I går skulle det laget et vedtak på amnesti for tidligere statsminister Thaksin regjering.
Det hele ble en direkte latterlig demokratisk prosses. Manglene på demokraftisk innsikt viste seg stort.
Det hele startet med at President i parlamentet som nektet motparten å tale. Etter svært høylytte protester startet motparten med å ta opp at foregående referat måtte korrigeres. Dette ble totalt avvist av Thaksin sine partnere. Videre er det helt klart at penger kan kjøpe alt.
Flere av presidentene i parlamentet viste at hvor deres standpunkt var. Da ved å ikke la motparten tale.
Dette ble feks slik at presidenten i parlamentet slo av mikrofonene til motpartene. For så å la medlemer av Thai Rak Thai tale. Disse medlemene fikk hele tiden tale tid, mens man saboterte alle forsøk som partiet til Abhisit forsøkte å ta opp.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhisit_Vejjajiva
Det brøt ut til tider direkte roping og skriking i parlamentet Og det hele ente med at Abhisit sine partimedlemer direkte stormet ut av parlamentet.
Media i Thailand viser i dag at stemmingen ble
-
The final vote was 310-0 with four abstentions.
Men sannheten er at dette ikke stemmer, Det var over 100 som stemte mot dette forslaget, og det er nå store protester i Bangkok.
Jeg vil gå så lagt å kalle hele greiene en kjøpt og betalt forestilling. Hvem sa at penger ikke kunne gjøre alt?
Thailand har her vist at dette ikke er et demokrati. Dette minner svært om et diktatur.
Det går rykter om betaling til stemmegivere. Thaksin søster og statsminister har ved flere anledninger funnet ut at andre ting er viktigere enn å være i parlamentet. Altså ble dette ikke et unntak.
Hun reise bort da dette foregikk. Dette har hun utført svært ofte. Og er kritisert av flere for å være kun en nikkedukke for hennes storebror.
HVILKEN STATSMINISTER REISER BORT NÅR MAN ENDRER LOVEN FOR ET LAND?
Det varslet nå at protestene er meget store. Og det ble blandt annet stoppet flere som forsøkte å komme seg inn til bangkok.
Politiet gikk så langt at dem stoppet tog som hadde protest deltakere med seg.
Videre er veier inn til Bangkok hindret av politiet.
Hvor er demokrati i dette ? Er Thailand på vei til å bli et diktatur?
Thaksin var partileder i det politiske partiet
Palang Dharma fra
1996, og leder for Thai Rak Thai fra
1998. Han fikk sin første regjeringspost i
1994, da han tjente som
utenriksminister. Han ble statsminister
9. februar 2001.
20. september 2006 ble han avsatt ved et
statskupp i landet, mens han var i
New York i møte i
FN.
Etter kuppet kunngjorde han at han trakk seg fra politikken, men krevde
samtidig en snarlig gjeninnføring av demokratiet. Etter at hans
politiske allierte vant valget i desember 2007 vendte han den
28. februar 2008 tilbake til Thailand, hvor han ble pågrepet men løslatt mot
kausjon. Han har vært på flukt fra Thailands
rettsvesen, etter at han unnlot å returnere fra et besøk til Kina i forbindelse med
OL i 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra
In a November 2009 interview, Thaksin told
The Times that he was
living in Dubai, still had access to about $100 million of his money
outside of Thailand, and was investing in gold mines, diamond polishing
and lottery licenses in various countries
I dag foregår det store protester rundt området til parlementet
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/377524/blanket-amnesty-bill-passed
Dette vedtaket gir altså alle medlemer til Thaksin amnesti for deres korrupsjonsanklager som dem ble dømt til av Thailandsk rett.
Det som også skjer er at Tv kanaler er kontrollert av regjeringen. Alle statlige kanaler har sensur på ting som ikke er til fordel for dagens regjering.
Blandt annet vises ikke demonstrasjonene i nyheter eller på tv.
Men dette vises på kanaler som ikke er kontrollert av regjeringen. Feks kabeltv kannaler.
Her kan man se den virkelige protesten.
Det hele virket som om at man før man gikk inn i parlementet var kjøpt og betalt.
Det er levert inn klager til FN på at dette skjer. Normale demokratiske prosseser er satt på sidelinjen og korrupsjon er nå blitt en lovlig hendelse i Thailand.
Signalene som dette gir er at hvis man utfører korrupsjon så er dette ikke så ille. Hva vil nå dette gi signaler om for befolkningene i Thailand.
ER KORRUPSJON HELT GREIT I THAILAND ELLER ER DETTE KUN FOR DE SOM HAR PENGER NOK FOR Å OMGÅ LOVEN.
Det som Thaksin har sørget for er at flere medlemer i hæren nå er skiftet ut. Og leder for politi er nå "Rød"
Altså er støtte apparatet nå klart for at Thaksin skal ta over makten igjen i Thailand.
Det går vel ikke lang tid før Thaksin er statsminister igjen og hans søster tar en lag ferie fra politikken.
Flere tar nå til ordet at FN og USA skal gripe inn i denne konflikten.
