Too many political cases unhealthy for Thai justice

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

Too many political cases unhealthy for Thai justice

Preoccupied judiciary struggling to create genuine “legal fairness”

It has been a busy week for “political animals”, legally. First, ex-prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra slammed the Thai justice system, which is trying to find “culprits” in the controversial rice-pledging scheme, and then a court ruling triggered an uproar among those on her opposite side. In the latter case, the court killed charges against former leading state officials implicated in a bloody crackdown on protesters.

 

Both cases have chipped away at the image of the Thai judiciary, no matter what it really tries to do. Yingluck portrayed herself as a victim of a concerted campaign against her big brother and former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. She questioned evidence of negligence and malpractice in the rice-pledging scheme, which she insisted could not be cancelled as it was her Pheu Thai Party’s policy platform. That her trial has taken place while Thailand has been under military rule does not help.

 

Yingluck delivered her stinging closing statement at the end of her trial on Tuesday, firing up hundreds of supporters gathered outside the Supreme Court. The next day, however, was her opponents’ turn to feel aggrieved. The same court judged former prime minister Somchai Wongsawat and three other defendants not guilty over the crackdown on yellow-shirt protesters in 2008. Somchai is an in-law of the Shinawatras who have been targetted for the protests by the yellow shirts.

 

The political divide has spawned court cases. This has put the Thai judiciary in both the domestic and international limelight.

Whatever decisions the judges have made or will make, with or without perceived political prejudices, are subjected to harsh scrutiny either way, creating a significantly unhealthy atmosphere for the Thai justice system as a whole.

 

The circumstances are either sapping the strength of the Thai judiciary or undermining its image at a time when the key pillar of Thailand needs both solid public support and strong credibility. As things stand, the judiciary requires firmer foundations so it can revamp the legal lopsidedness that has been in favour of the rich at the expense of the poor.

 

The country’s political system comprises three pillars. The monarchy is in transition and the legislature has been pretty much “taking a break”, following the 2014 coup which ousted Yingluck and installed the current interim parliament. Much hope has been placed on the third pillar, the judiciary, as one of Thailand’s most glaring weaknesses has to do with the legal privileges of the wealthy.

 

The problem of legal unfairness is not a political one. If the Thai justice system is to be reformed, it must be for the man on the street, not politicians.

 

Cases against Thaksin or Yingluck often draw massive attention both here and abroad. While that is understandable, they also make “man-on-the-street” cases go under the radar. The real issue in Thailand is not what has befallen politicians, but the ways affluent people are escaping from justice or delaying their cases.

 

To create legal equality will automatically reconcile a divided Thailand. “Fairness” can be subjective in politics, meaning whatever legal development occurring in the political arena is bound to upset a sizeable number of people. On the other hand, if a truck driver and the heir of a business empire are accused of similar crimes and undergo similar legal processes and timeframes, nobody will get upset about it.

 

The latter scenario is what is supposed to happen. That it couldn’t happen led to such cases as Thaksin’s and Yingluck’s, and their cases are making it even harder for it to happen. 

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30323015

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-08-07

[smutcakes]

Why would those in the judiciary want to change a system which watches out so well for them, their families and social circles.

[darksidedog]

43 minutes ago, webfact said:

To create legal equality will automatically reconcile a divided Thailand

While I agree with that statement, which would stop the likes of the Red Bull  “Boss” getting preferential treatment, and mean all people being considered equal under the law, I just don't see it actually happening. Corruption is so endemic here that sadly, I'm not sure Thailand could actually survive a free and fair society.

[Get Real]

Unhealthy? I would say it´s close to the last dying breath.

[Cadbury]

One of the biggest problems Thailand has is the corrupt system of people buying their jobs. It happens in the RTP, within government authorities including the education system. It happens in all forms of public employment..... including the judicial system. 

The existing system is designed for the prosperity of the individual rather than the advancement and improvement of the public service sector itself.

The government's disingenuous waffle about promoting on merit within the RTP will amount to nothing.

[mtls2005]

While the Thai legal system is subverted to benefit the upper classes, and used to keep the lower classes under control.

 

It is how it is used to control political aspirations that is far more dangerous.

 

 

How long has Jatupat "Pai Dao Din'' Boonpattararaksa been held in custody? ~ 8 months?

 

All for a Facebook share (which ~ 3,000 other people shared as well).

