Prosecution cites agencies’ warnings on rice scheme to accuse Yingluck

[webfact]

Prosecution cites agencies’ warnings on rice scheme to accuse Yingluck

By The Nation

 

File photo

 

BANGKOK: -- IN ITS CLOSING statement in former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s case regarding her government’s rice-pledging scheme, the prosecution claimed she had failed to act to prevent damages and irregularities.

The 211-page document was submitted on Wednesday to the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders, where Yingluck is charged with negligence in connection with the project, Isra news agency reported. The case was filed by the Office of the Attorney-General.

 

The closing statement pointed to written warnings from relevant state agencies – including the Office of the Auditor-General and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) – about reports of irregularities. 

 

Also, according to the document, the state-run Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, the Public Warehouse Organisation and the Marketing Organisation for Farmers had reported in writing to the Yingluck government about many irregularities involving the scheme. 

 

The problems included the reporting of false information about rice planting areas, missing rice from government stocks and the suppression of farmers’ rights.

 

The prosecution’s closing statement said there was no evidence to prove that Yingluck, as the government head at the time, had raised the issue with her Cabinet or taken any action in tackling the problem of irregularities in a concrete way.

 

Yingluck read her closing statement before the court on August 1. The court is scheduled to deliver its verdict next Friday.

 

More than 2,500 police officers will be deployed at the Supreme Court on that day to keep law and order, Metropolitan Police deputy commander Pol Maj-General Phanurat Lakboon said yesterday.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30324132

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-08-18

[Samui Bodoh]

53 minutes ago, webfact said:

The prosecution’s closing statement said there was no evidence to prove that Yingluck, as the government head at the time, had raised the issue with her Cabinet or taken any action in tackling the problem of irregularities in a concrete way.

 

You would be hard-pressed to find, anywhere in the world, a government project that did NOT have some warnings from bureaucrats. In fact, bureaucrats spend an inordinate amount of time, again anywhere in the world, writing "cover-your-ass" memos to ensure that they themselves don't take any responsibility.

 

If a PM had to take bureaucrats warnings to their Cabinet each time they arrived, the government wouldn't be able to accomplish anything, ever.

 

The rice-pledging scheme was not a good policy. However, it was not a criminal offence to implement it, it was merely stupid. And if governments can be criminally charged for stupidity, the it would mean the end of government everywhere.

 

This is a ridiculous case and a ridiculous charge

 

[davehowden]

Samui, I don't entirely agree with you.

 

Yes, "jobs worth" types will always try to cover their behinds but she has not been able to show that she or her entourage took any action over the "warnings" that were given, even if just to disprove them, she was above all that, and just went on her merry way, shopping etc.

 

I will be interested to see what the outcome of all this is going to be, a few years delay in sentencing, numerous appeals, unrest .....

[Samui Bodoh]

4 minutes ago, davehowden said:

Samui, I don't entirely agree with you.

 

Yes, "jobs worth" types will always try to cover their behinds but she has not been able to show that she or her entourage took any action over the "warnings" that were given, even if just to disprove them, she was above all that, and just went on her merry way, shopping etc.

 

I will be interested to see what the outcome of all this is going to be, a few years delay in sentencing, numerous appeals, unrest .....

 

If everyone agreed with me, life would be boring 

 

I will happily concede that it was a stupid policy, that warnings were given, and that it wasn't monitored sufficiently.

 

However...

 

• There are warnings regarding EVERY policy a government has, from both inside and outside government
• I would assume that EVERY government project in Thailand has some corruption
• A government cannot 'disprove' EVERY allegation made

My point is that bad policy and bad implementation are not a criminal offenses. if it were, every member of a government would be tossed in jail, everywhere.

 

The proper response to this situation is for voters to reject a government and vote it out of power, 

 

But, that wasn't allowed to happen... and so here we are.

 

[leeneeds]

 

Being a puppet CEO was always going to fail,

 

[ramrod711]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Also, according to the document, the state-run Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, the Public Warehouse Organisation and the Marketing Organisation for Farmers had reported in writing to the Yingluck government about many irregularities involving the scheme. 

