Acquittals In Thaksin Share Case Upheld

[webfact]

COURT

Acquittals in Thaksin share case upheld

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The Court of Appeals yesterday upheld a lower court's verdict acquitting a former chief of the Revenue Department and four other officials in connection with the 1997 tax-free transfer of shares by former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's thenwife Pojaman na Pombejra.

They were accused of malfeasance. The court said it found no evidence to support the prosecution's allegation that Sirote Swasdipanich, former directorgeneral of the Revenue Department, and the other defendants had helped Pojaman and her brother Bannapot Damapong evade taxes.

In February 2009, the Criminal Court acquitted Sirote and four former officials of the Revenue Department of charges of dereliction of duty. Prosecutors had accused them of intentionally failing to collect taxes from Pojaman and Bannapot in 1997, when she transferred 4.5 million shares worth Bt738 million in Shin Corp.

In December 2006, the National AntiCorruption Commission declared that Sirote and four of his colleagues had committed severe malfeasance by failing to collect tax from Pojaman for transferring shares as well as Bannapot's subsequent transfer of the shares to a family maid. The transfer apparently cost Bt7.38 million in fees.

In its verdict yesterday, the Appeals Court said the defendants had no authority to collect taxes from Pojaman and Bannapot. The court said it did not need to follow the NACC's decision against Sirote and the other Revenue Department officials.

-- The Nation 2012-02-01

[Chris Lawrence]

Gee, this could ruffle a few feathers?

[OzMick]

Thailand - the land of zero reponsibility.

[phiphidon]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

[drdoom6996]

Don't like the rules/laws? Pay to have them changed.

[rixalex]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

Had the courts not found in Thaksin's favour no doubt all the usual suspects would be flocking right now with how unfair / kangaroo court / establishment out to get him type comments. Find in his favour, and all of a sudden, they are myth busters.

[DP25]

A farmer doesn't have to pay tax when he gives a bag of rice to his brother, so a billionaire shouldn't have to pay taxes when giving 4.5 million shares of Shin Corp to a brother either. No double standards. The people have spoken, no taxes on the rich.

[phiphidon]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

Had the courts not found in Thaksin's favour no doubt all the usual suspects would be flocking right now with how unfair / kangaroo court / establishment out to get him type comments. Find in his favour, and all of a sudden, they are myth busters.

To be perfectly honest I didn't expect a Junta appointed NACC to be anything other than politically biased against a man they had just thrown out of office in a coup - did you?

[AleG]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

You think tax evasion is OK as a general principle or only when Thaksin and family do it?

[Reasonableman]

When something is simply not illegal, that doesn't make it ethical, moral, responsible, or socially acceptable. Some people seem to find some kind of weird amoral, even anti-social, satisfaction in avoiding and subverting laws designed to benefit the majority. Thank goodness for karma/fate/divine retribution/justice, the snake that eventually bites them in the butt, one of the few consolations for the powerless.

[rixalex]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

Had the courts not found in Thaksin's favour no doubt all the usual suspects would be flocking right now with how unfair / kangaroo court / establishment out to get him type comments. Find in his favour, and all of a sudden, they are myth busters.

To be perfectly honest I didn't expect a Junta appointed NACC to be anything other than politically biased against a man they had just thrown out of office in a coup - did you?

If you want to make that sort of argument that Thailand's judiciary is not above being influenced, why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? If it was vulnerable to being pressured in certain directions 3 or 4 years ago, i suggest it is unlikely that it wouldn't be vulnerable now.

[Roadman]

The acquittal was not in favour of the convicted criminal Thaksin and his thief of a wife. It was in favour of five members of the Revenue Department, so no myth busting as the convicted criminal Thaksin is exactly that - a convicted criminal fugitive.

[Reasonableman]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

Had the courts not found in Thaksin's favour no doubt all the usual suspects would be flocking right now with how unfair / kangaroo court / establishment out to get him type comments. Find in his favour, and all of a sudden, they are myth busters.

To be perfectly honest I didn't expect a Junta appointed NACC to be anything other than politically biased against a man they had just thrown out of office in a coup - did you?

If you want to make that sort of argument that Thailand's judiciary is not above being influenced, why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? If it was vulnerable to being pressured in certain directions 3 or 4 years ago, i suggest it is unlikely that it wouldn't be vulnerable now.

Agreed, such vagaries may actually be more attributable to a discontinuous supply of stuffed lunchboxes.

[Evilbaz]

Pity they didn't give us the family maid's name - she'd be a good catch.

[renaissanc]

I expect we are now seeing a process in which all of Thaksin's court cases are being rejected - one by one. There will be loopholes found for everything he is alleged to have done. Soon he will be declared innocent and the Red Shirts will say, "See! We told you so!" ...

[rixalex]

I expect we are now seeing a process in which all of Thaksin's court cases are being rejected - one by one. There will be loopholes found for everything he is alleged to have done. Soon he will be declared innocent and the Red Shirts will say, "See! We told you so!" ...

Or perhaps, "myth busted!"

[phiphidon]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

Had the courts not found in Thaksin's favour no doubt all the usual suspects would be flocking right now with how unfair / kangaroo court / establishment out to get him type comments. Find in his favour, and all of a sudden, they are myth busters.

To be perfectly honest I didn't expect a Junta appointed NACC to be anything other than politically biased against a man they had just thrown out of office in a coup - did you?

If you want to make that sort of argument that Thailand's judiciary is not above being influenced, why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? If it was vulnerable to being pressured in certain directions 3 or 4 years ago, i suggest it is unlikely that it wouldn't be vulnerable now.

