South: 19 young men of Sabayoi football team and judiciary process diversion

This was late but just came out in Prachatai yesterday about the ruling from the court of the first instant. In conclusion, the court decided to believed that 19 mens are armed, they fought the state security force and they were killed during a justifiable operation and in self defense. The post-mortem investigation used in court confirm those young men had gun shot wounds, said to be, according to official, a result of law enforcement operation. The court said defendants are armed, they had attacked the police first and after the operation, officials and other ad hoc post mortem team, composing of doctor, administrative officers and others had taken photo of the young men with weapons and collected the weapons used by them

AHRC has another petition, also available at Rules of Lords and UPI Asia.

To reach this finding, the court had to ignore the facts. Some of the evidence it heard but omitted from its verdict included the testimony of a national human rights commissioner. She told the judges that her agency had uncovered nothing to prove that the dead men, aged 18 to 34, had been carrying weapons. Nor was there any discernible damage to the Sabayoi market police post that had supposedly been assaulted.

She also told the court that the victims’ profiles did not fit with the official account that they were violent radicals. A number of them were football players who had been preparing to go and ask a local politician for team sponsorship. Some had pregnant wives.

Perhaps, you may know that in Thailand, we arenot supposed to put too much trust in security officers. But it was clear who were listened to.

Isara news also report diversion of people who turned themselves in from normal judiciary process. The amendment of the law likely to be imposed after the National Security Council has approve the principle.

In case of a person turned him/herself in or an investigator considered that the person did it because of being misguided and that if the person could be normalized would benefit internal security, the investigator may proposed that the person be exempted from penalty under the Criminal Code. The court and the director [of Internal Security Affairs?] are authorized to approved the proposal.

The procedure would include up to six months “training” and other conditions set by the court. The person acquitted must agree to be trained and to follow the conditions. After the training and conditions are fulfilled, the right to sue the person in criminal charge will be dropped.

ทั้งนี้ กฎหมายความมั่นคง มาตรา 21 ระบุว่า “ภายในเขตพื้นที่ที่คณะรัฐมนตรีมีมติให้ กอ.รมน. ดำเนินการตามมาตรา 15 หากปรากฏว่าผู้ใดต้องหาว่าได้กระทำความผิดอันมีผลกระทบต่อความมั่นคงภายในราชอาณาจักรตามที่คณะรัฐมนตรีกำหนด แต่กลับใจเข้ามอบตัวต่อพนักงานเจ้าหน้าที่หรือเป็นกรณีที่พนักงานสอบสวนได้ดำเนินการสอบสวนแล้วปรากฏว่าผู้นั้นได้กระทำไปเพราะหลงผิดหรือรู้เท่าไม่ถึงการณ์และการเปิดโอกาสให้ผู้นั้นกลับตัวจะเป็นประโยชน์ต่อการรักษาความมั่นคงภายในราชอาณาจักร ในการนี้ให้พนักงานสอบสวนส่งสำนวนการสอบสวนของผู้ต้องหานั้น พร้อมทั้งความเห็นของพนักงานสอบสวนไปให้ผู้อำนวยการ
ในกรณีที่ผู้อำนวยการเห็นด้วยกับความเห็นของพนักงานสอบสวนให้ส่งสำนวนพร้อมความเห็นของผู้อำนวยการให้พนักงานอัยการเพื่อยื่นคำร้องต่อศาล หากเห็นสมควรศาลอาจสั่งให้ส่งผู้ต้องหานั้นให้ผู้อำนวยการเพื่อเข้ารับการอบรม ณ สถานที่ที่กำหนดเป็นเวลาไม่เกินหกเดือนและปฏิบัติตามเงื่อนไขอื่นที่ศาลกำหนดด้วยก็ได้
การดำเนินการตามวรรคสอง ให้ศาลสั่งได้ต่อเมื่อผู้ต้องหานั้นยินยอมเข้ารับการอบรมและปฏิบัติตามเงื่อนไขดังกล่าว
เมื่อผู้ต้องหาได้เข้ารับการอบรมและปฏิบัติตามเงื่อนไขที่ศาลกำหนดดังกล่าวแล้วสิทธินำคดีอาญามาฟ้องผู้ต้องหานั้นเป็นอันระงับไป”

PS Meaw is taking weekend off, so this blog will be counted as Saturday blog. My dog need a visit and we have merit making in the family.

