 (No Ratings Yet) Loading ... |
 |
Thaksin found guilty and sentenced to two years in jail
(Source: The Nation)
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sentenced ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra to two years in jail for abusing power to facilitate a deal for his wife; Khunying Pojamarn, to buy a Bangkok land plot worth 772 million from the state.
However the Supreme Court on Holders of Political Office found Pojamarn not guilty and revoked an arrest warrant on her of this trial.
Thaksin was found guilty of violating articles 4, 100 and 122 of the National Counter Corruption Commission law which bar holders of public office and their spouses from entering into a contract with the state.
PAD's celebration after Supreme Court sentenced Thaksin to two years in prison for abusing of power - Source: Naewna
[Read comprehensive background]
The Supreme Court ruled against Thaksin after reading the verdict for about two hours.
The Supreme Court ruled 5:4 to say that former prime minister Thaksin knew about his wife’s purchasing of land from the Financial Institutions Development Fund.
With that knowledge, the court ruled Thaksin also carried out actions that constituted conflict of interest on part of Thaksin as a state official.
Before reaching the verdict, the Supreme Court said the Assets Examination Committee had the power to probe the Ratchadpisek land case against Thaksin and his wife.
The court dismissed claimed by Thaksin’s defence lawyers that the AEC had no authority to probe case the because the AEC was not investigators and because the Financial Institutions Development Fund had not filed complaint regarding to the land purchase.
In addition, the court ruled that the AEC was empowered by the court orders to conduct graft probe against the former prime minister so it did not have to wait for the FIDF to file complaint first.
The Supreme Court also ruled that the Financial Institutions Development Fund is a state agency so there is ground for trial in the Ratchadapisek land case against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife.
The court ruled down an agreement of Thaksin’s defence team that the FIDF is not under state administration and that the Ratchadaphisek land purchase did not fall under Article 100 (3) of the National Counter Corruption Act, which covers state agencies.
Since the court ruled that the FIDF is state agency, the land purchase fell under the anti-graft act.
Voting on key points of the verdict
9-0 – The 1999 anti-corruption act is effective.
9-0 – Appointment of Assets Examination Committee is constitutional with authority to investigate cases.
9-0 – Financial Institutions Development Fund, the land seller, is a government agency.
6-3 – The prime minister has oversight of FIDF.
5-4 – Thaksin Shinawatra violated the 1999 anti-corruption act.
7-2 – Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra is not guilty and her arrest warrant will be cancelled.
7-2 – The Ratchadaphisek land plot and transaction money will not be confiscated.
9-0 – Thaksin is sentenced to a two-year jail term.
Thaksin had failed to set an example of “good governance” and “honesty”
The nine judges handling the case said that as Thaksin, who fled to London in August, was then a prime minister and had failed to set an example of good governance and honesty, he will not be given a suspended sentence.
“The first defendant held the position of prime minister and had been given trust to administer the state for the highest benefit of the state and the people. But the first defendant ended up breaking the law although, as head of government, he should have set a good example, been honest and made it evident and behaved with good political ethics … so he should not be given a suspended sentence,” the judges concluded.”
What might happen next?
(Source: BangkokPost)
Article 278 of the constitution says that in the event the couple can produce new witnesses or new evidence which might substantially alter the facts of the case, they have the right to file an appeal to a general meeting of the Supreme Court within 30 days of the reading of the verdict.
If an appeal is filed, a general meeting of the Supreme Court will convene to choose a panel of five judges to make an initial inquiry to see whether there are new witnesses and new evidence, as might be claimed by the defendants.
The panel will then present its findings and recommendation to the Supreme Court’s general meeting.
In the event the appeal is accepted, the five-judge panel will be instructed to continue the investigation of the appeal and then submit their findings to a general meeting for a decision.
If the general meeting of the Supreme Court then upholds the prosecution’s case against Mr Thaksin and Khunying Potjaman, a process to seek their extradition will be launched.
“The attorney general will be seeking Thaksin’s extradition very shortly,” said Seksant Bangsomboom, the head of the prosecution team.
How does British think about it? (UPDATE 22/OCT)
Since Thaksin and his family is now living happily(?) in UK, I think it is nice to hear some comments from some native British people. It seems that even British people don’t want him there.
Fat chance the British Government agreeing to extradition!
