As PTP will soon be in power, I suspect the Dems are now rethinking about passing the law. With the UDD protests fresh in memory, the UDD is unlikely to let PTP pass the law. I’m quite confident the anti-protest bill will die when PTP forms the new government next Monday.
About an hour ago, the Bangkok Post was publishing comments on this online article: http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/249116/abhisit-warns-german-govt-to-back-off
There was a large number of comments, most of which were highly critical of the outgoing Governments stance and many were well informed about the legal issues. There was also some justified criticism of the Post’s misleading wording about Thailand’s current legal position.
The comments have now been removed.
This habit of removing comments when they are predominantly unsympathetic to the Government or the major Thai institutions seems to have become a standard practice of the Post in recent times. Yes, the paper legitimately reserves the right not to publish comments, but to remove comments, which they have moderated and agreed to publish, can only reflect badly on the paper and its editorial staff and must raise questions about the influence of outside pressure by the Government (or in other cases, the army).
Whatever, it is an insidious and despicable form of censorship.
The link you gave leads to “download not available,” but I can still access the German statement at the same addresses where I retrieved it on Tuesday:
The very first thing that Aung San Suu Kyi noticed to her surprise and remarked about later as she came out after her release from house arrest in November was the number of digital and mobile phone cameras, held up by the crowd that greeted her outside her gates.
It can only be a good thing that every moment of the popular struggle and state terrorism is likely to be captured by someone with a pocket device and more importantly on video. And its instant transmission around the planet will make the regime think twice of its actions and the repercussions. Not that when it comes to ‘fighting’ for its own survival it will flinch an iota because of this potential disadvantage.
Naturally as with most new technology this will prove to be a double edged sword. Already you see tons of material on Flickr and YouTube, good and bad, and that’s just from the Burmese diaspora in the main. Nonetheless this technology has a truly democratic and heady empowering impact inside the country, like the Internet in the global perspective.
Thankfully one crucial transformation is that we can today see what is really going on in ethnic homelands and at the border. We get to hear what our ethnic brethren bearing arms against the govt have to say, no longer easily vilified and demonised one sidedly stoking up irrational and unjustified racial hatred. Proper two way traffic on the small screen too with the advent of the DVB TV channel including Dateline Irrawaddy in its programmes beamed directly into rural and urban dwellings alike, far more effective and reaching a much wider audience than the Internet.
More is definitely more, and it’s a long way to go in Burma before it gets too much. I for one never owned a camera before I left the country.
Does anyone understand why the Nation is claiming that the German Embassy’s statement has been removed from its website? Tulsathit has been claiming this in the ‘tweets’ bit since yesterday. I have no problem accessing it at
“Acting government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn said the Foreign Ministry would explain and clarify the issue to its German counterpart. The ministry has never heard from any sources that the Thai government will violate any law or breach any agreement if it refused to pay, Foreign Ministry deputy spokesman Jessada Katawetin said.” http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/248948/germany-tells-govt-to-pay-contractor
This can of legislation is somewhat typical, like the Communist Act by Field Marshal Sarit, perpetuating the esotericism of power here in the Kingdom of Thailand.
Nobody @166: You make an excellent point that this “is in terms of state budgets a very small amount of money.” Similarly, it is a trivial issue for a prime minister to deal with — let alone speak out about, let alone bash a friendly country about.
The leader of a non-dysfunctional government would not concern himself or herself with such a trivial issue, and if asked about it by the press would say something like ‘we respect our treaty obligations with Germany’ and ‘the judicial process should run its course,’ and refer further inquiries to the responsible ministry. I am constantly amazed by how often Thai leaders (esp. AV) not only wade into small matters, but even offend people and countries about them.
Portman @167 is right, too, on similar points. Thailand has some excellent lawyers (the foreign ones, at least), and its law firm for the New York proceeding (DLA Piper) is one of the best in the country (and the world). To react to the recent developments with a ‘poor us, nobody warned us’ is not only ludicrous but also probably a lie.
“The jet is not a normal one, since it is often flown by HRH Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn. HRH the Crown Prince made clear he understands the situation, but it is the duty of the new foreign minister to employ his or her diplomatic skills to try to get the plane released. ”
You seem to be a great fan of railways. Nothing wrong with that but not much sense in the rest of your argument.
