Hunt for fugitive former prime minister Yingluck focuses on six countries

[ginjag]

3 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Of course the protests were not subsiding, they were never for something noble as "protecting the constitution" as Suthep initally claimed, they had just one goal, taking power without the Thai electorate having a say. He even wanted power handed over to him and his buddies, so they could change the constitution, the alternative was a coup which was eventually staged. 

 

I am not a pro "Shin" poster, that is just your childish mind playing tricks on you. I have seen a blatant attempt to sidetrack the Thai electorate, on the premises that they are uneducated and continue to elect corrupt politicians. The people doing the claim are equally corrupt, if not more so, as their actions did not have support from the majority of the electorate. 

 

The way Suthep and co disrupted the general election was a shameful display of exactly what I am talking about here. Of course he and his buddies are still free men, funny how you are so fanatic when it comes to prosecuting alleged "red criminals"  but remain silent when the other side breaks the law for all of us to see. 

 

Right or wrong, I have no problem with people being disposed from office because they misbehaved, I do have a huge problem with people trying to sidestep the electorate under dubious reasons. 

 

The UK will grant her assylum, there is no doubt about it, whether or not she actually goes there is anyone's guess.

I am not a pro Military poster but the times I told you you never believed.  So why should anyone believe you are not a quote " Pro Shin poster"  ??

[sjaak327]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Are you an expert on UK Asylum law?

 

The UK welcomes billionaires, without a doubt. Whilst the Thai government don't make a formal extradition request they won't consider it. If they do then they will decide based on their rules. They may well decide to grant asylum especially as finance will never be a problem!

Unless the Home Office poke their nose in for political reasons.

Oh I am certainly not an expert on UK Asylum laws. Howerver I doubt she would not be welcome there, and I am almost certain they would never consider extraditing her. The circumstances are just not right. That is, with the provision that she will be declared guilty next month, which I believe she will be. 

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

It is only legal, because the person concerned made it legal retroactively... And you call the Shins corrupt ? Thanks for the laugh..

 

He came to power through a coup. Not the first and maybe not the last. But the international community, whose opinions you seem to judge yourself an expert on, don't seem to think that makes him illegal?

 

Or would you like to prove otherwise?

[sjaak327]

3 minutes ago, ginjag said:

I am not a pro Military poster but the times I told you you never believed.  So why should anyone believe you are not a quote " Pro Shin poster"  ??

Where do you see me claiming they are not corrupt ? However facts are facts, Yingluck calling that election was in full accordance with the 2007 constitution, and as Jag pointed out, approved by the highest constitutional power. You could blame her for some things, but not this.

[sjaak327]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

He came to power through a coup. Not the first and maybe not the last. But the international community, whose opinions you seem to judge yourself an expert on, don't seem to think that makes him illegal?

 

Or would you like to prove otherwise?

I cannot speak for the international community. However the cries to return to democracy could hardly be described as an endorsement for the regime. Unless of course your bias plays tricks on you..

[HHTel]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

thousands-of-billions-baht damage to the national budget.

That's a big jump from the speculated 500 billion.

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

Oh I am certainly not an expert on UK Asylum laws. Howerver I doubt she would not be welcome there, and I am almost certain they would never consider extraditing her. The circumstances are just not right. That is, with the provision that she will be declared guilty next month, which I believe she will be. 

 

They currently welcome anyone with very large amounts of wealth; and she have very very large amounts. Easy to get through the immigration hoops with wealth.

 

You are however wrong. If they receive a formal extradition request, they will process it in accordance with the law and it will be considered in accordance with the law. What they will decide is speculation. But they will follow the correct procedure.

 

Hard for her to be found anything but guilty given what's been reported.

[lvr181]

"Authorities" are like chooks (poultry) running round with their heads cut off! 

[sjaak327]

2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

They currently welcome anyone with very large amounts of wealth; and she have very very large amounts. Easy to get through the immigration hoops with wealth.

 

You are however wrong. If they receive a formal extradition request, they will process it in accordance with the law and it will be considered in accordance with the law. What they will decide is speculation. But they will follow the correct procedure.

 

Hard for her to be found anything but guilty given what's been reported.

