Former foreign minister Surapong impeached for returning passports to Thaksin

[chowny77]

Good! I hate all this privaliged, nong, pei <deleted>. The guy was in the wrong and should have been put in jail as well. Thailand will have to change its system soon or it will be over-taken even more than its SE asian counterparts.

[sjaak327]

10 hours ago, scorecard said:

 Rubbish.

No he hit the nail right on the head.

 

I would like to add that the validity of the impeachment is of course zero. Thailand's rubber stamp parliament, where none of the MP's actually obtained a valid mandate, voted on the basis that Thakin's passports couldn't be returned due to his name appearing on a terrorism list ? is that really the best they could come up with. what an absolute joke. 

[scorecard]

' Terrorist list', please share more.

[scorecard]

6 hours ago, candide said:

I have been wondering since long about the official legal motive. It is finally stated that it was because Thaksin was on a list of suspects of terrorism. I wonder who decides who is on this list or not?

 

 

Suspects of terrorism, when did this item come into the discussion. This matter has been discussed at length for months, why hasn't the 'terrorism' appeared before in the discussions. How come?

 

However the fact remains that he broke regulations. and he (and madam) also refused to answer legitimate questions from the ombudsman.  

[sjaak327]

9 minutes ago, scorecard said:

' Terrorist list', please share more.

Read the OP perhaps ?

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, Becker said:

Organize a poll? Don't know how and can't be @***d to find out. You're more than welcome to do so if you want. BTW, do you think the people of Thailand should be allowed to have their say in a nationwide poll for or against the junta?

 

Don't understand your last sentence.

 

His last question / point is quite clear, he's saying if it wasn't proven that the guy broke the law, then this current action could never have proceeded.  

[candide]

30 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

 

Suspects of terrorism, when did this item come into the discussion. This matter has been discussed at length for months, why hasn't the 'terrorism' appeared before in the discussions. How come?

 

However the fact remains that he broke regulations. and he (and madam) also refused to answer legitimate questions from the ombudsman.  

It is the the OP and up to my knowledge it is the first time a precise legal motive is indicated.

[Becker]

1 hour ago, scorecard said:

 

His last question / point is quite clear, he's saying if it wasn't proven that the guy broke the law, then this current action could never have proceeded.  

I do believe you are mistaken as it's patently obvious the courts are doing whatever the junta wants them to do, current laws notwithstanding.

[gigman]

It tells you all about LOS ....and who loves who...

[KMartinHandyman]

and the reason being?? 

They don't dare go on record descending is my guess.

[tbthailand]

These morons can't help themselves, ... 

 

The purge continues.

 

[tbthailand]

8 hours ago, halloween said:

Yes he does. Does that give him the right to issue new passports to a fugitive criminal, who also happens to PAY him to be a member of his political party, as well as being a close relative. Might that not be considered corruption and abuse of office?

IMHO opinion the 5 year ban is totally unnecessary, the jail term term for his corruption should make his return to politics impossible.

how 'bout a jail term for the current 'PM' who single-handedly tore up the constitution, ... a treasonable offense?

[sjaak327]

17 minutes ago, tbthailand said:

how 'bout a jail term for the current 'PM' who single-handedly tore up the constitution, ... a treasonable offense?

No, pumpkin likes the current PM. the terms criminal and justice only applies to people he hates. 

 

Of course the term criminal handed down by a Thai court is in any case highly inflated. as such Thaksin can pretty much go anywhere in the world except for Thailand, says all you need to know.

[williamgeorgeallen]

any guesses how much he got paid to give the passports back. enough to cover a 5 year holiday i suspect.

[Ricardo]

5 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

Suspects of terrorism, when did this item come into the discussion. This matter has been discussed at length for months, why hasn't the 'terrorism' appeared before in the discussions. How come?

 

"How come"

 

Given Thailand's harsh (to say the least) libel-laws & certain peoples' willingness to use them, I'm not in-the-least surprised that allegations against senior politicians & hiso poo-yais, of supporting or funding terror-activity like marches or riots or bombings or assasinations, don't get made 'in public' on ThaiVisa or elsewhere.

 

That would be very unwise, for expats living here, just look at Jonathan Head or the labour-activist case.

 

Not saying that I agree with it, just that self-censorship has always been practiced, and wisely too IMO.

 

Some thoughts you just have to keep to yourself.

[Srikcir]

15 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

The report says they abstained.

Three abstained. Not that that matters in the Big Picture with a rubber-stamp NLA.

[Eric Loh]

14 hours ago, halloween said:

Yes he does. Does that give him the right to issue new passports to a fugitive criminal, who also happens to PAY him to be a member of his political party, as well as being a close relative. Might that not be considered corruption and abuse of office?

IMHO opinion the 5 year ban is totally unnecessary, the jail term term for his corruption should make his return to politics impossible.

Yes, he does have the right and authority as Foreign Minister. Did he break the law? No he didn't so your corruption and jail term analogy is irrelevant. 

 

Why impeach when he already not in office. Just another crafted event to impose the ban. This ban is robbing someone from exercising their rights to express their political views and Thailand has the distinction of banning many opposition politicians more than any other countries in the world. 

[Thechook]

18 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

So would you suggest that cases proceeding (very slowly) through the various courts should all be dropped.

 

What has this got to do with reconciliation? 

Reconcilliation is about going after and destroying one side.  It brings happiness to the other side