Filed under: Security , deep south, internal security, song kla, violence in the south

Stay home and watch TV and travel (PADs VS Sanam Luang), too (update)

Just want to write something as a mental note before I will crash and shut down. It has been a good day spent working, eating, chatting, walking and thinking.

Checking web board to be blocked.. nothing new under the sun.
Checking just in search and seizure of bombs and assault rifles in the south.
Checking Chamlong’ s argument whether people should stay at home. And whether the real one was real. (This will not benefit PADs with series of lame argument by Sonthi against Sumet, Ditsathorn and whoever to come in the future)

Who are real?

People are real. There are more people that would not join any side and they will stay home, waiting for the election day and then exercise their right, to be discredited by elite.

Checking explosion in Afghanistan and rebels in Congo

I want to curl with a warm blanket, a book and decaffeinated tea. Go home and play with my dog.

And you can read them tomorrow.

By the way, just in: Manager’s PADs Planet Guide. It is a guide for people who don’t want to take any side and not a guide to join the rally but to “visit” it as a new sightseeing and street shopping venue of Bangkok. That must be a new strategy to take people out of home.

Yes, I went to both place at Sanam Luang and at PADs. At PADs there are many southern friendly restaurant that open late at night. However, the shopping part are rather unexciting and expensive. If you want to buy some t-shirts and plastic hands to clap along, chinese wallet, sunglasses and brand new rally t-shirt or new outfit, it is the place but not a must as there are many night/weekend markets that sale those stuff. Apart from the campaign related thing that you can only bought there, and many roadside food, the would not rate this place so highly. Beside, now vendor will have to be organized by PADs. They have A4 paper banner stating owner’s name and location. I don’t know whether any fee were collected but it is like thus creating the new PADs state, overlapping BMA.

May I take you to my favorite shopping complex. Sadly I don’t have my camera with me now (Bought for mom and my little bro took it).

You know, it is easy to go Sanam Luang. Most taxi will not refuse to go there. I was offered a free ride with peers from my apartment who actually, rent that taxi. Catch something that pass Khao Sarn, and bingo, you are there. Since most Anti-Dictatorship people will be busy finding larger venue to house 1x,xxx audience, Sanam Luang was now quite abandoned, but still you can find some talk before 11 pm.

Between the road that cut across the middle of the ground, that link the Supreme Court side to Thammasat U. side, you can find Esarn restaurant, 120% roadside. We recommend a somtam vendor that have “Sick of PADs” sticker on the display shelf. The old lady seller makes superb som tam, jerky pork, grilled checken and pre-made egg plant spicy salad ala soup makeuk, or bamboo shoot one as soup of the day Pick your drink around that area. my girl friend and I was surprised at the 70 Baht full course Isarn dinner for two women that ate a lot.

Other quick one-dish wonder are available over the place.

Massage and other services are available from feet to full body and that naughty bit massage for men only.

For the shopping part. Here are list of my shopping.

Vintage (15-20 yrs old) clothes, mostly for women. Go dig it 20-40 Baht for a blouse/skirt. 40-80 Baht to a really nice dress. Got a M&S white shirt for 30 Baht in very good condition. There is a lady that sell white shirt at Thammasat side, she has a cuffed men’s shirt at 30 Baht along with really nice white shirt items, I wish I could wear that.
New shorts, t- shirts are available.
Check the winter gear at not over 100 baht. If you would like to fine a cheap wool sweater to unravel it or for a felting project, look no further. Multi-purposed cargo vest is 20-40 baht each.
Brand new jeans, from factory 199-299 Baht, for men. Women’s jeans (used) are from 50-100 Baht. Expect to pay more for branded item. I got a 70s flare jeans for 50 Baht. Shorts (new) are from 69-100 Baht.
Bags and shoes,mostly used, some new. Spotted a pre-own SODA suede for 200 Baht
Metal detector: 2000 Baht (negotiable)
Sunglasses, new about 50-100, used 30-50 Baht
Iron rods, martial art gears: Several shop will sell them, they are rather less expensive that at thief market (Klong Thom), both new and used.

