Updated: Blocking Thaksin

Thai Enquirer reports on the Bhum Jai Thai Party’s election rigging operations.

It reports that Prime Minister and Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul will appoint 18 provincial governors and 2 inspectors-general. It states: “Most of the newly appointed governors are reportedly close to key figures in coalition parties, particularly Bhumjai Thai and Kla Tham.”

But perhaps the most strategic moves involve Thaksin Shinawatra, where Bhum Jai Thai has had some “fortuitous” legal decisions that effectively remove Thaksin from any role in the next election.

On the same day – what a “coincidence” – Thaksin was hit with Bt17.6bn tax bill for 2006 sale of Shin Corp equity and the new Attorney General overturned all previous decisions within his office to appeal Thaksin’s recent lese majeste acquittal.

The first move means that Thaksin, unlike the Buriram gangsters, will be unable to easily move money around for the Puea Thai Party’s campaign. The second move is meant to prevent Thaksin from getting parole and playing a personal role in the election.

On the latter move, Thai Enquirer also reports that Chuwit Kamolvisit observed that:

Thaksin, who was sentenced to one year in prison, would normally be eligible for special parole after serving one-third of his sentence—around four months—under standard procedures for inmates over 70, which require review by a committee and approval from the Minister of Justice… He noted that the Attorney General’s appeal of Thaksin’s acquittal in his lèse-majesté case effectively blocks any chance of early release, as ongoing legal cases disqualify prisoners from parole.

Adding to this effort to keep Thaksin behind bars, Thai PBS reports that Anutin has “confirmed today that he has recommended the rejection of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s petition for a royal pardon, in connection with his prison sentence on corruption charges.”

Interestingly, the Bangkok Post has an editorial that questions all of this legal “luck” for Bhum Jai Thai. It refers to the “sudden shift in law enforcement against Thaksin Shinawatra [that] raises pressing questions about whether the justice system is being wielded for political purposes.”

Update: The Nation reports that The Criminal Court has granted prosecutors a third extension to file an appeal in Thaksin’s Article 112 case, extending the appeal period to 19 December. On 19 November— two days before the appeal deadline — prosecutors from Criminal Division 8 submitted a request to the Criminal Court seeking a third extension of time to lodge their appeal. On 21 November, the Criminal Court approved an extension. Of course they did.

As regular PPT readers know, we have been making this point for several years. Even so, the Post editorial is worth quoting:

This all begs the question about what standards our law enforcers have used in interpreting lese majeste acts and how they are enforced.

Over the past several years, the lese majeste law has been criticised for being used to control and harm political opponents, thereby undermining the monarchy’s institutions that it is meant to protect. A number of political activists, many of them young people, have been jailed under such a charge.

For years, critics and lawmakers have tried and failed to reform this law to fix its loopholes, such as reducing incommensurate severe penalties and addressing legal text that leads to broad interpretation.

The court and law-enforcement decisions on Thaksin’s lese majeste cases have now lent weight to these concerns.

Those who have previously felt the 112 wrath of the politicized judicial system could only agree with this assessment. One wonders why the Post hasn’t noticed this before and stopped reporting on lese majeste cases, many of which had even more bizarre twists and turns than the case against Thaksin.

Perhaps it is the realization that the gangster government is seeking to rig the election outcome?