Troubled Days in Thai Court Hearing on Prime Minister's Ill-Gotten Wealth by Phairath Khampha 31 May 2001 Thailand's Constitution Court began proceeding in April 2001 to determine the constitutionality of the National Counter Corruption Commission's indictment against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra. The popular politician was found to have concealed billions of baht's worth of companies' shareholding and of filing false asset statements with the National Counter Corruption Commission. And legal experts said the problems with Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's defence team stemmed more from a shift in the way the Constitution Court was conducting the trial than any lack of expertise on the part of his lawyers. The court adopted the proceedings of a so-called investigative trial court, setting a precedent in Thailand, most legal experts agreed. Most Thai lawyers, however, are trained in "accusative" proceedings that require them to make quick examinations of the parties during the course of a trial. Experts generally agreed that Thaksin's defence team had been lacklustre during the trial. The "investigative" system adopted by the Constitution Court is commonly used in the United Kingdom and the United States. Representatives of the law faculties at Ramkhamhaeng, Chulalongkorn and Thammasat universities said they were not yet prepared to change the law syllabuses on offer at their respective universities to accommodate the system being used by the Constitution and Administrative courts. However, Law Society chairman Sak Kawsaengruang said the society was planning to implement the training needed to prepare lawyers for arguing at the courts. Thaksin drops witnesses In a bid to quickly settle his landmark corruption case, Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's lawyers said on May 4 they would not put most of the defence witnesses on the stand. The Constitutional Court agreed to a request from Mr Thaksin's defence that 24 of his 30 witnesses would submit their testimony in writing instead, and only six would appear in person. "In order to speed up court settlement on the case, the defendant has decided to cut down his witnesses and instead prefers to give the court their testimony in writing," Phadungphan Chantaro, one of Mr Thaksin's six lawyers, told the court. Mr Thaksin, who became premier in February after a huge general election victory, faced a five-year ban from public office if the court upholds an indictment against him by the National Counter Corruption Commission for concealing his wealth when serving in a previous government in 1997. The NCCC indicted Mr Thaksin in December 2000 for transferring millions of dollars worth of shares to proxies including his domestic servants to avoid declaring them, as required by law of Cabinet ministers. Mr Thaksin denies any wrongdoing. An official source close to Mr Thaksin said that the defence's previous tactic of prolonging the case was only hurting the prime minister, after the NCCC chief presented a strong prosecution case when hearings started in April. Mr Thaksin was the first prime minister to be tried by the court, which was one of the new independent bodies, like the corruption commission, set up under a 1997 Constitution designed to make government more accountable and curb graft. The 15-judge court had been due to hear testimony from key witnesses in the case on May 4 including the personal secretaries of Mr Thaksin and his wife Pojamarn. They were among those who will give written statements. The secretaries filled out the asset declarations for Mr Thaksin. They previously told the corruption commission during its investigation that they were not familiar with the forms and they had inadvertently skipped some assets. The court said it would examine the written testimony, to be submitted by the defence on May 15 and May 17. If it still needed to cross-examine the secretaries after reading the testimony, it would ask them to appear in person. The defence also requested the court to subpoena three of the nine corruption commissioners including Prasit Damrongcha, but the court ruled that this would be most unusual since the commission was already presenting the prosecution case. However, commissioners could appear for the defence if it could persuade them to do so, the court said. One of the six defence witnesses was expected to be commissioner Prasit. He was the only one of the nine who dissented from a majority ruling against Mr Thaksin. The court adjourned after less than two hours. The next hearings were on May 22 and May 25. Witnesses defend Thai premier Witnesses on May 22 began giving evidence on behalf of the Thai prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, at hearings to determine whether he tried to conceal millions off dollars worth of assets from the tax authorities. Defence witnesses told the country's Constitutional Court that it was common practice to allow nominees to trade and be given control of shares on a stockholders behalf. Turnabout on tax evasion could prolong Thaksin case Corruption proceedings against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra could be prolonged following a dramatic reversal of opinion from the revenue department which earlier had suspected Mr Thaksin of tax evasion, a lawyer said on May 22. A statement that Mr Thaksin owed no back taxes came before the fourth hearing of the National Counter Corruption Commission on charges the prime minister concealed assets while serving as a deputy prime minister in 1997. The case appeared to be heading for a speedy conclusion after Mr Thaksin's lawyer cut the number of witnesses from 30 to six and submitted documents as testimony. The prime minister was under substantial pressure, with the director-general of the Revenue Department Suparat Khawakul telling the commission that he suspected Mr Thaksin was guilty of tax evasion. But the deputy director of the department Charnyut Pathummarak in the middle of May said Mr Thaksin and his wife owed no back taxes on controversial transfers of stock market shares, including some to his domestic servants that he failed to declare. Mr Charnyut's brother is a senior member of Mr Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai, or Thai Love Thai party, which swept to victory in January's general elections. Hence, given the corrupt infulences involved, this was just another classical Thai obfuscational manoeuvre of officials being paid off to lie in favour of consideration. Several prominent market experts, who had a great deal to gain from Thaksin remaining in power have, stated that Mr Thaksin did not violate market rules and regulations. A commission spokesman said the body would rule in its fourth session whether it needed to summon seven witnesses, most of them related to the tax issue and stock transfers. Vichai Thongtaeng, a member of Mr Thaksin's legal team, said he preferred an early settlement but added the case would be prolonged if the commission sought to cross examine witnesses for the defence. Mr Vichai earlier predicted the verdict would be handed down by late June or early July. Court told decision to indict Thai PM over-hasty A dissenting member of Thailand's anti-graft agency