Lock her up! lock her up! A total failure as a PM, a shill for her brother and completely guilty of negligence. I have said it before, there does not seem to be any evidence of criminality but certainly negligence and that is what she is charged with.

[yellowboat]

2 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Lock her up! lock her up! A total failure as a PM, a shill for her brother and completely guilty of negligence. I have said it before, there does not seem to be any evidence of criminality but certainly negligence and that is what she is charged with.

Lock her up for negligence ?  Waste more money guarding her ?  Not sure what end her detention would serve.  It would just make her more of a martyr.  Community service would be better. 

[NCC1701A]

after the civil war starts I hope Isan girls are allowed safe passage to Pattaya. And maybe a security "green" zone set up around Soi Six.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

 

You would be hard-pressed to find, anywhere in the world, a government project that did NOT have some warnings from bureaucrats. In fact, bureaucrats spend an inordinate amount of time, again anywhere in the world, writing "cover-your-ass" memos to ensure that they themselves don't take any responsibility.

 

If a PM had to take bureaucrats warnings to their Cabinet each time they arrived, the government wouldn't be able to accomplish anything, ever.

 

The rice-pledging scheme was not a good policy. However, it was not a criminal offence to implement it, it was merely stupid. And if governments can be criminally charged for stupidity, the it would mean the end of government everywhere.

 

This is a ridiculous case and a ridiculous charge

 

 

You'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere in the world a PM who appoints herself to Chair meetings, of her government's flagship policy, and then never bothers to attend any of the meetings. Especially as some of the warnings were given by the World Bank, the IMF and Bloomberg - or do you think they're just more inconvenient bureaucrats covering their <deleted>?

 

The offense wasn't in implementing it. It was in being negligent in not bothering to ensure it was implemented effectively and efficiently; in allowing rampant corruption; in treating warnings with contempt rather than investigating them thoroughly; and trying to cover up losses by suppressing issuing of accounts and keeping the whole thing away from parliamentary scrutiny. When an MP produced a bag of rotten rice what was the reaction? PTP threatened to charge him with theft! And that sums it up nicely. Too much to hide perhaps?

 

The case is valid and given her total absence from meeting she should've chaired and lack of actions, the charge is correct - negligence.

 

Any politician or government has a duty to act as best they can - of course that doesn't always mean success. But willful negligence is another matter. And simply repeating the family mantra "I haven't done anything wrong" isn't an explanation.

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, yellowboat said:

Lock her up for negligence ?  Waste more money guarding her ?  Not sure what end her detention would serve.  It would just make her more of a martyr.  Community service would be better. 

 

Financial restitution, which they've already started, ban from politics, which she'll possibly not be to bothered about, and some form of suspended sentence and/or community service. 

 

Anything else would be out of step with the offence. But, the justice system here is just full of surprises.

[Deez]

1 hour ago, NCC1701A said:

after the civil war starts I hope Isan girls are allowed safe passage to Pattaya. And maybe a security "green" zone set up around Soi Six.

The "green" zone can be right next to the "happy" zone

[greenchair]

I just don't understand "why" if the relevant agencies knew there was an irregularity , that the head of the agency did not file a complaint with the prosecutor and send the person/persons to court. 

Every state agency has a legal department , and the duty to investigate and prosecute. 

False declarations, rice stolen, suppression of farmers rights, all a job for the office of anti corruption, police, prosecutor and the courts. 

I could understand if they tried to investigate /prosecute, and she interfered. But no. They sent her a memo and did not do their job. 

 

[YetAnother]

20 minutes ago, greenchair said:

that the head of the agency did not file a complaint with the prosecutor and send the person/persons to court.

afraid of the people in power at that time

[4MyEgo]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

You'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere in the world a PM who appoints herself to Chair meetings, of her government's flagship policy, and then never bothers to attend any of the meetings. Especially as some of the warnings were given by the World Bank, the IMF and Bloomberg - or do you think they're just more inconvenient bureaucrats covering their <deleted>?

