Jump to content
BANGKOK
rooster59

Thanathorn suspects 'political motivation' in media ownership case

Recommended Posts

Thanathorn suspects 'political motivation' in media ownership case

By THE NATION

 

800_3479f9751ff2d60.jpg

Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit

 

With a verdict looming next week in the case over his alleged media ownership, Future Forward Party leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, on Friday (November 15), clarified on some issues through his Facebook fanpage.

 

 

Thanathorn’s case related to his alleged ownership of V Luck Media will be decided by the Constitution Court on November 20.

 

Thanathorn explained the case with his answers to four key questions:

 

1. Is V Luck Media a media?

 

A: V Luck Media is not a media, as the company had shut operations since November 26, 2018, well before the March general election. The company had no income, except unpaid dues, which was not for the company’s product or service.

 

The only income V Luck Media earned in 2019 was from selling properties to close the business. In conclusion, V Luck Media did not qualify as a media company as it was no longer in operation, had no employee, product, or service.

 

2 Was Thanathorn a V Luck Media shareholder on February 6, 2019?

 

A: A claim has been made that Thanathorn was a shareholder based on a paper V Luck Media had sent to the Ministry of Commerce about the latest list of shareholders, which was not valid in this case. In fact, to check the effectiveness in changing shareholders, or completing the transaction, people must refer to the Civil and Commercial Code, sections 1129 and 1141 on January 6, 2019.

 

“I have already transferred shares back to Somporn [Juangroongruangkit]. There was a transfer instrument, and payment before two witnesses and a Rotarian lawyer,” Thanathorn added. “Besides, I have completely changed the information in the company’s shareholder registration, according to the Civil and Commercial Code, sections 1129 and 1141.”

 

 

3 Is being a media shareholder wrong under the current Constitution?

 

A: The Constitution’s intention in barring politicians or authorised public persons from holding shares in a media company was because the media could be partial towards its owners and unfairly target rivals. “Those three magazines have neither contacted me nor blamed my political competitors,” Thanathorn argued.

 

He reiterated that the magazine company had closed down from November 26, 2018, before the general election was announced through a Royal Decree on January 23, 2019.

 

4 Has the judicial process been correct or fair towards Thanathorn?

 

The Election Commission, which is the petitioner, has nominated a set of committees to inspect this case. Preecha Namaeungrak was named president of this inspection. The committee called two witnesses who had signed the contract, together with the Rotarian lawyer, to give statements on May 22, 2019.

 

“During the investigation process, the petition was sent while the facts had not been inspected completely, raising my suspicion that this case is politically motivated,” Thanathorn said.

 

Source: https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30378410

 

logo2.jpg

-- © Copyright The Nation Thailand 2019-11-17
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No kidding!

 

Right of redress should be warranted, but we all know this will not happen, until the next election.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

Obvious to all that it is, he is the only real threat to the establishment

I agree 100% if he can prove the part with the lawyers then it should be all good. But layers can be bought, I'm not saying this is the case here but it does diminish the strength of the argument.

 

But this is political others that said their company had stopped operation came of scot free but those were on the junta side so that is not a guarantee.

 

Im happy all this is now laid out in the media as it puts pressure on the judges. But the pressure from the junta is probably stronger.

 

This article is far more detailed as those before it is almost as if they wanted to paint him in a bad light before.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say it ain't so! I cannot believe there is a person alive who doesn't think that. They will seek to undermine and destroy him bit by bit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, robblok said:

I agree 100% if he can prove the part with the lawyers then it should be all good. But layers can be bought, I'm not saying this is the case here but it does diminish the strength of the argument.

 

But this is political others that said their company had stopped operation came of scot free but those were on the junta side so that is not a guarantee.

 

Im happy all this is now laid out in the media as it puts pressure on the judges. But the pressure from the junta is probably stronger.

 

This article is far more detailed as those before it is almost as if they wanted to paint him in a bad light before.

 

 

 

And the thing is  ( and this is the really scary part) the "Government' KNOW they are wrong, and they KNOW that the foreign world will know that they are wrong, and they still, will push ahead.

 

They (the GOV) don't care that they are clearly wrong, that doesn't enter into their equation. They want what they want!

 

Scary isn't it, that they can totally ignore the evidence. 😞

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exhibitionist! You know very well that being honest doesn't make you rich, and, you are super-rich!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they don't get Thanathorn on this, they will get him on something else.

 

And even if (allowing myself a wild flight of the imagination) Thanathorn were ever allowed back into Parliament to operate as a practising M.P. (which he clearly and legitimately is), it would not really make much difference:

even the brilliant Thanathorn, without MILLION-FOLD backing from the Thai people (and I mean MANY MILLIONS of active Thais) can do NOTHING to overturn the existing regime.

 

So Thais: what will you decide to do? (I think I know: the past 6 years have shown it with all-too-obvious clarity ....).

 

 

Edited by Eligius
  • Like 1

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...