told the Constitutional Court on May 25 that a decision to indict Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra for concealing assets was hasty and not transparent. But Prasit Dumrongchai, the one dissenting voice when the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) indicted Thaksin in December for failing to declare assets, also admitted using a donation from Thaksin in the 1990s to throw a staff party. Prasit told the court he disagreed with the decision of the nine-member NCCC to indict Thaksin because it had been over-hasty and outside the anti-graft agency's jurisdiction. "I am not acting as Thaksin's lawyer, but I appear in court to give justice to the defendant," he said. "The NCCC made a presumption that Thaksin might have concealed his shares to evade tax and to manipulate stocks, but the panel did not consult any authorities involved in the issue, which has caused damage to the defendant," he added. During cross examination, NCCC Secretary-General Klanarong Chanthick told the court Prasit had a close relationship with Thaksin and his party colleagues. Prasit conceded that he had received a donation of 100,000 baht ($2,200) from Thaksin to throw a party when he was head of the now-defunct Counter Corruption Commission from 1995-1997. But he said he did not receive any personal benefit from the gift. "It was not a request, it was a giveaway by Thaksin. It is true, but it was not for my own pocket. It was for the welfare of the staff." Analysts say the case seemed to turn in Thaksin's favour that week when the Department of Revenue, overseen by a minister from his Thai Rak Thai Party, declared Thaksin and his wife did not commit any tax evasion by transferring assets to nominees. Prasit also said he believed that the stock transfers under scrutiny were made by Thaksin's wife without his knowledge. The next hearing was scheduled to be held on May 31. Public pressure grows on court to clear Thaksin Public pressure mounted on Thailand's Constitutional Court to clear Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra of graft charges and allow him to push ahead with his ambitious - and popular - policy programme, and also escape justice, thus continuing the culture of corrupt leadership in Thailand. The 14-judge court was due to decide by July or August whether to uphold a ruling by the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC) that Mr Thaksin failed to declare some of his wealth when he was a deputy premier in the 1990s. The Constitutional Court had said its verdict will not be influenced by support for Mr Thaksin, who won a landslide victory in a January general election despite the NCCC indictment. Opinion polls suggested he remained popular. "We'll do our best and no outside forces can influence our verdict," Constitutional Court President Prasert Nasakul said. But analysts said it would be difficult for the court to ignore the mounting pressure. Mr Thaksin swept to power with promises of a host of populist policies, and opinion polls suggest many Thais want him to be given more time to deliver on his pledges. "Many Thais were desperate for heroes during the economic recession," said radio show host Prachathai Thananarong. "So when Thaksin pledged to offer them various populist projects - namely village funds, debt suspension and universal cheap healthcare - they wholeheartedly supported him, no matter what the costs of those projects are." Mr Thaksin's policies not only caught the imagination of the poor. Several leading academics are also calling for him to be cleared and had told the media to stop focusing so much on the case. "The media have been over-reporting Thaksin's court case, especially the foreign media, which always say the prime minister is being tainted by a corruption case," said Prawes Wasi, a respected social commentator. Another widely respected figure, former health minister Sem Pringpuangkaew, has called upon voters nationwide to send letters to parliament expressing their support for Thaksin. "It is time for Thais in all walks of life to express our will to break the country's deadlock by voicing support for Thaksin's continued leadership," Dr Sem said. Such campaigns have drawn criticism from some lawmakers who say they could unduly influence the court. Such calls have come mainly from corrupt politicians and officials who want the corrupt status quo to be maintained in Thailand's government. "If they can raise millions of supporting letters for Thaksin, it will become a compelling public opinion that the court can't ignore," said Panas Tassaneeyanont, a member of the upper house of parliament. The Constitutional Court's Prasert has described Dr Sem's campaign as "frivolous" and a "distraction," saying the court's verdict had to be based on the law, not popular opinion. Early hearings in the case went against Mr Thaksin, analysts said, but in recent sessions the courtroom tussles seemed to move in his favour. Thai Constitutional Court Set June 18 to Rule on Case The Constitutional Court ended its sixth hearing on Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra's alleged hidden wealth case the morning of May 31, and set June 18 for its final verdict on the case. The hearing was scheduled to be started at 09:00 a.m., but the court's judge panel, headed by Prasert Nasakul, used about 35 minutes to hold discussions on a request of Thaksin's legal team that the last five defense witnesses not personally testify in the court, as they had submitted their written statements to the court. The five witnesses would include Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra, the Premier's wife, Banpot Damapong, Khunying Pojaman's elder brother, Viroj Nuankhae, president of the Association of Securities Companies and a member of the Stock Exchange Commission (SEC), Suwit Mapaisarnsilp, an executive of Merrill Lynch Phatra Securities Co., and Sakarin Ruamrangsi, director of the Legal Department of the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET). The judge panel then agreed on the request, saying that the court has no mandate to force witnesses to personally present in the court. Given the decision, the judge panel ordered that its hearing of witnesses of the premier be concluded. The court then set June 18 for its final verdict on the case. On that day, Thaksin as the accused party, and Klanarong Chantik, secretary-general to the National Counter Corruption Commission (NCCC), as the accuser, would be given 20 minutes each to make their closing statements on the case prior to the court's final ruling. Thaksin confirmed that he would be present in the court to personally make the closing statement. Thaksin submitted a series of three reports of his assets and liabilities to the NCCC. The first on November 7, 1997 after he was appointed as then deputy prime minister, the second on December 4, 1997, when he left office, and the third on December 4, 1998 one year after he left office. If the Constitutional Court were to stand on the NCCC's ruling in late 2000 that Thaksin had intended to conceal his wealth and submitted false reports on his assets and liabilities, the Thai leader would be deprived from the premiership and would be banned from the politics for five consecutive years.