Jump to content
BANGKOK
rooster59

Bahrain issued Interpol Red Notice for Hakeem Al-Araibi, document reveals

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I'm talking about the Interpol Red Notice, which is what got him in trouble in Thailand. And you indicated above that had been already canceled. Thus no basis for the Thai authorities to continue to hold him.

It was cancelled 3 days after his arrest and after the court case had started, thus, no basis for him to be released without going through the court process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Ah... still weird.... that’s reassuring.... and still wrong, I see.

 

al araibi had his official documents with him, to prove his refugee status.... these should have been considered on his arrival, and once the erroneous red notice was lifted, 2 days after his arrest, the man should have been released.... this is a screw up over documentation, at best. Political, at worst.

 

this was a wee bit of a set up... he visited the embassy to apply for a visa on 4/11... it was granted on 8/11.... Bahrain was erroneously granted a red notice on ..... you got it... 8/11

 

so.... while your opinion seems to be that only those that should feel in danger of being arrested (wrong doers), need worry, there are a whole litany of examples where those that shouldn’t feel in danger, are arrested (this being one of them).... this litany of examples has even caused the creation of an international body called amnesty international, amongst other organizations, that actively campaigne for the release of unjust detainees.... but don’t let that bother you

 

and, whilst you also don’t feel thailand is trampling on individual rights, we will just have to disagree. Thailand has a history of sending people back to a country that imprisons them, and has only recently acknowledged this by claiming that in future, it will follow international norms.... which it is not doing with this case, and they admit it... if thailand cared about not trampling on individual rights, it would be participating in the refugee treaties, not contemplating sending someone to a country that will in all likelihood torture that person.

 

if you feel extradition of al araibi to Bahrain is just.... well... just weird covers it pretty well.

 

"if you feel extradition of al araibi to Bahrain is just.... well... just weird covers it pretty well".

He hasn't been extradited!

 

"al araibi had his official documents with him, to prove his refugee status.... these should have been considered on his arrival..."

They were, as were the Interpol documents!  Any reason why both should not have been considered?

 

"...this is a screw up over documentation, at best".

You may be right but it certainly wasn't Thailand's fault that there was a documentation screw-up.

 

"...while your opinion seems to be that only those that should feel in danger of being arrested (wrong doers), need worry, there are a whole litany of examples where those that shouldn’t feel in danger, are arrested..."

In Thailand? Such as?

 

"Thailand has a history of sending people back to a country that imprisons them..."

And they don't deserve it?  Who exactly? 

Many countries, including you own, do exactly the same, that is not exclusive to Thailand!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Still weird... still wrong.

 

It (the court case) does not have to be heard and can (and should) be dismissed at any time by the prime minister.

 

meanwhile, the international community is in an uproar over the manacled images of al araibi, taken by foreign media, because the Thai media air brush that sort of abuse out of the pictures, keeping Thai people ignorant of the truth of abuse.

 

that there is another trampled right.

 

 

"that there is another trampled right".

What is the right that you are calling "trampled" in that post above?  What "abuse"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven’t read through all the pages so don’t know if anyone saw that there are actually two issues 1. Issue of Red Notice by Bahrain 2. Issue of Red Notice ALERT by Australia. After the Red Notice was issued, Australia would have checked passenger list against Interpol records which flagged the footballer as wanted, so they told Thailand. They should have checked his refugee status which would have stopped them notifying Thailand. Thailand should have checked his papers on arrival, confirmed he was a refugee and either refused him entry or allowed him free passage. Detention was not justified. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, farcanell said:

Taken into court in leg irons.... that’s abusive.... and Thai media air brush it away, as if it doesn’t happen, and because they know it’s abusive.

Could also be air brushed away because it looks more beautiful.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

the purpose of courts and prosecutors is to obtain justice. As soon as it became clear that the original complaint again him was wrong/invalid and had been withdrawn, the Thai police or prosecutor should have withdrawn the case against him, and/or, the court before which he appeared just the other day should have dismissed it as a legally incorrect injustice that had its origin in error.

 

The analogy here is kind of like, the Thais start to prosecute someone for murder, then DNA evidence comes along that clearly shows the suspect was not the killer, and then they continue to prosecute the guy as if nothing had happened and ignoring the evidence.  It's not justice, it's a miscarriage of justice.

 

 

that's of course if all the DNA isn't used up / missing / poorly tested / side tracked etc.- koh Tao comes to mind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, farcanell said:

Taken into court in leg irons.... that’s abusive.... and Thai media air brush it away, as if it doesn’t happen, and because they know it’s abusive.

If taken into court in shackles is abusive then Australia, America and most other countries that do the same thing are abusing the prisoners rights.

All prisoners are shackled for transport between the remand centres and the courts, it is then up to the judge at the court on whether the prisoner remains shackled or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two questions.

Why did Australia take so long for the counter claim?

Where is the document proof on date of offence to coincide with live telecast tv match?

 

I'd be a terrible judge. Always asking for facts and evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...