PM Prayut denies court interference

[webfact]

PM denies court interference

By WASAMON AUDJARINT 
THE NATION

 

Former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra is surrounded by supporters as she arrives at the Supreme Court yesterday to make her closing statement in the case linked to her government’s controversial rice-pledging scheme.

 

‘No concern’ about mobilisation ahead of August 25 verdict

 

PRIME MINISTER General Prayut Chan-o-cha yesterday rejected allegations by former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, insisting that he had never interfered in the judicial process as she alleged during her closing remarks to the Supreme Court yesterday. 

 

Yingluck earlier said in court that junta chief Prayut, who staged a coup to topple her government three years ago, had implied in a recent statement that she was guilty in the case relating to her government’s rice-pledging scheme, otherwise she would never have been brought to court. 

 

Prayut said yesterday the junta government had only provided testimony as witnesses for the plaintiff, which is the government itself.

 

“I never led [the decision] of the court. I don’t have to order them,” the premier said. “The judicial system is always independent. They have inspected the issues based on facts and they’ve finished.”

 

Yingluck is accused of negligence and malfeasance for allegedly ignoring corruption related to the rice-pledging scheme conducted while she was in office, despite a warning from the Office of the Auditor-General. 

 

 

She rejected the charges, saying her government had to implement the policy because it had been approved by Parliament and measures had been taken to prevent corruption in the scheme. 

 

By invoking his absolute power under Article 44 of the interim charter, Prayut issued an order in November 2015 regarding legal and disciplinary action against officials involved in managing government rice stockpiles and releasing stocks. 

 

Yingluck said the action had singled out policy-makers in her Cabinet. 

 

Meanwhile, Prayut suggested that there should not be public criticism regarding the case. “Let the court do its work. It [the court] has to follow legal procedures right away so please don’t criticise much,” he said.

 

Asked whether the final verdict against Yingluck later this month could spark political turmoil, Prayut replied: “It is not up to me. It’s up to people and politicians whether they want to return to the same old conflicts.”

 

Hundreds of Yingluck’s supporters yesterday gathered at the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders where 300 riot police were deployed to maintain order. 

 

Security response

 

National police chief Pol General Chakthip Chaijinda said he was not concerned about the political situation leading up to judgement day on August 25, when a verdict in the case is expected.

 

There have not been any reports indicating mass mobilisation on the day of the verdict, he said, but he added that deputy police chief General Srivara Rangsipramanakul had been assigned to evaluate the situation and decide whether to adjust security plans. 

 

The police chief said relevant agencies were communicating and building mutual understanding with the leaders of Yingluck’s supporters. “Intelligence officials are also monitoring [their movements],” he said.

 

Chakthip added that police estimated that fewer than 1,000 people had shown up yesterday in front of the Supreme Court to show support for Yingluck.

 

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is scheduled to rule today in the case involving Yingluck’s brother-in-law, former prime minister Somchai Wongsawat of the now defunct People’s Power Party, and his former deputies and top-ranking police officers regarding his government’s crackdown on People’s Alliance for Democracy protesters in 2008.

 

Somchai’s case is seen as an indicator for Yingluck, which could affect whether she will appeal her case if the court rules against her. 

 

However, there are different legal opinions about what could happen in such a scenario. Meechai Ruchupan, the chief drafter of the present charter, has said she would have a constitutional right to appeal, while the camp led by Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam has argued that she could appeal only after a new law on the court’s procedures comes into force. 

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30322492

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-08-02

[Thechook]

Yep no coup, I won't be P.M. elections in 2015, 2016 and no interference in judicial system.  I believe you.

[Prbkk]

Classic Mandy Rice-Davies.

[Dobredin Ghusputin]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

fewer than 1,000 people had shown up yesterday

 

Clearly no one supports her. Let's hold an election tomorrow.

 

[Thechook]

8 minutes ago, Dobredin Ghusputin said:

 

Clearly no one supports her. Let's hold an election tomorrow.

 

999 isn't to bad more than Prayuth gets.