Facilities: BMA mobile toilet or use Thammasat’s at Faculty of Law, open until 10.30 or 11.00 pm. If you are lucky, there will be some tissue left. Also TU service is useful if you can negotiate with a seller to try an item if it fit. Several shops I went to offer an exchange to other item but no refund (would you dare ask for a refund for 20 Baht item?).

The place is dimly lid, for inspection or check accurate color, bring your own flashlight or buy cheap plastic one (29-59) Baht. Sleek, high-powered and “gadget”flash ones are from 199 Baht. Vendor s would start the business around 9.00 pm and packed up around 2.00 am-ish. However, they might be asked to stop prior to the funeral rite. The safe bet is to go on Fri or Sat night.

Security concern: Due to the construction and decoration of princess kalayani’s royal crematorium, the area is safe. No-one would hurl a bomb there. Night shift uniformed police patrol the venue occasionally. Since the anti-dictatorship people will be gathering at a stadium, there is no need for now for PADs revenge or third party.

Enjoy shopping.

Filed under: Political Sciences , anti PADs, Bangkok rally, leisure, PADs

Bombs in the City Politics

Nine people were injured and the resident of Charan Pakdithanakul was alsohit, but he was safe.

Bombs and small arms light weapons are my compulsory newspaper read growing up in Phetchaburi, no less. They are cheap, effective and even though you know who did it, it would be hard to trace the mastermind in court as most people who agreed to do it will confessed that no one involved, faced some jail term and have the families being taken care of or risked being silenced by the other group of gunmen. Thus, eliminating several tough opponents would still be the best deal. Think about less than 5000 Baht M16 or cheaper AK plus 400,000 to a million service fee in return to what one would gain from being able to take over local politics.

But that was my bannok background.

In the modernized protest, where the elimination does not warrant a smooth passage, and during a ‘human rights’ violation mimicry (sorry, there is no human right discourse/ regime when you think that two people, doing the same violation, are not deserved to be condemn in the same manner.) The simple mind mentality will think:

Only people who don’t like PADs will hurl the bombs at them

Sae Deang or Salang do not like PADs and Charan

They are, both of them or each, individually capable of obtaining bombs making material and do it

They must represent Anti dictatorship people to do it.

The city politics are not outspoken like the conclusion of bannok one, and the bannok start to get more complicated. Sae Daeng denied that he did not involved but the bomb, particularly illegal one need not to come from certain security authority. They can be “leaked” to anyone with sufficient compensation and connection.

Army specialist Maj-Gen Khattiya Sawasdipol, an outspoken anti-PAD activist, also denied any involvement in the bombing.

He said, however that it is now time for the PAD supporters to leave Government House. He added that he believes the PAD faces “a group of enemies” who are adopting guerrilla techniques.

Today is a bit messy, another man was found dead with gunshot wound at the back of metropolitan police bureau. He was identified as PADs supporter. Bangkok Post has more detail.

It would be difficult to think that the events were not from the anti-PADs, but take no haste in making decision to join the rally. Remember both event could be more manufactured as political, rather than highlighting what really happened and why.

Disathorn Vajarotai, Chairperson of the Rachapracahsamasai Foundation mentioned that people who loved the king should stay home or return home… he is real [rep?], he took his royal words… and he only knows he is with Nai Luang Party, an enormous party (emphasis added.) via Matichon.