Walter Bau did not “conspire with the Thai government of the day ” they entered into a well publicised contract. That is the way the free world does business.
As for “mak[ing] Bangkok more car polluted and energy wasteful” you obviously don’t consider the traffic jams on the old Vibhavadi Rangsit Highway. Cars are far more polluting and energy wasteful when they are inching along in endless traffic jams rather than on a freeway. Improving traffic flow reduces pollution and is hardly an “environmental crime”.
After reunification Germany did spend massive amounts on railways in the old DDR but they also spent massive amounts on roads . They knew that improved transport was essential to revitalize the East. Thailand also is in great need of improvements to both road and rail infrastructure if the lives of the majority are to be improved.
“Why weren’t they pushing Thailand into upgrading the railway to Don Muang twenty years ago? ” you ask. Well twenty years ago I was working on upgrading the railway to Don Muang. But paid by the Australians not the Germans. After that the Japanese invested further money into improving the same line. But you are right that there is still scope for huge improvements.
As for the Thai government forfeiting the plane, so far the only result of their stubbornness is that a second plane has been flown out to rescue the CP. So no savings for the environment there. And if the Thai government ever diverts budget from the CP’s fleet of planes to invest in badly needed improvements at Royal State Railways of Thailand I shall eat my plastic Thomas the Tank Engine model.
I’ve very much enjoyed this recent round of ‘community thinking.’
I specially want to thank BKK lawyer for his patient sharing of his legal understandings! He kept this portion of the dialogue going and centered on trying to work out ‘what are the real legal issues and what laws apply, in what manner.’ In a few short days our understandings reached new heights.
My respects BKK lawyer. Between you and the Bangkok Pundit (BP) and all the intelligent folks inspired to contribute by your examples, this has been a rewarding legal discussion.
And, while it goes without saying, maybe we should say it more often, anyway. We owe appreciation to New Mandala for making this forum available and encouraging such a broad range of perspectives.
Interesting observations. First, while cameras are certainly widely used in the major cities, they are still quite a novelty in the rural areas. On one of my trips, a friend of mine had a small instant camera, the prints from which were huge hits with the kids. (and their parents).
I think the effect of increased photography will be mixed. The protests and crackdown of 2007 was captured on video (Burma VJ, for example), and caused no real repercussions for the government. Think about the images many of have burned into our minds of Tienanmen Square. China is hardly suffering from that. In addition, in spite of the brave work of many citizen journalists, most of the images I see come out of Burma are of its beauty — the land, the people, the temples. Such images of beauty on the surface can often mask the brutality lurking underneath for those not well informed about the political and humanitarian situation in the country.
All of that said, I think more openness is always better. More photography, more video, increased internet access will hopefully lead to better times ahead….some day.
There is an old saying “There is no honour among thieves” and when one considers who are the parties to this dispute surely the adage applies to all concerned.
Firstly Walter Bau. Why did this German company conspire with the Thai government of the day to make Bangkok more car polluted and energy wasteful? Did the company’s principals think they might be able to come and join in the high life of Bangkok and speed around the town in bright red BMWs or elegant Benz limosines, all made in Germany of course?
Following the re-unification of Germany, the government there poured massive sums of money into upgrading the railways of the DDR so why does it now stand by a treaty which rewards environmental crime in Thailand? Why weren’t they pushing Thailand into upgrading the railway to Don Muang twenty years ago? The train trip from HuaLampong still takes 50 minutes.
Also please do not be fooled into thinking the German-Thai investment treaty has anything to do with justice. Does this treaty guarantee a minimum wage for workers, the right to form trade unions and to strike, safe working conditions and the protection of the environment? I rather think not unless it is an entirely different animal from say NAFTA and the fact that building this road goes completely against the protection of the environment.
So should Thailand pay up now? I suggest not. The forfeiture of the plane or planes will save the government the great cost of running them and the 30 million Euros owed would be better spent on railway works.
