Prisoner amnesty

Talking to a prisoner governor this week and they have all been told to provide a list of inmates serving sentences of less than 3 years for crimes not associated with drugs or violence ,in preparation for a mass amnesty and release in December, presumably to coincide with HM the Kings birthday . The cynical amongst us will note that Mr T and several Red Shirt leaders were given sentences that fall into this criteria.

I wonder if they have to have served a sentence or admit guilt, before becoming elgible for amnesty? Since I am not a cynic(denial),probably not1

nkstan wrote::lol: I wonder if they have to have served a sentence or admit guilt, before becoming elgible for amnesty? Since I am not a cynic(denial),probably not1

I understand it to be an amnesty not a pardon as in other years so length of time already served, or none at all( )shouldn't enter into the equation .

Now they are saying it's still a secret .
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews ... l-a-secret
Not to readers of Udon Map it isn't .

Does the Gov't grant amnesty or does the King grant it?

nkstan wrote:Does the Gov't grant amnesty or does the King grant it?

Well to my knowledge this is the first time there has been a general amnesty as opposed to a pardon. Normally a pardon is given by the King on the recommendation of his ministers(The govt in power) as a sort of celebration of His birthday. It reinforces the compassionate nature between sovereign and subjects .However whereby a pardon doesn't overturn the legal jurisdiction, the subject is still guilty of the crime, and still has the record against them, an amnesty literally says you haven't committed any crime, your innocent .Thereby making the court verdict null and void . This as you may well imagine has far reaching implications when a person is charged with a similar offence in the future. A lawyer will simply argue, quite rightly so, the offence his client is charged with has previously been granted a general amnesty so is no longer a crime.
Troubled times ahead .

In Thaksin's case, it shouldn't matter, as he still has about 10 other charges to face up to - unless of course the government is proposing the amnesty to be prospective (as well as secret).

But this is truly a compassionate government - I have seen estimates that the amnesty could cover up to 26,000 other convicts, just to get Thaksin off the hook.

What a crock.

Surely, If it is a "PRISONER AMNESTY", it can ONLY cover prisoners, and not "CONVICTS ON THE RUN"

It is worth possibly noting an amnesty pardons or cancels the crime not the perpetrator ,so perhaps my topic title is slightly misleading.

Bangkok Pundit discusses the issue of prisoner releases at http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Included is this table. I've been told that drug related prisoners won't be on the list....but don't know the validity of that info.

parrot wrote:Bangkok Pundit discusses the issue of prisoner releases at http://asiancorrespondent.com/author/bangkokpundit/

Included is this table. I've been told that drug related prisoners won't be on the list....but don't know the validity of that info.

That's correct. The original amnesty was proposed only for crimes not attracting either a sentence of over 3 years or if drug related.
Incidentally for anyone that has someone inside. The eligible inmates have all been graded and if given a red card they are up for release .

far be it for me to correct current information, but like the pardons, i have heard that anyone who is in prison who has admitted their guilt is eligible for this amnesty which is part of the kings gift to his people, note the wording

Anyone who is IN prison and ADMITTED their guilt, which i feel should rule out most of the Political prisoners as they have not admitted nor in some cases are they IN a prison.
I may be wrong but the wording is important as in most legal machinations.

Khun Paul wrote:far be it for me to correct current information, but like the pardons, i have heard that anyone who is in prison who has admitted their guilt is eligible for this amnesty which is part of the kings gift to his people, note the wording

Anyone who is IN prison and ADMITTED their guilt, which i feel should rule out most of the Political prisoners as they have not admitted nor in some cases are they IN a prison.
I may be wrong but the wording is important as in most legal machinations.

I am sorry KP but I don't understand what you are trying to say .So my reply is based on normally observed procedure.
An admission of guilt is only taken into consideration when considering the sentence to be imposed, it has absolutely no connection with the later parole or pardon as it's called here .That is based entirely on the amount of remorse the convicted appears to show and his likely hood of re offending .Here however we are not talking of parole or pardon which is given to the prisoner if he matches the criteria but an amnesty for the crime. Completely different kettle of fish .The proposal from the Yingluck team is a complete amnesty based on the offenders age, for all offences that don't involve drugs or would attract a sentence of more than three years .So literally they are saying a man over 60, with those two exceptions, cannot commit a crime .. Now this is explosive stuff, to which I , as a lay man , can see the implications, but which the lawmakers themselves do not seem to be aware.They do not seem to realise there is a vast difference in forgiving a crime, a pardon, an an amnesty which negates the crime .Historically an amnesty is only granted in cases of political unrest, never for a crime , and normally for named persons, never to my knowledge with such blanket coverage they seem to be proposing .They are moving into unknown territory here , not only for Thailand but the rest of the civilised world .I await the outcome with baited breathe .

No question, this'll be explosive stuff. But then, so was the coup, the airport takeover, the red shirt protests last year, the drug-related killings a few years ago.....all things that the civilized world would not approve of.....yet Thailand got away with it all.

yes on second thoughts I was wrong ( admission ) , however I do feel that considering the furore that has erupted folling the disclosure of the 'Secret meeting ' this will go the way of the dodo. it will still need the Royal assent , and before today I am aware that this current king will not put his country into jeopardy but we wait with bated breath. Hopefully reason will take centre stage and the avid amnesty seeking people will run for cover. As they say this is Thailand and anything can happen and probably will to the detriment of the Thai people.