[ad_1]
Image source, Facebook / Progressive movement
Thanathorn Chuengroongruangkit The Chairman of the Progressive Council is on tour to assist a candidate for the Provincial Administrative Organization election as his brother is being seen by society on charges of paying bribes to Crown Property officials.
A week after the website “The Truth” posted the Central Criminal Court verdict for corruption and misconduct, the headline “” Open trial !! Nong Thanathorn’s fraudulent case shoved money under the Property Office office.
December 2, “The Truth”, claiming to be a news website, but no producer’s name, content, or contact location. Published the judgment of the Criminal Court on Corruption and Misconduct dated November 27, 2019, which convicted Mr. Prasap Apai Phonchan, a former official of the Crown Property Office, and Mr. Surakit Tangwituwanich, a real estate agent estate. On the charge of taking bribes and falsifying official documents of the Property Office
In this judgment, the defendant referred to the name of Mr. Sakulthorn. Therefore prosperity Company Executives Real Asset Development Co., Ltd., Mr. Thanathorn’s brother. Therefore prosperity President of the Faculty of Progress Who paid 20 million baht for hiring the two defendants to coordinate the work for the company to rent 2 parcels of land in Soi Ruamrudee and Chidlom district from the office of the property. Without going through the normal auction process
However, there were only 2 defendants in this case, Mr. Prasit and Mr. Surakit. Regarding Mr. Sakulthorn The police did not report the charges and did not name the defendants.
After the issue circulated widely on social media and mainstream media, Watchara Petchthong, a former Democratic Party deputy. Has sent a letter to Major General Suwat Jengyodsuk, Commissioner of the Royal Thai Police (Pol. Police), He requested the investigation of the investigating officer responsible for the case why the name of Mr. In the case sent to prosecutors and today (December 9), Mr. Watchara once again filed a complaint on the same issue with the Law Commission. Justice and human rights Of the House of Representatives with Mr. Sira Jenjaka as president
Although the verdict has been issued since last year But the return to the public interest of the case has led the Attorney General’s Office and the Crime Suppression Division, the two main agencies involved, to clarify.
While Ms. Pannikarvanich, Executive Director of the Faculty of Progress Believes that the accusations of “Sakulthon Hup Thung Luang” was deliberately picked up by political opponents of the Progressive Party. Attacking Mr. Thanathorn, who is in the process of assisting the candidate’s campaign for the Provincial Administrative Organization Council. And the president of the Provincial Administrative Organization (PAO) that will take place on December 20
Ms Pannikar noted that the indictment could be an attempt to “silence” Thanathorn and his coalition by calling for reform and transparency verification of the Crown Property Office. Possible
BBC Thai contacts Real Asset to request an interview with Mr. Sakulthorn But I have not received a reply yet. Meanwhile, sources said Sakulthorn may soon clarify the matter publicly.
Statement from the Attorney General
Today (December 9), Mr. Itthiphon Kaewthip, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office (OASO), denied the news that PAHO “ordered not to sue” Mr. Sakulthorn, stating that Mr. Sakulthorn Young was not charged. And the investigative officer of the Law Enforcement Division is still investigating. The prosecutor has no power to sue or not to sue.
Mr. Itthiporn also summarized the content and background of the criminal court cases in the corruption case as follows:
- Early 2017 Surakit Tangwituwanich, an independent land broker, met with Mr. Sakulthorn Who is the president of Real Asset? Offer for rent 2 parcels of the Crown Property Office located in Soi Ruam Ruudee and the location of the Telephone Organization of Thailand in the Chidlom district To which Mr. Sakulthon paid attention Therefore, the Company entered into a contract to hire Mr. Surakit to coordinate and enable the Company to lease the land with a compensation of 500 million baht. Mr. Surakit and Mr. Prasit Who is an officer of the Property Office Suggested that Mr. Sakulthon file a land lease application through normal channels with the Property Office That Mr. Sakulthon paid the first installment 5 million baht to carry out this matter.
- March 2017 Mr. Prasit has falsified official documents from the Property Office. Stating that real asset company Has passed the property inspection as a tenant That when Mr. Sakulthon received the book and then paid another 5 million baht
- November 2017 When it appeared that the Company had not yet received the right to lease both parcels of land, Mr. Sakulthon urged Mr. Surakit to continue. Mr. Surakit and Mr. Prasit jointly falsify the Property Office documents. Another problem is the invitation letter from the Real Asset Company representative to the meeting when receiving the meeting invitation. Mr. Sakulthon then paid another 10 million baht, totaling 3 times the 20 million baht payment. But when the meeting approached Mr. Sakulthorn was informed that the meeting had been canceled. He therefore demanded the money back. The investigation said 7 million baht was reimbursed to Mr. Sakulthon. Knowing the matter, it delegated to the agents the power to file a complaint with the Repression Division to prosecute the agents and interested parties.
