Notification sent to Ms Yingluck demanding 35 billion baht in compensation

[elgordo38]

2 hours ago, Freed1948 said:

It's not so much the hate of the Shins, it's the hate of ANYONE who rips off

the average citizen to feather their own nest.

I will condemn any who do so.

The fact is that the Shin family had no problems doing so, but pretended to be the

savior of the poor.

Yes your right its so gratifying to see the new government the "savior" of the poor. I just hope the poor will wake up one day and realize they are being saved. Time to move your sights in a new direction now that you have demolished the Shins. 

[FritsSikkink]

5 hours ago, AlQaholic said:

This would be the first time in a long history of failed rise pledging schemes by various governments over the past 30 years, due to rampant corruption, that a former Prime Minister is held solely responsible for the whole <deleted>@#$@Up and forced to pay for it from their own pockets, however deep they may be.

problems with the facts? 20% responsible

[brucec64]

5 hours ago, Srikcir said:

5 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

5 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

 

Only executive immunity protects politicians from actions for negligence or malfeasance.  Thailand has no such immunity for its politicians.  Maybe you should try learning about political and legal systems before you jump to conclusions about how these systems usually operate.  An administrative order is merely a claim  for damages which must be adjudicated by the Courts.  Article 44 is irrelevant to the claim.

Only executive immunity protects politicians from actions for negligence or malfeasance.  Thailand has no such immunity for its politicians.  Maybe you should try learning about political and legal systems before you jump to conclusions about how these systems usually operate.  An administrative order is merely a claim  for damages which must be adjudicated by the Courts.  Article 44 is irrelevant to the claim.

 

Really?

 

If this is so above board, why did the following occur have to occur?

 

"Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha, in his capacity as the junta chief, in mid-September issued an order by his absolute power under Section 44 of the 2014 interim constitution to have the Legal Execution Department seize the assets of state officials liable to pay civil damages under the scheme. The executors will have immunity in doing their duties. "

 

Section 44 is very relevant. Also, why do executors need immunity if everything is legal and above board? Why would someone need immunity to do their job in a legal manner?

 

Maybe you don't understand how the system works in Thailand now.

 

 

[Artisi]

10 hours ago, NongKhaiKid said:

Will it be put back in a mailbox marked Return To Sender ?

Unknown at this address.

[MaiChai]

Its probably not wise to criticise the legal system. my tuppence worth.

Edited October 21, 2016 by MaiChai
change

[JAG]

5 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

 

Only executive immunity protects politicians from actions for negligence or malfeasance.  Thailand has no such immunity for its politicians.  Maybe you should try learning about political and legal systems before you jump to conclusions about how these systems usually operate.  An administrative order is merely a claim  for damages which must be adjudicated by the Courts.  Article 44 is irrelevant to the claim.

Well, only executive immunity, or of course granting oneself and ones fellow coup makers a retrospective amnesty..........

[JAG]

2 hours ago, elgordo38 said:

This is the option they want her to take. She will be the eternal target just like her brother. 2 whipping people boys no one male and one female. 

 

But she just won't flee will she?

 

And the junta know the likely response to throwing her in jail, or they would have done so right at the start.

 

So if she doesn't pay, doesn't have the assets to be "seized", what do they do? 

 

Up the blood pressure med dosages I suppose.

[nasa123]

Take the whole matter to the Court of Human Rights in The Hague, she was the Prime Minister and they can not stand personally responsible for what the whole government makes

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.  This topic is not about allegations of vote buying in previous elections. 

[nasa123]

11 hours ago, waldroj said:

"...A letter of notification demanding about 35 billion baht in compensation...has been sent to former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra..."

 

Probably sent Postage Due !!!

And we are waiting for the 1 Billion Norwegian Krone  Thailand borrowed by the Norwegian Government fore under 2 years ago.

[scorecard]

14 minutes ago, nasa123 said:

Take the whole matter to the Court of Human Rights in The Hague, she was the Prime Minister and they can not stand personally responsible for what the whole government makes

 

?

[Basil B]

Quote

Deputy Finance Minister Visut Srisuphan who signed the letter said he expected the letter would be received by Ms Yingluck within Thursday.

 

Probably gone shopping... so hope they know where so they can get the letter signed for. 

[Artisi]

Might as well gave posted it to Father Christmas in Santaland, it will get a similar response,  look in your Christmas stocking.

[garyk]

48 minutes ago, MZurf said:

You claim that the Shins won due to vote buying. I claim that they would have won irrespective of vote buying.

Do you understand now? If you don't then I'm sorry but I don't know how to dumb it down any further.

 

"You are out of your league here IMO."

I shall refrain from commenting due to TVF rules.

 

"I talked to many people from Issan back then."

Well, that changes everything...

 

Getting back to the subject.

Law of the land says she is guilty and has to pay the piper. I agree. 

 

[tbthailand]

9 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

 

Only executive immunity protects politicians from actions for negligence or malfeasance.  Thailand has no such immunity for its politicians.  Maybe you should try learning about political and legal systems before you jump to conclusions about how these systems usually operate.  An administrative order is merely a claim  for damages which must be adjudicated by the Courts.  Article 44 is irrelevant to the claim.

you fail to address which law has given the power to whom to demand $1 billion from Yingluck.

 

The point being that the junta is just pulling this out of their backside. 

 

She's going down anyway, ... That has clearly already been decided... 

[baboon]

2 hours ago, garyk said:

 

Getting back to the subject.

Law of the land says she is guilty and has to pay the piper. I agree. 

 

It is for courts to determine innocence or guilt, not for laws to be written that state which person(s) are guilty and of what.