[yellowboat]

The junta will have to go before legal reform to happen.  Article 44 and the junta's forgiveness clause have to be distant memories, as they are extra-judicial instruments.  And they should never be allowed to appear again in the future.

 

There is no love of the law in this country, except by a few non compromised souls who spend the same amount of time defending themselves as they do their clients. 

 

Until everyone is treated fairly, then too the courts will have respect.  Until that time comes, they should expect and learn to embrace heavy scrutiny. 

[maewang99]

once again. kudos to Thailand.

at least they don't just pass a "resolution" naming names and then baddabing baddaboom... everything is all done.

don't get me wrong, it's a serious thing but just naming names... how did we get to this...... in the USA? but not in Thailand.

the new way to do things. UNSC 2371.

in Thailand they can still 'see ya in court'.... in New York 2 days ago, they just simply named names..

but in Thailand at least they take you to court first. 

kudos to Thailand.







 

 

Edited August 7, 2017 by maewang99

[cornishcarlos]

35 minutes ago, maewang99 said:

once again. kudos to Thailand.

at least they don't just pass a "resolution" naming names and then baddabing baddaboom... everything is all done.

don't get me wrong, it's a serious thing but just naming names... how did we get to this...... in the USA? but not in Thailand.

the new way to do things. UNSC 2371.

in Thailand they can still 'see ya in court'.... in New York 2 days ago, they just simply named names..

but in Thailand at least they take you to court first. 

kudos to Thailand.







 

 

 

What ?

[halloween]

Too many political cases unhealthy for Thai justice. 

Too many corrupt politicians unhealthy for Thai democracy.

 

 

Edited August 7, 2017 by halloween

[Dobredin Ghusputin]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

the Thai justice system

Thailand does not have a justice system. It has a Sakdina system.

 

[halloween]

1 hour ago, Cadbury said:

One of the biggest problems Thailand has is the corrupt system of people buying their jobs. It happens in the RTP, within government authorities including the education system. It happens in all forms of public employment..... including the judicial system. 

The existing system is designed for the prosperity of the individual rather than the advancement and improvement of the public service sector itself.

The government's disingenuous waffle about promoting on merit within the RTP will amount to nothing.

All those people buying jobs, yet you left out the Prime Minister.

[Get Real]

 

49 minutes ago, maewang99 said:

once again. kudos to Thailand.

at least they don't just pass a "resolution" naming names and then baddabing baddaboom... everything is all done.

don't get me wrong, it's a serious thing but just naming names... how did we get to this...... in the USA? but not in Thailand.

the new way to do things. UNSC 2371.

in Thailand they can still 'see ya in court'.... in New York 2 days ago, they just simply named names..

but in Thailand at least they take you to court first. 

kudos to Thailand.







 

 

Sorry, totally lost here. You really got me on this one! 

Edited August 7, 2017 by Get Real

[worgeordie]

If politicians could just make laws,instead of breaking them,

there would be less political cases,its as simple as that.

 

regards worgeordie

[YetAnother]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Too many political cases unhealthy for Thai justice

i disagree with the base premise; to NOT prosecute and rule on these cases is far worse than doing so; if laws were broken, then apply the justice system; that is what it is for; politicians running wild is one of the root causes of the mess that is thailand today

Edited August 7, 2017 by YetAnother

[scorecard]

 

And if a certain party had respected numerous laws we wouldn't be in this situation at all. 

[scorecard]

6 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

i disagree with the base premise; to NOT prosecute and rule on these cases is far worse than doing so; if laws were broken, then apply the justice system; that is what it is for; politicians running wild is one of the root causes of the mess that is thailand today

 

Well said, well said, well said!

[Cadbury]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

All those people buying jobs, yet you left out the Prime Minister.

I left him out purposely because it was not his own money he used to buy himself the top job. It was the taxpayer's money!

And he continues to use a whole lot more of it to keep himself in that job.......along with his family cronies.

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, yellowboat said:

The junta will have to go before legal reform to happen.  Article 44 and the junta's forgiveness clause have to be distant memories, as they are extra-judicial instruments.  And they should never be allowed to appear again in the future.

 

There is no love of the law in this country, except by a few non compromised souls who spend the same amount of time defending themselves as they do their clients. 

 

Until everyone is treated fairly, then too the courts will have respect.  Until that time comes, they should expect and learn to embrace heavy scrutiny. 

