webfact Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 POLITICS Legal doubts over defence for Yingluck WASAMON AUDJARINT THE NATION Experts say Rerngchai case not comparable to former PM’s rice scheme punishment BANGKOK: -- THE CASES AGAINST former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra regarding the controversial rice-pledging scheme are not comparable to that against a former central bank governor who was recently acquitted, according to lawyers familiar with both proceedings. One difference lies in the approaches adopted by prosecutors, the lawyers said. Comparisons between the two sets of cases were first cited by Yingluck's lawyer Noppadon Laothong, who pointed out that both Yingluck and former Bank of Thailand governor Rerngchai Marakanond were being held accountable for damages stemming from government policies. Full story: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Legal-doubts-over-defence-for-Yingluck-30297284.html -- © Copyright The Nation 2016-10-10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbthailand Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 and just who are these lawyers casting doubts over Yingluck's defence??? Jade is ... an adviser to the drafters of the new charter appointed by the ruling National Council for Peace and Order. Got that? Is it clear? Good, now go hang her high because she deserves it. Prayuth said so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAG Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 One very obvious difference is that the penalty is being applied before the case is concluded, which rather suggests that the verdict was, shall we say, predetermined. No doubt the usual suspects will be along in due course to assure us that such an act is fully in accordance with best practice in the world's most advanced jurisdictions . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 "The clear difference is the rice-pledging scheme was graft-related." Known to be a hotbed of corruption from its early inception, the scam went ahead without change. So why should the PM who used it to buy her way to office be forced to pay some of the costs? BTW I doubt Noppadon Laothong will try the cake-box bribe after his namesake was jailed for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 36 minutes ago, halloween said: "The clear difference is the rice-pledging scheme was graft-related." Known to be a hotbed of corruption from its early inception, the scam went ahead without change. So why should the PM who used it to buy her way to office be forced to pay some of the costs? BTW I doubt Noppadon Laothong will try the cake-box bribe after his namesake was jailed for it. Because it was a hotbed of corruption is a valid excuse to skip due process? As far as I know, the court cases are ongoing, yet the penalty has already been applied. Would you accept this in your own country? Do you really think that vengeance instead of justice will help this country move forward? Or does rule of law only apply when it is convenient? Replacing one corruption with another just shows that all of the "reasons" for the coup are a complete farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 25 minutes ago, brucec64 said: Because it was a hotbed of corruption is a valid excuse to skip due process? As far as I know, the court cases are ongoing, yet the penalty has already been applied. Would you accept this in your own country? Do you really think that vengeance instead of justice will help this country move forward? Or does rule of law only apply when it is convenient? Replacing one corruption with another just shows that all of the "reasons" for the coup are a complete farce. Would you accept this in your own country? The list of corrupt acts that I have witnessed in this country, that would not be acceptable in mine, is immense, and most committed under Shinawatra regimes. For once, I see an allegedly unacceptable act actually punishing the corrupt instead of enriching them. Don't expect me to get all bothered by it. Letting corrupt politicians know that their ill-gotten gains may be stripped from them is a great way to advance this country. You want to call it vengeance, fine. I ask again " should the PM who used it to buy her way to office be forced to pay some of the costs? " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 minute ago, halloween said: Would you accept this in your own country? The list of corrupt acts that I have witnessed in this country, that would not be acceptable in mine, is immense, and most committed under Shinawatra regimes. For once, I see an allegedly unacceptable act actually punishing the corrupt instead of enriching them. Don't expect me to get all bothered by it. Letting corrupt politicians know that their ill-gotten gains may be stripped from them is a great way to advance this country. You want to call it vengeance, fine. I ask again " should the PM who used it to buy her way to office be forced to pay some of the costs? " Of course you are not bothered, but unfortunately, that also makes you part of the corruption, and puts your own morals into question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellowboat Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Some people on this forum prefer the truncheon in lieu due process and impartiality. The US has its Guantanamo Bay to avoid due process and Thailand has its Article 44 to exact revenge. Given the existence of the new improved military law, Article 44, it is a somewhat comfort that they are discussing law and how it is applied at all. But with Thailand's new improved military law, one wonders if it is nothing more than an academic exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Loh Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Why is the Nation only soliciting comments from people that are friendly with the junta. Jade Donavanik was NRC adviser and Preecha Suwannathat was Meechai classmate and former Dem Party MP. Much like those junta friendly polls that always popped up whenever the junta in a sticky position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silent Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 16 minutes ago, halloween said: Would you accept this in your own country? The list of corrupt acts that I have witnessed in this country, that would not be acceptable in mine, is immense, and most committed under Shinawatra regimes. For once, I see an allegedly unacceptable act actually punishing the corrupt instead of enriching them. Don't expect me to get all bothered by it. Letting corrupt politicians know that their ill-gotten gains may be stripped from them is a great way to advance this country. You want to call it vengeance, fine. I ask again " should the PM who used it to buy her way to office be forced to pay some of the costs? " If you say so. I just don't know if fighting fire with fire is the same as fighting corruption with corruption or perhaps only an apparent sense of predetermined justice, (ancestral vengeance), and if that really addresses the heart of the problem either. However I obviously haven't been here as