One of the controversial aspects of the case was the fact that the FIDF did not want to file a charge against Thaksin and his wife, reasoning that they found the deal transparent, and the price fair. By their own admission, they could not find any way in which the FIDF had been damaged, and finally, only after threats of criminal action against Dr.Tarisa-Watanagase,the head of the Bank of Thailand, did they consent to file the complaint. The actual charges were prepared in advance by the Asset Examination Committee, for someone to sign, after the original complaint failed to name anyone or specify any damages, although even the AEC were unsure whether it should be the FIDF, Bank of Thailand or Ministry of Finance who were authorised to make the complaint. As it turned out most of the defence witnesses were either current or former members of either The FIDF or Bank of Thailand.The Charges were:
Sections 4, 100 and 122 of the NCCC Act, and Section 33, 83, 86, 90,96, 152 and 157 of the Criminal Code. Most of these are clarifications and possible punishments, and the main charges are violating NCCC Act Article 100 and Criminal code Acts 152 & 157. The NCCC Act charge is labeled as a conflict of interest, whilst the other two main charges are criminal malfeasance charges. Generally an individual will only be investigated for violation of NCCC Act 100, when there is evidence of corruption.
NCCC Act. Section 4
In this Organic Act:
“State official” means a person holding a political position, Government official or local official assuming a position or having permanent salaries, official or person performing duties in a State enterprise or a State agency, local administrator and member of a local assembly who is not a person holding a political position, official under the law on local administration and shall include a member of a Board, Commission, Committee or of a sub-committee, employee of a Government agency, State enterprise or State agency and person or group of persons exercising or entrusted to exercise the State's administrative power in the performance of a particular act under the law, whether established under the governmental bureaucratic channel or by a State enterprise or other State undertaking;
“person holding a political position” means:
(1) Prime Minister;
NCCC Act. Section 100
Any State official shall not carry out the following acts:
(1) Being a party to or having interest in a contract made with a Government agency where such State official performs duties in the capacity as a State official who has the power to conduct supervision, control, inspection or legal proceedings.
(4) The provisions of paragraph one shall apply to spouses of the State officials under paragraph two. For this purpose, the activities carried out by the spouse shall be deemed as the activities carried out by the State official.
NCCC Act. Section 122
Any State official who violates the provisions of section 100, section 101 or section 103 shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding sixty thousand Baht or to both.
Criminal Code. Section 33
For the forfeiture of a property, the Court shall, besides having the power to forfeit under the law as specially provided for that purpose, have the power to forfeit the following properties also, namely:
(1) A property used or possessed for use in the commission of an offence by a person; or
(2) A property acquired by a person through the commission of an offence. Unless such property belongs to the other person who does not connive at the commission of the offence.
Criminal Code. Section 83
In case of any offence is accrued by commission of the person as from two persons upwards, such accomplices deemed to be principals shall be punished as provided by the law for such offence.
Criminal Code. Section 86
Whoever does for any reason whatsoever as assist or facility to any other person committing an offence before or late time of committing the offence, even though such assistance or facility is not known by the offender, such assistant deemed to be supporter in committing such offence shall be punished by two-thirds of the punishment as provided for such offence.
Criminal Code. Section 90
When any act is one and the same act violating several provisions of the law having the severest punishment shall be applied to inflict the punishment upon the offender.
Criminal Code Act. Section 96
Subject to Section 95, in case of compoundable offence, if the injured person does not lodge a complaint within three months as from the date of offence and offender to be known by the injured person, the criminal prosecution is precluded by prescription.
Note: Section 95 refers to the Statute of limitations.
Criminal Code Act. Section 152
Whoever, being an official having the duty of managing or looking after any activity, takes the interest for the benefit of himself or the other person concerning such activity, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to ten years and fine of two thousand to twenty thousand Baht.
Criminal Code Act. Section 157
Whoever, being an official, wrongfully exercises or does not exercise any of his functions to the injury of any person, or dishonestly exercises or omits to exercise any of his functions, shall be punished with imprisonment of one to ten years or fined of two thousand to twenty thousand Baht, or both.
Sources:
Organic Act on Counter Corruption BE 2542 (1999)
Criminal Code.No17 BE 2547 (2003)
After arriving back in Thailand on January 8th 2008, Pojaman Shinawatra was taken to the Department of Special Investigations, where she acknowledged the Charges related to the Ratchada-Phisek land case and was released on 5 million baht bail.
On January 23rd 2008, at a hearing of The Supreme Court; Pojaman Shinawatra pleaded, "Not Guilty". The court scheduled the examination of evidence for the 30th and 31st April 2008
After arriving back in Thailand on February 28th 2008, Thaksin Shinawatra was taken to the Department of Special Investigations, where he acknowledged the charges related to the Ratchada Phisek case and was released on 8 million baht bail.
On March 13th 2008, at a hearing of the Supreme Court; Thaksin Shinawatra pleaded, "Not Guilty". The Court also proceeded to review and approve a defence request for the trial proceedings to be conducted in-absentia, freeing Thaksin and Pojaman from having to attend every court session. The court also upheld the restriction on travel, except where the Supreme Court gave permission in advance.
On March 30th 2008, at a hearing of the Supreme Court; The Court scheduled 1st July 2008 as the Opening of the trial, where both Prosecution and Defence lawyers would give their opening Statements. The court also scheduled:
The prosecution witnesses to testify on July 8, 15, 22 and 25.
The defence witnesses to testify on August 1, 5, 15, 19 and 22.
The high court reserved two extra days, August 26 and 29, for the examination of additional evidence, if submitted.
