A lawyer yesterday threatened to take legal action against the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) accusing the agency of dragging its feet in a criminal case against 58 members of the defunct People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC).
Suthep Thaugsuban, former leader of the PDRC anti-government protest movement, is among 58 suspects facing nine insurrection and other charges in connection with their seizures of government offices between 2013 and 2014.
"I've observed that it's been more than a year since the prosecutor ordered the DSI to conduct an additional investigation into this case. I'm wondering what has been holding them back," said Winyat Chatmontri, the lawyer.
Mr Winyat describes himself as a human rights lawyer and secretary-general of the United Lawyers for Rights and Liberty, but is better known as a lawyer for Jatuporn Prompan, a core leader of the red-shirt United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship.
"This has drawn criticism over whether it is an case of dereliction of duty by the DSI. And if the DSI won't do anything about that, then we may have to take legal action against them," Mr Winyat said.
The lawyer yesterday submitted a letter to DSI chief Paisit Wongmuang asking the DSI to speed up its investigation into the PDRC case.
Thatchakon Annopphet, a senior DSI investigator, received the letter from Mr Winyat, and said it would be forwarded to Pol Col Paisit.
As the lawyer who brought the case against the 58 PDRC suspects, Mr Winyat said, he had previously asked the Office of the Attorney-General (OAG) twice about any progress in the OAG's role to decide whether or not to indict the suspects.
Most recently, the Department of Special Litigation on July 12 asked the DSI in a letter to accelerate the submission of findings from the additional investigation, he said.
According to Mr Winyat, 30 suspects postponed the submission of additional witness statements between Nov 2, 2015 and May 16 this year.
And so far, no progress at all has been achieved, Mr Winyat said.
He said the DSI should therefore speed up submission of the additional findings to the OAG, or the public could conclude the suspects did not intend to provide witness statements despite their claim to the contrary.