long to know Shinawatra regimes have been the most corrupt, so I should bow to superiority and restrain myself from emanating enough BS to choke a horse from a mile away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canopus1969 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Phew, thankful they added their names to the pictures so no mistakes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 hour ago, Eric Loh said: Why is the Nation only soliciting comments from people that are friendly with the junta. Jade Donavanik was NRC adviser and Preecha Suwannathat was Meechai classmate and former Dem Party MP. Much like those junta friendly polls that always popped up whenever the junta in a sticky position. You mean as opposed to the clearly unbiased comments from the highly paid lawyer hired to try and get Yingluck by obfuscation, deflection and attracting sympathy? So sweet how all the Shin fans want to protect little sweet Yingluck. And none of really know if she is just a poor abused puppet or an enthusiastic participant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 hour ago, yellowboat said: Some people on this forum prefer the truncheon in lieu due process and impartiality. The US has its Guantanamo Bay to avoid due process and Thailand has its Article 44 to exact revenge. Given the existence of the new improved military law, Article 44, it is a somewhat comfort that they are discussing law and how it is applied at all. But with Thailand's new improved military law, one wonders if it is nothing more than an academic exercise. I would never condone ignoring due process, like getting MP's to illegally vote using other people's cards, or sending the opposition home and then voting when they're not there; or illegally amending bills in between readings to try and whitewash a criminal's crimes. But to accept what a PTP hired lawyer says as "fact" is naive to say the least. One of the many issues of the justice system is the lack of clarity of some laws. which seem to have been deliberately written that way to allow wiggle room. This is really about showing the masses whose in control now and that the Shins and some of their gang are no longer "untouchable". But when it comes to the crunch who will sign all this off? Pass the parcel time again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
than Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 the same defend : avoid all responsibility of her fail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alocacoc Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I guess Thailand faces soon other problems. I wonder why TV don't cover this latest news..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Loh Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, alocacoc said: I guess Thailand faces soon other problems. I wonder why TV don't cover this latest news..... When the SET falls today in dramatic fashion, we dont need the mass media to cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alocacoc Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Well, the mass media covered it already but TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thailand Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Better to find a loophole so that she can get away with it. Then the current ptb can perhaps use the same loophole(s) in the future when their turn comes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 4 hours ago, brucec64 said: Of course you are not bothered, but unfortunately, that also makes you part of the corruption, and puts your own morals into question. No, it doesn't make me part of the corruption because I don't accept that the act is corrupt. The nation is recouping some of the funds wasted by corrupt politicians, not some corrupt mongrel lining his/her own pockets. OTOH you might consider you own morals in accepting a corrupt government because they were elected. I support the millions of Thais willing to speak up and risk their lives to protest the blatant criminal actions of the Shinawatras. You don't have to be in the majority to be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 3 hours ago, silent said: If you say so. I just don't know if fighting fire with fire is the same as fighting corruption with corruption or perhaps only an apparent sense of predetermined justice, (ancestral vengeance), and if that really addresses the heart of the problem either. However I obviously haven't been here as long to know Shinawatra regimes have been the most corrupt, so I should bow to superiority and restrain myself from emanating enough BS to choke a horse from a mile away. And yet, you do. You allege seizing her assets is corruption, but who is profiting from the action? She is being made repay a tiny fraction of the public money she wasted, but her supporters claim that waste was her right, while nit-picking military purchases and trip expenses minuscule in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 35 minutes ago, halloween said: No, it doesn't make me part of the corruption because I don't accept that the act is corrupt. The nation is recouping some of the funds wasted by corrupt politicians, not some corrupt mongrel lining his/her own pockets. OTOH you might consider you own morals in accepting a corrupt government because they were elected. I support the millions of Thais willing to speak up and risk their lives to protest the blatant criminal actions of the Shinawatras. You don't have to be in the majority to be right. I don't remember posting anything accepting corruption in government. Just because you don't consider this action corrupt, does not mean it is not corruption. It is a corruption of rule of law and due process. Thailand desperately needs rule of law, applied equally to all (meaning your heros, and those pulling their strings), a lot more than it needs Yinluck's 36 billion. This does not move Thailand any closer to ending corruption, just a lesson that you better have the right friends while you line your pockets. Unfortunately, your obsession with Yingluck blinds you from seeing the bigger picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 46 minutes ago, brucec64 said: I don't remember posting anything accepting corruption in government. Just because you don't consider this action corrupt, does not mean it is not corruption. It is a corruption of rule of law and due process. Thailand desperately needs rule of law, applied equally to all (meaning your heros, and those pulling their strings), a lot more than it needs Yinluck's 36 billion. This does not move Thailand any closer to ending corruption, just a lesson that you better have the right friends while you line your pockets. Unfortunately, your obsession with Yingluck blinds you from seeing the bigger picture. Doh! The lesson is, it doesn't matter who your friends are if you can later be held accountable and your assets seized. You don't accept corruption in government (allegedly) but when the corrupt are finally held accountable, you want to moralise over due process. Thailand needed B600 billion, not 36, for infrastructure and services - instead