[Jack100]

Can't quite follow  this one  , if the scheme had been  successful and    made billions for the country ,   they should  now , according to  same logic   be giving her a personal  cheque for the difference ?

 

[maxcorrigan]

10 hours ago, AlQaholic said:

This would be the first time in a long history of failed rise pledging schemes by various governments over the past 30 years, due to rampant corruption, that a former Prime Minister is held solely responsible for the whole <deleted>@#$@Up and forced to pay for it from their own pockets, however deep they may be.

Why do you think Uncle P gave himself absolute amnesty past present and future, knowing this could well happen to him, if he ever stands down that is! 

[ukrules]

If the current government are holding leaders personally responsible for state losses on projects which don't quite work out the way they intended then I do hope they have thought the process through properly as one day it might come back and bite them...

[Srikcir]

12 hours ago, zaphod reborn said:

Maybe you should try learning about political and legal systems before you jump to conclusions about how these systems usually operate.

I asked the question of what statute covers the government's claim for compensation. If the claim must be adjudicated by the Courts (ie., the government must sue for damages) , legal authority such as a law must be the basis to sustain the government's proposed action. "Just because we can do it" is not a legal foundation. Your response is meaningless and a diversion.

 

[VN4now]

8 hours ago, JAG said:

Well, only executive immunity, or of course granting oneself and ones fellow coup makers a retrospective amnesty..........

Who is paying for the fake bomb detectors .... Mr. Pryouth going to pay for the cost of the coup?

[realenglish1]

The day financial responsibility for government doings for the head of state because part of the landscape is the day politics is the day truly great leaders will lead and gets the dredge of the earth.

We would not have had leaders Like Mandela or Kennedy Reagan or Lincoln Or the likes or Gorbachev .

 

If these could have been held financially  responsible  for the actions of the government no one of merit will ever run

This is a very bad precedent

[scorecard]

20 hours ago, elgordo38 said:

The check is in the mail. If you haven't backed up the truck yet dear lady your a dead duck. What no checks cash only dear oh dear how many trucks will be needed. We have us a Convoy!! Do the same as upset bill payers in the west do pay it all in satangs. Beware the cupboard may well be bare. Does she have to sell the mushroom farm? Does she get a crime discount for prompt payment? Woe is me so many if buts and maybes. Stay tuned for episode 2 of this soap opera. 

 

Here's a scenario:

 

- The paymaster sends his personal jet to Bkk to pick her up

 

- On arrival the authorities seize the jet.

[scorecard]

On 10/21/2016 at 10:10 AM, Srikcir said:

Maybe she can get a soft uncollateralized loan from the government to pay it.

That's been the Prayut government's answer for Thais who can't pay their debts.

Give Yingluck equal treatment.

 

Or maybe her convicted brother can try to order KT bank to give her an equivalent loan. It worked before.

 

[scorecard]

On 10/21/2016 at 10:30 AM, Srikcir said:

What statute would that be that covers compensation for a failure of a political policy?

I believe that the idea of using an administrative order was because there was no law being violated.

So it remains to see if the government will sue Yingluck in court (Prayut vs Yingluck) or simply invoke Article 44.

 

 

Another less than honest and misleading comment from this poster, then again he/she and others do it regularly with no hesitation. It's been said many times by the authorities that A 44 was used to ensure the whole thing is finished before the SOL hits.

[scorecard]

17 hours ago, Jack100 said:

Can't quite follow  this one  , if the scheme had been  successful and    made billions for the country ,   they should  now , according to  same logic   be giving her a personal  cheque for the difference ?

 

 

 

In that scenario there is no reason whatever why she should 'get a personal cheque'.

 

If it did happen that would be good (but very unlikely) and she would be seen as being a good PM, doing her job, worthy of consideration for a further term, nothing more nothing less.  But that's of course subject to positive value added results of other aspects of her direct active leadership work and a substantive picture of morals and values and seriously fighting corruption and cronyism with documented proven results. 

Edited October 22, 2016 by scorecard

[Srikcir]

30 minutes ago, scorecard said:

A 44 was used to ensure the whole thing is finished before the SOL hits.

Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam insisted the government did not invoke Section 44 of the interim charter to seize assets from politicians. Ministry must seek rice compensation, September 27, 2016 in that other news source.

 

The SOL ends in February 2017. Apparently Prayut decided subsequently to partially bypass due process of law to hold Yingluck immediately liable for the alleged damages. I say "partially" as the LED by law cannot actually seize Yingluck's assets until after the court upholds the compensation order. (ditto citation). But there is nothing to refrain Prayut justice to further invoke Article 44 to "ensure the whole thing is finished before the SOL hits."

 

[worgeordie]

Reply from Yingluck, I.O.U.  35 Billion,written on a scrap of paper,

or ask my brother for it,he's the one that got me in this mess.

regards worgeordie

[MZurf]

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

 

 

In that scenario there is no reason whatever why she should 'get a personal cheque'.

 

If it did happen that would be good (but very unlikely) and she would be seen as being a good PM, doing her job, worthy of consideration for a further term, nothing more nothing less.  But that's of course subject to positive value added results of other aspects of her direct active leadership work and a substantive picture of morals and values and seriously fighting corruption and cronyism with documented proven results. 

"If it did happen that would be good (but very unlikely) and she would be seen as being a good PM, doing her job, worthy of consideration for a further term....."

 

Worthy of consideration by the voters or by the old elite?

[tbthailand]

given that the "loss" is calculated in a way which is akin to putting numbers out of thin air, this is already nonsense.

 

Notice that the "loss" does not calculate the % gain to the economy from the stimulus resulting from the rice program, and if it did, the result would be a net gain and the current "government" would have to send Ms Yingluck a check...