[ad_1]
Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu said he was not concerned after the Central Administrative Court canceled an order for Yingluck to pay 35 billion baht – seizure. The dishonest pawn case The Ministry of Finance was able to appeal the case within 30 days, while the criminal case remained guilty of the Supreme Court ruling. But if you think you’re not wrong, come back.
April 2, 64 – At 13:30 in the Government House of Mr. Wissanu Kru-ngam, Deputy Prime Minister Interviewed on the case that the Central Administrative Court ordered the annulment of the order Ms. Yingluck Shinawatra, the former first Minister, returned 35,000 million baht to revoke the seizure order that as for the assets that the state has initially seized, there are still less than 100 million baht, which is in the process of being prepared to seize. But when the Central Administrative Court so ordered It must stop and continue the appeal. What is considered normal
Mr. Wisnu went on to say that the court had previously decided the case of Mr. Bunsong Teriyaphirom, former Minister of Commerce and Mr. Phumisaraphon, former Vice Minister of Commerce, who ordered the seizure of assets. But an appeal has been made. Today, the court has ordered the seizure of property to stop, but the case is not yet final. However, the state must file an appeal within 30 days to the relevant departments, especially the Ministry of Finance. I already recognized everyone That it is considered fine Since the case is not yet final, the procedure is quite common. The seizure has gained something, it has lost something, which is normal and has no problems. And he was not attracted to anything because he considered himself normal
“Just don’t go and say that when either party wins, they say the court has rendered a fair trial. But when he was defeated, he said it was not fair to apply double standards. Lean on two levels, please don’t think so. Let’s put the case to the end, “Wissanu said.
The reporter asked whether the attached property Do you have to put up first? Mr. Visanu said You must hold down first However, the assets that were seized only a few satang. For example, in Chiang Mai province, it was only slightly double digits less than 100 million baht.
When asked if it had been sold at auction, Wisanu said it was still uncertain. The authorities have reported But only that there is a little bit here, less than 100 million baht in the seizure.
Another reporter asked that In the case of seizure and auction sale, when the court issued an order like this, what action will the state take? Mr. Wissanu explained that the case has not yet reached its conclusion. I can’t return it. Because if after this the court ordered the seizure again, it should not be carried around. This case just stopped. Like the story of the house in Soi Yothin Phatthana He held it, but did nothing. And the owner still lives Today the Administrative Court has ordered that everything stop. And continue prosecuting in the highest administrative court From now on it is up to the Ministry of Finance, which is the suffering one, to proceed. Where there will be a prosecutor to help carry out
When asked whether this decision of the Central Administrative Court will be effective against a criminal case, Mr. Wissanu said that he did not know that the case was started with the Supreme Court, the Criminal Division for Persons in Political Positions, ruled that the defendant was guilty. . He is omitted as president and then the NCCC has a letter informing that they get seizure of the property AND when the property was seized The victim then sued to withdraw the seizure. Which is the same as Mr. Boonsong’s case.However, he still did not see this trial, but someone summarized it to hear it, so he had to drop the steps. Only to feel inconsistent with the judgment Of the Division of Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court Holder of a political office
The reporter asked When this is the case, the defendant can bring the trial against him or not, Witsanu said he has not done anything yet. Until the end of the day, nobody does anything.
If the decision of the Central Administrative Court is a worrying matter in the future fight of the state, the deputy prime minister said that if he loses the case, he will worry. But I was not very worried because there are still steps that can be taken until the end
When asked if it showed that it could not be claimed or not, Ms. Yingluck was not guilty, Mr. Wissanu said that he could not say that due to the ruling of the Criminal Division for Persons in Political Positions of the Supreme Court of Justice . The blame remains
The reporter also asked that Sentences of the Central Administrative Court and the Criminal Court The conflicting opinions will have some effect or not. Mr. Wissanu said I don’t know yet. But the start of the seizure is due to the Supreme Court ruled that the NACC was wrong to seize the property. We proceed to seize the property. Then the first level administrative court I saw that he was not guilty and I had to appeal. Who has no problem to appeal
When asked how many people misunderstood after the Central Administrative Court ruled out, Ms. Yingluck Able to return to Thailand because she is not guilty. Mr. Wissanu said, “Come back if you want to go back. It does not matter But it must be repeated and stressed That this case is not final yet Or even Mr. Bunsong’s case was not the last If asked if it is wrong or not, the state still has a Supreme Court ruling that it is wrong. Because if the court didn’t say it was wrong, how could we stop it? ”.
The reporter asked If the Supreme Administrative Court is not guilty, will there be a conflict with the Supreme Court? This matter, they do not. You can be prepared.But they don’t respond in public. “Otherwise, neither you nor I will violate the jurisdiction of the court.”
[ad_2]