Domstolens avgjørsel:
The verdict
The court first ruled that Thaksin and Potjaman were the real owners
of the assets, rather than his children and relatives. The court also
ruled that it had the authority to seize assets, based on the
announcements of the junta. The court found Thaksin guilty of four out
of five policy corruption, and ordered that 46 billion baht be seized.
The remaining 30 billion continued to remain frozen.
- Count 1: Conversion of telecom concession fees into excise charges.
Previously, telecom operators had to pay the TOT/CAT a percentage of
their revenue as a concession fee (TOT/CAT are state-owned enterprises,
although they were going through the process of privatization). The
Thaksin government modified this into a system wherein all operators
would instead directly pay the government an equivalent excise tax. The
imposition of excise tax here would eventually be passed on to
consumers.[206]
Thaksin claimed that all operators continued to pay the same total
costs. The judges ruled that this benefited AIS while harming the TOT,
and thus was an abuse of power.
- Count 2: Modification of a revenue sharing agreement on pre-paid
mobile services. Previously, telecom operators had to pay the TOT a
percentage of their revenues for post-paid mobile services. To offer
pre-paid services, which are generally cost less to the consumer, AIS
negotiated with TOT to design a revenue sharing agreement for pre-paid
services that offered less revenue to the TOT comprising an estimated
loss of 14.2 billion baht (revenue reduced from 25% to 20%) from 2001 to
2006 and another estimated loss of 56 billion baht (revenue reduced
from 30% to 20%) from 2006 to 2015.[207]
The judges ruled that the terms of the pre-paid agreement harmed TOT
while benefiting AIS. The judges did not dispute the fact that TOT's
total revenue actually increased substantially as a result of the
agreement, but noted that the rise in pre-paid revenue came about while
harming TOT's post-paid revenue. The massive growth in Thai mobile
penetration from 13% in 2001 to 80% in 2007, due almost completely to
pre-paid services, and the reduction in AIS market share from 68% to 53%
in the same period were not taken into account by the court.
- Count 3: Modification of mobile roaming agreement. Previously, there
were no roaming agreements between mobile operators – subscribers from
one operator were not allowed to use services on another operator's
network, thus limiting the growth of the mobile industry. Under the
Thaksin government, roaming was allowed, with roaming fees deducted from
the revenue that AIS and other operators had to share with TOT and
other state enterprises. Essentially, TOT helped AIS shoulder the costs
of its subscribers roaming on the mobile networks of other operators.
This reduced TOT and CAT's income while benefiting the operators.
However, the judges ruled that it while benefited AIS, it did so to the
benefit of AIS's new owners (Temasek Holdings) rather than Thaksin, and
hence was not an abuse of power.
- Count 4: Replacement of ThaiCom 4 with iPSTAR.
A previous government had originally contracted with ShinSat to launch
and operate ThaiCom 4 as a backup satellite for ThaiCom 3. Instead,
ShinSat negotiated with the Thaksin government to launch iPSTAR, at the
time the largest commercial satellite in history, which it claimed could
offer commercial internet services while also providing backup for
ThaiCom 3. However, the claim is not technically possible since iPSTAR
does not have C-band transponders as ThaiCom 3.
Shin Corp's ownership in ShinSat was subsequently reduced from 51% to
40%. The judges found that the changes in ownership and satellite
specification change reduced Thailand's communications security by not
having the backup satellite for ThaiCom 3 on the one-to-one basis. It
also noted that the negotiations allowed ShinSat to launch a satellite
with much greater commercial potential than ThaiCom 4 without having to
bid for a separate concession agreement.
- Count 5: EXIM Bank loan to Myanmar to pay for ThaiCom services.
Thaksin was scheduled to meet with Burmese leaders to negotiate trade
deals between the two countries. One of the deals negotiated gave
Myanmar a Thai EXIM Bank loan to purchase 376 million baht in satellite
services from ShinSat. Thaksin noted that many deals were struck in the
negotiations, and that 16 other companies also benefited from the EXIM
Bank's loans. The judges ruled that the loans gave preferential
treatment to Thaksin, and hence were an abuse of power.[208][209]
The judges decided to seize 46 billion differences in value of Shin
Corp. shares from the date when he came to office and the value when the
shares were sold to Singapore's Temasek Holdings in early 2006. Note
that, Thaksin had declared around 500 million baht in assets and Pojaman
had 8 billion to 9 billion baht while Thaksin served as prime minister.
[207] Nevertheless, during that period, Shin shares gained 121%, compared with a 128% gain in the benchmark SET index, while
Siam Cement, one of Thailand's premier blue chip companies, gained 717%.
[210]
The judges did not find that Thaksin was guilty of malfeasance. They
also noted that any benefit to the government from Thaksin's policies
was irrelevant to the ruling. The government reaped approximately
100 billion baht in increased revenue from changes in the concession
agreements alone.
Thailand parliament to hear amnesty bill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98GbIM_ami0&noredirect=1
BBC News Protests in Thailand over proposed political amnesty bill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZaESerwOJA
Thailand opposition to protest amnesty bill
Morning Thailand 29 October 2013 3/4
Morning Thailand 28 October 2013 4/4
Morning Thailand 30 October 2013 3/4
.jpg)
