System of checks and balances weakened

Experts predict graft agency will suffer

Post Reporters

The Constitutional Court's verdict could upset the checks and balances of government and generate more legal disputes, academics and activists said.

In clearing Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra of guilt, the court had undermined the National Counter Corruption Commission, which would consequently be less effective in future.

Pibhop Dhongchai, secretary-general of the Campaign for Popular Democracy, said no-one would be willing to work for the graft commission because the Constitutional Court judges did not support it.

"From now on, the Thaksin government will have more power. Without a good system of examination, there may be abuse of power because the check-and-balance mechanism will find it hard to function," he said.

He stressed that the decision was close, only 8-7 in favour of Mr Thaksin.

He was looking forward to reading the individual opinions of the judges, especially those favouring Mr Thaksin.

"If the reasoning of the majority judges does not outweigh the opinions of the minority, there will be an effect on the judges and on some NCCC members," Mr Pibhop said.

Surapol Nitikraipot, dean of Thammasat University's law faculty, said the court discredited itself with a "very strange" ruling.

Mr Surapol said the prosecution of Prayut Mahakijsiri, a former Thai Rak Thai list MP who faced a similar wealth concealment case, was much weaker than that of Mr Thaksin, but Mr Prayut lost.

"Mr Prayut never said he was aware of his wife's assets, but Mr Thaksin said he was but did not know they had to be declared.

"He was trapped by his own words, but eventually found not guilty," Mr Surapol said.

He predicted the verdict would lead to a spate of legal disputes and that Constitutional Court judges would find it hard to explain their individual opinions and come up with the official judgment of the court.

Kasem Sirisamphan, former member of the constitution drafting assembly, supported the ruling in favour of Mr Thaksin. The majority of judges might have based their decision on facts and the national interest, he said.

He praised the prime minister for impressive leadership and staying calm despite the positive ruling, and forgiving the NCCC and promising to co-operate with it in future.

Montri Roopsuwan, law lecturer at Ramkhamhaeng University, said the ruling should satisfy people in general. The quick ruling benefited the nation.

A split decision was normal as the judgment was based on public law principles that allowed each judge to apply his own rationality, he said.

Mr Montri rejected the rumour that some Constitutional Court judges had been bribed, saying all the judges ruled without prejudice.

However, the prime minister should not have thanked only the majority judges, he said. The minority also did their duty well.

Prayat Hongthongkham, political science lecturer at Chulalongkorn University, said the ruling surprised him.

However, the majority judges might truly have believed in Mr Thaksin's innocence and acted to prevent social disruption.

He urged everyone to accept the verdict, especially politicians.

"Thailand is unlucky because politicians usually play destructive games-even though they know full well they cannot change the ruling," Mr Prayat said.

"Politics should have been reformed so well that the rules should not have been relaxed for someone," he said.