Thai editorial: Fire truck verdict lost amid the political impasse

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
Fire truck verdict lost amid the political impasse
The Nation

National polarity does no justice to a significant anti-graft message

BANGKOK: -- Thailand's deep-rooted political conflict must have taken some of the gloss off an historic clampdown on corruption earlier this month. Former deputy Interior minister Pracha Maleenont became the fourth high-profile politician to be convicted of graft in our modern history, but much attention was given to those acquitted in the same case. That a top Democrat, ex-Bangkok governor Apirak Kosayodhin, was let off the hook means one side of the political divide has been celebrating while the other has been left fuming.

Politicisation of the court's verdicts in the fire-truck scandal seems hard to avoid. In fact some bets have been placed on who will "last longer" - Pracha or the anti-corruption mechanism credited with his downfall. The conviction by the Supreme Court's Political Division followed a steadfast campaign by the National Counter-Corruption Commission (NCCC) after the Attorney General's Office was reluctant to prosecute.

The NCCC, the Supreme Court and the Constitution Court have always been criticised by one side of the political polarity for being biased against certain political figures. The other side, meanwhile, has charged that the government's reform agenda carries the ulterior motive of blunting the powers of the so-called "independent" bodies. How Pracha's conviction will affect the ongoing, trouble-plagued charter-reform effort remains to be seen.

He is only the fourth political big gun to have been jailed for corruption in Thailand's modern history. Before him were ex-Education minister Rakkiat Sukthana, ex-prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and another ex-deputy Interior minister, Vatana Asavahame. All fled when prison sentences were handed down. Rakkiat was the only one subsequently found and arrested. He spent five years in jail before being released and subsequently entered the monkhood.

More significantly, perhaps, all four were convicted under the anti-corruption mechanism that was established by the 1997 Constitution and has been allowed to keep functioning under the current 2007 charter. Without a system that shields investigators and judges from political influence, whether such convictions would be possible remains a big question.

Debate could get fiercer as to whether the powers of the "independent" bodies should be clipped or maintained. There are those who claim the current system is plagued by extreme prejudices, whereas others point at the simple fact that the key convictions that sent powerful politicians fleeing are solid ones. One side asks if Thailand needs a biased yet totally powerful system serving as a tool to destroy elected politicians. The other asks if elected politicians should be trusted to combat corruption by themselves.

As yet, the reform debate has not addressed such questions. But it will soon, especially if the government has its way on writing a brand-new charter. Some political analysts consider the enacting of a new Constitution the only way to expunge the legal consequences of the 2006 coup, which include Thaksin Shinawatra's corruption conviction and seizure of his assets. And if writing a new charter is possible, the process will involve two big questions: Should the legal consequences of the 2006 coup be nullified? And how much power should the "independent" bodies have, if they are to continue to exist in their current forms?

Regarding the second question, some will take a look at the outcome off the fire-truck case and say something, while others will do the same and say something else. That's how cursed Thailand's fight against corruption is.


-- The Nation 2013-09-21

[worgeordie]

4 Convicted and only 1 severed his sentence,not good enough,by far.

With the massive corruption that is carried out here ,there should have

been many more convictions,thats why it will be hard to stamp out,nobody

takes it seriously enough,the powers that be,are not doing their jobs,to

pursue,properly investigate,and bring the corrupt to court and hand down

long jail terms for the guilty,and not to allow bail,after conviction.

regards Worgeordie

[Halion]

A cosmetic verdict at best owing to the fact that the case which was well documented and as shown by the eventual result most valid, however , the massive delays in the issuance of a guilty verdict have significantly diluted any punitive action.

Just more of the same from the biased judicial system.

[Siripon]

Note the 2 defendants guilty had already fled the scene whilst everyone acquitted turned up at the court.

That means one of 2 things:

1. They knew the verdict in advance.

2. The defendants knew they were surely guilty and hence made plans well in advance to flee.

[Bagwan]

The statement that the former Governor Apirak was let off the hook shows extreme prejudice. He was found not guilty and should never have been dragged into the mess in the first place. If he hadn't allowed the contract to be honoured then he would be liable to a charge of dereliction duty i.e. he had no choice. Pity that his predecessor isn't still about to face the music.

[timewilltell]

Any way to punish corruption in this pace has to be good. Corruption is biased to those in power so even a mechanism biased in the other direction has some merit. In any case I think these courts are not so biased, just an annoyance to the childish PTP who cannot get their own way every single time.

What happened about the transport minister (ex?) and his mysterious sacks of cash at home?

What happened about the MP who shot his wife at a restaurant and was immune from investigation while the house was sitting?

I think there are so many more but just can't remember them because all reporting stops after the first report.

I suppose to culture ministers dad is still serving his time at the VIP sea view hospital suite he has hired instead of prison?

What a screwed up place this truly is.