The Thai Foreign Ministry’s response to the German government’s succinct and accurate summary of the situation and how it can easily be resolved is truly amazing. They say that nobody told them that they were in breach of any law or agreement, if they refused to pay the compensation ordered by the UN arbitration tribunal in Geneva, despite the fact that they knew the tribunal, which even included a Thai presiding officer and at which the Thai government was represented by distinguished international lawyers, was convened under the German-Thai investment treaty. They also claim that nobody told them they had no right to appeal the tribunal’s decision, despite the fact that under the terms of the treaty willingly entered into by the Thai government there is clearly no avenue for appeal against the tribunal’s judgement.
The statements beg the question of who on earth have they been talking to, if nobody told them what would be patently obvious to a first year law student after a cursory reading of the treaty and the tribunal’s judgment.
Finally they complain that Germany is interfering in a dispute to which it is not a party. While Germany is not a litigant, it is clearly one of the two parties bound by the bilateral investment treaty that has been flagrantly violated by the Thai government. As such it has to guarantee the treaty’s tag along rights to German firms. If the boot were on the other foot and the German government refused to pay an arbitration award to a Thai company under the treaty, it is hard to imagine the Thai government remaining silent. It is more likely that individuals within the government would see an opportunity for personal gains and that the government would vociferously try to collect the debt on commission.
So all of this could have been avoided if the Thai government had accepted the final ruling of the arbitration court and paid up what is in terms of state budgets a very small amount of money. Why wont they pay up?
There is a certain irony when considering Thai government spokespeople go on about foreign governments respecting Thai court decisions and returning the evil one or at least not letting him into their hallowed land.
(Sam) Your concern about ‘fairness’ — does it extend to the 4,000 workers who reportedly lost their jobs when Walter Bau went belly-up in 2005? I don’t know if timely payment by Thailand would have helped avoid that, but put it on the scales against annoying publicity and loss of use of one personal jet, and see what it weighs. Might payments now go toward benefits for those laid-off workers? Fairness is in the eyes of the beholder, I guess.
(FGA#163): ‘Malethic’? That’s ‘malefic’ spoken with a lisp, right?
I would suggest that the image revolution is less differentiated by nation or culture as a whole than the act of reading, a much more layered form of consumption, is. As insta-cams litter themselves into the front pockets of shirts and waists of lungyis, Burmese people may find themselves becoming more vain, image-conscious, creative, empowered or even salacious, just like the rest of the world. It’s early days.
But it’s fair to say that censorship is certainly something that will feel repercussions. Graffiti can now become immortalised. Anonymous dissent will not be wiped clean so easily.
Across the border with Bangladesh, cameras are still an immense and mighty novelty, and showing one in public is tantamount to inviting the most epic of Bengali lynchings.
Indeed, I found the German Embassy in Bangkok press release to be very strongly worded. In essence, it says to the Royal Thai Government: “You have run out of time and exhausted all appeals. We expect you to PAY UP NOW!”
I have extracted the following from the Bangkok Pundit post listed in posting #161:
“The aircraft was impounded after an international arbitration panel ruled in summer 2009 that the Thai state should pay compensation to the company Walter Bau AG. The judgement is final. In line with the Investment Protection Treaty between Germany and Thailand, the German Government expects the Thai Government to fulfil its obligation under the judgement as soon as possible.”
“Reports in the Thai media about ongoing proceedings in New York in this connection are misleading. The proceedings in New York merely concern the question as to whether a compulsory enforcement is also possible in the US. This will do nothing to alter Thailand’s obligation to pay compensation.”
“An early resolution of this case would restore the confidence of German and other foreign investors in Thailand and would send out a positive message about the further development of German-Thai relations.”
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Translating Thai political restrictions
BangkokPost had an article on this several months ago:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/228496/demystifying-the-bill-on-public-assembly
As PTP will soon be in power, I suspect the Dems are now rethinking about passing the law. With the UDD protests fresh in memory, the UDD is unlikely to let PTP pass the law. I’m quite confident the anti-protest bill will die when PTP forms the new government next Monday.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
About an hour ago, the Bangkok Post was publishing comments on this online article:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/249116/abhisit-warns-german-govt-to-back-off
There was a large number of comments, most of which were highly critical of the outgoing Governments stance and many were well informed about the legal issues. There was also some justified criticism of the Post’s misleading wording about Thailand’s current legal position.
The comments have now been removed.
