Snubbed Appeals Court president Sirichai set to quit 

By The Nation

 

File photo: Appeals Court president Sirichai Wattanayothin

 

BANGKOK: -- Appeals Court president Sirichai Wattanayothin is set to resign from government service. 

He is scheduled to hold a press conference on Tuesday afternoon to explain the reason.

 

Sirichai failed to get nominated by the Judicial Commission to become Supreme Court president, even though he was the most senior candidate. 

 

The commission backed the next most senior candidate, Supreme Court vice president Cheep Jullamon, for the top job at the country’s highest court. 

 

The panel gave no reason for its decision to overlook Sirichai, but a source from the nominating committee said he was deemed to lack the qualifications for the job and had not been performing to expectations.

 

It was reported that Sirichai would be removed as Appeals Court president to fill a new position created by the Judicial Commission - adviser to the Supreme Court president. 

 

Sirichai last week threatened to take legal action if he was reshuffled to the new post.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30321048

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-18

8 minutes ago, webfact said:

"Sirichai failed to get nominated by the Judicial Commission to become Supreme Court president"

Simple explanation as to why he was turned down for the job. The envelope wasn't fat enough.

Just about everyone in Thailand's justice system buys their job. His bid wasn't high enough to satisfy the needs of the Judicial Commission. 

This is such a whitewash .

His record is squeaky clean. They have found nothing bad or corrupt about him. And yet he is passed over for the flimsy excuse he wasn't performing well enough. 

What does that even mean? ?

For such an important pass over, that reason is pathetic. 

Good luck judge. 

If not wrong, he is one of the 9 judges hearing Yingluck's. If he resigned from the government, how will that affect the case. Maybe the hearing will be delayed until another judge appointed. Thailand the land of political intrigue. 

20 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

If not wrong, he is one of the 9 judges hearing Yingluck's. If he resigned from the government, how will that affect the case. Maybe the hearing will be delayed until another judge appointed. Thailand the land of political intrigue. 

Perhaps a more agreeable judge would replace him. 

35 minutes ago, greenchair said:

This is such a whitewash .

His record is squeaky clean. They have found nothing bad or corrupt about him. And yet he is passed over for the flimsy excuse he wasn't performing well enough. 

What does that even mean? ?

For such an important pass over, that reason is pathetic. 

Good luck judge. 

 

So you have inside comprehensive information on this guy, please share. 

iS 

41 minutes ago, greenchair said:

This is such a whitewash .

His record is squeaky clean. They have found nothing bad or corrupt about him. And yet he is passed over for the flimsy excuse he wasn't performing well enough. 

What does that even mean? ?

For such an important pass over, that reason is pathetic. 

Good luck judge. 

What does it mean.. that there are others more qualified... do you think people should be chosen only on seniority ? I believe that performance should be used not how many years you have done your job. I like it if people are promoted based on performance.

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

iS 

What does it mean.. that there are others more qualified... do you think people should be chosen only on seniority ? I believe that performance should be used not how many years you have done your job. I like it if people are promoted based on performance.

Called meritocracy

4 hours ago, robblok said:

iS 

What does it mean.. that there are others more qualified... do you think people should be chosen only on seniority ? I believe that performance should be used not how many years you have done your job. I like it if people are promoted based on performance.

Yes, agreed, if indeed that is why he was overlooked.although Thailand is not well known for promoting solely on the basis of qualifications or performance.  Even the P.M. has identified that as a pressing problem.

4 hours ago, robblok said:

iS 

What does it mean.. that there are others more qualified... do you think people should be chosen only on seniority ? I believe that performance should be used not how many years you have done your job. I like it if people are promoted based on performance.

Maybe someone more qualified but really not. Be judge in Thailand is very political job. Politic more important than qualify in Thailand. 

5 hours ago, greenchair said:

This is such a whitewash .

His record is squeaky clean. They have found nothing bad or corrupt about him. And yet he is passed over for the flimsy excuse he wasn't performing well enough. 