 

But unfortunately that corruption and disrespect for the law is ingrained in the social fabric now. People don't bother with laws they don't like. It's very noticeable here how no one's bothering with crash helmets on motor bikes anymore after the last clamp down, people still have 3,4, and more on bikes, under age school children still drive them, without helmets and presumably licenses. And the police do zilch. Not flavor of the month any more. As you go up the very formal social structure, bigger, more important wide ranging laws get ignored with impunity. Why - because they know they can!

The police enforce the law differently seemingly based on how wealthy, well connected, family background. And of course always appear willing to negotiate. Similarly juries aren't used, and judges have the power to interpret the law as they deem in any case without having to take any notice of precedent, unless they want to.

Politicians, whether elected civilians, or coup appointed spend time avoiding, manipulating or twisting laws to suit their own interests and have little interest in changing a system which facilitates great personal wealth. All investigations, prosecutions, are selective, and not evenly applied without favor or bias. All politicians squeal "it's political" as a get out for anything. 

 

Changing this requires a massive effort and must be driven by the people actually wanting change and leaders who can deliver that change which means being fully transparent and everyone respected and supporting the law. Not much chance of that happening any time soon.

Edited August 7, 2017 by Baerboxer

[Baerboxer]

25 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

And if the military had just let democracy take its course and not try to collude to topple elected governments since 2005 we wouldn't be in this situation at all. 

 

Yes we would. None of the governments this century have done anything about reforming the justice system so far. We shall see where the current reform of the police progresses to. 

 

There is nothing on past performance to show an elected government would make positive reforms to the justice system. But based on past performance it is very likely they would continue as before.

[Baerboxer]

30 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

Too many coups not allowing proper democracy to function.

 

How can proper democracy function without a robust independent justice system and checks and balances?

[Baerboxer]

Just now, Father Fintan Stack said:

A military should be controlled by the elected government and removing elected governments not part of their mandate.

 

Not allowing democracy to take its course is the biggest impediment to having a functioning judiciary as we can clearly see with human rights abuses, abduction of activists from foreign countries (that is actually an act of war BTW), arbitrary detentions, military courts etc. 

 

Great article in the Nikkei Times today about the junta costing Thailand a decade in economic growth.

 

 

 

Agree that a military should be controlled by an elected government.

 

But that elected government must be subject to checks and balances, and the judiciary must be independent and the law must be applied consistently, evenly and without manipulation. When it's not, then you get the situation Venezuela has, various African and Asian states either have or have had.

 

If you have a PM of a country trying to bribe judges to let him off, or one whose ministers threaten judges with dire consequences should they make the "wrong" decision, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the case, then it is highly unlikely that you will have a government that respects the law and acts lawfully. Effective opposition is eliminated in such countries. Hun Sen, Maduro are the latest examples.

[GarryP]

14 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Yes we would. None of the governments this century have done anything about reforming the justice system so far. We shall see where the current reform of the police progresses to. 

 

There is nothing on past performance to show an elected government would make positive reforms to the justice system. But based on past performance it is very likely they would continue as before.

But wouldn't reform of the justice system potentially subject those reforming it to 112? Judges are appointed by someone you know. It is one of the main reasons why criticism of courts is not allowed here. I believe that those ties must be severed before any true reform could take place.

[halloween]

54 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

Too many coups not allowing proper democracy to function.

Too many apologists willing to accept corruption allow it to flourish.

[halloween]

Just now, Father Fintan Stack said:

The ultimate corruption is military coups over elected governments, self-appointed rulers and authoritarianism. 

Really? I see them as the flush that cleans the toilet bowl that is elected government in this country.

 

BTW you still haven't come forward with why you are so willing to accept corruption and offer excuses for it. Is honesty only something you expect in others?

[halloween]

15 minutes ago, GarryP said:

But wouldn't reform of the justice system potentially subject those reforming it to 112? Judges are appointed by someone you know. It is one of the main reasons why criticism of courts is not allowed here. I believe that those ties must be severed before any true reform could take place.

Who would you have appoint judges? The elected criminals try their hardest to appoint cronies as head of police depts, would you have them appoint the judges too?

[Baerboxer]

13 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

Conjecture.

 

Thailand has never been anywhere close to Venezuela or African states. The Democrats were credible opposition and that was not in jeopardy in any of the elections during the 00's, nor is it now.