This habit of removing comments when they are predominantly unsympathetic to the Government or the major Thai institutions seems to have become a standard practice of the Post in recent times. Yes, the paper legitimately reserves the right not to publish comments, but to remove comments, which they have moderated and agreed to publish, can only reflect badly on the paper and its editorial staff and must raise questions about the influence of outside pressure by the Government (or in other cases, the army).
Whatever, it is an insidious and despicable form of censorship.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
JohnW @175:
The link you gave leads to “download not available,” but I can still access the German statement at the same addresses where I retrieved it on Tuesday:
Thai version: http://www.bangkok.diplo.de/contentblob/3221716/Daten/1466452/Flugzeug_Download.pdf
English version: http://www.bangkok.diplo.de/contentblob/3217318/Daten/1454765/Flugzeug_Download.pdf
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Tell the Germans they can keep the plane. That will save 200,000,000 Baht a year in running costs for somebody…..
taxpayers?
Taking photos in Burma
The very first thing that Aung San Suu Kyi noticed to her surprise and remarked about later as she came out after her release from house arrest in November was the number of digital and mobile phone cameras, held up by the crowd that greeted her outside her gates.
It can only be a good thing that every moment of the popular struggle and state terrorism is likely to be captured by someone with a pocket device and more importantly on video. And its instant transmission around the planet will make the regime think twice of its actions and the repercussions. Not that when it comes to ‘fighting’ for its own survival it will flinch an iota because of this potential disadvantage.
Naturally as with most new technology this will prove to be a double edged sword. Already you see tons of material on Flickr and YouTube, good and bad, and that’s just from the Burmese diaspora in the main. Nonetheless this technology has a truly democratic and heady empowering impact inside the country, like the Internet in the global perspective.
Thankfully one crucial transformation is that we can today see what is really going on in ethnic homelands and at the border. We get to hear what our ethnic brethren bearing arms against the govt have to say, no longer easily vilified and demonised one sidedly stoking up irrational and unjustified racial hatred. Proper two way traffic on the small screen too with the advent of the DVB TV channel including Dateline Irrawaddy in its programmes beamed directly into rural and urban dwellings alike, far more effective and reaching a much wider audience than the Internet.
More is definitely more, and it’s a long way to go in Burma before it gets too much. I for one never owned a camera before I left the country.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Does anyone understand why the Nation is claiming that the German Embassy’s statement has been removed from its website? Tulsathit has been claiming this in the ‘tweets’ bit since yesterday. I have no problem accessing it at
http://www.bangkok.diplo.de/contentblob/3217318/Daten/1466452/Flugzeug_Download.pdf
Was there something more, that’s now been removed, or has the Nation simply decided to go the DP route and make stuff up as it goes along?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
another update from BangkokPost:
“Acting government spokesman Panitan Wattanayagorn said the Foreign Ministry would explain and clarify the issue to its German counterpart. The ministry has never heard from any sources that the Thai government will violate any law or breach any agreement if it refused to pay, Foreign Ministry deputy spokesman Jessada Katawetin said.”
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/248948/germany-tells-govt-to-pay-contractor
FYI, the CP is flying back to Thailand before Aug 1st, so I suspect the second plane won’t be there for long:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/249064/crown-prince-to-chair-aug-1-opening-of-parliament
Translating Thai political restrictions
This can of legislation is somewhat typical, like the Communist Act by Field Marshal Sarit, perpetuating the esotericism of power here in the Kingdom of Thailand.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Nobody @166: You make an excellent point that this “is in terms of state budgets a very small amount of money.” Similarly, it is a trivial issue for a prime minister to deal with — let alone speak out about, let alone bash a friendly country about.
The leader of a non-dysfunctional government would not concern himself or herself with such a trivial issue, and if asked about it by the press would say something like ‘we respect our treaty obligations with Germany’ and ‘the judicial process should run its course,’ and refer further inquiries to the responsible ministry. I am constantly amazed by how often Thai leaders (esp. AV) not only wade into small matters, but even offend people and countries about them.
Portman @167 is right, too, on similar points. Thailand has some excellent lawyers (the foreign ones, at least), and its law firm for the New York proceeding (DLA Piper) is one of the best in the country (and the world). To react to the recent developments with a ‘poor us, nobody warned us’ is not only ludicrous but also probably a lie.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
“The jet is not a normal one, since it is often flown by HRH Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn. HRH the Crown Prince made clear he understands the situation, but it is the duty of the new foreign minister to employ his or her diplomatic skills to try to get the plane released. ”
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/07/27/national/The-job-nobody-wants-next-foreign-minister-30161215.html
Interesting viewpoint, I thought.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Re Ricky #168
You seem to be a great fan of railways. Nothing wrong with that but not much sense in the rest of your argument.
