1. The Germans did not file the appeal. (Where did you read this?) You can see the notice of appeal filed by Thailand on the public docket of the case, Schneider v. Kingdom of Thailand, case no. 10-cv-02729, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.
2. You ask how the aircraft owner would recover the airplane if the Thai government wins the appeal. The plane has only been impounded – its status frozen – not sold. That is a long way off. The creditor must give a prescribed notice to the debtor and the public before selling it. That allows an interval of time in which the debtor can redeem the property or seek a stay to postpone a sale pending the outcome of the appeal (or a third party can try to prove the property does not belong to the debtor). The process is designed to protect all parties’ rights. It is not an unfair game, as you surmise. The process operates routinely, day in and day out, in legal systems around the world, for creditors and debtors and judgments of all sizes.
3. The attorney general is quoted as saying Thailand will sue the German creditor. I can’t say that is incorrect: Thailand may or may not carry out its threat to sue. I have only said that Thailand probably would lose such a suit. Maybe such a suit would fly in Thailand, but it would not fly in most other countries (as many grounds for suing in Thailand would not fly in many countries).
As for the AG’s reason for suing–that it was not proper to say that Thailand had failed to pay damages as the case is still on appeal–that is indeed incorrect, as I explained in my original comment on this issue. The judgment is due and immediately enforceable, and the appeal does not change that, unless Thailand seeks and obtains a stay of enforcement, which it has not done, for whatever reason.
Why would Thailand sue anyway? According to the Thai position, the Germans have not impounded Thailand’s property. If anyone would sue, it would be the CP, who claims ownership of the seized airplane.
The only debate left is whether or not there is/was any other Thai who should wield the title ‘Mother of all Thai Corruption’, if not Thaksin.
Why is it the only debate? what’s the point? do we even have the degree of corruptness?? Don’t you think its a bit shallow to be even debating about the topic? since you don’t even want to list out what exactly did thaksin do that constituted as corruption (mind you with good solid proves), so how do we even initiate your demand for debating??
This whole issue should be put into perspective again. As Kasit said, it has become such a prominent issue only due to the involvement of monarchy. Obviously, it is difficult for Kasit and a few others to understand that here we have a “juridical” not a monarchic court case that should be cleared based on existing legal (not political or status) regulation.
There seems to be some more confusion. It is not, as Sam indicates, a case of Germans against Thais, but a company registered in Germany (which does not even have to be a German company!) applying international law against the Thai state for a debt claim. Though we have a Thai-state, one should not confuse population with political system! Sam might explain as well what is meant by “backwater court”. As far as I understand the German legal system, the courts, regardless of their location within Germany, have to apply the same laws. May be this is different in Thailand, depending on what courts are involved. If the representatives of the Thai state could easily prove ownership of the plane, then all would have been set already! It is quite simple: just show legally valid documents that prove ownership to this “backwater” court. May be in Thailand, if a high ranking person says so, no legal documents and regulations are needed.
What I don’t understand is why the current Thai government (not the Thais or the Thai state) tries so hard to keep this case (not paying debts, not being able to prove ownership, etc.) in the international news. Is this a new kind of “amazing Thailand” campaign?
Your sentiments are laudable, but “We all in Thai knows it by heart that it is the Crown Prince’s” is certainly inaccurate as an assumption. Many Thai people and others in Thailand are convinced of the opposite, and they talk to one another about it. There are two sides, yes. Let the lawyers and courts, and hopefully non-Thai justice, decide what is fact and just.
I think both sides are right to their points. Thai government correctly said that the airplane is belonged to HRH Crown Prince, and Walter AG countered that it belonged to Thai government. We all in Thai knows it by heart that it is the Crown Prince’s, but Walter AG follows the document which is aviation registries –stating that it belongs to Thai Government.
Why the aviation registries states that it is Thai government? Because if you show it is personal property, the taxes and charges will be very high. On the other hand, if you register as government property, the charges will become much cheaper.
Whose false? Nobody false? Or trying to get away the charges?