ถ้ารักในหลวงให้อยู่ชุมพร ไม่ต้องไปที่อื่น ผมเคยพูดตลอดเวลาว่า รักในหลวงให้อยู่บ้าน รักในหลวงให้กลับบ้าน คุณไปแสดงพลังตรงนั้นไม่ได้เกิดประโยชน์อะไรเลย รังแต่จะทำให้เกิดความแตกแยก ผมกล้าพูดตรงนี้เพราะผมเป็นตัวจริงเสียงจริงนะครับ รับพระราชกระแสมาเองว่า พวกเราต้องขยาย ทำอย่างไรให้เขาทราบว่า เรามีหน้าที่และทำหน้าที่อะไร ผมไม่ได้เข้าข้างใครนะครับ ผมไม่รู้ว่าใครผิดใครถูก ผมรู้อย่างเดียวว่า ผมอยู่พรรคในหลวง และพรรคนี้ใหญ่โตมาก

Filed under: Political Sciences , PADs, salw

Respect

So the PAd think that there are lesser being in democratic food chain? They are not the first one and will not be the last one also. This include people that think that everything to the public should be watered down, censored, educated properly.

This is for them.

There will never be a really free and enlightened State, until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treat him accordingly. “On the Duty of Civil Disobedence” | Henry David Thoreau

Filed under: Political Sciences , New Politics, PADs, political theory

Republic of Thailand as virus

Virus attack? Home URL keeps changing to ‘republic of thailand’ how to get rid of it? tried AVG, spybot

Got this bugs? People’s Republic of Thailand (PRT)
Found it a couple of months ago in internet cafe on a PC regular browser I am a Mac. Thus I miss this kind of fun.

And I seriously thinking that if we were to think about republic as a virus, that need a host. Republic thoughts foster under the red host cells? Using this metaphor, would I underestimate the free republic supporters beyond the colour red? To lump people together under the same single host is very very unlikely and ugly, too. And there are many strains. Not only virus, worms, trojans… possibilities of cross breeding are endless. Yet, the viruses are not one.

And the ‘germs’ are neither red nor yellow. Thammasat metaphor give me a big laugh, Thammasat model where red and yellow are one blah blah blah.

Unfortunately the anti virus imposed on the system tried to link multiple strains together, creating underground culture and hybrid of viruses. Some are common cold and some could be deadly to the immune system.

The computer viruses did not spread on its own, they slowly infiltrated the system, subtly infused people with cryptic messages, validated by host cells’ action and inaction.

The red is not the only brand of virus manufactured. Too many viruses that make computer can not think and react critically will result in anti-virus. On the other hand, the anti-virus rise capacities of the new breeds of virus, worms, malwares, etc.

Probably whatever virus get into the system, your PC may need reformatting.

And you may, if you really get sick of it, change the operating system like me.

Linux? Mac?

Filed under: Political Sciences

Hang in there, stay safe and keep thinking

After facing the harsh pressure from Democrat, PADs and the Army, The Police, by Patcharawas ordered that the strict measure for such and such inappropriate content but this time no report of the websites, radio or TVs, and in prints to press a charge. In case of foreigners, deportation is added to the penalty (via Matichon) they may not report the webs to the public probably because of the surge of traffic generate by people who would like to see what it is really about.

So much to talk about staying within the politics.
Anyone with underground links in English?

Filed under: Political Sciences

Then and Now: A Reflection after Yud Saeng-Utai Seminar after Manthorpe’s Article

An article in the Economist,  another article in Vancouver Sun appeared in Prachatai webboard. As the country moving forwards, one of the key highlight was still finding “fingerprints” (in Jonathan Manthorpe’s article ) and fine prints in politics sprinkled with the “golden” touch. 

Such fingerprints was perceived to be a unique blessing in the public space. Well, may be even a rubber stamp. In the latest constitution, there is no stipulated cause for political neutrality, non-partisan or non-intervention.Well, what we believed is not as simple as it may seem. Check the constitution out before you continue. Do you see anything like ‘above politics?’