Walter Bau did not “conspire with the Thai government of the day ” they entered into a well publicised contract. That is the way the free world does business.
As for “mak[ing] Bangkok more car polluted and energy wasteful” you obviously don’t consider the traffic jams on the old Vibhavadi Rangsit Highway. Cars are far more polluting and energy wasteful when they are inching along in endless traffic jams rather than on a freeway. Improving traffic flow reduces pollution and is hardly an “environmental crime”.
After reunification Germany did spend massive amounts on railways in the old DDR but they also spent massive amounts on roads . They knew that improved transport was essential to revitalize the East. Thailand also is in great need of improvements to both road and rail infrastructure if the lives of the majority are to be improved.
“Why weren’t they pushing Thailand into upgrading the railway to Don Muang twenty years ago? ” you ask. Well twenty years ago I was working on upgrading the railway to Don Muang. But paid by the Australians not the Germans. After that the Japanese invested further money into improving the same line. But you are right that there is still scope for huge improvements.
As for the Thai government forfeiting the plane, so far the only result of their stubbornness is that a second plane has been flown out to rescue the CP. So no savings for the environment there. And if the Thai government ever diverts budget from the CP’s fleet of planes to invest in badly needed improvements at Royal State Railways of Thailand I shall eat my plastic Thomas the Tank Engine model.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
I’ve very much enjoyed this recent round of ‘community thinking.’
I specially want to thank BKK lawyer for his patient sharing of his legal understandings! He kept this portion of the dialogue going and centered on trying to work out ‘what are the real legal issues and what laws apply, in what manner.’ In a few short days our understandings reached new heights.
My respects BKK lawyer. Between you and the Bangkok Pundit (BP) and all the intelligent folks inspired to contribute by your examples, this has been a rewarding legal discussion.
And, while it goes without saying, maybe we should say it more often, anyway. We owe appreciation to New Mandala for making this forum available and encouraging such a broad range of perspectives.
Altogether, “Hear! Hear!”
Taking photos in Burma
Interesting observations. First, while cameras are certainly widely used in the major cities, they are still quite a novelty in the rural areas. On one of my trips, a friend of mine had a small instant camera, the prints from which were huge hits with the kids. (and their parents).
I think the effect of increased photography will be mixed. The protests and crackdown of 2007 was captured on video (Burma VJ, for example), and caused no real repercussions for the government. Think about the images many of have burned into our minds of Tienanmen Square. China is hardly suffering from that. In addition, in spite of the brave work of many citizen journalists, most of the images I see come out of Burma are of its beauty — the land, the people, the temples. Such images of beauty on the surface can often mask the brutality lurking underneath for those not well informed about the political and humanitarian situation in the country.
All of that said, I think more openness is always better. More photography, more video, increased internet access will hopefully lead to better times ahead….some day.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
overheard at a noodle shop, (it almost made me spit out my food in laughter).
loosely and literally translated:
“Phor Piang Hia arai wa? Meng nueng Khrob khrua tong kaan boeing kii khan wa?”
“What kind of Sufficiency economy monitor lizard is this? 1 family needs how many boeings?”
I felt like correcting him, it was for 1 person, not the family… but like I usually do in this country, I decided that saying nothing was best
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
There is an old saying “There is no honour among thieves” and when one considers who are the parties to this dispute surely the adage applies to all concerned.
Firstly Walter Bau. Why did this German company conspire with the Thai government of the day to make Bangkok more car polluted and energy wasteful? Did the company’s principals think they might be able to come and join in the high life of Bangkok and speed around the town in bright red BMWs or elegant Benz limosines, all made in Germany of course?
Following the re-unification of Germany, the government there poured massive sums of money into upgrading the railways of the DDR so why does it now stand by a treaty which rewards environmental crime in Thailand? Why weren’t they pushing Thailand into upgrading the railway to Don Muang twenty years ago? The train trip from HuaLampong still takes 50 minutes.
