Verdict a warning to self-serving politicians, says Udom 
By Bancha Khaengkhan
The Nation
Published on October 22, 2008
Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's conviction in the Ratchadaphisek land case should serve as lesson for politicians to adhere to morality, good governance and righteousness in performing their job, the lead investigator said yesterday.
"Politicians should act as a role model for ethical standards and not abuse their office for self-serving gain," Udom Fuangfung said.
As a member of the Assets Examination Committee, Udom's work led to yesterday's sentencing of Thaksin to two years in jail for conflict of interest as premier.
Under Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Commission Act, political office holders, specifically the prime minister and Cabinet members, are banned from involving themselves or their spouses in a business transaction or contract with a government agency.
Udom said he was satisfied with the guilty conviction and punishment although Thaksin had escaped criminal culpability for corruption, a graver charge.
Thaksin's wife and co-defendant Pojaman was acquitted on grounds that she was not a political office holder.
Since Thaksin is living in exile in London, the next step is for the Attorney-General's Office to seek his extradition to serve out the prison term. The government has 10 years to bring the fugitive back.
The Supreme Court's judgement is final unless the defence finds fresh evidence to appeal to the court's full bench.
Former AEC member Kaewsan Atibhodi said the long arm of the law punished Thaksin for breaching ethical norms but stopped short of holding him and his wife accountable for graft because of insufficient evidence.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/22/politics/politics_30086582.php
======
Fugitive PM guilty and sentenced 2 years in jail
By Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
Published on October 22, 2008
Former premier Thaksin Shinawatra was sentenced to two years in jail yesterday for conflict of interest by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.
Thaksin was found guilty of breaching Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act by aiding his wife Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra win a bid for a state-owned land on Ratchadaphisek Road in 2003.
The judges voted 8-1 to rule Thaksin guilty.
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 verdict cannot be appealed under the law governing the court's division.
"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.
Pojaman, meanwhile, was let off as the National Counter Corruption Act does not have any penalty clause against family members of political office holders.
The court ruled, however, that Pojaman's action, with written acknowledgement by her husband, must be considered an action of Thaksin who was then prime minister and could influence the Financial Institutions Development Fund. The court deemed unanimously that the FIDF was under the control of the state.
The judges also stated that Thaksin's influence as prime minister could have deterred two other on-line bidders from offering higher prices for the land, leading to a second bidding of Bt772 million by Pojaman, which was lower than the Bt870 million in the first open and off-line bidding process.
However, the court decided not to confiscate the land or the money used for the bidding.
The court also threw out an argument by the defendants' lawyer, who were conspicuously absent from the bench yesterday, that the National Counter Corruption Act is no longer valid after the coup-makers of September 2006 annulled the 1997 charter.
The court reasoned that the military junta had no intention of stopping the functioning of the judiciary except the Constitution Court. They took control of the executive and legislative branches after the coup and thus any organic law not specifically annulled must be considered valid.
The judges decided with a narrow 5-4 vote that Thaksin's action of acknowledging his wife's bid for the state-owned land should be considered an action on behalf of him, making him legally responsible.
While most matters were decided by a clear majority if not unanimously, the matter on whether Thaksin's action by signing a document acknoledging his wife legal move in the bidding for the land should be considered as an action on behalf of Thaksin or not was crucially decided in a hair-splitting vote of 5 against 4 in favour of Thaksin being the person who should be legally responsible, thus setting stage for the two years sentence.
Hundreds of pro-Thaksin supporters quickly dispersed from the front of the Supreme Court in disappointment.
A lawyer who works for Thaksin, although he was not involved in this case, told The Nation: "We will let the people judge... We have seen many courts passing similar rulings, such as the Constitution Court disqualifying prime minister [Samak Sundaravej] for hosting a cooking show.
It raises doubt about whether the junta still has influence. The people shall be the judge," he said. He wondered how some journalists seemed to have made such a precise and detailed speculation a day before the ruling was given.
The lawyer also added that argument whether the anti-corruption law was still valid after the 1997 charter was abolished by the junta is still debatable, including whether the junta-appointed Asset Examination Committee, who filed the case to the court, should be regarded as legitimate or not.
Saeksan Bangsomboon, director-general of the Office of Attorney-General's Department for Special Cases said the ruling will be translated in English as soon as possible to help speed up the attempt to have Thaksin extradited.
He said the sentence has a statute of limitation of 10 years. Saekban declined to answer what the OAG will do if the United Kingdom decided to grant Thaksin political asylum. He vowed to continue the work without fear.