I am not very interested in wording in constitution and always skip The “King” part until lately, when I attended the Yud Saeng-Utai memorial seminar. I rely on my own note-taking of the discussion and the transcript of Dr. Suthachai Yimprasert (via Prachatai). There are other two part in Thai, which were also very interesting by Natthapol Jaijing  and Dr. Vorachet Phakhirat(sorry if I transliterate names and  wrong ). I ueged everybody who can read Thai to read them, if they did not read it already. It was one of the best seminar I attended this year.

It was not the succession per se , combining the succession, the succession law (palace law) and the change on constitution discussed in the seminar, it is apparent that so many things are missing from the original intention of the first constitution. No, don’t look at the first one in nostalgic and dewy eyes, look at it as a benchmark that should be excelled or expelled [?] over time.

Taking succession law reflected in the constitution  as an example, allow my seminar note to take you to the several changes in the constitution that I have overlooked.

Wording and Rewording

The temporary constitution was proposed on 24 June BE 2475, I remember because it was silently celebrated somewhere and not as a glossy national agenda. Whenever I watch V for Vendetta, I rephased it. “Remember, remember, the 24th of June. ” The temporary constitution was proposed by the People’s Party. The temporary and the first constitution represented an ideology tug of war between the then “new” and “old” politics.

” ‘พระมหากษัตริย์ใต้รัฐธรรมนูญ’ จึงหายไปและเรียกเป็น ‘ประชาธิปไตยที่มีพระมหากษัตริย์เป็นประมุขแทน’ ” [the king under the constitution disappeared and was replace with Democracy with the King as the head of the state]” At the beginning of the first draft of the constitution, he noted a tug of war between being the king “under” and “by” the constitution [Suthachai used 'ใต้' and 'ตาม' respectively] was the point of negotiation between Rama VII and the constitution drafter.

The temporary constitution proposed by Pridi Banomyong envisioned in Section 2: “มาตรา 2 ผู้ใช้อำนาจแทนราษฎร คือ พระมหากษัตริย์ สภาผู้แทนราษฎร คณะกรรมการราษฎร และศาล.” [Note: To make it easier to compare with the current 2007 version. The 2007 version will be in black and if any details were not appear in the temporary constitution, it will be crossed out. The content of the temporary constitution will be in blue and please excuse my translation] [The King as Head of StateThe sovereign power shall be exercised such power through the King, the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers the People's Council [คณะกรรมการราษฎร] and the Courts. in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.]

Change in Succession Law

Section 4 of the  temporary constitution stipulated that [Section 4]Section 22. Subject to section 23, the succession to the Throne shall be in accordance with the Palace Law on Succession, B.E. 2467, with the National Assembly’s approval. [ด้วยความเห็นชอบของสภาผู้แทนราษฎร]

The Amendment of the Palace Law on Succession, B.E. 2467 shall be the prerogative of the King. At the initiative of the King, the Privy Council shall draft the Palace Law Amendment and shall present it to the King for His consideration. When the King has already approved the draft Palace Law amendment and put His signature thereto, the President of the Privy Council shall notify the President of the National Assembly for informing the National Assembly. The President of the National Assembly shall countersign the Royal Command. The Palace Law Amendment shall come into force upon its publication in the Government Gazette.

In BE 2475 constitution, the National Assembly must approved a succession. However, Dr. Suthachai noticed that the BE 2540 and BE 2550 constitution did/does not have such clause ["กษัตริย์ที่จะดำเนินการตามกฎเกณฑ์นี้พระองค์แรกคือ รัชกาลที่ 8 ตอนนั้นเราจะเห็นหนังสือพิมพ์พาดหัวว่า “สภาล่างเลือกพระองค์เจ้าอนันต์” ต่อมารัชกาลที่9 คือพระองค์ต่อมาที่สภาผู้แทนราษฎรประชุมคืนวันที่ 9 มิถุนายน 2489 หลังจากรัชกาลที่ 8 สวรรคตแล้ว และได้เลือกพระองค์เจ้าภูมิพลขึ้นเป็นกษัตริย์ ดังนั้น ทั้งสองพระองค์ผ่านกระบวนการที่เลือกโดยสภา แต่เท่าที่ทราบในรัฐธรรมนูญ 2540 และ2550 ไม่มีแล้ว"]

