh at.

I've read a lot recently about people 'distorting the facts', but have read nothing with regards to which facts, and how they were distorted.

I hope that holding a different opinion is not grounds for being accused of 'distortion'.

I've read a lot recently about people 'distorting the facts', but have read nothing with regards to which facts, and how they were distorted.

I hope that holding a different opinion is not grounds for being accused of 'distortion'.

well its along the lines of reject the constitution.... saying "reject" / "No" in public is enough to get you investigated for "distortion".

More is going on here than meets the eye.

Shintown is under siege.

evidence obtained are apparent to charge him

But apparently not credible enough to be prosecuted according to the current organic criminal laws. Hence, the use of Article 44 to bypass all those unnecessary and time consuming rights to a suitable defense.

Why broadcast to the world we have evidence to prosecute?

Just kick your a..e in gear and get on with it.

The Thai authorities love to broadcast their intentions before they do anything why?

I suppose it's because it often saves them from the trouble of actually doing anything. If they can scare somebody into complying with their wishes it's easier than actually going into a court and presenting "evidence" which the judge might laugh at.

No. I think the recent Koh Tao court case has shown that, under the thumb of this government, the judges have no sense of humour at all.

I know that this is the domain of the Thai people (well, some of them, at least), but is there an English translation of the draft constitution doing the rounds anyone?

The topic should say "prosecute" and not "sue".

Publish the letters. Let's see if it's true

Why broadcast to the world we have evidence to prosecute?

Just kick your a..e in gear and get on with it.

The Thai authorities love to broadcast their intentions before they do anything why?

I suppose it's because it often saves them from the trouble of actually doing anything. If they can scare somebody into complying with their wishes it's easier than actually going into a court and presenting "evidence" which the judge might laugh at.

Thai judges do NOT consider evidence a laughing matter. They will accept any evidence as long as it is properly "presented and supported".

I know that this is the domain of the Thai people (well, some of them, at least), but is there an English translation of the draft constitution doing the rounds anyone?

Yes, it would be good to know what the Thai people might be rejecting or approving, whatever the case maybe?

No worry TIT