[yellowboat]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Meanwhile, Prayut suggested that there should not be public criticism regarding the case. “Let the court do its work. It [the court] has to follow legal procedures right away so please don’t criticise much,” he said.

This entitled man hates scrutiny.  Baseless criticisms are easily brushed aside.   Why does he fear being challenged so much ?  The former PM, who is being charged, deals with it in a graceful and adept manner.  Guilty or not, she is looking good where he does not.  The rice pledge was a bad idea on her part.    

[JAG]

 
Clearly no one supports her. Let's hold an election tomorrow.
 

As, so obviously, no one supports her, why bother with an election?

[wakeupplease]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

interfered in the judicial process

100% certain he did that is for sure

[bluesofa]

Loosely related is the cartoon in Today's Nation. The cartoonist (Steph?) has captured a lot of relevance with all the dials, etc in the background. I thought it's a very observant cartoon.

Here's the link:  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/cartoon

although it will only be valid for today.

I hope I don't into trouble for this, but I'm going to include the image as well. I suppose any mod could just delete the image if I have transgressed any rule.

 

[Prbkk]

18 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Loosely related is the cartoon in Today's Nation. The cartoonist (Steph?) has captured a lot of relevance with all the dials, etc in the background. I thought it's a very observant cartoon.

Here's the link:  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/cartoon

although it will only be valid for today.

I hope I don't into trouble for this, but I'm going to include the image as well. I suppose any mod could just delete the image if I have transgressed any rule.

 

Indeed. Slightly OT, but I wish Thai Visa and The Nation would post the cartoon each day. Often, I don't have access to the print copy and the online version doesn't show it. Steph hits the mark about 80%.

 

[Chris Lawrence]

Point 4 is saying there was money made in the economy? That will upset a few.

[bluesofa]

23 minutes ago, Prbkk said:

Indeed. Slightly OT, but I wish Thai Visa and The Nation would post the cartoon each day. Often, I don't have access to the print copy and the online version doesn't show it. Steph hits the mark about 80%.

 

Why do you say the online version doesn't show it? It's there everyday now via the link I posted. That was why I said it will only be valid today, because tomorrow it will show Thursday's cartoon.

[HiSoLowSoNoSo]

53 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Loosely related is the cartoon in Today's Nation. The cartoonist (Steph?) has captured a lot of relevance with all the dials, etc in the background. I thought it's a very observant cartoon.

Here's the link:  http://www.nationmultimedia.com/cartoon

although it will only be valid for today.

I hope I don't into trouble for this, but I'm going to include the image as well. I suppose any mod could just delete the image if I have transgressed any rule.

 

"The Submarine MahaPrayut" :-)  

[Golgota]

Quote

“I never led [the decision] of the court. I don’t have to order them,” the premier said. “The judicial system is always independent. 

Best joke of the day!

[bluesofa]

2 minutes ago, HiSoLowSoNoSo said:

"The Submarine MahaPrayut" :-)  

Yes, just what he needs with all the flooding (and drowning in criticism). He's a very forward-thinking man you know, buying submarines.

[Lupatria]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

“The judicial system is always independent.”

 

Is someone trying to "prayut" me here?

[Prbkk]

32 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Why do you say the online version doesn't show it? It's there everyday now via the link I posted. That was why I said it will only be valid today, because tomorrow it will show Thursday's cartoon.

Yes, I meant it's not there for reference/catch up. You are correct.

[bluesofa]

3 minutes ago, Prbkk said:

Yes, I meant it's not there for reference/catch up. You are correct.

Yes, the link itself shows that day's cartoon.

However, if you scroll down the page there are a lot of previous cartoons showing there. Clicking those numbered links right at the bottom will take you even further back.

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Prbkk said:

Classic Mandy Rice-Davies.

 

How apt a name!

 

But I think the Mandy Rice-Davies syndrome applies to all of them!

Edited August 2, 2017 by Baerboxer

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Dobredin Ghusputin said:

 

Clearly no one supports her. Let's hold an election tomorrow.

 

 

Why, she can't stand as she's already banned.