I never said they won't follow the procedure, I said they will not consider extraditing her. Yes they will handle the formal request, but don't expect them to actually extradite her. All in the name of diplomacy or smoke and mirrors. 

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

I cannot speak for the international community. However the cries to return to democracy could hardly be described as an endorsement for the regime. Unless of course your bias plays tricks on you..

 

I'm not biased, that's your descent into childish argument.

 

Of course they all, well the democratic ones at least, call for a return to democracy. And possible apply unreported diplomatic pressure and encouragements to do so.

Not sure China, Russia, and a few others would be particularly bothered.

 

Only by return to democracy, they hope perhaps for real democracy. As do we all.

[ginjag]

2 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Where do you see me claiming they are not corrupt ? However facts are facts, Yingluck calling that election was in full accordance with the 2007 constitution, and as Jag pointed out, approved by the highest constitutional power. You could blame her for some things, but not this.

Because you defend near everything she did, whether it be shopping when she should be chairing, near always in denial about her abuse of power, When tablets were bought and she held up a Samsung then bought Chinese and only bought a third----pre election stuff,  Amnesty 3am morning to rush a vote through ??  I never remember you saying these things were out of order..........so the point being where  do we see you saying they are as bent as a hairpin.

[sjaak327]

2 minutes ago, ginjag said:

Because you defend near everything she did, whether it be shopping when she should be chairing, near always in denial about her abuse of power, When tablets were bought and she held up a Samsung then bought Chinese and only bought a third----pre election stuff,  Amnesty 3am morning to rush a vote through ??  I never remember you saying these things were out of order..........so the point being where  do we see you saying they are as bent as a hairpin.

I dare you to find one post (1) where I defend her shopping, her purchase of tablets ?

 

I did indeed think that she had the right to propose the amnesty bill, and I believe it would have done more to reconciliation than anything this administration has done so far.  Of course, that amnesty as proposed, would have benefited every politician on both sides and was only for past crimes. 

 

The current amnesty enjoyed by the NCPO is benefiting precisous few and even covers future crimes, and introduced without any electoral mandate. Where is the outrage about that ?

[Baerboxer]

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

I never said they won't follow the procedure, I said they will not consider extraditing her. Yes they will handle the formal request, but don't expect them to actually extradite her. All in the name of diplomacy or smoke and mirrors. 

 

You can never assume anything with law courts. Especially in such cases. Their is a strong probability that they'd decline given the government is still not a democratically elected one. However, there is always a possibility they could decide that's not material to the context of the case.

 

But she has the wealth to go through all the appeals, including, at the moment, the ECCHR. So whilst it might cost her she would probably get to stay.

 

But all that is based on them actually requesting extradition, if that's where she is. Nothing to say she's there and nothing to say they will and how long it might take them to do.

[HHTel]

9 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

They currently welcome anyone with very large amounts of wealth; and she have very very large amounts. Easy to get through the immigration hoops with wealth.

 

You are however wrong. If they receive a formal extradition request, they will process it in accordance with the law and it will be considered in accordance with the law. What they will decide is speculation. But they will follow the correct procedure.

 

Hard for her to be found anything but guilty given what's been reported.

Usually decided by the law in the 'requested' country.  If the conviction in Thailand is not recognised by the country she is in, then extradition is highly unlikely.

 

[GoldenTriangle]

7 hours ago, catman20 said:

cant believe how these people get away with it, if both of them were a ordinary criminals they get them in no time with the help of Interpol. or come to that being such high profile people did they not get recognized at any of the boarders when leaving the country? and we all knew she would be on her toes, it runs in the family.

"These people"? Just happen to be the last 2 leaders that were actually elected by a majority and would be elected again.

[sjaak327]

13 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

I'm not biased, that's your descent into childish argument.

 

Of course they all, well the democratic ones at least, call for a return to democracy. And possible apply unreported diplomatic pressure and encouragements to do so.

Not sure China, Russia, and a few others would be particularly bothered.

 

Only by return to democracy, they hope perhaps for real democracy. As do we all.

So it is ok for you to call me a "shin" supporter, and not ok for me to accuse you of being biased ? Your posts certainly seem to indicate you have a strong bias. At the very least a strong bias against anything the Shinawatra family has done, even if they actually follow the law to the letter, as was the case with the election that was called.