it was wasted on a vote-buying scam and pocket lining. What you call obsession is a deep seated moral objection to the hugely wealthy enriching themselves from those who have very little, and getting away with it because they have perverted democracy. That is the ONLY picture I need, and I rejoice at the moaning when some form of justice is delivered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbrock Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 5 hours ago, halloween said: Would you accept this in your own country? The list of corrupt acts that I have witnessed in this country, that would not be acceptable in mine, is immense, and most committed under Shinawatra regimes. For once, I see an allegedly unacceptable act actually punishing the corrupt instead of enriching them. Don't expect me to get all bothered by it. Letting corrupt politicians know that their ill-gotten gains may be stripped from them is a great way to advance this country. You want to call it vengeance, fine. I ask again " should the PM who used it to buy her way to office be forced to pay some of the costs? " If they were stealing her "ill-gotten gains" then that would be fine - but she is charged with dereliction of duty causing damage (Criminal Code Section 157) and failure to perform her duty as a state official (Anti-Corruption Act 1999) for allegedly causing losses to the state, not with any corruption charges in relation to this scheme. Do you think if the junta had even a shred of evidence that she gained personally that they wouldn't be shouting it from the mountain tops? If she is charged and found guilty of personally gaining through corrupt means, then by all means seize that what she stole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, halloween said: Doh! The lesson is, it doesn't matter who your friends are if you can later be held accountable and your assets seized. You don't accept corruption in government (allegedly) but when the corrupt are finally held accountable, you want to moralise over due process. Thailand needed B600 billion, not 36, for infrastructure and services - instead it was wasted on a vote-buying scam and pocket lining. What you call obsession is a deep seated moral objection to the hugely wealthy enriching themselves from those who have very little, and getting away with it because they have perverted democracy. That is the ONLY picture I need, and I rejoice at the moaning when some form of justice is delivered. hugely wealthy enriching themselves from those who have very little, and getting away with it because they have perverted democracy" And what is so different with the current lot, except that their excuse for power was also "deep seated moral objection"! And their true colours are there for all to see, and they don't even bother hiding it anymore. So excuse me if I can't take your indignation seriously... Edited October 10, 2016 by brucec64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, jamesbrock said: If they were stealing her "ill-gotten gains" then that would be fine - but she is charged with dereliction of duty causing damage (Criminal Code Section 157) and failure to perform her duty as a state official (Anti-Corruption Act 1999) for allegedly causing losses to the state, not with any corruption charges in relation to this scheme. Do you think if the junta had even a shred of evidence that she gained personally that they wouldn't be shouting it from the mountain tops? If she is charged and found guilty of personally gaining through corrupt means, then by all means seize that what she stole. Hopefully with the 800+ corruption cases being investigated, evidence will be turned up. But with the close relationship between President Agri/Siam Indica and Thaksin, and the billions they earned in secret commissions, do you really think there were no kickbacks for these sweetheart deals? Yingluk was the pretty face to hide Thaksin's involvement, but by allowing that corruption to flourish, she is equally guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucec64 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, halloween said: Hopefully with the 800+ corruption cases being investigated, evidence will be turned up. But with the close relationship between President Agri/Siam Indica and Thaksin, and the billions they earned in secret commissions, do you really think there were no kickbacks for these sweetheart deals? Yingluk was the pretty face to hide Thaksin's involvement, but by allowing that corruption to flourish, she is equally guilty. And yet you support the penalty phase, even though you admit that her guilt has not yet been proven. Unbelievable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbrock Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 minute ago, halloween said: Hopefully with the 800+ corruption cases being investigated, evidence will be turned up. But no evidence has turned up, nor been trumped up, yet. 1 minute ago, halloween said: But with the close relationship between President Agri/Siam Indica and Thaksin, and the billions they earned in secret commissions, do you really think there were no kickbacks for these sweetheart deals? Nope, I don't think that at all. Again, present the evidence, convict her, and I'll join the asset-seizing cheer squad. 1 minute ago, halloween said: Yingluk was the pretty face to hide Thaksin's involvement, but by allowing that corruption to flourish, she is equally guilty. Equally guilty of what? Your presumptions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 9 minutes ago, brucec64 said: hugely wealthy enriching themselves from those who have very little, and getting away with it because they have perverted democracy" And what is so different with the current lot, except that their excuse for power was also "deep seated moral objection"! And their true colours are there for all to see, and they don't even bother hiding it anymore. So excuse me if I can't take your indignation seriously... You can't take me seriously because "little Johnny did it too!"? This is a military government, they don't pretend to be democratic heroes of the people. Hopefully, they will soon be history, and Thailand will have a better version of democracy to look forward to. It couldn't be much worse than the last effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halloween Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 minute ago, jamesbrock said: But no evidence has turned up, nor been trumped up, yet. Nope, I don't think that at all. Again, present the evidence, convict her, and I'll join the asset-seizing cheer squad. Equally guilty of what? Your presumptions? If you like. at least I am not naive enough to believe the leopard changed his spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesbrock Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Just now, halloween said: If you like. at least I am not naive enough to believe the leopard changed his spots. Nor am I, but should we seize the assets or jail everybody we presume to be guilty of graft? Or is YL a special case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now