Development over the succession law:

•  BE 2492: Succession shall be in accordance with the Palace Law, BE 2467, which cannot be amended.
• BE 2540 and 2550:  Amendment of the Palace law will by pass National Assembly approval. Note that the National Assembly will be “informed.” of the draft succession law approved by the King. See crossed out content in BE 2550 constitution above.

Dr. Suthachai also pointed out changes in the temporary constitution (24 June BE 2475) and the first constitution (10 December 2475) on several points on “The King.”

The missing Section 11 of the BE 2475 constitution does not resurface in the ‘most’ democratic constitution in BE 2540 or in BE 2550. It was something I vaguely remembered, citing for exams or I was told some time back, but it did not existed in BE 2540 constitution.  

	BE 2475 (not an exact wording)	BE 2489	BE 2550
Sovereign Power	The sovereign power “comes from” the people.    Suthatchai noted that the temporary constitution said the sovereign power “belong” to the people.	Not discussed	Section 3. The sovereign power belongs to the Thai people. The King as Head of State shall exercise such power through the National Assembly, the Council of Ministers and the Courts in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.
The King	Section 3: The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated.		Section 8: The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated.       No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action.
	Section 4: The King is a Buddhist and Upholder of religions.		Section 9: The King is a Buddhist and Upholder of religions.
	Section 5: The King holds the position of Head of the Thai Armed Forces.		Section 10: The King holds the position of Head of the Thai Armed Forces.
	Section 10: Whenever the King is absent from the Kingdom or unable to perform His functions for any reason whatsoever, the King may appoint a person or a group of person as Regent(s), by the Nation Assembly’s approval [TH by Suthachai โดยความเห็นชอบของสภาผู้แทน ราษฎร]		Section 18: Whenever the King is absent from the Kingdom or unable to perform His functions for any reason whatsoever, the King may appoint a person as Regent. In this regard, the President of the National Assembly shall countersign the Royal Command therefor.     [TH text: ให้ประธานรัฐสภาเป็นผู้ลงนาม รับสนองพระบรมราชโองการ]
	Section 11: The King shall be above politics. [This part was not discussed further in the seminar]	Section 11: The King shall be above the politics.     Revoked.	[No such stipulation that the King shall be above politics in the Constitution.]

Filed under: Political Sciences

To have my fair share of it.

The constitution court post a warrant for PPP to testify in party dissolution case. Might be a small win for some, however, what really count is voters.

The new party is said to be established and number of executives reduced to avoid them from being banned from official political activities and this did not stop any of the banned TRT member from their public speech. They could even do more under the less scrutinizing eyes from organizations said to watch politicians. They did not have to report their wealth or be accountable to anything but their interests. Welcome to the jungle.

Ethic was a deciding matter for independent bodies to investigate politicians, but ethic, on the other hand, for voters never mean a squeaky clean person. Who care if they lavish some budget for the people and save some interests for themselves. Enough of telling some to be sufficient. Everybody want wealth generation parties. Not only people in Isarn but also business sectors. They love wealth, mega projects and deal with government,too. Sufficiency was a new green or a cloth bags, a marketing campaign that did not sound right because desire to purchase and to be wealthy is not bad at all, particularly for the new lower middle class. The thai ideal of being in the same par as your neighbors, you colleagues or friends doesn’t sound like limiting one’s appearance to one’s budget.

