Thread: A Judicial Process that Cannot Be Regarded as Legitimate

the following is from the blogworld ..........................

I'm interested to see what holes can be found in it ?

A Judicial Process that Cannot Be Regarded as Legitimate
Pravit Rojanaphruk
Thu, 25/02/2010

What should be done if the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders find ousted and convicted former premier Thaksin Shinawatra to be guilty of corruptions on Friday February 26?

The court should then returns the Bt76 billion assets frozen since Septmeber 2006 coup to Thaksin and his family because the whole process from the staging of the coup on the eve of 19 September 2006, the appointment of the Asset Examination Committee (AEC) by the military junta and so on, was illegitimate - disregard of whether-Thaksin may in fact be corrupt or not.

Those concerns about the state of Thai politics and society today must try to look at the big picture and avoid compartmentalised thinking that deals with the controversial assets case per se without recognising how the case came to be.

Come Friday February 26, the court will have to try its best to explain beyond reasonable doubt (and make it accessible to less-educated public) on whether Thaksin indeed abused his power to benefit the business empire of his family or not. But more important is the need for the Supreme Court to take the opportunity to severe any linkages with the 2006 putsch which have resulted in the destruction of the due process of law, amongst others.

A group of generals and lower ranking soldiers armed themselves with weapons to overthrow a government and tear down the constitution cannot be legitimate and it's now up to the court on Friday to clearly demonstrate that they will no longer merely act as a vessel for anyone to ursurped power and legitimise themselves, no matter how well-intended the coup makers may claim to be.

The court should rise above the occasion (although it's rather late and most unlikely at this stage given that they have earlier accepted the case as legitimate) to see the bigger picture and recognise that two wrongs cannot make a single thing right and admit that the whole process emanating from the coup is illegtimate and wrong.

Because of that, the Bt76 wealth must be returned to Thaksin by default. In fact, the whole trial cannot even be regarded as legitimate and the court should not even have taken up the case into the judicial process as it lacks even a single iota of legitimacy.

This doesn't necessarily make Thaksin innocent by default, however, but by returning the massive sum to Thaksin by default, the court will be able to demonstrate its unwilling to merely submit itself to any future coup makers who wish to put cases into the judicial system by force - that is, by staging a coup against their enemy and setting up the AEC and so on.

Such move will not only reduce the temptation to stage future coup but will be act as a strong deterrence to any attempts by elements within both the yellow-shirt People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) and the red-shirt Democratic Alliance Against Dictatorship (DAAD) who may seek to ignore the rule of law.

Such move will constitute a strong message sent to the army that future coup makers cannot expect to rely on the supreme court to simply legitimise them simply because they forcefully tear up a constitution, overthrow a "corrupt" government and put "legal" cases against an ex-premier whom they believed to be corrupt.

People must also be reminded of the ironic fact that coup makers such as Gen. Sonthi Boonrakalin still walk around town a "respectable" free man and even headed a small political party while enjoying prestige "accorded" by most in the mainstream mass media as if he has never committed a crime.

Red shirts who genuienly aspire for a democratic Thailand must recognise that simply because Thaksin was a victim of the 2006 coup doesn't make him necessariily a clean and uncorrupt politician by default. If after reading the verdict on Friday, they found Thaksin to be corrupt beyond doubt then they should have the courage to admit it.

As for yellow shirts, especially those who still claim to be genuinely for democracy, perhaps it's time to also admit that outright or tacit support for military coup is undemocratic and will only be democratically regressive and to finally accept that the case against Thaksin put up by the coup makers was illegitimate. They should thus be willing to admit that because of this, Thaksin's wealth should be returned by default, even if he may have been proven to be corrupt by evidences on Friday.

Thai society today pays too much attention to revering and demonising a single individual, be it Thaksin or others. The society is filled with strong passion and hatred and at times, people no longer see or think about the bigger picture.