What does that even mean? ?

For such an important pass over, that reason is pathetic. 

Good luck judge. 

Maybe that was the reason exactly,  he was not corrupt.  This Junta will not entertain anyone who uses moral or ethical judgment to reach a verdict.

4 hours ago, robblok said:

iS 

What does it mean.. that there are others more qualified... do you think people should be chosen only on seniority ? I believe that performance should be used not how many years you have done your job. I like it if people are promoted based on performance.

 

Agree, highly successful organizations today base promotions on:

 

1. Displayed knowledge and capability to do job which is open.

 

2. Displayed outstanding / well above average performance for the last immediate 3, 4, 5 years.

 

Same should be applied to all positions.

 

Same approach already in place for many years in many government agencies in Singapore. 

 

I agree with you 100%, his envelope was to thin.

4 minutes ago, esprit said:

Maybe that was the reason exactly,  he was not corrupt.  This Junta will not entertain anyone who uses moral or ethical judgment to reach a verdict.

 

What rubbish or perhaps your thinking about the previous government.

1 minute ago, scorecard said:

 

What rubbish or perhaps your thinking about the previous government.

So in a country where no person in any Government organisation ever takes responsibly, is dismissed, is promoted on merit over seniority, you think the Thai Judicial System has suddenly got a case of meritocracy and passed the most senior judge based on his qualification?

 

Lol.. your a dreamer.

All too many posters here are in a constant rush to vilify this country, its government and its judicial system, usually on the basis of sheer ignorance. While not perfect, they are what we have.

 

For those who would like to know why he was rejected, the full details are in this link. It has nothing to do with current cases or bribes.

https://lifespaceconnect.com/blog/2017/07/17/embattled-appeal-court-chief-to-resign-face-probe/

 

Those who couldn't be bothered to read it and prefer to continue baseless criticism remind me of migratory birds. You fly in, shit all over the place, and then fly out again.

23 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

What rubbish or perhaps your thinking about the previous government.

Are so you are a Junta apologist.  

5 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

So you have inside comprehensive information on this guy, please share. 

The man is president of the appeals court. A public figure. 

Enough said. 

5 hours ago, robblok said:

iS 

What does it mean.. that there are others more qualified... do you think people should be chosen only on seniority ? I believe that performance should be used not how many years you have done your job. I like it if people are promoted based on performance.

I'm all for promoting based on performance. His performance is 30 plus years in the judiciary, rising through the ranks to be President of the appeals court. An exempletory record, with no blemishes, corruption or sordid behaviour in those 30 plus years.

His shortfall apparently, is he saw a discrepancy in the transfer of a  case that was not even his case many  years ago. 

A bit like yingluck, couldn't find any mud to sling, so blamed him for the wrong doing of others. 

 

26 minutes ago, halloween said:

All too many posters here are in a constant rush to vilify this country, its government and its judicial system, usually on the basis of sheer ignorance. While not perfect, they are what we have.

 

For those who would like to know why he was rejected, the full details are in this link. It has nothing to do with current cases or bribes.

https://lifespaceconnect.com/blog/2017/07/17/embattled-appeal-court-chief-to-resign-face-probe/

 

Those who couldn't be bothered to read it and prefer to continue baseless criticism remind me of migratory birds. You fly in, shit all over the place, and then fly out again.

Pot meet kettle...... 

 

Whenever I read news reports like this, about someone being passed over here in Thailand, I always wonder:

 

--Is it really because the person at hand is not up to snuff, and they really wanted to choose someone better.

 

--Or more likely, the person passed over didn't cozy up enough to the right people, didn't pay enough, or didn't pay his allegiance to whomever's in power at that time.

 

You read the OP article, and have no way of telling which is which.  After living here for some years, though, I'm always inclined to believe the reason is usually one of those in the 2nd category.

 

If the authorities kept choosing BETTER people for the jobs that need to be filled, then Thailand would be in a whole lot better place and position than it is, and things would function a lot better than they actually do. All in all, it's pretty dysfunctional.

