Yingluck case: Anti-corruption commission keeps its leg stiff
We have done enough and we are not going to hear more witnesses, says the National Anti-Corruption Commission about the demand of the Public Prosecution Service in the case against former Prime Minister Yingluk to provide more evidence.
The NACC accuses Yingluck of dereliction of duty for failing to act on corruption in the rice mortgage system and rising costs as chair of the National Rice Policy Committee.
After the NACC had advised the OM to prosecute Yingluck, a joint committee was formed four months ago at the suggestion of the OM to further investigate the case. It clearly didn't come out.
The OM says: we want more witnesses and more evidence; the NACC says our investigation is complete both in terms of witnesses and evidence.
The committee meets again on Tuesday; the NACC will determine its final position tomorrow.
The point of contention is government-to-government (G-to-G) rice sales. Those deals are irrelevant to the case, according to the NACC, because it only deals with Yingluck's role as chairman. They are relevant in another case, namely against the former Minister and Secretary of State for Trade. The NACC says the sales, which the government shielded Yingluck from, never took place, but witnesses differ.
(Source: Bangkok Post, Dec. 14, 2014)
"The NACC is accusing Yingluck of dereliction of duty for failing to act on corruption in the rice mortgage system and rising costs as chair of the National Rice Policy Committee."
1 To date, no case of corruption in the rice mortgage system has been identified, let alone convicted. As if someone is accused of murder when it is not certain that a murder has been committed.
2 Yingluck carried out a program approved by parliament. You can disapprove the program because of the rising costs and other issues, but it would have been a dereliction of duty if she had NOT run the program.
Barber must hang. This is a purely political act of revenge.
@ Tino Kuis Correct what you write under point 1, but you still miss the essence. The NRPC has been warned about corrupt practices from various sides, including by the TDRI and the woman whose name I forgot for a moment (chairman of a committee). The question is: how did the committee or Yingluck react to this? Did she ignore these warnings or did any action take place? Whether corruption has actually been committed is irrelevant to this question. We've had it here before, stubborn man (but I love you though).
The bottom line is that since 2012, the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has received hundreds of complaints alleging corruption in the Yingluck government's rice mortgage system. Hundreds. None of these hundreds of complaints over the past nearly three years has led to a conclusion, a ruling, let alone a legal charge or conviction. Just assume that the NACC has done its utmost to achieve this. If the NACC, whose job it is to investigate corruption and which employs hundreds of people, has already found nothing to suggest corruption, then it is only common sense to argue that it is nonsense to prosecute another agency for dereliction of duty. It is more obvious if they start to examine themselves.