Thai court dismisses graft case against Airports of Thailand, King Power

 

BANGKOK (Reuters) - A Thai court on Tuesday dismissed a 14 billion baht ($430 million) graft case against Airports of Thailand and duty-free retailer King Power, owner of the English Premier League club Leicester City.

 

A former anti-graft official, Charnchai Issarasenanark, had filed a lawsuit against executives from both firms last year.

 

A judge at the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases said Charnchai "was not an affected party, therefore he cannot sue in this case".

 

Airports of Thailand and King Power had denied the allegations.

 

($1 = 32.5700 baht)

 

(Reporting by Aukkarapon Niyomyat and Chayut Setboonsarng; Editing by Darren Schuettler)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-09-18

 

A judge at the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases said Charnchai "was not an affected party, therefore he cannot sue in this case".

 

Sure he was affected if he ever purchased a single item from King Power.  Things really aren't "duty free" if they are more expensive at the airport then in town where items are taxed.  One only has to do the math to see if an entity can buy duty free, then be the only retailer allowed to sell at the airports, that perhaps all is not on the up and up.

 

Nice cop out by the judge.  Wonder where his next out of the country trip takes him? Vanuatu? Belize?  Cyprus? or perhaps Mauritius.

 

 

Edited September 18, 20187 yr by steelepulse

It must be nice to have influential friends.

Imagine that.

 

Dismissed and swept under the memory carpet.

 

Nothing to see behind the curtain, folks.

Move along, now.

rich, connected, entitled 'good' establishment figures in shock not guilty verdict.

NOT!

Bring on the increased passenger departures tax increases and rent rises...............

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Thai court dismisses graft case

Who would have thought!

Wow - the power of graft.

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

Wow - the power of graft.

As much duty free as you can carry plus some each time you travel, Oh! we also have tickets available anytime you're a bit short..

never mind

Edited September 19, 20187 yr by alfalfa19
never mind

How do these airport duty free scams  stay in business?

Their 'duty free ' prices are often more expensive than retail downtown.

Doesnt matter how influencial the owners are  and their power over the courts.

Why do travellers waste their money in those places ?

I travel abroad from Thailand about four times a month, and frequently buy duty free (whisky, watches, phones etc)

I make a point to never buy from Thai airports, the 'duty free' is the most expensive in the region by far.

Singapore (strangely given that its the region's most expensive country) is the region's cheapest 'duty free' .

The Judge hasn't stated that there was no corruption involved, just that the person suing wasn't in a position to do so. An interested party, I assume, could be a competitor in the bid for the contract but I'd guess they've been paid off anyway.  

King Power is a laugh. I would NEVER BUY from them they are NOT duty free. Bottles of drink like Jonny Walker Black are less the 100 baht more in the supermarket and 7/11's. For 1lt bottles.

As far as I know duty is around 40+%.

It they let other duty free outlets into the airports we would get duty free.

i and others believe there is a lot of large envelopes being passed around.

it will NEVER change. Pity.

 

An off topic post has been removed.

1 hour ago, lanista said:

How do these airport duty free scams  stay in business?

Their 'duty free ' prices are often more expensive than retail downtown.

Doesnt matter how influencial the owners are  and their power over the courts.

Why do travellers waste their money in those places ?

Good question - particularly in view of KP's high prices, surly uninterested staff and (cough cough) unattributable overheads.How is KP so successful?

21 hours ago, webfact said:

A judge at the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases said Charnchai "was not an affected party, therefore he cannot sue in this case".

The Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases in Bangkok agreed to hear the case circa Nov. 14, 2017: “The court agreed to hear the case,” an official from Bangkok’s Corruption court told reporters."

https://coconuts.co/bangkok/news/thai-court-accepts-thb14-billion-lawsuit-leicester-city-owner/

 

If Charnchai did not have standing to bring the lawsuit, the court would not by all rights have accepted the case as such argument would surely have been presented by the defendant at that hearing.

