[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
News from Today's Thai Newspapers
Bangkok Post
June 12, 1997
Li could be sent back to face bribery investigation
US authorities ready to facilitate inquiry
Surath Jinakul
Li Yun Chung could be returned to Thailand to explain how he came to be
released on bail.
The United States has promised to facilitate Thai investigations into
bribery allegations against Li, the Narcotics Suppression Bureau chief
said yesterday.
Pol Lt-Gen Noppadol Somboonsap was given the assurance by Katherine
Palmer, a New York public prosecutor, who called on him to thank Thai
police for helping extradite Li.
Ms Palmer assured him US authorities were ready to send Li back here if
there was a need to question him.
Li, or Pongsak Rojanasaksakul, was handed over to the Drug Enforcement
Administration this month after he jumped bail and was returned by Burma
last month. On departure for the US, Li said: "I will not return."
He was alleged to have bribed Thai officials to secure his release on
bail in February following his arrest in Samut Sakhon last year.
The Justice Ministry has appointed a panel to investigate Somchai
Udomwong, former Criminal Court deputy chief justice, for granting Li
bail in contravention of a standing policy covering narcotics cases.
The Police Department set up a separate committee to look into the
allegation.
Pol Lt-Gen Noppadol said Ms Palmer told him Thailand could request Li be
flown back for further questioning. The prosecutor also discussed legal
cooperation between Thailand and the US but Pol Lt-Gen Noppadol declined
to elaborate.
Ms Palmer said Thailand's help in extraditing Li to face charges of
importing 486kg of heroin showed there was nowhere drug traffickers can
hide.
BURMA GAS PIPELINE / MEETING ENDS IN CONFUSION
Conflicting stories told after talks
Govt says it's a deal, opponents disagree
Chakrit Ridmontri, Yuwadee Tunyasiri and Suebpong Unarat
The government said yes but opponents said no.
Depending on who made the statement, the meeting between supporters and
opponents of the controversial gas pipeline project chaired by Prime
Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh either arrived at a satisfactory
conclusion or none at all.
Gen Chavalit and Industry Minister Korn Dabbaransi told reporters at
Government House where the meeting took place that both sides had agreed
that the 16.5-billion-baht project should go ahead.
"Conservation groups do not want the project rejected. They only want
more information so that it will proceed without posing adverse
effects," said the premier, adding that "the two sides understood each
other".
But opponents told a different story.
"The prime minister has yet to solve the problems we raised and just
passed them on to the provincial committee," said Phiphop Dhongchai,
leader of a coalition for democracy campaign.
Gen Chavalit said the committee, which was recently set up to monitor
the environmental impact of the project, would have to make public
contract details made between the Petroleum Authority of Thailand, the
Burmese gas exploration consortium and its own contractor.
He also assured opponents that the committee would be empowered to
command various agencies involved in the project implementation and
impose environmental mitigation measures.
Construction of the 260-km pipeline which will deliver natural gas from
Burma's Yadana and Yetagun fields to a power plant in Ratchaburi began
in February after the National Environment Board approved its
environmental impact assessment study.
Opponents opposed it on the grounds that it will pass through a national
park and an 1A watershed area, threatening ecology and endangered
wildlife species.
Chaired by the Kanchanaburi governor, the multilateral committee
convened its first meeting last month in an attempt to sort out
differences between the two sides. But the two conservation groups,
including a local one, have pulled out citing "a lack of transparency".
Mr Korn and government spokesman Warathep Rattanakorn also echoed Gen
Chavalit's optimistic outlook, insisting that the project "will proceed
and its plan made clear".
Mr Warathep said representatives of kamnan and village chiefs in
Kanchanaburi had voiced support for the project because it will lead to
greater development and prosperity in the area. They said they
represented the majority of local people.
But opponents remain sceptical. Local conservation group leader Boonsong
Chansongrassami said the provincial committee comprising mostly local
officials and village chiefs could "neither conduct environmental impact
studies nor monitor the construction".
He said it was a bureaucratic body and unreliable.
"What we need is an independent committee with neutral experts from
various fields to conduct a study on the impact of the project, which is
powerful enough to monitor and control the work done by the PTT."
He said construction work must stop while the study is being done.
Suraphon Duangkhae, deputy director of Wildlife Fund Thailand, said the
conservation groups have yet to agree with Gen Chavalit's conclusion,
saying that the provincial committee would be unable to make a decision
contrary to the government's wishes.
Meanwhile, human right activists have claimed that the project
encourages the use of forced labour and the relocation of ethnic groups
living along the pipeline route in Burma.
Postbag
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A fist full of dollars?
Am I the only person confused by US foreign policy? Both China and Burma
have a less than glowing record with respect to human rights, yet Burma
has sanctions applied against her while China's Most Favoured Nation
status is extended.
Could the difference be that Burma is a small country of little
commercial significance, whereas China presents tempting financial
opportunities?
US attitudes towards the Middle East are also perplexing. What would be
their policy if the Palestinians, and not the Gulf States, were sitting
atop an oil field?
Maybe I should not be confused, but simply accept that these are just
two examples of a US foreign policy which is riddled with hypocrisy.
Sleepless in Sukhumvit
Ambassador's Burma views are skewed
I find it interesting that the Bangkok Post (June 11) published
Philippine Ambassador Arcilla's apologia on Burma's impending induction
into Asean for a variety of reasons.
Firstly, it is contrary to the outrage of the Philippine people
themselves, who denounced Burma's admittance as an historic mistake and
a "step backward" for democracy (Bangkok Post, June 3). Secondly, H.E.
