Mr. Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, Secretary of the Faculty of Progress, recently shared his thoughts on the case of Mr. Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister, and suggested a different approach to bringing him back to Thailand without facing imprisonment.
Mr. Piyabutr believes that the delay in the formation of the government is a consequence of the overturning of the 2017 constitution, which empowered Parliament to vote for the prime minister. However, another key factor in the government formation is the announcement made by Thaksin Shinawatra about his return to Thailand. This has led to political parties and the Senate using it as a “bargaining tool” to determine the prime minister and the composition of political parties in the government. As a result, the hopes and aspirations of 25 million people who expressed their intentions through the elections have been disregarded. This issue of Thaksin’s return has been a topic of discussion in Thai society for almost two decades and is always raised around the time of elections.
Having followed the political landscape since 2005, Mr. Piyabutr has expressed his disagreement with the People’s League for Democracy rally that demanded the royal grant for the prime minister under Section 7. He also disagreed with the coup d’état of September 2006 and expressed his disapproval and criticism of the prosecution of Thaksin in several cases, including the seizure of his assets. Following the dissolution of the 2010 rally, Mr. Piyabutr and his colleagues formed the “Faculty of Law.” On September 18, 2011, the Nitirat Council proposed a motion to invalidate the results of the September 19, 2006 coup and nullify the amnesty granted to the coup committee members. The proposal aimed to declare the coup as treason and allow officials in the judicial process to prosecute the coup committee members.
Mr. Piyabutr explains that after the coup of May 22, 2014, the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) and the National Legislative Assembly, established by the NCPO, collaborated in enacting legislation. He highlights the significance of sections 25, 27, and 28 of the Criminal Procedure for Persons Holding Political Office Act BE 2560. These sections state that the escape period is not counted towards the statute of limitations for criminal cases and allow arrest warrants to be issued if the defendant fails to appear in court. These provisions have implications for the case against Thaksin Shinawatra.
In conclusion, Mr. Piyabutr argues that using the same process and organization that started from the September 2006 coup to prosecute Thaksin is unfair. He believes that Thaksin should not be brought back to Thailand through imprisonment and seeking forgiveness, as it would not only be detrimental to Thaksin but also to Thai politics. Mr. Piyabutr questions whether Thaksin would be pardoned if he returned to prison, highlighting the uncertainty surrounding this issue.
‘Piyabutr’ suggests how to bring ‘Thaksin’ back home without going to jail
On August 12, Mr Piyabut Saengkanokkul, Secretary of the Faculty of Progress Post a message via Facebook Piyabutr Saengkanokkul – Piyabutr Saengkanokkul about the case of Mr. Thaksin Shinawatra, former prime minister. Traveling back to Thailand means the right way to bring Thaksin back home
Almost three months have passed since the May 14 elections. Until today, the formation of the government is still not complete. Of course, the delay in the formation of this government is a direct result of the overturning of the 2017 constitution which give the power to Parliament. vote on opinion, as a person to hold the position of Prime Minister, however, we cannot deny that Another issue that is an important factor when considering the establishment of a government is the case where Thaksin Shinawatra has announced that he will return to Thailand soon.
This led to the use of political parties and the Senedd as a “bargaining tool” determines the prime minister and determines the composition of political parties that can join the government. I caused the dreams and hopes of nearly 25 million people who expressed their intentions through the elections to see the “8-party/312-vote government” to be abolished.
The issue of Thaksin’s “back home” has been in Thai society for nearly two decades. when is the election When will you get a new government from the Pheu Thai pole? People will always bring up this issue.
If anyone has followed my comments since 2005/06, you will remember that I disagreed with the People’s League for Democracy rally which demanded “the Prime Minister’s royal grant, Section 7” disagrees with the coup 19 September 2006
I issued a statement to my friends, Faculty of Law, Thammasat University, including 5 people at that time. The coup was disapproved on 19 September 2006
Subsequently, we also made statements expressing our disapproval and criticism of the prosecution of Thaksin in several cases. Including the judgment in the seizure of property case too After the dissolution of the 2010 rally, we formed a “Faculty of Law”
On September 18, 2011, Nitirat Council proposed a motion to “negate the results of the September 19, 2006 competition” as follows:
First, make the coup on 19 September 2006 and the actions of the CCP from 19 September 2006 to 30 September 2006 null and void.
Secondly, Section 36 of the Constitution 49, section 36 (which certifies that all acts of the junta are constitutional and legal) is null and void, making it arguable that all acts of the junta are contrary to the constitution and the law.
Thirdly, the annulment of Section 37 of Constitution 49, where the amnesty for the coup d’etat is void, making the amnesty coup on September 19, 2006 void, as if it had never happened of the front.
When there is no amnesty for coup committee members As a result, the coup on September 19, 2006 is still guilty of treason in the Kingdom. According to Section 113 of the Criminal Code, officials in the judicial process can prosecute the coup d’état and punish them.
Fourthly, the decision of the Constitutional Court The Judgment of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court for Persons Holding Political Positions as a result of the September 19, 2006 coup is null and void.
Fifthly, put the matter under consideration arising from the initiative of the Certificate having ended
All these proposals must be done through an amendment to the constitution. If these proposals are successful, the result is that the coup d’état can be executed immediately.
Regarding the legal case against Thaksin and many other politicians As a result of the coup of 49, there was no amnesty or pardon in any way. just set aside those judgments AND he can proceed with the prosecution in accordance with the normal process of providing justice to the accused and the defendant
…
Today, the issue of “Thaksin returning home” is raised again.
I still insist on prosecuting Thaksin Using the organization and process that started from the 19 September 2006 coup is unfair to Thaksin.