In many countries the criminal code also acts as the code for suppressing dissent, something it should not be used for as it calls the impartiality of the whole system into disrepute. By using the criminal system to intimidate and imprison dissent a government can conveniently claim to be removed from the decision and claim that it was simply a legal matter that did not involve it or that it does not interfere in the judicial process.
Many laws are universal and just, others are a prostitution of the system usually with the intent of crushing dissent and criticism. Even in Australia Gillard wants to try and censor a newspaper that is frequently critical even though she has the national broadcaster and others lavishing praise, totalitarian politicians can’t resist the temptation to utilize the judiciary to further their own political agenda or maintain power.
Also of course there is that different social classes in most countries often have very different treatment under a supposedly universal code due to wealth, connections etc, but that is another topic. As to Daranee, I doubt she will ever see the light of day.
If ownership of the plane was transferred at the time the government says it was, then it is curious that they are having such a hard time producing credible documentary evidence. It seems quite likely that the plane was actually presented to the CP for his personal use without a transfer of ownership. It is hard to imagine any one in the air force having the signing power to give away a plane as a gift and under normal circumstances it would make more sense sense that the transfer should technically be a loan that wouldn’t require higher approval. Thus the air force could more easily cover the cost of maintenance and just replace it with a new “loaner” in time. I imagine that the air force handled the gifting of the CP’s F15 in this way. It is hard to imagine an advanced fighter bomber being owned by a private indivual.
“The recent wikileaks about Thaksin skimming the national lottery and using the Thai Deputy Police Chief as the bagman to make the deliveries to we-know-who should underscore that point.”
Which specific cable are you referring to?
“And Snoh’s bombshell of a book…”
Book title? Author? Link?
Corruption on this scale must have been known by many people. Why has it not been brought to court?
Thank You BKK lawyer. It is nice to have a lawyer’s view.
Three thoughts:
1. Perhaps I have a ‘correction’ for you as well.
I have read that the Germans actually filed the Appeal, not the Thai Government, as you wrote.
I could not make sense as to motive. I assumed that it was German maneuvering to preemptively Appeal to gain some legal advantage before the Thai Government filed an Appeal. (?)
2. To this non-attorney, the legal process you lay out, if it works exactly as you describe, could be inherently unfair, in this case, to the Thais.
To Whit:
Suppose the Germans are successful in seizing Thai Government Property and selling it, as you say they legally can do. Then suppose the Thai Government wins the Appeal.
Then legally what would the Thai have to do to get back their asset?
Would the Thais have to sue the Germans to regain their asset value? Would a whole new round of suits begin? Ugh! What a legal mess would result.
The legal logic you describe would seems to me to be illogical legally. The Thais would be punished for having been right all along. And, this injustice would be built into your described justice procedures!
3. If you are legally correct as you write, then why does Thailand’s head prosecutor, Attorney General Julasing Wasantasing, who is also an attorney — disagree with you?
as declaring he will sue the German company Bau, as ‘it was not proper for the company to claim that Thailand had failed to pay damages’, as the Appeals Court had not ruled on if damages are owed?
Is he and his team mistaken about the law, as you describe it?
Again, I am not an attorney, so I am stuck with relying on legal authority for the ins and outs of this legal struggle. As it is, however, I am now faced with conflicting legal views.
So I respectfully stand by my original view, until I’m convinced the legal facts are otherwise.
Again, thank you for the thoughtful reply. I am open for any further considerations.
Certainly it seems to have more of a reading culture than Cambodia, which is the only country I know enough about to make a comparison with. I’m not sure if I’d say there’s less intellectual curiosity among younger people, but I”d say there’s more to draw them away from what could be considered intellectual pursuits.
It’s not just popular music and South Korean soaps though. The majority of internet users that I encounter are using gmail/gtalk, Facebook, VOIP, online games and so on. Looking for information, whether its news or otherwise, seems less of a priority, despite the censorship that hinders local media reporting. (That being said, one development that I’m happy to see is that a lot of local news is being distributed through Facebook and forwarded emails – in many cases before it has made it to exile media.) As we can’t even get an accurate figure for the number of internet users, I think there’s little chance of finding out what people are using the internet for. It would be interesting to see how it differs from neighbouring and Western countries.