- peter, worthing, 21/10/2008 17:23I’m sure gordon brown will be open to an offer
- clive, london, 21/10/2008 17:29I’m sure if he qote’s the Yuman Rites Act he’ll be welcome to stay here!
- K. Walsh-Johnson, Kingsmead, Cheshire, 21/10/2008 18:19He won’t be deported if he makes a donation to NuLabour.
- Lickyalips, Richmond, Surrey., 21/10/2008 18:21No way will Mr Bean agree to that,these things have a way of coming back to bite you and not just your nails.
- Trend, Luton UK, 21/10/2008 22:27No chance that he will go, Labour only extradite British subjects, foreigners are immune to the same rules….don’t you think he knew he was safe before he came here.
- Lloyd, Conwy UK, 21/10/2008 22:31Get him on the first available flight there,
- tez, Leeds, 21/10/2008 22:32Thai prosecutors called on Britain to extradite Thaksin Shinawatra this morning after a court convicted the former prime minister of corruption and sentenced him to two years’ jail.
Did he come to the UK to see his mates in Parliament i.e. MPs and Ministers. In reading what this nation demands because of the alleged fiddling, does the public feel the same over our lot legally fiddling the UK Tax payers and the Tax Man, and do we think it could ever happen in the UK when these MPs and ministers were put on trial? I wonder if they would claim their human rights, like the rest of the criminals, better still what of the MPs and ministers claim from the UK Tax payers the legal aid so as to defend them all. I am of course being fatuitous, but what a comedy situation, as they say all good comedy comes from truth.
- J.S.S., UK, 22/10/2008 1:22send him back , ?why is he here in the first place ?
He is not british , not european , not from the commonwealth , not a refugee , not an asylum seeker , not a student , not even of any benifit to this country .
Of course he is very wealthy ( from stealing from the Thai people ) and has friends in “high” places but the truth is he is a common criminal and must
be extradited to thailand , with no detours on the way .
- jonathan charles gale, lymington England, 22/10/2008 1:25He’s got to much money for Gordon’s cronies to deport him.
- Mike Ratcliff, Launceston ,ENGLAND, 22/10/2008 1:43Britain, the dustbin of the world where rich crooks are welcomed with open arms by Nu Labour. Does he owe us any tax money from the sale of Man City?.
- John Gee, London England, 22/10/2008 3:05Lets see how the uk react to this,he as had a fair trial and is a criminal the uk should send him back here to serve his time but dont lets take any bets.
- Charles, Chiang Mai Thailand, 22/10/2008 7:00Send him back, the UK have enough homegrown criminals without taking in others. I would not be allowed into Thailand if I had a criminal record and be deported immediately if I get one here. This should be enforced both ways.
- Mike, ex pat, Thailand, 22/10/2008 8:49According to the Thai press, Thaksin will claim his misdemeanor is a political crime, not covered by the extradition treaty, so he can stop safely in the UK. What will HM Government make of that one?
- Steve, Cha-am, Thailand, 22/10/2008 13:20A Thai Politician accused of corruption – Who would have even considered sucgh a thing could happen.
Just about every expat in Thailand for a start
- Howard Leech, Gdansk,Poland, 22/10/2008 14:32Former Thai PM Thaksin faces two years in prison over corruption… if Britain agrees to extradite fugitive billionaire (Source: Daily Mail)
Verdict Development
Here, look at how the court sentenced Thaksin 2 years in prison and Pojarmarn not guilty
(1) Supreme Court rules AEC has authority to probe land case
The Supreme Court Tuesday ruled that the Assets Examination Committee had the power to probe the Ratchadpisek land case against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife.
The court dismissed claimed by Thaksin’s defence lawyers that the AEC had no authority to probe case the because the AEC was not investigators and because the Financial Institutions Development Fund had not filed complaint regarding to the land purchase.
The court ruled that the AEC was empowered by the court orders to conduct graft probe against the former prime minister so it did not have to wait for the FIDF to file complaint first.
(2) FIDF is state agency
The Supreme Court ruled that the Financial Institutions Development Fund is a state agency so there is ground for trial in the Ratchadapisek land case against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his wife.
The court ruled down an agreement of Thaksin’s defence team that the FIDF is not under state administration and that the Ratchadaphisek land purchase did not fall under Article 100 (3) of the National Counter Corruption Act, which covers state agencies.
Since the court ruled that the FIDF is state agency, the land purchase fell under the anti-graft act.
