Updated: The judicial coup gathers pace

8 05 2014

After the judicial intervention yesterday to oust the prime minister and nine ministers on the flimsiest of grounds and with creative “interpretation” of the constitution, the another royalist “independent” agency has moved rapidly to complete the judicial coup.

The Nation reports that former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra will now “face impeachment in the upper house over a costly rice-pledging scheme in a ruling which could see her banned from politics for five years.”

The National Anti-Corruption Commission has found that “there is enough evidence to indict (Yingluck) and refers (the case) to the Senate…”. Note that even when referring to “enough” evidence, the “NACC … unanimously agreed to indict Yingluck for allegedly having intent to exercise power against Article 178 of the Constitution concerning rice-pledging scheme.”

Section 178 states:

Ministers shall carry out the administration of State affairs in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, laws and the policies stated under section 176, and shall be accountable individually to the House of Representatives for the performance of their duties and shall also be accountable collectively to the National Assembly for the general policies of the Council of Ministers.

The NACC will forward the “enough evidence” to the Senate, which is dominated by royalists, to seek Yingluck’s impeachment. However, because there is only “enough evidence,” the NACC will “further investigate to decide whether to take criminal charge against Yingluck for allegedly dereliction of duty under Section 157 of the Criminal Court and Negligence of duty under the Commission Act BA 2542.”

PPT reckons that the mounting anger at the judicial coup is going to (and should)  become incendiary as the creeping coup rushes to its conclusion.

Update: The Bangkok Post adds to the evidence of how pathetic the judicial/independent agency assault is, stating that Yingluck’s alleged “dereliction of duty … as chair of the National Rice Policy Committee,” was that “[s]he … failed to stop the scheme after it was found to be incurring heavy losses…”. This is about as lame as it gets.

 

 


Actions

Information