We shouldn’t forget that for most people outside of the larger towns, getting books, journals and magazines is quite difficult, even when you don’t take into account the cost factor. One anecdotal example: The only place in the Bagan area where I could find Burmese-language books for sale was inside Htilominlo pagoda. There were also one or two book rental shops, but they didn’t have much in the way of new stock. Most people I asked couldn’t even tell me where the book rental shops were, which would indicate they don’t really use them.
One focus of the growing local NGO/civil society activity has been on getting rural communities reading through the establishment of village libraries (the government had a similar program but with no funding to stock the libraries). Often these programs are instigated by famous writers and I think it’s a step in the right direction, but re-establishing a culture of reading in these communities will take some time.
Many times irate but polite Thais have resorted to criminal rather than civil options to pay back or put a wrench in the works. BKK lawyer – any chance or probability of this happening?
All of this back and forth re. who is really corrupt and who is serving the interests of whom is interesting but does not settle the legality issues, of course. That a German court made a decision and ordered an aircraft seized does not make the decision wrong because it was a “backwater”court. I suspect that many professionals in the legal field are also weighing the rights and wrongs, and are filing claim and counter-claim. The difference between Thai and non-Thai machinations is not one of who is more corrupt but rather who is in control. I place my faith in those who weigh rather than pretend, in those who know facts and are not afraid to express them than in those who are afraid of others expressing facts.
Sorry, but you’re mistaken on a number of key points.
The Thai govt lost the arbitration, and the arbitration award has been entered as a judgment in U.S. federal court. The judgment is immediately enforceable, even though the Thai government has appealed. The appeal does not prevent Bau from taking all steps to enforce his judgment — including levying on assets like the airplane. If the Thai government wants to obtain a stay to prevent enforcement pending the appeal, it must file a motion to ask for that — though it’s not likely to be granted.
Moving to enforce the judgment is not ‘subverting’ the process; it is carrying out the process.
I don’t know German law, but I seriously doubt that the liquidator can be held liable for pursuing an authorized process of impounding an asset for the purpose of enforcing a judgment. Such actions are usually privileged and immune against civil liability. If he had no basis for believing the asset belonged to Thailand, then he could be liable for abuse of process, but as we’ve seen, it is far from clear that Thailand does not own the asset. Again, the debt most certainly has been legally established, and can be enforced unless and until the U.S. court orders otherwise.
I agree with Dom that the older generation are better educated because of the educational infrastructure that existed until it was gradually dismantled by the military regime from 1962 onwards. And from 1988 onwards, the political situation further destroyed the learning of one whole generation. Nevertheless, there seems to be a glut for reading and information because Burma is behind the times where cyber connectivity and ubiquity of information is concerned. If this question of ” Thai and Burmese society superiority in intellectuality” was asked 20 years ago. I would have said “Burma” without a moment’s hesitation. Most certainity “reading” “listening to short-wave” radio in the pursuit of knowledge is very high in Burma, simply because of lack of anything else better to do, although of late, popular music culture is begining to engulf the society’s pass time.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. The underhanded actions taken by Bau, and the backwater local German Court, are as unjust as any debt payment stalling by the Thais.
By seizing the plane, a week before the Appeal Court case in the US convenes, the German liquidators are subverting this independent, international legal proceeding. Furthermore, they shift the “legal issue” from the justness of the German ‘debt claim’ to that of private verses Thai Government ownership of the questionably seized plane.
Well, it looks like the German ‘tricky’ attempt to escape the Appeal Court’s determination, as to whether the Thai Government owes the Germans anything, might have backed fired.
If the Thai Government files suit against Bau for falsely filing a Failure to Pay Charge, then there’ll surely be egg on German faces.
The Thai attorney’s logic, points out that – until the US Court appeal is settled, Thailand has not failed to pay their debt. The Appeal Court has not yet ruled that the debt is actually owed. So how can charges of failure to pay an ‘unresolved debt claim’ be legitimately filed in the German Court?
Personally, if I were the Thais, I would sue the German Court, too. I am not using hyperbole when I say they appear quite “corrupt”.