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, yellowboat said:

This entitled man hates scrutiny.  Baseless criticisms are easily brushed aside.   Why does he fear being challenged so much ?  The former PM, who is being charged, deals with it in a graceful and adept manner.  Guilty or not, she is looking good where he does not.  The rice pledge was a bad idea on her part.    

 

You really believe the rice pledge was her idea?

 

 

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, Chris Lawrence said:

Point 4 is saying there was money made in the economy? That will upset a few.

 

Have they proved that claim?

 

Not exactly renowned for their fact based comments.

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

“The judicial system is always independent.

Except when Prayut abolished the 2007 Constitution that was the foundation for the court system, instituted absolute power that bypasses the rule of law and wrote the 2017 Constitution with provisions for the military to "legally" overthrow an elected government without judicial due process.

Better to say that the judicial system is independent if and when Prayut decides it's to the autocracy's advantage.

[TheFishman1]

They are all corrupt TIT

[Gary A]

I don't think that Yingluck is smart enough to be corrupt. Besides that, she certainly doesn't need the money. Why don't we hear anything about the corrupt thieves who stole the rice?  How about the corrupt dealers who sold foreign rice to the government? How about the corrupt border officials who allowed hundreds or maybe thousands of truck loads of foreign rice to cross the border to be sold to the government? Yingluck is only guilty of being stupid enough not to see what was happening. Of course the government is very reluctant to go after the very high officials who got even richer through the program. Heaven forbid that the government even try to prosecute the real thieves.

[YetAnother]

5 hours ago, Thechook said:

Yep no coup, I won't be P.M. elections in 2015, 2016 and no interference in judicial system.  I believe you.

way way way past the point of belief

[PREM-R]

3 minutes ago, Gary A said:

I don't think that Yingluck is smart enough to be corrupt. Besides that, she certainly doesn't need the money. Why don't we hear anything about the corrupt thieves who stole the rice?  How about the corrupt dealers who sold foreign rice to the government? How about the corrupt border officials who allowed hundreds or maybe thousands of truck loads of foreign rice to cross the border to be sold to the government? Yingluck is only guilty of being stupid enough not to see what was happening. Of course the government is very reluctant to go after the very high officials who got even richer through the program. Heaven forbid that the government even try to prosecute the real thieves.

"Heaven forbid that the government even try to prosecute the real thieves "

      These would be the Sino-Thai families, or people with close connections to them, they are considered to be the ".Good People".

[YetAnother]

1 hour ago, Golgota said:

I don’t have to order them,”

loaded and loaded with innuendo; am sure he doesnt have to; i sometimes wonder, no i don't, about the average gullibility here

Edited August 2, 2017 by YetAnother

[JAG]

6 minutes ago, Gary A said:

I don't think that Yingluck is smart enough to be corrupt. Besides that, she certainly doesn't need the money. Why don't we hear anything about the corrupt thieves who stole the rice?  How about the corrupt dealers who sold foreign rice to the government? How about the corrupt border officials who allowed hundreds or maybe thousands of truck loads of foreign rice to cross the border to be sold to the government? Yingluck is only guilty of being stupid enough not to see what was happening. Of course the government is very reluctant to go after the very high officials who got even richer through the program. Heaven forbid that the government even try to prosecute the real thieves.

I think the greatest irony is that out of all political figures on the stage which is  Thailand, she is probably the least corrupt, and arguably the most well intentioned.

 

That said I will now sit back and wait for the indignant flaming to begin....

Edited August 2, 2017 by JAG

[YetAnother]

14 minutes ago, Gary A said:

I don't think that Yingluck is smart enough to be corrupt. Besides that, she certainly doesn't need the money. Why don't we hear anything about the corrupt thieves who stole the rice?  How about the corrupt dealers who sold foreign rice to the government? How about the corrupt border officials who allowed hundreds or maybe thousands of truck loads of foreign rice to cross the border to be sold to the government? Yingluck is only guilty of being stupid enough not to see what was happening. Of course the government is very reluctant to go after the very high officials who got even richer through the program. Heaven forbid that the government even try to prosecute the real thieves.

amen; dont know where you got your facts, but my sources indicate the same...