Jump to content

PM cautions public on misunderstanding Yingluck cases


Recommended Posts

Posted

PM cautions public on misunderstanding Yingluck cases

By The Nation

 

f558b6b4fb1a9eab6a684b7196a2d1d9.jpeg

 

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has urged the public to avoid misunderstanding the separate criminal and administrative actions being taken against former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra over her alleged mishandling of her government’s rice-pledging scheme.
 

Yingluck wrote on her Facebook page that some money in her bank accounts were taken away by authorities. 

 

The Supreme Court’s Division on Criminal Offences of Political Office Holders will deliver a verdict on August 25 in the case against Yingluck for alleged negligence of official duty while implementing the rice-pledging scheme, resulting in corruption and a huge loss to the state.

 

Prayut said there are two separate cases against the former premier. The freezing of Yingluck’s assets, including bank accounts, follows the Finance Ministry’s administative actions taken under the Article 44 on seizure of assets to cover the Bt35-billion compensation to the state.

 

The other case is the criminal lawsuit in which the highest court would issue a verdict next month. Prayut said the public should avoid any misunderstanding that could be abused to create unrest.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30321992

 
thenation_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-7-27
Posted

Going on the defensive just make the misunderstanding worse. On a personal note, his consistent lying also does not help to allay public perception that this cases are vindictive and has an agenda. Better he talk and threaten less. 

Posted (edited)

Absolutely clear as a bell.

 

He has imposed a penalty by decree ( he did it all by himself using his special powers which he granted himself).

 

The courts will will deliver his verdict, (I'm sorry find her guilty) next month.

 

I really don't see how there can be any confusion. Totally separate matters.  Purely co-incidence that the subject is the same person, and the man behind both the decree and the judgement is the same person. Could easily happen...

Edited by JAG
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, JAG said:

Absolutely clear as a bell.

 

He has imposed a penalty by decree ( he did it all by himself using his special powers which he granted himself).

Who could call that 'justice' with the exeption of a smattering of fascists and cranks on certain internet forums?

Edited by baboon
Posted
15 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Article 44 on seizure of assets to cover the Bt35-billion compensation to the state.

Sadly everyone pretty much understands that 44 has usurped due process.  His sense of entitlement and delusional righteousness is nauseating. 

Posted

He talking out his ass as usual. I.listen to his Friday speaches and it is total bs. Here is a man that wants to be the PM.

Mark my words he will not step down when someone is elected if that ever happens.

 

Posted
16 hours ago, edwinchester said:

I'm sure people understand perfectly well the confiscation of assets before any verdict is handed down.

 

Lucky he has no interest in finding the truth regarding people smuggling or he may issue administative death penalty orders before the verdicts ...of which by then would be of little consequence. Talkng about that of little consequence when will Prayuth say something intelligent as it has been more than 3 years of waiting in anticipation

Posted
3 minutes ago, rossd said:

The man is slowly becoming a dictator.

 

By the look on his face he may be more acustomed to being a dic taker

Posted

Whatever.   ................

 

In any case we now know that regardless of how many criminal cases are bought against her she can only be found guilty of one.

 

Otherwise .......................as the Criminal court pointed out in another political case on July 20th , it will consider it double jeopardy.

 

And of course the law is the law , applied to everyone equally and fairly without bias  , rich or poor, red or yellow , and the criminal court can't be wrong can they ?

 

:coffee1:

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...