 

As to return to a real democracy, the "approved" constitution has ensured Thailand will not return to a real democracy for decades to come (unless they find a way to change the constitution without the army staging yet another coup...) And.. that was precisely the reason for Suthep's demonstration and the subsequent coup !

Edited August 30, 2017 by sjaak327

[binjalin]

1 minute ago, sjaak327 said:

I dare you to find one post (1) where I defend her shopping, her purchase of tablets ?

 

I did indeed think that she had the right to propose the amnesty bill, and I believe it would have done more to reconciliation than anything this administration has done so far.  Of course, that amnesty as proposed, would have benefited every politician on both sides and was only for past crimes. 

 

The current amnesty enjoyed by the NCPO is benefiting precisous few and even covers future crimes, and introduced without any electoral mandate. Where is the outrage about that ?

Why all this talk about shopping?  it's is mere deflection, one must infer, from the main 'game'. For that is what it is, a game. It amuses me no end to hear of the criticism of the attempt at amnesty yet the deathly silence for the governments success in appointing such an amnesty for ALL their transgressions, past, present and future. Surely that is of far more consequence?  

[maxcorrigan]

5 hours ago, ldiablo72 said:

" Prayut said Thailand did not contact the United Kingdom – where Yingluck is speculated to have sought political asylum – as he doubted she would qualify for that status."

She was overthrown by a military coup. If anyone qualifies for political asylum it's Yingluck.

She would be welcome in the Uk, the Thai Emabasy is London The big cheese in the Embassy is a red supporter and was ensconced apparently by Thaksin, so if the UK asked about YL they would get positive results, pertaining to her asylum application!

[binjalin]

1 minute ago, maxcorrigan said:

She would be welcome in the Uk, the Thai Emabasy is London The big cheese in the Embassy is a red supporter and was ensconced apparently by Thaksin, so if the UK asked about YL they would get positive results, pertaining to her asylum application!

Indeed, dear fellow, and the HM government would not even consider deporting a political fugitive from a military regime.  And THAT, dear posters, is a fact like it or not.

[Baerboxer]

Just now, sjaak327 said:

So it is ok for you to call me a "shin" supporter, and not ok for me to accuse you of being biased ? Your posts certainly seem to indicate you have a strong bias. At the very least a strong bias against anything the Shinawatra family has done, even if they actually follow the law to the letter, as was the case with the election that was called.

 

As to return to a real democracy, the "approved" constitution has ensured Thailand will not return to a real democracy for decades to come (unless they find a way to change the constitution without the army staging yet another coup...)

 

So it's ok for you to accuse other of being childish and biased but you of course are always mature, fair and balanced?

 

I have no bias per se. She followed the law in calling the election. Shame she didn't make sure the law and parliamentary procedure was followed when she allowed the Amnesty Bill to be amended without following procedure to favor her brother; or her MP's to illegally vote for their absent colleagues; or illegally not allowing debate time; or illegally sending the opposition MP's home before changing the voting time etc etc etc etc. But as she rarely attending parliament she never really knew what was going on. The minions just acted as instructed.

 

Are you really trying to claim the Shiniwattra family are law abiding citizens who always act lawfully? Try checking just how many have convictions for starters. 

 

Do you think a situation where a criminal was allowed to pay a salary to the MP's of his family's political party to do his bidding real democracy? Note that PTP, whilst supporting an elected Senate, were against elected provincial governors preferring to appoint cronies. 

 

 

[ginjag]

16 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

I dare you to find one post (1) where I defend her shopping, her purchase of tablets ?

 

I did indeed think that she had the right to propose the amnesty bill, and I believe it would have done more to reconciliation than anything this administration has done so far.  Of course, that amnesty as proposed, would have benefited every politician on both sides and was only for past crimes. 

 

The current amnesty enjoyed by the NCPO is benefiting precisous few and even covers future crimes, and introduced without any electoral mandate. Where is the outrage about that ?

Your silence on her wrong doings tells me all,  AmNASTY was for her brother  really  true or not  ??