There is no way, this German Court could have examined the original International Court finding against the Thais, and not see that that the ‘debt claim’ was still being challenged in the Appeal Court. Therefore there is no way the backwater German Court could legally seize THE plane for debt due, when debt was not legally established.
Therefore this German Courts proceedings appear to me to be quite tainted, to say the least.
Boy! For once the sibling rivals Hla Oo and Moe Aung grudgling agreeth! (Perhaps, a harbinger that ASSK and “new” Burmese governent are about to sign on the dotted lines:))
I understand that both HHH and Moon Hsar (the second claimant) hail from Brisbane, a coincidence? Their stories belong to different periods and geographical locations, and therefore different and unrelated issues as well. There is but an uncanny similarity in the ambiguity of motives on their part. If ‘attention seeking” is their motive, it is not slow news day, with the unfolding of the killings in Norway and the imminent signing of the “Malaysia deal”…… it seems the Australian media’s interest is already wanning. The Burmese disapora need to understand that Australia and Australians have very little interest in Burma, even Kevin Rudd’s visit was greeted with: “why is he going there?”.
I should point out that reading and being intellectual are not necessarily the same thing. This particularly true in Burma where there many ethnic minorities with pretty limited reading materials in their languages. I’ve met some pretty intellectual people who I doubt had done much reading beyond, say the Bible, which was about the only book translated in to their language. They could also read Burmese, but the availability of books just was that great where they lived.
I’d agree, at least amongst the middle-to-older Burmese with some education. Although we have to remember that more “modern” forms of mass entertainment, such as Hollywood movies and rock bands, are relatively recent in Burma. The younger Burmese I know seem anti-intellectual by comparison.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Frank @137: I don’t see any grounds for seeking criminal charges for the impoundment — was that your question?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Sam @138. To respond to your three points:
1. The Germans did not file the appeal. (Where did you read this?) You can see the notice of appeal filed by Thailand on the public docket of the case, Schneider v. Kingdom of Thailand, case no. 10-cv-02729, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York.
2. You ask how the aircraft owner would recover the airplane if the Thai government wins the appeal. The plane has only been impounded – its status frozen – not sold. That is a long way off. The creditor must give a prescribed notice to the debtor and the public before selling it. That allows an interval of time in which the debtor can redeem the property or seek a stay to postpone a sale pending the outcome of the appeal (or a third party can try to prove the property does not belong to the debtor). The process is designed to protect all parties’ rights. It is not an unfair game, as you surmise. The process operates routinely, day in and day out, in legal systems around the world, for creditors and debtors and judgments of all sizes.
3. The attorney general is quoted as saying Thailand will sue the German creditor. I can’t say that is incorrect: Thailand may or may not carry out its threat to sue. I have only said that Thailand probably would lose such a suit. Maybe such a suit would fly in Thailand, but it would not fly in most other countries (as many grounds for suing in Thailand would not fly in many countries).
As for the AG’s reason for suing–that it was not proper to say that Thailand had failed to pay damages as the case is still on appeal–that is indeed incorrect, as I explained in my original comment on this issue. The judgment is due and immediately enforceable, and the appeal does not change that, unless Thailand seeks and obtains a stay of enforcement, which it has not done, for whatever reason.
Why would Thailand sue anyway? According to the Thai position, the Germans have not impounded Thailand’s property. If anyone would sue, it would be the CP, who claims ownership of the seized airplane.
I hope my explanations are helpful.
Thailand’s corruption record
Vichai N – 47
The only debate left is whether or not there is/was any other Thai who should wield the title ‘Mother of all Thai Corruption’, if not Thaksin.
Why is it the only debate? what’s the point? do we even have the degree of corruptness?? Don’t you think its a bit shallow to be even debating about the topic? since you don’t even want to list out what exactly did thaksin do that constituted as corruption (mind you with good solid proves), so how do we even initiate your demand for debating??
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
This whole issue should be put into perspective again. As Kasit said, it has become such a prominent issue only due to the involvement of monarchy. Obviously, it is difficult for Kasit and a few others to understand that here we have a “juridical” not a monarchic court case that should be cleared based on existing legal (not political or status) regulation.