Using the power of the junta to appoint a person who opposes Thaksin to investigate making an unfair lawsuit against Thaksin
Furthermore After the coup of 22 May 2014, the Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) and the National Legislative Assembly established by the NCPO still legislate jointly. Section 25, Section 27 and Section 28 of the Criminal Procedure for Persons Holding Political Office Act BE 2560 states
“Section 25 In criminal cases under this Organic Act When the suit has been filed with the court let the stumbling block stop
In a case where the accused or the defendant escapes during litigation or during court proceedings The period during which the accused or the defendant escaped will not be counted as part of the prescription.
In the event of a final judgment to punish the defendant If the defendant escapes during the final judgment to impose a penalty section 98 of the Criminal Code will not apply.”
“Section 27 When filing a legal case to court The Attorney General or the NACC will notify the accused to come to court on the date of filing the case. In case the accused does not appear in court and the Attorney General or the NACC has evidence to the court that an arrest warrant has been issued for the accused but has not yet arrived. or the reason why the accused did not come to court was delaying the case or not appearing in court as scheduled without a reasonable excuse Let the court stamp to accept the legal case for consideration. Although the accused did not appear before the court. “
“Section 28 If it happens that the Court has accepted the charge under Section 27 and the Court has appropriately sent the summons and a copy of the charge to the defendant. But the defendant did not come to court. Ask the court to issue a warrant to arrest the defendant and the persons involved in the pursuit or arrest of the accused must report periodically on the results of the pursuit and arrest as determined by the Court.
If an arrest warrant has been issued for the accused and the steps under paragraph one have been carried out But the defendant could not be arrested within three months of the date of the arrest warrant. The court has the power to try the case without having to act in the presence of the defendant. But this does not deprive the defendant of the right to appoint a lawyer to act on his behalf.
The provisions of this section do not deprive the defendant of the right to appear in court to defend the case at any time before the judgment of the court. But coming to court does not affect the investigation and proceedings that have already taken place.”
These three provisions
One, the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders was able to hear Thaksinbaeb’s criminal case. “Hide behind the defendant”
Secondly, how long will Mr. Thaksin staying abroad? There is no way to cause cases to expire because the law requires that the escape period is not counted as part of the prescription.
Thirdly, in the case where Thaksin was sentenced to imprisonment of 1 year but not more than 7 years, although Thaksin fled the case abroad for more than 10 years, who would normally benefit from Section 98 of r Criminal Code. But since Section 25 paragraph three of Section 60 of the Royal Decree states that the statute of limitations under Section 98 of the Criminal Code will not be applied in this case Consequently, the sentence must who sentenced Mr. Thaksin to prison after the enforcement of Decree 60 continues to be implemented.
It can be seen that these three sections of Royal Decree 60 are intended to be used in the case of Khun Thaksin and Khun Yingluck in particular
…
I saw that choosing the way to “go back home” by going back to prison and hope for forgiveness It’s not just you and Thaksin. But it is not good for Thai politics either.
Why am I saying this?
To this day, there is a 100 percent guarantee that If Thaksin returned to prison after a while, will he be pardoned? Well, to this day Thaksin’s return to Thailand has been delayed several times. Until there are many predictions that the negotiations are not settled.
even if it is believed to be the end Then Mr. Thaksin to prison indefinitely. and no royal pardon has been given to Mr Or maybe there is no pardon at all.
If this really happened We asked if Mr Thaksin, Pheu Thai Party, Pheu Thai Party MP and the masses who support Plaid Thai Pheu How to come out to fight this issue?
Is there enough legitimacy to motivate the masses to fight against injustice again? Can it have a base of legitimacy and high current like in the year 2009 or 2010 or not?
Most importantly, many of the masses who are disappointed with the Thai Pheu Party case are “crossing the poles” to form a government with the Bhumjaithai Party. Palang Pracharat Party Thai Ruam Party is creating a nation, the force that is “ta sawang” of establishing the government in this round. Will you continue to come out to fight to demand justice for Mr. Thaksin and the group again or not?
In addition, if the issue “Thaksin returned home” is part of the negotiations to form a government. Until the Pheu Thai Party was forced to “cross the poles”, the power groups that were on the same side as the 2006 and 2014 coups and the power succession of Force bargained to put pressure on the Pheu Thai Party causing the Thai Pheu Party to If he abandons his stance The “democratic side” that was confiscated since the 2006 coup, and which had destroyed the power of the democratic side that had been strong for almost two decades.
…
To this day, I believe that Thaksin should not have to go to jail. Thaksin’s imprisonment was unfair, and Thaksin was the “victim” of the coup.
the right way Be fair to Thaksin And stand on the principle which is to negate the result of the coup September 19, 2006, according to the proposal of the Council of Laws that was proposed 12 years ago.
Or at least it should be stable. Criminal Procedure for Persons Holding Political Offices Act BE 2560 (2017) in Section 25, Section 27, and Section 28 will return to the normal rules as in other criminal cases. Not enacting laws specifically by “looking at people” to attack Thaksin and Yingluck.
Mr Thaksin does not have to go to jail. when he’s not in jail I don’t need to apologize. There is no need to enact an amnesty law for Thaksin.
However, the judgment was reversed as a result of the September 19, 2006 coup and a new fair trial began. temporarily released to live a normal life and fight a new lawsuit
This road may delay Thaksin’s return home a bit. but to create sustainability of security for Khun Thaksin more than Thaksin and Thai Party Pheu He will not lose his popularity with the masses.
and the power of the democratic party is still strong Continue to fight against the authoritarian factions.
Adhere to all situations of [email protected] here
#Piyabutr #suggests #bring #Thaksin #home #jail