[Baerboxer]

11 minutes ago, binjalin said:

Why all this talk about shopping?  it's is mere deflection, one must infer, from the main 'game'. For that is what it is, a game. It amuses me no end to hear of the criticism of the attempt at amnesty yet the deathly silence for the governments success in appointing such an amnesty for ALL their transgressions, past, present and future. Surely that is of far more consequence?  

 

Indeed. But the Amnesty Bill was botched in it's implementation which drew attention to it and allowed focus on the version that was designed to ensure one man was whitewashed. And many non Yellow shirts reacted badly to that. Whereas the Junta slipped their complete blanket Amnesty through, for past, present and future, without really much of a ripple in comparison.

The real issue is that no one should be above the law. But then you also need a robust justice system to enforce that.

[Bill Miller]

As sort of an aside to the debate is INTERPOL likely to get very excited about pursuing somebody who may or may not, as I have not heard a verdict yet, be officially guilty of negligence, which was the formal charge?
It DOES sound rather political, and I do not doubt she would be eligible for asylum in any of a number of nations.

 

[Baerboxer]

18 minutes ago, HHTel said:

Usually decided by the law in the 'requested' country.  If the conviction in Thailand is not recognised by the country she is in, then extradition is highly unlikely.

 

 

Correct. It's not the conviction but the crime. They could freeze the verdict if they wanted to and apply for extradition on the grounds she jumped bail. The country's law she's in will govern. The offense she is accused of must be a crime under their law. If so, then they will look at the case and verdict and arguments put forward by her defense team. If they decide she jumped bail to escape a verdict because she knew she was guilty, then they will consider other reasons why she shouldn't be extradited. A county being run by a military Junta, technically still under martial law, which deposed the caretaker government she once headed, would not be seen as the most impartial and fair place to send her to!

 

 

[Baerboxer]

4 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

As sort of an aside to the debate is INTERPOL likely to get very excited about pursuing somebody who may or may not, as I have not heard a verdict yet, be officially guilty of negligence, which was the formal charge?
It DOES sound rather political, and I do not doubt she would be eligible for asylum in any of a number of nations.

 

 

She jumped bail. That's enough to request an Interpol notice.

[observer90210]

One must admit, that this chick is really a fine hottie!!...with or without her potential scams!!

 

And how about starting to concentrate on hunting first the redbull "boss" cop-killer?

 

However, Thailand is gaining fast and good experience in letting high profile suspects flee it's country. The world headquarters of Interpol should be shifted to Thailand...it will save them time when having to hunt them down later ....

 

But please...please..people must understand...all the Thai Immigration Police are too busy harassing or delaying tourists and expat farangs at immigration booths or at local immigration offices on Visa issues (that can lead to tea money)...so no time to check on high ranking Thai suspects who flee...

 

 

[Bill Miller]

1 minute ago, Baerboxer said:

 

She jumped bail. That's enough to request an Interpol notice.

Not what I asked.
Is INTERPOL likely to expend much effort and resource pursuing a bail jumper or non convicted negligent person?
We have seen what vigor the RTP and Interpol have expended on the Red Bull case, e.g.

[sjaak327]

15 minutes ago, ginjag said:

Your silence on her wrong doings tells me all,  AmNASTY was for her brother  really  true or not  ??

No, it would have benefited the other side too. That was how the bill was proposed. I deal in facts, not suspicions. Yes it is probably save to say that the main target indeed was Thaksin, but the facts were it did not only benefit Thaksin.

 

Now why do you not comment on the NCPO's amnesty, after all, the amnesty YL proposed never actually made it through, courtesy of a working democratic system, yet the NCPO amnesty is a reality, courtesy of the abolishment of said democracy. 

 

Dying to hear the answer to that one, but someone I think it will remain silent. 

[Baerboxer]

Just now, Bill Miller said:

Not what I asked.
Is INTERPOL likely to expend much effort and resource pursuing a bail jumper or non convicted negligent person?
We have seen what vigor the RTP and Interpol have expended on the Red Bull case, e.g.

 

Interpol don't pursue or arrest anyone. They are an information exchange. Google and read if your're interested.

 

I don't think Interpol can be blamed in anyway for the lack of progress on the Red Bull boy's case. The RTP were incredibly slow in completing the necessary request and have only asked for a blue notice.

[edramoso]

Find her with your eyes not with your mouth.