 

The offense wasn't in implementing it. It was in being negligent in not bothering to ensure it was implemented effectively and efficiently; in allowing rampant corruption; in treating warnings with contempt rather than investigating them thoroughly; and trying to cover up losses by suppressing issuing of accounts and keeping the whole thing away from parliamentary scrutiny. When an MP produced a bag of rotten rice what was the reaction? PTP threatened to charge him with theft! And that sums it up nicely. Too much to hide perhaps?

 

The case is valid and given her total absence from meeting she should've chaired and lack of actions, the charge is correct - negligence.

 

Any politician or government has a duty to act as best they can - of course that doesn't always mean success. But willful negligence is another matter. And simply repeating the family mantra "I haven't done anything wrong" isn't an explanation.

It would appear that you didn't read her statement or failed to accept what she said she did to try and counter the problems.

 

There are plenty of PM's around the world that don;t attend meetings that they chair, nothing unusual to send someone else in their place.

 

I haven'y heard of anyone else being taken to the cleaners, just going for the head honcho, a witch hunt in my opinion, reminds me of another one some time back, sure they had the same surnames 555

[Srikcir]

42 minutes ago, greenchair said:

I just don't understand "why" if the relevant agencies knew there was an irregularity , that the head of the agency did not file a complaint with the prosecutor and send the person/persons to court. 

Taken a step further, the former Democrat PM and then current Democrat House Parliament member Abhisit was among those who warned Yingluck's regime of potential large government losses from the rice pledge program. If anyone had the political capital to file suit against Yingluck's rice pledge program, it was Abhisit.

Perhaps Abhisit was looking towards the bigger picture such as organizing overthrow of Yingluck's regime. A successful lawsuit wouldn't be a guarantee.

 

Or that there was really no crime per se that had been committed.

Now with the military junta regime, crimes against the overthrown elected regime needn't be statutory. Especially when the Constitution under which Yingluck's government operated is abolished.

[Ron19]

Anti government post and reply removed.

[halloween]

51 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

It would appear that you didn't read her statement or failed to accept what she said she did to try and counter the problems.

 

There are plenty of PM's around the world that don;t attend meetings that they chair, nothing unusual to send someone else in their place.

 

I haven'y heard of anyone else being taken to the cleaners, just going for the head honcho, a witch hunt in my opinion, reminds me of another one some time back, sure they had the same surnames 555

You're dead right.  She sent Chalerm who reported back there was no sign of irregularities. Case closed.

[greenchair]

1 hour ago, YetAnother said:

afraid of the people in power at that time

I fully agree with you ,  interfering with government  agencies and the judicial system would certainly be a crime. 

Oh, but she's not being accused of that, maybe you have some evidence that the rest of the country doesn't know about? ????

[greenchair]

41 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Taken a step further, the former Democrat PM and then current Democrat House Parliament member Abhisit was among those who warned Yingluck's regime of potential large government losses from the rice pledge program. If anyone had the political capital to file suit against Yingluck's rice pledge program, it was Abhisit.

Perhaps Abhisit was looking towards the bigger picture such as organizing overthrow of Yingluck's regime. A successful lawsuit wouldn't be a guarantee.

 

Or that there was really no crime per se that had been committed.

Now with the military junta regime, crimes against the overthrown elected regime needn't be statutory. Especially when the Constitution under which Yingluck's government operated is abolished.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Abhisit the one that started the scheme and cant irregularity be traced right back to the beginning of the programme. 

Why isn't he in court. 

Funnily enough, the people that were allegedly stealing and corrupting have not been to court yet ??? imagine if they all come up innocent. 

The strangest things go on in this country ??

[sawadee1947]

6 hours ago, ramrod711 said:

Lock her up! lock her up! A total failure as a PM, a shill for her brother and completely guilty of negligence. I have said it before, there does not seem to be any evidence of criminality but certainly negligence and that is what she is charged with.

I don't agree with you. But just in case you are right.........can you name ONE PM you delivered good work (except Thaksin)?

