Yingluck’s lawyer cites Rerngchai case to renew call for fair treatment from Prayut

[webfact]

Yingluck’s lawyer cites Rerngchai case to renew call for fair treatment from Prayut

 

 

BANGKOK: -- The lawyer of ousted prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra says he will ask the military junta to allow  her to defend herself  in the court of justice for the  huge compensation she has to pay for the loss in the rice-pledging scheme.

 

 The lawyer cited the Supreme Court’s ruling yesterday that the former central bank governor was not responsible for civil penalties in using national reserves to defend the Thai currency in 1997.

 

The movement of the lawyer Noppadol Laothong came as the former central bank governor Rerngchai Marakanond was cleared of compensation by the Supreme Court in a decade-long battle involving the loss of 186 billion baht just before the 1997 economic crisis.

 

The Supreme Court ruled Mr Rerngchai did not commit recklessness resulting in the severe damage so the court upheld the Appeal Court ruling acquitting the case.

 

Noppadol cited the ruling in his new petition to be submitted to Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha to seek mercy for Ms Yingluck.

 

Saying that he is the lawyer in both Rengchai and Yingluck cases, he would ask the prime minister for same practices.

 

As both Rerngchai and Yingluck faced civil compensation almost at the same amount for loss and damages caused by the implementation of state policies,  he said the court has set a norm in its verdict that any loss  from decision making could not be interpreted as profit or loss.

 

Full story: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/yinglucks-lawyer-cites-rerngchai-case-renew-call-fair-treatment-prayut/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2016-10-06

[seajae]

totally different, one was to try to defend the thai currency, the other was a bribe to win office and then totally ignore the way the money was being lost hand over fist in the corrupt set up  even though she had been warned several times and was aware it was happening. She also was the one in charge yet tried to do absolutely nothing to stop it, the only similarity is the fact money was involved

 

[Cuchulainn]

Barbie is still blubbering, I see.

[worgeordie]

Please dont take my money, I was confused,did not know what I was doing,

can i blame the Gardener or Maid.please,please.

regards Worgeordie

[webfact]

Prayut urged to review his policy against Yingluck over the rice scheme

The Nation

 

Former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s lawyer urged Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha Thursday to review his decision of seeking civil liabilities from the former premier for massive losses resulting from her government’s rice-pledging scheme.

 

Noppadon Laothong, who represents Yingluck in legal cases stemming from the corruption-plagued project, said her case was comparable to that of former Bank of Thailand governor Rerngchai Marakanond, who was acquitted by the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

 

Full story: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/breakingnews/Prayut-urged-to-review-his-policy-against-Yingluck-30297060.html

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2016-10-06

[BigFun]

Over ruled! 

[Jimbo2014]

Shes got more chance of buying Pork Satay at the local Mosque.

[williamgeorgeallen]

i think as long as she is allowed to keep her mushroom farm she will be ok. dirty business working among all that manure but at least she would still have a way to support herself.

[Eric Loh]

The Rerngchai case which was acquited by the Supreme Court will set a good precedent for similar cases in the future. I think she now stand a better chance if she appeal. Prayut now has cold feet signing the executive order. 

[Ricardo]

" Noppadol cited the ruling in his new petition to be submitted to Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha to seek mercy for Ms Yingluck "

 

Shouldn't her lawyer have submitted the argument to the court, rather than to an unrelated politician, in mitigation ?

[elgordo38]

A voice crying in the wilderness. 

[Srikcir]

On 10/6/2016 at 2:08 PM, seajae said:

the other was a bribe to win office

Wasn't she already in office?

 

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

The Rerngchai case which was acquited by the Supreme Court will set a good precedent for similar cases in the future. I think she now stand a better chance if she appeal. Prayut now has cold feet signing the executive order. 

 

Thai law isn't based on common law. Judges are not obliged to take precedent into account. 

 

Regarding Mr. Rerngchai - did he appoint himself chair the committee in charge and then not bother to attend any meetings, even after countless external and internal warnings of severe issues and corruption?

 

The main chance she has is that no one in Thailand ever wants to accept responsibility or accountability for anything ever. So this will drag on and on and on and on.

[Baerboxer]

21 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Wasn't she already in office?

 

 

Wasn't it promised when they electioneering?

[maxcorrigan]

7 hours ago, Jimbo2014 said:

Shes got more chance of buying Pork Satay at the local Mosque.

Exactly she's got no chance, rightly or wrongly, this is a personal vendetta by the big Honcho himself, although he denies it of course!