(3) Supreme Court rules 6:3 say Thaksni had authority over FIDF
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Thaksin Shinawatra, when he was the prime minister, had the authority to supervise the Financial Institutions Development Fund.
The court dismissed claim of Thaksin’s lawyer that he did not have authority over the FIDF so he could not abuse his authority to secure the land purchase from the FIDF for his wife.
The court ruled that prime minister is an official in accordance with Articles 152 and 157 of the National Counter Corruption Act.
(4) Supreme Court rules 5:4 that Thaksin knew of land purchase by wife
The Supreme Court ruled 5:4 to say that former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra knew about the land purchase by his wife from the Financial Institutions Development Fund.
The court ruled that with the knowledge, Thaksin also carried out actions that constituted conflict of interest on part of Thaksin as a state official.
(5) Thaksin guilty in land case, gets 2-year imprisonment
The Supreme Court Tuesday found former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra guilty in the Ratchada land case.
He was sentenced to 2 years in jail.
Pojaman Shinawatra, his wife, was found not guilty and the court revoked arrest warrant against her.
The court found that Thaksin had violated Article 100 and Article 102 of the National Counter Corruption Act, which states that government officials, including prime ministers, and their spouses are prohibited from entering into or having interests in contracts with state agencies under their supervision.
The Nation
Image from nationmultimedia.com
News Sources: International
- Ousted Thai PM Thaksin guilty of corruption (CNN)
- Thai ex-PM guilty of corruption (BBC)
- Former Thai PM Thaksin faces two years in prison over corruption… if Britain agrees to extradite fugitive billionaire (Daily Mail)
News Sources: The Nation
- Fugitive PM guilty and sentenced 2 years in jail
- Thaksin found guilty and sentenced to two years in jail
- Thaksin guilty in land case, gets 2-year imprisonment
- Supreme Court rules 5:4 that Thaksin knew of land purchase by wife
- Supreme Court rules 6:3 to say Thaksin had authority over FIDF
- FIDF is state agency: Supreme Court
- Supreme Court rules AEC has authority to probe land case
- Court begins reading verdict in the Ratchadapisek land case
News Source: BangkokPost
Related posts:
RSS
Subscribe by Email
This is one of the best verdicts from various supreme courts of Thailand which include the verdict on Samak’s conflict of interests, Thai Rak Thai Party’s Dissolution on top of another best one from the lower criminal court in Potjaman’s tax frauds
(1) This verdict has set a standard for the cabinets, not to be personally involved or influence in the state’s deals by any means. ( From now on, politicians have to be very careful with their declaration of their assets, their family’s deal with the state and any conflict of interests with the state. Any crooks will have to keep an eye on their taxes while hiding their corrupted money.)
(2) It has obviously and definitely disproved Thaksin Shinawatra’s lies, accusing the courts not providing fair trials for his family. First, the verdict, strictly followed the laws, was postponed for a month because of the absence of the two accused. Second, the court justly lifted the charge for Potjaman. Third, the court justly lifted the charge of the violation of 157 and 158 criminal laws as Thaksin was not the officer who carried out the land auction process.
However, this would certainly urge the crooked Thaksin’s cronies to retaliate against the courts (such as an explosion at the house of the Chief Administrative Court Judge the night before.) as well as the attempt to amend the constitution to launder Thaksin Shinawatra’s family.
Reply to this comment
(3) Moreover, this verdict has indirectly proved that, even against the Thaksin’s brother-in-law, Somchai, the Courts are independent as well as the state is stable enough. This could disproof the fabricated reasons in the Shinawatras’ application forms for asylum in UK.
Reply to this comment
(4) Thaksin said the charges were politically motivated and that he had expected the Supreme Court to sentence him. He was correct because if the judges had taken it financially, rather than politically with Thaksin’s bribe, the verdict would have gone another way, i.e., acquiting Thaksin. Thaksin should know better already that mourning through international media is useless as the insider deal with the government by any high ranking political position is not allowed in the democratic countries like in UK and USA. An equivalent example is the American Martha Stewart, the cooking master was jailed because of the insider trading in American stock market.
(5)Potjaman is not going free from the conviction by this Supreme Court, however, since she is still subjected to be sued under the criminal laws in the usual criminal court because she was either the actual culprit or the supporter for Thaksin in committing this criminal action. She deserves to have her money seized either by the too-eager Tax revenue office or at the request of the attorney general to the criminal court.
http://www.antithaksin.com
Reply to this comment