If the court do not accept that the whole process since the coup was a fraud, red-shirts will continue to question whether law scrutinising potentially-corrupt people are being applied equally or not especially on old elite group.

The opportunity to weaken this vicious cycle of military coup is here upon us. Right after the coup, the court may feel they had no choice as the whole case was set up by armed men im uniform. Now that the military junta are no longer running the country, people will be waiting to hear what the court has to say about the big picture that dates back to the eve of September 2006 and how it is relevant to Friday's controversial case.

prachatai.com

what a load of crap and non-sense,

thanxs bf , just the reply I expected from you

glad I didn't disappoint then

there are so many circular arguments in that piece, I am not sure why you posted it

The court should then returns the Bt76 billion assets frozen since Septmeber 2006 coup to Thaksin and his family because the whole process from the staging of the coup on the eve of 19 September 2006, the appointment of the Asset Examination Committee (AEC) by the military junta and so on, was illegitimate - disregard of whether-Thaksin may in fact be corrupt or not.

at what stage did the illegitimate become legitimate ?

the question of legitimacy is not related to the notion of democracy

for example a dictatorship can legitimize any act it deems to be appropriate, including mass murder. Basically the authority have the final say into what is legitimate or not legitimate.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

there are so many circular arguments in that piece, I am not sure why you posted it

I think there was a fairly strong hint at the top of the post.

Originally Posted by Mid

I'm interested to see what holes can be found in it ?

Too subtle for you, BF?

the question of legitimacy is not related to the notion of democracy

au contraire , there will never be democracy without legitimacy , the point the article you so quickly summarily dismissed makes .

Originally Posted by DrB0b

I think there was a fairly strong hint at the top of the post.

well like I said, if it was that obvious even for mid, not sure why it was posted

Originally Posted by Mid

au contraire , there will never be democracy without legitimacy ,

??? I think you are confused here, democracy and legitimacy are two different notions and unrelated to each other

not at all , what your promoting and have been all along is an illegitimate democracy

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by Mid

Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij announced that the Revenue Department would exercise its right to seek the court's permission for the confiscation of the Shinawatra family's Bt72 billion proceeds from Shin Corp's share sale.

He said that the right would be exercised if the Supreme Court rules not to seize the family's assets.

Revenue Dept moves on Shin share sale proceeds

I sincerely hope this happens instead, the current 76b seizure is really a poor case

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...ml#post1336447 (Thailand : 76-bn THB asset seizure case)

^ again mid, confusing legitimacy with evidence of a poor case ?

evidence != legitimacy

do you think like a Thai ?

like I said , no prizes for second , thanxs for playing

Originally Posted by Butterfly

^ again mid, confusing legitimacy with evidence of a poor case ?

evidence != legitimacy

do you think like a Thai ?

Legitimacy means according to the law. As the coup was illegal it was automatically illegitimate. The fact that the coup-makers were pardoned only highlights the fact that it was illegitimate, pardons are not given out for not breaking the law.

so the general election organized by the coup leaders under the new constitution was also illegitimate in that regard ?

so technically Samak government was also illegitimate

Althought the money was frozen do they still actually have it, I wouldn't be suprised if they havent already started spending, they have been throwing around a lot of coin in the past few months.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

so the general election organized by the coup leaders under the new constitution was also illegitimate in that regard ?

so technically Samak government was also illegitimate

yep , and ???

Originally Posted by Mid

I'm interested to see what holes can be found in it ?

Originally Posted by Mid

The high court ruled that the coup-issued law is classified as an equivalent to an act of Parliament, hence it is legally binding.

Court says coup order to appoint AEC legally sanctioned

that be the answer .

^ thanks Mid, we know already it was legitimate

bf , I've no idea who we is but you know jack shite

Originally Posted by Mid

not at all , what your promoting and have been all along is an illegitimate democracy

Democracy. Which variety of democracy....?? As it manifest through many forms.

Originally Posted by Mid

bf , I've no idea who we is but you know jack shite

still more than you do,