Thailand's Top Court Under Fire as Corrupt Ex-judge Found on Payroll by Phairath Khampha 31 August 2001 Thailand's top court was engulfed in further controversy on August 8, 2001 with the revelation that a senior provincial judge sacked for granting bail to the mastermind of a high-profile murder was now working for a Constitutional Court judge. News that Samer Intharasak was serving as a secretary to one of the 15 Constitutional Court judges came while the court was under attack for its hotly debated 8-7 dismissal of the case against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra on August 3. Most Thais have seen the prime minister's acquittal as rigged. Mr Samer, who had served as a provincial appeals court judge, was dismissed by the Judicial Commission early in 2001 after he received a 10 million baht (US$1 = 45.4 Thai baht) bribe to bail a sugar-mill owner who ordered the murder of Australian auditor Michael Wansley in March 1999. Mr. Wansley had uncovered a massive fraud scheme of a bankrupt suger mill operation that was being bailed out. Some members of Thailand's economic and political elite were stealing vast amounts of the bailout money. Mr Wansley was about to release his findings and was executed, Mafia-style, by the mill owners' henchmen as he was driving out to the mill in Nakhon Sawan province. Mr Samer was serving as secretary to Constitutional Court judge Sak Techacharn and receiving a monthly salary of 37,000 baht. Legal observers said the Constitutional Court was independent from the judicial and executive branches, and hiring Mr Samer as a secretary was "unlikely to contravene the Judicial Commission's decisions", but the appointment could still be regarded as "improper by the public". Mr Samer, the former chief justice of Appeals Court Region No 6, was investigated after releasing murder defendant Pradit Siriviriyakul - who had plotted Wansley's murder because of conflict over a debt-rehabilitation plan involving three sugar mills in Nakhon Sawan, in central Thailand. Mr Samer released Pradit on health grounds. But an inquiry panel found the judge had not followed normal procedure. Furthermore, Pradit had no health complications. Pradit's release followed several failed bail attempts and reports by a regional police chief of bribes worth 100 million baht being offered to have the case against the conspirators in the murder dropped. Following the release of Pradit, Wansley's son, Adam, voiced concern over his safety and fears that Pradit would threaten trial witnesses, a normal process in Thailand. Shortly after the complaint the case was transferred to Bangkok on the basis of witness safety. Legal sources said on August 8 the Wansley murder trial was plodding on, with just 18 of 57 police witnesses having given evidence. Everyone concerned is hoping, in true Thai style, that by keeping the trial plodding along endlessly it would just fade into obscurity and the plotters could go home free. The Justice Ministry inquiry into Mr Samer, completed in February, recommended his immediate sacking. The former judge understandably made the usual excuses and denied any wrongdoing and said he had not been paid to grant Pradit bail. But why would he admit it in the first place?