Arcilla's article appears to be a well-crafted propaganda piece,
attempting to present the issue as another example of "Meddling West
versus Proud and Independent Asia" and to skew the meaning of
"constructive engagement" to his own ends.
Since several Asean-member governments are "special democracies" who
view themselves as "benevolently authoritarian - with elections", it is
understandable that they see no obstacle to admitting Slorc Burma. They
argue that Western-style democracies are not suitable for them at the
present time. Aside from insulting the intelligence of their citizens,
it is nothing more than justification for these governments to continue
doing things the way they want, irrespective of the wishes of the
electorate. There is no such thing as Western-style democracy. A
government is either democratic or it is not.
The essence of widespread objections to the proposed admission of Burma
is that Slorc is nothing more than the man with the gun. Slorc was not
elected and has only used its guns on its own people. It has done
nothing to better the country's economy, unless for personal gain.
An example of constructive engagement would be the encouragement of
Slorc to relinquish its choke-hold on the Burmese people in return for
increased recognition in the political and economic arenas (as was done
with apartheid). Not only does Asean not encourage Slorc to cease
governing at the point of a gun, it gives Slorc the additional means to
do so. This is one reason why so many people find Burma's admission to
Asean so highly objectionable.
Jonathan Nations
The Nation
PTT agrees to bare all on Yadana deal
BY WATCHARAPONG THONGRUNG
THE Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT) has finally agreed to reveal
all information about the Yadana gas pipeline project, including details
of the contract it signed with the Burmese government.
Pala Sookawesh, PTT's governor, said yesterday that his agency will
reveal contract details to the provincial sub-committee in Kanchanaburi
today.
''We [the PTT] want to make things clear to Kanchanaburi residents and
protest groups," he said at a meeting with government officials,
Kanchanaburi residents, environmentalists and the state enterprise.
PM's Office spokesman Warathep Rattakorn said the meeting decided that
the provincial sub-committee would solve all the problems and conflicts
between the PTT and those opposed to the project. The sub-committee must
submit its resolution to Prime Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh within two
weeks, he said.
However, he said construction would go ahead since nobody has taken any
action against the project.
''The protesters are just concerned about the environmental impact and
want to know all information about the project," Warathep said.
Pipob Thongchai, a project opponent, said he was upset with the
meeting's conclusion.
''The PTT and the government do not answer our questions. We want the
project developers to stop construction and make everything clear to
us," he said.
Pipob said he did approve of PTT's promise to reveal the contract
details today.
''However, they should be revealed in front of a national committee and
not a provincial sub-committee," he said.
Pala said the contractor was now building the pipeline in the area
outside the forest and 20 per cent of the job had already been
completed. He expected at least 210 kilometres of the pipeline to be
laid by the latter part of the year.
He added that work on the six-kilometre section that passed through the
forest would begin in November.
''We can't bow to all of the environmentalists' demands. However, we
have reduced the width of the construction path through the forest from
20 metres to 12," he said. ''Reducing the width requires higher costs,
but the forest will only lose 40 rai."
He added that if construction was not completed by June 1 next year, the
day gas is due to start flowing as per the terms of the contract, the
PTT would be fined.
Fines total Bt125.5 million for a delay of two months, Bt487.5 million
for three months, Bt967.5 million for four months and Bt1.57 billion if
it is five months late.
Burma closes key post on Thai border in row over shifting frontier
posted at 20:40 hrs (Bangkok time)
BANGKOK, June 12 -- Burma on Thursday sealed a key frontier post facing
Thailand, in a sharp escalation of a simmering boundary dispute,
television reports said.
The border post in the Mae Sot district of the western Thai province of
Tak, 426 kilometers (256 miles) west of was closed Thursday morning,
cutting the passage of all trade people across.
Burma shut the border after the two countries failed to reach an
agreement over a disputed boundary along the Moei River which divides
them, and also over a Thai ban on the export of a small onion native to
Burma, national television said.
Officials could not immediately be reached for comment on the issue
which has dogged ties for several weeks.
The closure came after heavily-armed Thai and Burmese troops in May and
in early June were locked in a tense stand-off on a disputed island in
the river dividing the two countries.
In late May, rival troops armed with tanks and heavy weapons manoeuvred
within meters (yards) of each other, attempting to gain a better
position to claim the disputed land.
The two sides have been holding talks over the issue, but all attempts
at a diplomatic solution have failed.
The standoff began in May after Burma refused to act on a Thai request
that construction workers dredging the banks of the island in an attempt
to divert the Moei River cease operations.
Thai troops were stationed across from the workers in order to force the
issue, and Burmese soldiers were sent in to protect them.
The showdown came after the river changed course after severe flooding
during the rainy season several years ago, and Thailand holds that under
existing agreements the demarcation of the border must change as a
result.
Burma was said to be attempting to divert the river back to its original
course in a bid to win back territory lost through the natural
phenomenon.
The foreign ministry has said Thailand had sent an aide-memoire to Burma
on November 23, 1995, putting forth its claims.
Thailand's director for Treaties and Legal Affairs has held talks with
his counterpart but Burmese officials refused to accept the Thai
position. (AFP)
"THERE WILL BE NO REAL DEMOCRACY IF WE CAN'T GURANTEE THE RIGHTS OF THE
MINORITY ETHNIC PEOPLE. ONLY UNDERSTANDING THEIR SUFFERING AND HELPING
THEM TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS WILL ASSIST PREVENTING FROM THE
DISINTEGRATION AND THE SESESSION." "WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THEIR
STRENGTH, WE CAN'T TOPPLE THE SLORC AND BURMA WILL NEVER BE IN PEACE."
---------------------------------------------------------
Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------