- Apr. From 2019 After arresting Mr. Surakit and Mr. Prasit, the two defendants had the investigating officer of the Law Enforcement Division complete the investigation and refer the case to the Prosecutor’s Office. Alleged that both collectively claim, accept or agree to receive property or any other benefit for themselves or others in exchange for intentionally or unintentionally allowing the official to act by dishonest or illegal means OR does not perform tasks that are theirs or punishable by Thai Joint forgery of official documents and use of forged official documents. Which is a crime classified in the Penal Code and the Organic Law for the Prevention and Repression of National Corruption. The prosecutor examined the case and issued an opinion to prosecute the two defendants in the Criminal Court for fraud and central misconduct. Both defendants pleaded guilty.
- Nov 27, 2019 Criminal Court for Corruption Cases Sentenced to three years in prison for both defendants.
A spokesman for the Oss. He explained that the investigation officer of the Law Enforcement Division did not charge Mr. Sakulthorn. He was not the defendant in this case. Therefore, the prosecutor has no power to sue or not sue Mr. Sakulthorn.
Image source, Reuters
However, the investigation officer wrote at the end of the investigation report that
“In the role of Mr. Sakulthorn The person who gives money to the first and second defendants with the intention of taking it to the official to induce him to act. Helping Real Asset Company Development Co., Ltd. to acquire land lease rights from the Property Office Without going through the usual steps Therefore, it is characterized by using the two defendants to commit a crime, so that Mr. Sakulthorn does not legally use the injured person. In which the investigating officer is meeting evidence for further processing “
Mr. Itthiphon went on to say The investigating officer’s record shows that the Sheriff’s investigating officer Desiring to separate the prosecution of Mr. Sakulthon in another case Therefore, the prosecutor has to wait for the investigator to act. When the investigation is finished, it will be sent to the Public Ministry to consider the accusation or not to sue, which the prosecutor will consider based on the evidence contained in the case.
PEP confirmed, still under investigation.
Yesterday (December 8), several media offices reported on an interview of Pol. Major General Suwat Saengnom, commander of the Suppression Division (PEP) of the progress of the case, that the bailiff has separated the litigation into 2 expressions so that the sopese case One of the expressions was the bribery case and the other was the bribery mediator, Mr. Prasit and Mr. Surakit, who had already sent the case to the prosecutor and to the court for a decision.
Regarding the case of the bribery person The investigation officer has been investigating the case the whole time. So that the case is as detailed as possible
“There is a lot of progress in (the investigation) now. Let’s work once again to get the facts and evidence clearer. Therefore, identify how the infraction was committed. Who is wrong Who will give justice to all parties But if it is found guilty, he will also take action under the law, ”reported the Isara news agency. Pol.Maj.Gen. Suwat
Major General Suwat added that, at present, no one has been called in to investigate or report the allegations.
“Pannikar” identifies not affect Thanathorn – Faculty of Advancement
Since Mr. Sakulthorn is the brother of Mr. Thanathorn The President of the Progressive Council, who sent candidates to the electoral field of the Provincial Administrative Organization on December 20 and is currently actively campaigning in many areas. Therefore, BBC Thai interviewed representatives of the Progressive Party about the impact of the bribery case on the work of Mr. Thanathorn and the Progressive Party. Especially during the local election campaign.
Ms. Pannikar Executive Committee, Faculty of Progress Confirmed that this case had no impact on the work of the Progressive Party. He pointed out why this case was back in the spotlight despite the court’s ruling from last year.
Image source, Facebook / Progressive movement
Phannika Vanich
“I can’t say anything about the gist of the case because it is ongoing … but keep in mind that the case has been going on for many years anyway. Local on December 20,” Miss Pannikar said.
She believed that taking the matter back, it was quite clear that “Political results”, that is, Mr. Thanathorn lost the vote in the local elections.
Miss Pannikar said that the accusations of “swallowing Luang” were a big problem, especially in the minds of people in the provinces. “But we think people will understand it as a political attack.”
In addition to hoping to cause doubts in Mr. Thanathorn and the advance group Ms. Pannikar still believes that taking up the case “could be an attempt to silence us so that we do not talk about reform and transparency in the Crown Property Office “.
