Judges accept Yingluck’s plea, will make referral decision

[candide]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

bla bla bla.. Thaksin abused his power in other ways when he could (he almost got away with it).. now the tables are turned and crocodile tears are shed. If they can get absolute power again they would abuse it again. They are no saints they are as bad as the other side. They have just been outplayed in the power game. They all put their people in key positions to influence everything.

 

I think its a real bad system, but its not like the PTP is any better, they did the same thing but got outplayed. If Thaksin had gotten his way I would be the one moaning and you would be defending him. I prefer it an other way but I have yet to see a clear separation of power and no nepotism here from any of the parties. 

That they are all as bad seems to be a reasonable assumption in this particular country. However, the fact that Thaksin did bad things is no excuse for others to do worse. If they can do worse, it is because they benefit from an unmatched level of control, without any check and balance. And to a large extent, it will remain the same under the new constitution, as the role of appointed politicians will be more important than the role of elected politicians

 

It is not a question of which side I prefer, but an issue of democracy. I have no problem with the "other side" being in power, as long as they are elected and can be voted out, and not entrenched in power positions indefinitely thanks to the appointment system.

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, candide said:

That they are all as bad seems to be a reasonable assumption in this particular country. However, the fact that Thaksin did bad things is no excuse for others to do worse. If they can do worse, it is because they benefit from an unmatched level of control, without any check and balance. And to a large extent, it will remain the same under the new constitution, as the role of appointed politicians will be more important than the role of elected politicians

 

It is not a question of which side I prefer, but an issue of democracy. I have no problem with the "other side" being in power, as long as they are elected and can be voted out, and not entrenched in power positions indefinitely thanks to the appointment system.

Democracy only works when there is true democracy. When T was in power he removed all checks and balances. YL tried to do the same with cutting funding to the NACC. I would gladly support any party that was clean. But the fact remains they are all the same in power they will do as they please without checks and balances and that is no democracy.. just like this is no democracy.

 

Don't misunderstand me I want elections.. rather tomorrow than now. But I don't see this as a working Democracy. I have no problem if the PTP gets in power again. You will see the same tricks the junta did done by them. Then you will be defending them and I will be attacking them. Would be nice for a change.

 

But really.. i don't see any good guys in the near future. 

[scorecard]

On 7/10/2017 at 5:34 AM, candide said:

They may have dreamed to do it too! Somehow one could say: "Thaksin dreamed it, and the Junta did it". However, except in the early years, the Shins did not have much grip on the Judiciary. They have been convicted several times, while their opponents have not been much affected, even when the Shins were in power.

 

As concerns this particular case, the rice scheme was not a very  bright idea and has been poorly managed. However, I don't know of any case (in Thailand or elsewhere) in which a PM has been convicted for implementing a scheme that was part of the political program citizen voted for, and also voted in parliament, even if poorly executed.

 

"...However, except in the early years, the Shins did not have much grip on the Judiciary. ..."

 

I don't agree at all.

 

And let's not forget the pastry box with 3 Million Baht delivered to the court staff by the paymasters lawyer but noticed immediately by a very senior court official, and the paymaster's lawyer did jail time.

 

What that indicates is that the paymaster and his lawyer had no hesitation to bride judges. 

 

Fast forward to today - do you think the paymasters morals in regard to respecting the law and the process of the law (or in regard to anything) would have changed? I don't. 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2017 by scorecard

[candide]

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

Democracy only works when there is true democracy. When T was in power he removed all checks and balances. YL tried to do the same with cutting funding to the NACC. I would gladly support any party that was clean. But the fact remains they are all the same in power they will do as they please without checks and balances and that is no democracy.. just like this is no democracy.

 

Don't misunderstand me I want elections.. rather tomorrow than now. But I don't see this as a working Democracy. I have no problem if the PTP gets in power again. You will see the same tricks the junta did done by them. Then you will be defending them and I will be attacking them. Would be nice for a change.

 

But really.. i don't see any good guys in the near future. 

You know that the budget cutting imposed to the NACC was not that significant (the Junta increased it of only 17.8%).

 

But you fail to address the point I made, which is not that one side is significantly better than the other. It is that one side has an unmatched level of control and impunity by the law they have designed for their self-interest. And it will go on after elections, even if the PTP wins.

[candide]

1 minute ago, scorecard said:

 

"...However, except in the early years, the Shins did not have much grip on the Judiciary. ..."

 

I don't agree at all.

 

But let's not forget the pastry box with 3 Million Baht delivered to the court staff by the paymasters lawyer but noticed immediately by a very senior court official, and the paymaster's lawyer did jail time.

 

What that indicates is that the paymaster and his lawyer had no hesitation to bride judges. 

 

Fast forward to today - do you think the paymasters morals in regard to respecting the law and the process of the law (or in regard to anything) would have changed? I don't. 

 

 

They had so much grip on the judiciary that they got convicted several times! 

[Chris Lawrence]

‘The anthropologist Donald Hindley wrote in 1965, at the height of a despotic military dictatorship, that a “a government-appointed constituent assembly has been meeting for more than six years to prepare a replacement for the constitution discarded in 1958” and that regardless of a result “there is no expectation that genuine political competition will be tolerated (…) No one expects the replacement of the military as the arbiters of Thai politics.”

Exactly 50 years later, little seems to have changed as the military is in a comfortable position again to continue ruling directly through provisional clauses, while trying to cement its power to be best positioned for any twists and turns in Thailand’s never-ending political crisis.’ Constitutional.net

‘Since the May 2014 military coup, there has been no independent scrutiny of defence policy by the legislature, a lack of budget transparency, and insufficient institutional measures concerning most aspects of the procurement cycle.   While pre-coup anti-corruption organisations like the National Anti-Corruption Commission still enjoy a quasi-legal status, they lack sufficient influence to curtail military involvement with the proliferation of organized crime in southern Thailand or ghost soldiers.  Taken together, these corruption risks not only pose a serious threat to the stability of the state but fundamentally undermine its accountability to the people of Thailand.’ Government Defence Index

“In the latest setback to Thailand’s corruption watchdog effort, all inquiries, including that over a construction run by junta chairman Prayuth Chan-ocha’s nephew, cannot move forward until officials implement the changes in recent amendments to anti-graft laws, according to NACC Secretary-General Sansern Poljiak.

“I insist that we have not halted only the fact-finding in the case of Gen. Preecha’s son,” Sansern told reporters Monday, referring to Prayuth’s brother, Preecha Chan-ocha. “But we halted all cases. It’s the same for every case that we have to slow down for only two months so we can fix internal regulations and make them comply with the bigger laws.” Pattaya One

So, has the NACC any teeth? What is their record for convictions since circa1991? Have the heads been of the elite or sub juniors in Government? Is this the biggest case that has landed in their lap?