[Eric Loh]

She will be acquitted. The NACC took just 79 days to compile the charges and was totally inadequately investigated. That was the AG warning to the NACC but they ignored perhaps from junta pressure and file the charge. The court this time is free from political pressure and will acquit her. The former judge who said that was right that there is flimsy case against her. His comment was to cushion the expectation of the coup leaders. There will be lots of red faces here. 

[halloween]

4 minutes ago, greenchair said:

Please correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Abhisit the one that started the scheme and cant irregularity be traced right back to the beginning of the programme. 

Why isn't he in court. 

Funnily enough, the people that were allegedly stealing and corrupting have not been to court yet ??? imagine if they all come up innocent. 

The strangest things go on in this country ??

You are so wrong it's bloody hilarious - have you been watching Peace TV? the Democrat/Abhisit price guarantee scheme had very little in common with Thaksin's rice pledging scam. Introduced in 2001/2, it was a failure, plagued with corruption in its initial form and introduced unchanged by Yingluk.

 

"The first rice-pledging policy was introduced, three decades ago, during the ... In 2001/2, under the newly elected populist government of Thaksin Shinawatra, ...."

https://books.google.co.th/books?isbn=1317811674

[khunken]

4 minutes ago, sawadee1947 said:

I don't agree with you. But just in case you are right.........can you name ONE PM you delivered good work (except Thaksin)?

Yes, in my 20+ years here there was one - Chuan Leekpai. He wasn't perfect but, despite having to include Suthep & some of Samak's 'Cobra Faction' in his cabinet, he had to (& did) clear up the 1997 aftermath.

He, personally, wasn't corrupt unlike Thaksin whose venality far surpassed the few good things he did.

BTW I can't stand the Shin blood-suckers, but I disagree with charging YL with negligence as it's a waste of resources that could be deployed more usefully elsewhere.

 

[Eric Loh]

6 minutes ago, khunken said:

Yes, in my 20+ years here there was one - Chuan Leekpai. He wasn't perfect but, despite having to include Suthep & some of Samak's 'Cobra Faction' in his cabinet, he had to (& did) clear up the 1997 aftermath.

He, personally, wasn't corrupt unlike Thaksin whose venality far surpassed the few good things he did.

BTW I can't stand the Shin blood-suckers, but I disagree with charging YL with negligence as it's a waste of resources that could be deployed more usefully elsewhere.

 

Apologies for my ignorance but can you name a Chuan policy or policies that been praised and still practiced currently? I do know that his brother was charged for corruption and did a runner until the statute of limitation expired. Am I right? 

[halloween]

Just now, Eric Loh said:

Apologies for my ignorance but can you name a Chuan policy or policies that been praised and still practiced currently? I do know that his brother was charged for corruption and did a runner until the statute of limitation expired. Am I right? 

Certainly looks bad for someone when their "brother was charged for corruption and did a runner until the statute of limitation expired." How could you trust somebody like that?

[Eric Loh]

Just now, halloween said:

Certainly looks bad for someone when their "brother was charged for corruption and did a runner until the statute of limitation expired." How could you trust somebody like that?

Different time different stroke. Junta court carry less credibility.

[johng]

Karaboa did a song about Chaun Leekpai.
I just remember 1 line from it that says
"we love khun chuan leekpai,wherever ever he goes we go too."

[halloween]

Just now, Eric Loh said:

Different time different stroke. Junta court carry less credibility.

You forget who was in government at the time Eric, or is it different in the red version of history?

[Eric Loh]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

You forget who was in government at the time Eric, or is it different in the red version of history?

I do remember that Chuan was just a corrupted businessman not a popularly elected PM who was serving his second term much to the horror of the establishment.

[halloween]

Just now, Eric Loh said:

I do remember that Chuan was just a corrupted businessman not a popularly elected PM who was serving his second term much to the horror of the establishment.

So Chuan was a corrupt businessman and Thaksin was not? Really? how many outstanding court cases for corruption await Chuan?