Voting on key points of the historic 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.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/22/politics/politics_30086596.php
By Bancha Khaengkhan
The Nation
Published on October 22, 2008
Former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's conviction in the Ratchadaphisek land case should serve as lesson for politicians to adhere to morality, good governance and righteousness in performing their job, the lead investigator said yesterday.
"Politicians should act as a role model for ethical standards and not abuse their office for self-serving gain," Udom Fuangfung said.
As a member of the Assets Examination Committee, Udom's work led to yesterday's sentencing of Thaksin to two years in jail for conflict of interest as premier.
Under Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Commission Act, political office holders, specifically the prime minister and Cabinet members, are banned from involving themselves or their spouses in a business transaction or contract with a government agency.
Udom said he was satisfied with the guilty conviction and punishment although Thaksin had escaped criminal culpability for corruption, a graver charge.
Thaksin's wife and co-defendant Pojaman was acquitted on grounds that she was not a political office holder.
Since Thaksin is living in exile in London, the next step is for the Attorney-General's Office to seek his extradition to serve out the prison term. The government has 10 years to bring the fugitive back.
The Supreme Court's judgement is final unless the defence finds fresh evidence to appeal to the court's full bench.
Former AEC member Kaewsan Atibhodi said the long arm of the law punished Thaksin for breaching ethical norms but stopped short of holding him and his wife accountable for graft because of insufficient evidence.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/22/politics/politics_30086582.php
======
Fugitive PM guilty and sentenced 2 years in jail
By Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
Published on October 22, 2008
Former premier Thaksin Shinawatra was sentenced to two years in jail yesterday for conflict of interest by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.
Thaksin was found guilty of breaching Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act by aiding his wife Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra win a bid for a state-owned land on Ratchadaphisek Road in 2003.
The judges voted 8-1 to rule Thaksin guilty.
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 verdict cannot be appealed under the law governing the court's division.
"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.
Pojaman, meanwhile, was let off as the National Counter Corruption Act does not have any penalty clause against family members of political office holders.
The court ruled, however, that Pojaman's action, with written acknowledgement by her husband, must be considered an action of Thaksin who was then prime minister and could influence the Financial Institutions Development Fund. The court deemed unanimously that the FIDF was under the control of the state.
The judges also stated that Thaksin's influence as prime minister could have deterred two other on-line bidders from offering higher prices for the land, leading to a second bidding of Bt772 million by Pojaman, which was lower than the Bt870 million in the first open and off-line bidding process.
However, the court decided not to confiscate the land or the money used for the bidding.
The court also threw out an argument by the defendants' lawyer, who were conspicuously absent from the bench yesterday, that the National Counter Corruption Act is no longer valid after the coup-makers of September 2006 annulled the 1997 charter.
The court reasoned that the military junta had no intention of stopping the functioning of the judiciary except the Constitution Court. They took control of the executive and legislative branches after the coup and thus any organic law not specifically annulled must be considered valid.
The judges decided with a narrow 5-4 vote that Thaksin's action of acknowledging his wife's bid for the state-owned land should be considered an action on behalf of him, making him legally responsible.
While most matters were decided by a clear majority if not unanimously, the matter on whether Thaksin's action by signing a document acknoledging his wife legal move in the bidding for the land should be considered as an action on behalf of Thaksin or not was crucially decided in a hair-splitting vote of 5 against 4 in favour of Thaksin being the person who should be legally responsible, thus setting stage for the two years sentence.
Hundreds of pro-Thaksin supporters quickly dispersed from the front of the Supreme Court in disappointment.
A lawyer who works for Thaksin, although he was not involved in this case, told The Nation: "We will let the people judge... We have seen many courts passing similar rulings, such as the Constitution Court disqualifying prime minister [Samak Sundaravej] for hosting a cooking show.
It raises doubt about whether the junta still has influence. The people shall be the judge," he said. He wondered how some journalists seemed to have made such a precise and detailed speculation a day before the ruling was given.
The lawyer also added that argument whether the anti-corruption law was still valid after the 1997 charter was abolished by the junta is still debatable, including whether the junta-appointed Asset Examination Committee, who filed the case to the court, should be regarded as legitimate or not.
Saeksan Bangsomboon, director-general of the Office of Attorney-General's Department for Special Cases said the ruling will be translated in English as soon as possible to help speed up the attempt to have Thaksin extradited.
He said the sentence has a statute of limitation of 10 years. Saekban declined to answer what the OAG will do if the United Kingdom decided to grant Thaksin political asylum. He vowed to continue the work without fear.
Voting on key points of the historic 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.
http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2008/10/22/politics/politics_30086596.php