People who pick wealth generation party or coalition know more than the superficial glow of ‘enough.’ Why have enough when you can have more, from tax payers’ money. Why not vote for any party that will bring wealth and development. Wealth is good. I have never seen any regular wealthy people give up wealth. They may donate some of their money, but they don’t give up. So that must be good. Let the politicians corrupt, well, every politicians are corrupted, but do not forget the share for the people.

Populism is the way to mutually benefit people who need some facelift. People who claimed they do not have to are those whose wealth are beyond populist policy influence. They did not have to rely on free buses and trains or worry that no one will guarantee their loans.

Filed under: Political Sciences

Guilty. Fine print read: “PM” should be a good example.

Come on! (Read it long, loud and clear like ‘camwaaaaaan’ )

I am sure that the details from Thaksin’s verdict would be differ in various translations. The official one will be sent to the UK and ‘his’ take on the verdicts will be deliver ‘worldwide.’

In detail, the Nation has published the voting records in several points of the case:

Voting on key points of the historic verdict

9-0 – The 1999 anti-corruption act is effective.

9-0 – Appointment of Assets Examination Committee is constitutional with authority to investigate cases.

9-0 – Financial Institutions Development Fund, the land seller, is a government agency.

6-3 – The prime minister has oversight of FIDF.

5-4 – Thaksin Shinawatra violated the 1999 anti-corruption act.

7-2 – Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra is not guilty and her arrest warrant will be cancelled.

7-2 – The Ratchadaphisek land plot and transaction money will not be confiscated.

9-0 – Thaksin is sentenced to a two-year jail term.

The majority agreed that it was an oversight trade. Notice that narrow gap in corruption case? Summary by the Bangkok Post below.

The court’s ’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions ruled 5-to-4 that Mr Thaksin was guilty of conflict of interest by helping his wife get a sweet, discounted price for her purchase of 33 rai of land on Thiam Ruam Mit Road in the Ratchadaphisek business district.

The deal went through while Mr Thaksin was prime minister, through an auction run by the Bank of Thailand’s Financie[sic.] Development Fund (FIDF) five years ago.

“Thaksin violated the article of the constitution on conflict of interest, as he was then prime minister and head of government, and was supposed to work for the benefit of the public,” one judge said, reading the verdict. “He is sentenced to two years in jail.”

The Nation has the other summary, this one with reasons why he will not be given a suspended sentence.

Thaksin was found guilty of breaching Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act by aiding his wife Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra win a bid for a state-owned land on Ratchadaphisek Road in 2003.

The judges voted 8-1 to rule Thaksin guilty.

The nine judges handling the case said that as Thaksin, who fled to London in August, was then a prime minister and had failed to set an example of good governance and honesty, he will not be given a suspended sentence.

The verdict cannot be appealed under the law governing the court’s division.

“The first defendant held the position of prime minister and had been given trust to administer the state for the highest benefit of the state and the people. But the first defendant ended up breaking the law although, as head of government, he should have set a good example, been honest and made it evident and behaved with good political ethics … so he should not be given a suspended sentence,” the judges concluded. Emphasis added.

Seem like being a good example and ethic is a key point. Yet, the key point that he was guilty of corruption by using his political position to benefit a family member is rather, base on voting record, controversial. A beneficiary of an oversight trading, when not a political title holders, are not acquitted in this specific court.

The fine print will be enlarged, but people always do not trust that politicians will be good example. They would superficially remain good example, when people like them and when not investigated. The ruling will take political officials corruption to the next level.

People will not care if politicians corrupt. The local knowledge of Thai[?] people know that power corrupts, politicians corrupt, and they do not care if the corruption is not ethical. Ethic and preferences are clearly separated.

Filed under: Political Sciences , corruption, Ratchadapisek land case, Thaksin polit

Short and sweet: for an alternative views

Finally I found a link for Prachatouch online, which should be the other point to counter argument the manager.

And here is a not quote of the day:” they do things for themselves. “

Interestingly, the website also announced that the red shirts will joint the rally at rachamakala stadium onn 1 November. They also recommended former ‘forbidden books.’

Filed under: Political Sciences