 

59 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Agree, highly successful organizations today base promotions on:

 

1. Displayed knowledge and capability to do job which is open.

 

2. Displayed outstanding / well above average performance for the last immediate 3, 4, 5 years.

 

Same should be applied to all positions.

 

Same approach already in place for many years in many government agencies in Singapore. 

 

............. and squeaky clean?

 

Hey, hang on scorecard this is the Judicial system we are talking about?

 

Are you smoking the Hydro grass clippings while typing?

6 hours ago, webfact said:

lack the qualifications for the job and had not been performing to expectations.

Ouch, we as Outsiders cannot know;

Perhaps he just didn't make the alliances as he should have here

2 minutes ago, Chris Lawrence said:

............. and squeaky clean?

 

Hey, hang on scorecard this is the Judicial system we are talking about?

 

Are you smoking the Hydro grass clippings while typing?

Thailand is quite a few steps behind Singapore

10 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Whenever I read news reports like this, about someone being passed over here in Thailand, I always wonder:

 

--Is it really because the person at hand is not up to snuff, and they really wanted to choose someone better.

 

--Or more likely, the person passed over didn't cozy up enough to the right people, didn't pay enough, or didn't pay his allegiance to whomever's in power at that time.

 

You read the OP article, and have no way of telling which is which.  After living here for some years, though, I'm always inclined to believe the reason is usually one of those in the 2nd category.

 

If the authorities kept choosing BETTER people for the jobs that need to be filled, then Thailand would be in a whole lot better place and position than it is, and things would function a lot better than they actually do. All in all, it's pretty dysfunctional.

 

It is called meritocracy

5 hours ago, scorecard said:

 

So you have inside comprehensive information on this guy, please share. 

So you have the inside information that this fellow was bent. Please share your research data.

 

What's good for the goose is good for scorie. Or something like that.

I fear his 'thinking' was not 'on message' so better to resign as high profile as he can or he may have an accident and all the CCTV will be 'under maintainance'.  It's that bad here now sadly.  

40 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Whenever I read news reports like this, about someone being passed over here in Thailand, I always wonder:

 

--Is it really because the person at hand is not up to snuff, and they really wanted to choose someone better.

 

--Or more likely, the person passed over didn't cozy up enough to the right people, didn't pay enough, or didn't pay his allegiance to whomever's in power at that time.

 

You read the OP article, and have no way of telling which is which.  After living here for some years, though, I'm always inclined to believe the reason is usually one of those in the 2nd category.

 

If the authorities kept choosing BETTER people for the jobs that need to be filled, then Thailand would be in a whole lot better place and position than it is, and things would function a lot better than they actually do. All in all, it's pretty dysfunctional.

 

 

 

Mostly agree.

 

In reality If Thailand had been selecting honest and sincere people who have displayed high capability and high performance for the last 14 / 16 years just imagine how much better everything would be today.

 

And even more better if the above had been happening for the last 20 / 30 years. 

39 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

It is called meritocracy

 

Thailand has its own special version of meritocracy, unlike the meaning elsewhere.

 

Instead of meaning the most talented rise to the top, here apparently it more likely means people rise to the top based on "making merit" to those above them, either by payments, or groveling or whatever. Hence the Thailand meaning of "merit-ocracy."

9 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

 

Mostly agree.

 

In reality If Thailand had been selecting honest and sincere people who have displayed high capability and high performance for the last 14 / 16 years just imagine how much better everything would be today.

 

And even more better if the above had been happening for the last 20 / 30 years. 

How about the last 80 years. The only reason it has come out into the open is due to the media, internet etc. I dread to think what was going on 30 years ago and before.  

 

One military general (Sarit) managed to amass over $100 million in assets as leader and this was in 1960. God knows how much that is in todays money.

 

The system has been developed since the beginning, and only with the rise of the digital world etc is any of it coming to light. Prior to that it would go on completely unchecked and unfettered.

 

If anything it will be less now than previously.