[Srikcir]

31 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Wasn't it promised when they electioneering?

You mean that the public promised to bribe her to win?

[sharecropper]

It'll be more judicial hypocrisy I'm sure. She's simply 'not one of Them'. In which case she could have invaded an airport and nobody would have been bothered.

[Srikcir]

33 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

Thai law isn't based on common law. Judges are not obliged to take precedent into account. 

It is based on common law just like the UK. A judicial system wherein precedent is a large  part of the basis for rulings is called case law such as used in the USA. Under common law a judge can rule based on culture, tradition and customs of the society while contradicting or ignoring previous rulings with the same fact pattern.

[Eric Loh]

34 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Thai law isn't based on common law. Judges are not obliged to take precedent into account. 

 

Regarding Mr. Rerngchai - did he appoint himself chair the committee in charge and then not bother to attend any meetings, even after countless external and internal warnings of severe issues and corruption?

 

The main chance she has is that no one in Thailand ever wants to accept responsibility or accountability for anything ever. So this will drag on and on and on and on.

 

Although civil law do not fully adopt the precedent doctrine in adjudication, precedent still serve a persuasive role in deciding a legal case in civil law.

 

No one even Prayut want to take responsibility opens up to a lot of speculations. 

[Ricardo]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Wasn't she already in office?

 

 

The price-promise was one of PTP's main policy-pledges, during the election-campaign, and very effective too.

 

Surely you were here then, and remember that ?

 

Then she implemented it, once elected, and in-office.

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, Ricardo said:

 

The price-promise was one of PTP's main policy-pledges, during the election-campaign, and very effective too.

 

Surely you were here then, and remember that ?

 

Then she implemented it, once elected, and in-office.

A politician made political pledges to the electorate to gain their vote and when elected, actually did implement those pledges as promised? How extraordinaire. Often we see in democracies where politicians make pledges for election and never deliver on those pledges once in office. At least Yingluck delivered what she promised, albeit not very effectively but in a democracy that's to be judged by the electorate, not by a military junta.

[Grubster]

On October 6, 2016 at 2:08 PM, seajae said:

totally different, one was to try to defend the thai currency, the other was a bribe to win office and then totally ignore the way the money was being lost hand over fist in the corrupt set up  even though she had been warned several times and was aware it was happening. She also was the one in charge yet tried to do absolutely nothing to stop it, the only similarity is the fact money was involved

 

No the difference is one was bribing the rich and the other was bribing the poor, neither is good.

[Ricardo]

10 hours ago, Srikcir said:

A politician made political pledges to the electorate to gain their vote and when elected, actually did implement those pledges as promised? How extraordinaire. Often we see in democracies where politicians make pledges for election and never deliver on those pledges once in office. At least Yingluck delivered what she promised, albeit not very effectively but in a democracy that's to be judged by the electorate, not by a military junta.

 

Agreed, very extraordinaire for a politician to follow the plan, even more so when warned repeatedly that it was doomed or failing-to-deliver, and then when it became a giant let-down to her family's core-supporters due to inability-to-pay.

 

I almost felt sorry for her, being left to hold the bag, when the brilliant lets-get-elected plans fell apart, and all those mere 'pre-election promises'  were shown to be un-deliverable.  Computers for school-pupils, immediate pay-rises for the poor & graduates, a chicken in every pot (OK, I admit, I imagined that last one), all Thais becoming rich after six months, and all doomed.

 

But you do now remember, it was a pre-election vote-winning commitment, and not just something she devised once in power, as you'd previously wondered ?

 

If only more of the Thai electorate would judge these populist-politicians (of whatever party), by their failure-to-deliver, but there's little sign of it happening so far. One might get a better class of Thai politician, if they thought that there was any real risk, of them having to deliver on their promises after being elected.  And break this ugly repeating-cycle.

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, Ricardo said:

If only more of the Thai electorate would judge these populist-politicians (of whatever party), by their failure-to-deliver, but there's little sign of it happening so far.

Apparently the majority of the Thai electorate had judged these populist-politicians favorably by their continued support in elections. Given time the majority might be convinced by the regime opposition that change is needed and throw their support against tha incumbent elected government.

 

But It has been the undemocratic and unconstitutional obstruction of the minority and the military to sidestep a democratic system to presuppose the will of the majority of the electorate that prevents any shifting of the majority to hold any elected regime accountable for failed policies.  And there is little sign of that happening so far, especially given the 2016 draft constitution.