There seems to be some more confusion. It is not, as Sam indicates, a case of Germans against Thais, but a company registered in Germany (which does not even have to be a German company!) applying international law against the Thai state for a debt claim. Though we have a Thai-state, one should not confuse population with political system! Sam might explain as well what is meant by “backwater court”. As far as I understand the German legal system, the courts, regardless of their location within Germany, have to apply the same laws. May be this is different in Thailand, depending on what courts are involved. If the representatives of the Thai state could easily prove ownership of the plane, then all would have been set already! It is quite simple: just show legally valid documents that prove ownership to this “backwater” court. May be in Thailand, if a high ranking person says so, no legal documents and regulations are needed.
What I don’t understand is why the current Thai government (not the Thais or the Thai state) tries so hard to keep this case (not paying debts, not being able to prove ownership, etc.) in the international news. Is this a new kind of “amazing Thailand” campaign?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Your sentiments are laudable, but “We all in Thai knows it by heart that it is the Crown Prince’s” is certainly inaccurate as an assumption. Many Thai people and others in Thailand are convinced of the opposite, and they talk to one another about it. There are two sides, yes. Let the lawyers and courts, and hopefully non-Thai justice, decide what is fact and just.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
I think both sides are right to their points. Thai government correctly said that the airplane is belonged to HRH Crown Prince, and Walter AG countered that it belonged to Thai government. We all in Thai knows it by heart that it is the Crown Prince’s, but Walter AG follows the document which is aviation registries –stating that it belongs to Thai Government.
Why the aviation registries states that it is Thai government? Because if you show it is personal property, the taxes and charges will be very high. On the other hand, if you register as government property, the charges will become much cheaper.
Whose false? Nobody false? Or trying to get away the charges?
Are secret trials compatible with liberties and rights?
In many countries the criminal code also acts as the code for suppressing dissent, something it should not be used for as it calls the impartiality of the whole system into disrepute. By using the criminal system to intimidate and imprison dissent a government can conveniently claim to be removed from the decision and claim that it was simply a legal matter that did not involve it or that it does not interfere in the judicial process.
Many laws are universal and just, others are a prostitution of the system usually with the intent of crushing dissent and criticism. Even in Australia Gillard wants to try and censor a newspaper that is frequently critical even though she has the national broadcaster and others lavishing praise, totalitarian politicians can’t resist the temptation to utilize the judiciary to further their own political agenda or maintain power.
Also of course there is that different social classes in most countries often have very different treatment under a supposedly universal code due to wealth, connections etc, but that is another topic. As to Daranee, I doubt she will ever see the light of day.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
If ownership of the plane was transferred at the time the government says it was, then it is curious that they are having such a hard time producing credible documentary evidence. It seems quite likely that the plane was actually presented to the CP for his personal use without a transfer of ownership. It is hard to imagine any one in the air force having the signing power to give away a plane as a gift and under normal circumstances it would make more sense sense that the transfer should technically be a loan that wouldn’t require higher approval. Thus the air force could more easily cover the cost of maintenance and just replace it with a new “loaner” in time. I imagine that the air force handled the gifting of the CP’s F15 in this way. It is hard to imagine an advanced fighter bomber being owned by a private indivual.
Thailand’s corruption record
Vichai,
“The recent wikileaks about Thaksin skimming the national lottery and using the Thai Deputy Police Chief as the bagman to make the deliveries to we-know-who should underscore that point.”
Which specific cable are you referring to?
“And Snoh’s bombshell of a book…”
Book title? Author? Link?
Corruption on this scale must have been known by many people. Why has it not been brought to court?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Thank You BKK lawyer. It is nice to have a lawyer’s view.
Three thoughts:
1. Perhaps I have a ‘correction’ for you as well.
I have read that the Germans actually filed the Appeal, not the Thai Government, as you wrote.
I could not make sense as to motive. I assumed that it was German maneuvering to preemptively Appeal to gain some legal advantage before the Thai Government filed an Appeal. (?)
2. To this non-attorney, the legal process you lay out, if it works exactly as you describe, could be inherently unfair, in this case, to the Thais.
