5 minutes ago, bangrak said:

Yes, indeed 'rkidlad', names, when I'm correct, the UK judicial system allows naming persons having benefitted from acts of corruption (while, in Thailand, when it ever comes in front of a Court, it will last till the Supreme Court will, one day, in 'xx' years have had the last say about it, untill anyone can be sued for having expressed the least of a doubt or criticism about a 'suspect'...), so please, let's have it, even when it brings the BBC off the screen for a day or two, let their nose be rubbed in their s..t, so, maybe, maybe, it will not be, once more, brushed under the carpet!

P.S.: I guess a carpet of that size can only be the one in the lobby of the 'inactive' department, LOL   

 

And when you are not correct you neglect that people are only named once formally charged not just as soon as someone else implicates them.

I suspect that no foreign company has ever done business in Thailand without paying some sort of bribe to someone.

 

But no one should imagine that the companies pay bribes because they want to: they pay them because they have to. And the real culprits are those who receive, because if they didnt take it from RR they would have taken it from GE or someone else.

time to seize all the assets of those that were in charge of PT at the time and put them away for several years but as they are hi-so's that is unlikely to happen, easier to simply forget about it. Criminal acts committed by hi-so's dont count as crime here, too much face involved.

Were they bribes? Or had the Thai "persons" just demanded a commission for buying/selling? 

12 hours ago, PiAnt said:

Dave, John, Steve, Robert (and derivatives of course), Paul, Andrew..

 

That's it I'm spent.

 

Anyone else have any names?

 

Oh, Ann - just popped into my head. Go figure.

 

 You forgot Somchai.

10 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Were they bribes? Or had the Thai "persons" just demanded a commission for buying/selling? You forgot Somchai.

Not only a commission for the actual transaction, but also a "facilitation fee" for effecting the necessary introductions

1 minute ago, SaintLouisBlues said:

Not only a commission for the actual transaction, but also a "facilitation fee" for effecting the necessary introductions

Yup.

 

So whether it is a bribe or not depends on which side of the fence you are looking from? 

 

To the Thais it is a cost of doing business, to the UK authorities it is seen as paying a bribe. A bit "heavy handed" by the UK authorities I think. A 500bht fine of R.R. would suffice.

 

9 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

To the Thais it is a cost of doing business, to the UK authorities it is seen as paying a bribe. A bit "heavy handed" by the UK authorities I think. A 500bht fine of R.R. would suffice.

Interestingly there are commercial assessments of places like Thailand compared to other countries that use "cost of doing business" in precisely that way as part of their research

12 hours ago, SOTIRIOS said:

....again...absence of details.....wow....

All the details are here.

Six Boeing 777 and 800 engines?  800 engines?

 

A 777 has 2 engines only. What the h@%** are they doing with 800 engines?

 

Aww!  sold but not delivered, right?

 

 

20 hours ago, Basil B said:

I am sure it would have been a lot more if Boeing was not an American company...

American co or not I was alluding to the fact that even if there a thousand investigations here over TG NOTHING WILL HAPPEN AND NO ONE WILL BE FINED. Or even named. And by the way big banks are the ones who are usually fined and forced to  pay well into the billions of dollars.

Yup.
 
So whether it is a bribe or not depends on which side of the fence you are looking from? 
 
To the Thais it is a cost of doing business, to the UK authorities it is seen as paying a bribe. A bit "heavy handed" by the UK authorities I think. A 500bht fine of R.R. would suffice.
 

Your semantics are irrelevant.

Whatever you're calling it, the practice skews the decision-making process for any business that engages in such deeds. Decisions are made based on personal gain, not the facts of the business deal itself. That is the basis of the rot we call corruption.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

The case involving the huge bribes paid for the CTX explosive scanners implicating a Thaksin government senior minister died a death despite the existence of a 'smoking gun' in the form of a dossier from the US Justice Department detailing the bribery. This was easily achieved simply by getting the Justice Ministry to declare that the Thai translation provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' expert translators was 'unclear'.  Apparently no attempt was necessary to clarify the points in doubt or even to commission another translation.

 

The case involving the former tourism minister implicated in the bribery scandal over the Bangkok Film Festival seems to be dying a similar death, despite the fact that she and her daughter were clearly implicated in the trial of the two American bribe payers.  They have long since completed their prison sentences but the only downside for the Thai culprits is that they can't travel to countries that have extradition treaties with the US where they are wanted for extraditable crimes. 

 

The above shows how easy it is for the right people in Thailand to brush aside damning evidence provided by reputable authorities in countries where rule of law generally prevails.  This THAI scandal must cover wide ranging networks of politicians, civil servants and THAI executives over three different time periods which will undoubtedly include many who have good enough connections in the current regime and whatever succeeds it to ensure that the evidence provided by Rolls Royce and British authorities is treated with the same utter contempt and disregard for rule of law as the above two cases.