But I was constantly being told during the abhisit years that the judges could do no wrong and were virtuous.

[phiphidon]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

You think tax evasion is OK as a general principle or only when Thaksin and family do it?

It's not for me to say one way or another, thats down to the Judiciary, and as they were held up as being virtuous during the abhisit years I find it hard to believe that they have done a u turn over night therefore their decision must be right - that's the argument I've been given in the past.

[whybother]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

What was the "myth"?

The revenue department failed to collect taxes from Pojaman and Bannapot. The courts found them not guilty of doing it intentionally.

[rixalex]

If you want to make that sort of argument that Thailand's judiciary is not above being influenced, why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? If it was vulnerable to being pressured in certain directions 3 or 4 years ago, i suggest it is unlikely that it wouldn't be vulnerable now.

But I was constantly being told during the abhisit years that the judges could do no wrong and were virtuous.

That viewpoint, if it even existed, i don't recall you supporting.... but now it seems you do...

[jayboy]

That viewpoint, if it even existed, i don't recall you supporting.... but now it seems you do...

It existed alright on the lines that the court system was totally independent and the most important bulwark against the abuses of democracy particularly those committed by elected dictators like Thaksin.Furthermore any criticsm of the courts was itself unacceptable.One member, thankfully now vanished from view - notorious for arguing the redshirts murdrered themselves - specialised in threatening members who ever speculated that the courts had been harnessed for political ends.The independence, moral stature and puirity of the Thai judicial system was of course a myth then, despite the hysterical elite propaganda, and it is a myth now.The judicial system has always been subject to political direction and clearly nothing has changed.It doesn't mean there aren't some first class judges around - I know one or two - but the overall picture is a depressing one.

[GarryP]

The RD five have said that they are very happy with the verdict and will be issuing a formal statement to the press in the lobby of the Burj Al Arab Hotel where they will be celebrating the decision.

[rixalex]

That viewpoint, if it even existed, i don't recall you supporting.... but now it seems you do...

It existed alright on the lines that the court system was totally independent and the most important bulwark against the abuses of democracy particularly those committed by elected dictators like Thaksin.

Obviously i can't speak for others but my suspicion would be that the more commonly view held was not that it was totally independent, but that it was more independent than it had been. You are obviously welcome to dispute this.

[phiphidon]

If you want to make that sort of argument that Thailand's judiciary is not above being influenced, why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? If it was vulnerable to being pressured in certain directions 3 or 4 years ago, i suggest it is unlikely that it wouldn't be vulnerable now.

But I was constantly being told during the abhisit years that the judges could do no wrong and were virtuous.

That viewpoint, if it even existed, i don't recall you supporting.... but now it seems you do...

I didn't, that's my point.

[lannarebirth]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

I don't think I ever had an opinion about this case so I'm not going to admit that I was wrong. I DO think Thaksin is a mass murdering kleptocrat who would like to turn Thailand into an autocracy run by himself (or proxies) for the benefit of himself and proxies. I'm not going to insult your intelligence and suggest that you don't believe exactly the same thing.

[lannarebirth]

I might have my cases confused, as there are so many, but I DO remember there being testimony from Thaksin's driver who corroborated that he traded in shares over the phone each day while PM. My recollection is that many of the transactions concerned his own company, while many others concerned companies that his government was making policies concerning. I'm not sure if a guy like that deserves the firing squad (leaving drug war issues aside), but he certainly deserves a long long stretch in prison.

[OzMick]

Oh well, that's another myth busted. I'm sure all the usual suspects will flock to the forum and admit they were wrong.

What was the "myth"?

The revenue department failed to collect taxes from Pojaman and Bannapot. The courts found them not guilty of doing it intentionally.

Not guilty of dereliction of duty would indicate that they at least attempted to collect the tax as it is the function of the dept to monitor such transactions and collect tax where due. The NACC charge would indicate otherwise. IMHO intent would be irrelevant.

[rixalex]

If you want to make that sort of argument that Thailand's judiciary is not above being influenced, why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? If it was vulnerable to being pressured in certain directions 3 or 4 years ago, i suggest it is unlikely that it wouldn't be vulnerable now.

But I was constantly being told during the abhisit years that the judges could do no wrong and were virtuous.

That viewpoint, if it even existed, i don't recall you supporting.... but now it seems you do...

I didn't, that's my point.

Which is in contraction to your earlier point. If you didn't believe the judges could do no wrong or were virtuous during Abhisit's tenure, then why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? What has changed?

[jayboy]

Obviously i can't speak for others but my suspicion would be that the more commonly view held was not that it was totally independent, but that it was more independent than it had been. You are obviously welcome to dispute this.

I'm not sure how that view can be sustained.It was the military constitution of 2007 that accelerated "judicial activism" so that the elite's will could prevail over the democratically expressed views of the Thai people.Under Thaksin certainly there was the assumption the courts were persuaded to support his personal business interests - nothing new there if one examines the relationship between power and the judiciary over the last 50 years.However to suggest the post coup/ militaryconstitution judiciary was in any sense "independent" is stretching credibility.It was a a complete disgrace.

[phiphidon]

Which is in contraction to your earlier point. If you didn't believe the judges could do no wrong or were virtuous during Abhisit's tenure, then why are you proclaiming them as myth busters now? What has changed?

In a vain attempt to get any of the anti thaksin brigade to accept that fact by using their logic and exposing their hypocrisy i.e when the judges verdict reflects ones beliefs they are virtuous, any other result they are malleable and can be bought, which has been expressed already in this thread.