To Whit:
Suppose the Germans are successful in seizing Thai Government Property and selling it, as you say they legally can do. Then suppose the Thai Government wins the Appeal.
Then legally what would the Thai have to do to get back their asset?
Would the Thais have to sue the Germans to regain their asset value? Would a whole new round of suits begin? Ugh! What a legal mess would result.
The legal logic you describe would seems to me to be illogical legally. The Thais would be punished for having been right all along. And, this injustice would be built into your described justice procedures!
3. If you are legally correct as you write, then why does Thailand’s head prosecutor, Attorney General Julasing Wasantasing, who is also an attorney — disagree with you?
Why is the Attorney General quoted at
http://www.mcot.net/cfcustom/cache_page/241834.html
as declaring he will sue the German company Bau, as ‘it was not proper for the company to claim that Thailand had failed to pay damages’, as the Appeals Court had not ruled on if damages are owed?
Is he and his team mistaken about the law, as you describe it?
Again, I am not an attorney, so I am stuck with relying on legal authority for the ins and outs of this legal struggle. As it is, however, I am now faced with conflicting legal views.
So I respectfully stand by my original view, until I’m convinced the legal facts are otherwise.
Again, thank you for the thoughtful reply. I am open for any further considerations.
Burma’s reading culture
Certainly it seems to have more of a reading culture than Cambodia, which is the only country I know enough about to make a comparison with. I’m not sure if I’d say there’s less intellectual curiosity among younger people, but I”d say there’s more to draw them away from what could be considered intellectual pursuits.
It’s not just popular music and South Korean soaps though. The majority of internet users that I encounter are using gmail/gtalk, Facebook, VOIP, online games and so on. Looking for information, whether its news or otherwise, seems less of a priority, despite the censorship that hinders local media reporting. (That being said, one development that I’m happy to see is that a lot of local news is being distributed through Facebook and forwarded emails – in many cases before it has made it to exile media.) As we can’t even get an accurate figure for the number of internet users, I think there’s little chance of finding out what people are using the internet for. It would be interesting to see how it differs from neighbouring and Western countries.
We shouldn’t forget that for most people outside of the larger towns, getting books, journals and magazines is quite difficult, even when you don’t take into account the cost factor. One anecdotal example: The only place in the Bagan area where I could find Burmese-language books for sale was inside Htilominlo pagoda. There were also one or two book rental shops, but they didn’t have much in the way of new stock. Most people I asked couldn’t even tell me where the book rental shops were, which would indicate they don’t really use them.
One focus of the growing local NGO/civil society activity has been on getting rural communities reading through the establishment of village libraries (the government had a similar program but with no funding to stock the libraries). Often these programs are instigated by famous writers and I think it’s a step in the right direction, but re-establishing a culture of reading in these communities will take some time.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Many times irate but polite Thais have resorted to criminal rather than civil options to pay back or put a wrench in the works. BKK lawyer – any chance or probability of this happening?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
All of this back and forth re. who is really corrupt and who is serving the interests of whom is interesting but does not settle the legality issues, of course. That a German court made a decision and ordered an aircraft seized does not make the decision wrong because it was a “backwater”court. I suspect that many professionals in the legal field are also weighing the rights and wrongs, and are filing claim and counter-claim. The difference between Thai and non-Thai machinations is not one of who is more corrupt but rather who is in control. I place my faith in those who weigh rather than pretend, in those who know facts and are not afraid to express them than in those who are afraid of others expressing facts.
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Sam @134:
Sorry, but you’re mistaken on a number of key points.
The Thai govt lost the arbitration, and the arbitration award has been entered as a judgment in U.S. federal court. The judgment is immediately enforceable, even though the Thai government has appealed. The appeal does not prevent Bau from taking all steps to enforce his judgment — including levying on assets like the airplane. If the Thai government wants to obtain a stay to prevent enforcement pending the appeal, it must file a motion to ask for that — though it’s not likely to be granted.
Moving to enforce the judgment is not ‘subverting’ the process; it is carrying out the process.