 

Thailand is however the only military ********** in the World which in itself deters development and progress and as I have already stated is exactly the wrong way to strengthen institutions such as the judiciary as the military ignores all due process, does what it wants and grants itself immunity. All the while doing far more damage than any elected government has done.

 

There's a reason Thailand's economic growth is less than half that of the Philippines, and it isn't down to the elected governments. 

 

 

 

Deflection.

 

Had a certain person managed to get control or large influence over the military, as he was trying then Thailand may well have been close to some Asian, African and American countries. Hun Sen, The Lees of Singapore, spring to mind. These  types of "leaders" change laws to benefit themselves, enrich their families, create political family dynasties and use strong laws to control opponents, critics and suppress free speech. They are a more clandestine and hypocritical version of a junta. They make people believe they are free to elect who they choose, whilst trying to ensure systems favor themselves. And watch how they react when they see their grip loosening - as in Cambodia and Venezuela.

 

Unless of course you think it perfectly acceptable for a PM to bribe and intimidate the judiciary to try and subvert justice.

[yellowboat]

42 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

But unfortunately that corruption and disrespect for the law is ingrained in the social fabric now. People don't bother with laws they don't like. It's very noticeable here how no one's bothering with crash helmets on motor bikes anymore after the last clamp down, people still have 3,4, and more on bikes, under age school children still drive them, without helmets and presumably licenses. And the police do zilch. Not flavor of the month any more. As you go up the very formal social structure, bigger, more important wide ranging laws get ignored with impunity. Why - because they know they can!

The police enforce the law differently seemingly based on how wealthy, well connected, family background. And of course always appear willing to negotiate. Similarly juries aren't used, and judges have the power to interpret the law as they deem in any case without having to take any notice of precedent, unless they want to.

Politicians, whether elected civilians, or coup appointed spend time avoiding, manipulating or twisting laws to suit their own interests and have little interest in changing a system which facilitates great personal wealth. All investigations, prosecutions, are selective, and not evenly applied without favor or bias. All politicians squeal "it's political" as a get out for anything. 

 

Changing this requires a massive effort and must be driven by the people actually wanting change and leaders who can deliver that change which means being fully transparent and everyone respected and supporting the law. Not much chance of that happening any time soon.

For the sake of their own good, they should wear a crash helmet and should not pile people on a motorbike.  But these flagrances sound more like poor people not having enough money to do the right thing rather than blatant disregard for the law. 

 

But you are right, a massive effort is needed, but to start, the government needs to clean up its own way of doing business.  Tariffs are too high in Thailand, and the ease of doing business is not easy at all. 

 

If you have a big mess, start with small things first and leave the big things for later. 

[GarryP]

17 minutes ago, halloween said:

Who would you have appoint judges? The elected criminals try their hardest to appoint cronies as head of police depts, would you have them appoint the judges too?

There needs to be a severing of the current link of the courts, which would then allow for discussion of court decisions and public debate when there are questionable rulings. You can't even question court judgments at present.

 

At least if they were appointed by the elected government, this would allow for debate and even protests against unreasonable/biased decisions without any worry of repercussions for simply expressing one's opinion.  Are you saying  the current scheme of things is already the best option?  Thai courts are already exceedingly biased when it comes to cases involving people of influence and we can't do anything about it as to call a judge incompetent, you are questioning the competence of the person who appointed him or her and that is a very big no-no. Judges also need to be answerable to the people. Under the present system, they are above the very law that they are supposed to be upholding.   

[halloween]

1 minute ago, GarryP said:

There needs to be a severing of the current link of the courts, which would then allow for discussion of court decisions and public debate when there are questionable rulings. You can't even question court judgments at present.

 

At least if they were appointed by the elected government, this would allow for debate and even protests against unreasonable/biased decisions without any worry of repercussions for simply expressing one's opinion.  Are you saying  the current scheme of things is already the best option?  Thai courts are already exceedingly biased when it comes to cases involving people of influence and we can't do anything about it as to call a judge incompetent, you are questioning the competence of the person who appointed him or her and that is a very big no-no. Judges also need to be answerable to the people. Under the present system, they are above the very law that they are supposed to be upholding.   

Nobody said it is perfect. Judges are always going to be relatively conservative and a product of the educated upper classes. OTOH with a corrupt PM appointing his cousins/uncles/nephews as senior BIB and judges, with the usual lightning promotions, what chance do you have of prosecution.