Also please do not be fooled into thinking the German-Thai investment treaty has anything to do with justice. Does this treaty guarantee a minimum wage for workers, the right to form trade unions and to strike, safe working conditions and the protection of the environment? I rather think not unless it is an entirely different animal from say NAFTA and the fact that building this road goes completely against the protection of the environment.
So should Thailand pay up now? I suggest not. The forfeiture of the plane or planes will save the government the great cost of running them and the 30 million Euros owed would be better spent on railway works.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
The Thai Foreign Ministry’s response to the German government’s succinct and accurate summary of the situation and how it can easily be resolved is truly amazing. They say that nobody told them that they were in breach of any law or agreement, if they refused to pay the compensation ordered by the UN arbitration tribunal in Geneva, despite the fact that they knew the tribunal, which even included a Thai presiding officer and at which the Thai government was represented by distinguished international lawyers, was convened under the German-Thai investment treaty. They also claim that nobody told them they had no right to appeal the tribunal’s decision, despite the fact that under the terms of the treaty willingly entered into by the Thai government there is clearly no avenue for appeal against the tribunal’s judgement.
The statements beg the question of who on earth have they been talking to, if nobody told them what would be patently obvious to a first year law student after a cursory reading of the treaty and the tribunal’s judgment.
Finally they complain that Germany is interfering in a dispute to which it is not a party. While Germany is not a litigant, it is clearly one of the two parties bound by the bilateral investment treaty that has been flagrantly violated by the Thai government. As such it has to guarantee the treaty’s tag along rights to German firms. If the boot were on the other foot and the German government refused to pay an arbitration award to a Thai company under the treaty, it is hard to imagine the Thai government remaining silent. It is more likely that individuals within the government would see an opportunity for personal gains and that the government would vociferously try to collect the debt on commission.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
So all of this could have been avoided if the Thai government had accepted the final ruling of the arbitration court and paid up what is in terms of state budgets a very small amount of money. Why wont they pay up?
There is a certain irony when considering Thai government spokespeople go on about foreign governments respecting Thai court decisions and returning the evil one or at least not letting him into their hallowed land.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
(Sam) Your concern about ‘fairness’ — does it extend to the 4,000 workers who reportedly lost their jobs when Walter Bau went belly-up in 2005? I don’t know if timely payment by Thailand would have helped avoid that, but put it on the scales against annoying publicity and loss of use of one personal jet, and see what it weighs. Might payments now go toward benefits for those laid-off workers? Fairness is in the eyes of the beholder, I guess.
(FGA#163): ‘Malethic’? That’s ‘malefic’ spoken with a lisp, right?
Taking photos in Burma
I would suggest that the image revolution is less differentiated by nation or culture as a whole than the act of reading, a much more layered form of consumption, is. As insta-cams litter themselves into the front pockets of shirts and waists of lungyis, Burmese people may find themselves becoming more vain, image-conscious, creative, empowered or even salacious, just like the rest of the world. It’s early days.
But it’s fair to say that censorship is certainly something that will feel repercussions. Graffiti can now become immortalised. Anonymous dissent will not be wiped clean so easily.
Across the border with Bangladesh, cameras are still an immense and mighty novelty, and showing one in public is tantamount to inviting the most epic of Bengali lynchings.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Re SteveCM #161
Indeed, I found the German Embassy in Bangkok press release to be very strongly worded. In essence, it says to the Royal Thai Government: “You have run out of time and exhausted all appeals. We expect you to PAY UP NOW!”
I have extracted the following from the Bangkok Pundit post listed in posting #161:
“The aircraft was impounded after an international arbitration panel ruled in summer 2009 that the Thai state should pay compensation to the company Walter Bau AG. The judgement is final. In line with the Investment Protection Treaty between Germany and Thailand, the German Government expects the Thai Government to fulfil its obligation under the judgement as soon as possible.”
“Reports in the Thai media about ongoing proceedings in New York in this connection are misleading. The proceedings in New York merely concern the question as to whether a compulsory enforcement is also possible in the US. This will do nothing to alter Thailand’s obligation to pay compensation.”
“An early resolution of this case would restore the confidence of German and other foreign investors in Thailand and would send out a positive message about the further development of German-Thai relations.”