So now either the court admits to accepting the case out of some courtesy to Charnchai, incompetence in previously accepting the lawsuit or to corruption.

Or all the above?

 

Personally, I don't believe Charnchai would have standing. The lawsuit alleged that King Power owed the State $420 million in unpaid taxes.
 https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/11/thai-court-accepts-420m-lawsuit-leicester-city-owner/

Charnchai would have to prove personal harm from the alleged unpaid taxes to the State. That's Brain Freeze!

 

Who clearly does have standing is the Revenue Department under the Ministry of Finance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Finance_(Thailand)

Has the Revenue Department performed an audit of King Power and Airports of Thailand to confirm full tax compliance? If it finds unpaid tax payments, it has standing to file a lawsuit(s) against the defendants that may be both with the Administrative (ie., tax collection) and Criminal (ie., conspiracy to defraud the State) Courts.

Thus far, there seems to be silence from the ministry. Neither defendant has alleged passing any state income tax audits.

 

From the perspective that the State is either complicit or negligent in the alleged unpaid taxes, any Thai citizen might have standing to petition the NACC to file suit against the Ministry of Finance for unpaid taxes. NACC is charged with combating corruption by high-ranking government officials and politicians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Anti-Corruption_Commission_(Thailand)

(please let's don't go off topic with NACC's seemingly ineffectiveness with the Prayut regime - I am just coming from a layman's legal viewpoint)

 

Even if a petition with the NACC is not accepted or NACC finds no underpayment of taxes, there is potential for political issues that could be used against Prayut's election and/or pro-military candidates.

 

Was anyone expecting a different outcome?

I under stood the court case was dismissed because the person who brought the action was not an interested party and therefore the case was dropped on a technicality .Does this mean the verdict does not absolve graft at the airport and could be reconsidered if brought by  an interested party acceptable in law ?

3 hours ago, madmitch said:

The Judge hasn't stated that there was no corruption involved, just that the person suing wasn't in a position to do so. An interested party, I assume, could be a competitor in the bid for the contract but I'd guess they've been paid off anyway.  

When corruption involves any official entity of a country (like AOT), every citizen is an affected party due to the public funds being somewhat diverted but also due to the public system being undermined in its missions and integrity.

It is way past time the Government finished this monopoly & put some maximum mark ups in place.

Thaksin started this so I wonder if he is still getting his commission ?

Every citizen in Thailand and every tourist who has purchased anything at the duty-free

in Thailand has been affected. 

In 10 years, i have spent exactly zero baht at Suvarnabhumi airport after going airside. Because the prices are so stupid. 

11 hours ago, jayboy said:

Good question - particularly in view of KP's high prices, surly uninterested staff and (cough cough) unattributable overheads.How is KP so successful?

I can only speak for the Pattaya branch.

 

Always rows of Chinese tour busses outside. Never seen a normal tourist going in.

 

They tell the Chines tourists that it's duty frr and half the price that they'll get anywhere else in the World. All come out with armfuls of expensive crap. The tour company gets a nice drink out of it as do the tour guide and driver. Everybody's happy, except the taxman, but maybe he gets the biggest drink of all.

10 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Who clearly does have standing is the Revenue Department under the Ministry of Finance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Finance_(Thailand)

Has the Revenue Department performed an audit of King Power and Airports of Thailand to confirm full tax compliance? If it finds unpaid tax payments, it has standing to file a lawsuit(s) against the defendants that may be both with the Administrative (ie., tax collection) and Criminal (ie., conspiracy to defraud the State) Courts.

Thus far, there seems to be silence from the ministry. Neither defendant has alleged passing any state income tax audits.

Of course an audit has been performed. A guy from the Ministry of Finance came round to the King Power offices and had a few million baht shoved in his mouth. Money talks in Thailand but more often it stops people talking.

5 hours ago, natway09 said:

It is way past time the Government finished this monopoly & put some maximum mark ups in place.

Thaksin started this so I wonder if he is still getting his commission ?

Who do you think brokered the deal for Leicester City?