I don’t know German law, but I seriously doubt that the liquidator can be held liable for pursuing an authorized process of impounding an asset for the purpose of enforcing a judgment. Such actions are usually privileged and immune against civil liability. If he had no basis for believing the asset belonged to Thailand, then he could be liable for abuse of process, but as we’ve seen, it is far from clear that Thailand does not own the asset. Again, the debt most certainly has been legally established, and can be enforced unless and until the U.S. court orders otherwise.
Burma’s reading culture
I agree with Dom that the older generation are better educated because of the educational infrastructure that existed until it was gradually dismantled by the military regime from 1962 onwards. And from 1988 onwards, the political situation further destroyed the learning of one whole generation. Nevertheless, there seems to be a glut for reading and information because Burma is behind the times where cyber connectivity and ubiquity of information is concerned. If this question of ” Thai and Burmese society superiority in intellectuality” was asked 20 years ago. I would have said “Burma” without a moment’s hesitation. Most certainity “reading” “listening to short-wave” radio in the pursuit of knowledge is very high in Burma, simply because of lack of anything else better to do, although of late, popular music culture is begining to engulf the society’s pass time.
Burma’s reading culture
How does Burma compare with Vietnam on the reading front?
What role did colonisation (or lack of it in Thailand’s case) play in the development of reading?
Plane audacity in Thai dispute
Two wrongs don’t make a right. The underhanded actions taken by Bau, and the backwater local German Court, are as unjust as any debt payment stalling by the Thais.
By seizing the plane, a week before the Appeal Court case in the US convenes, the German liquidators are subverting this independent, international legal proceeding. Furthermore, they shift the “legal issue” from the justness of the German ‘debt claim’ to that of private verses Thai Government ownership of the questionably seized plane.
Well, it looks like the German ‘tricky’ attempt to escape the Appeal Court’s determination, as to whether the Thai Government owes the Germans anything, might have backed fired.
If the Thai Government files suit against Bau for falsely filing a Failure to Pay Charge, then there’ll surely be egg on German faces.
The Thai attorney’s logic, points out that – until the US Court appeal is settled, Thailand has not failed to pay their debt. The Appeal Court has not yet ruled that the debt is actually owed. So how can charges of failure to pay an ‘unresolved debt claim’ be legitimately filed in the German Court?
Personally, if I were the Thais, I would sue the German Court, too. I am not using hyperbole when I say they appear quite “corrupt”.
There is no way, this German Court could have examined the original International Court finding against the Thais, and not see that that the ‘debt claim’ was still being challenged in the Appeal Court. Therefore there is no way the backwater German Court could legally seize THE plane for debt due, when debt was not legally established.
Therefore this German Courts proceedings appear to me to be quite tainted, to say the least.
Htoo Htoo Han the confessor
Boy! For once the sibling rivals Hla Oo and Moe Aung grudgling agreeth! (Perhaps, a harbinger that ASSK and “new” Burmese governent are about to sign on the dotted lines:))
I understand that both HHH and Moon Hsar (the second claimant) hail from Brisbane, a coincidence? Their stories belong to different periods and geographical locations, and therefore different and unrelated issues as well. There is but an uncanny similarity in the ambiguity of motives on their part. If ‘attention seeking” is their motive, it is not slow news day, with the unfolding of the killings in Norway and the imminent signing of the “Malaysia deal”…… it seems the Australian media’s interest is already wanning. The Burmese disapora need to understand that Australia and Australians have very little interest in Burma, even Kevin Rudd’s visit was greeted with: “why is he going there?”.
Burma’s reading culture
I should point out that reading and being intellectual are not necessarily the same thing. This particularly true in Burma where there many ethnic minorities with pretty limited reading materials in their languages. I’ve met some pretty intellectual people who I doubt had done much reading beyond, say the Bible, which was about the only book translated in to their language. They could also read Burmese, but the availability of books just was that great where they lived.
Burma’s reading culture
I’d agree, at least amongst the middle-to-older Burmese with some education. Although we have to remember that more “modern” forms of mass entertainment, such as Hollywood movies and rock bands, are relatively recent in Burma. The younger Burmese I know seem anti-intellectual by comparison.