Bangkok Post : FIDF wants Ratchadapisek land back

News » Politics

FIDF wants Ratchadapisek land back

Published: 17/09/2009 at 05:05 PM
Online news: Politics

The Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF) is preparing to sue Khunying Potjaman Damapong, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra's ex-wife, to reclaim the controversial 33-rai block of land in Bangkok's Ratchadapisek area, Bank of Thailand governor Tarisa Wattanagase said on Thursday.

Mrs Tarisa, chairman of the FIDF board, said the action will be taken on the advice of the Office of the Attorney-General that it could take legal action to reclaim the land.

She said the matter still needs to be discussed in detail because the FIDF was not well-versed in legal procedure. It would have to seek more advice from the OAG on what to do next.

Thong-urai Limpiti, BoT deputy governor and manager of the FIDF, said the OAG suggested that a lawsuit be filed demanding that Khunying Potjaman revoke registration of the land and return it to the FIDF on the grounds that the land purchase was invalid because the prime minister or his spouse is prohibited from entering into a contract with a state agency.

The BoT plans to inform the public of this matter in greater detail next week, she said.

In October 2008, Thaksin was convicted by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions of abusing his power while he was prime minister to help his wife's purchase of the Ratchadaphisek land at a discount in 2006.

The court did not rule that the FIDF auction was illegal. So the FIDF asked for the OAG's advice on whether it could reclaim the land.

Give us your ideas!

What do you want to see at the website? We need your input! We appreciate your suggestions.

Take survey

About the author

Writer: BangkokPost.com

Keep this article in your social bookmark:

Latest stories in this category:

Share your thoughts

For more candid, lengthy, conversational and open discussion between one another, use our Forum

Report objectionable comments click here. Include: discussion #, commenter name, comment date / time as it looks on the page. Example: discussion 15: 09/01/2009 at 10:00 AM.

ricefieldradio

Discussion 20 : 19/09/2009 at 12:41 AM20
Bob, don't always agree with you but you are 100% correct on all you said.

As I have stated many times I have a friend who was involved in the original bidding process. He can be described as a Thaksin hater, even he states quite categorically the PM was not ever involved in any way and was setup.

It's just too easy to blame Thaksin for all of Thailand's faults. I have no problem with charging him with something just don't invent a law to get the result you want after the fact. That's wrong for you, it's wrong for me and it's wrong for him. That is not justice, not even close.
tony

Discussion 19 : 18/09/2009 at 08:20 PM19
Why Thaksin has even a satang in Thailand that hasn't been seized and liquidated is beyond me. The man is a fugitive, a terrorist, a traitor etc. He sat there during Songkran purposefully antagonizing and condoning the violence.

Every satang he and his rotten worthless family has should be taken to finally end this. He is 3 years, 3 PM's removed from his fraudulent reign. Enough is enough already. Just because you have billions should not mean you can pay mobs to hold a nation hostage indefinitely. Same goes for PAD. Real grassroots movements don't have billionaires hiding behind them, and leading every movement.
isan farang

Discussion 18 : 18/09/2009 at 05:11 AM18
The apologists for Thaksin,in this discussion, just continue to want to whitewash the issues here and as one would suspect don't bother reading about the facts.
1.) Under article 100 and 122 of the 1999 NCCC act there is a "ban on political office holders and their spouses entering into transactions with State agencies".
2.) Under the criminal code Thaksin was prosecuted for "abuse of power" in his interference in getting this land for his wife ( now pretend ex-wife).
Yes, the FIDF should have been more diligent in knowing WHO they were dealing with but this would hardly be the first time that the civil service has failed Thailand either through ineptitude or collusion with corrupt politicians and business tycoons.
Get the land back,pay them back the money and then stage a REAL auction or tender for the land.
However this does not exonerate the Shinawatra clan from the laws above, as he happened to be the P.M. at the time.
Bob

Discussion 17 : 18/09/2009 at 03:49 AM17
Mr. Amazing Thai # 13, you are very amazing. First the hold thing has nothing to robbing a bank. It was about Mr. Thaksin (allegedly) interfering in the land deal. The only thing he did was to use his PM id card when he signed his name to register the land, which is required by law in this country when a wife buys and registers land. Maybe you need to know more...
Pridiyathorn Devakula defended the FIDF transaction, saying that it was transparent. Chanchai Boonritchaisri, a senior director of the central bank's Legal and Litigation Department, also claimed that the FIDF did not view itself as the damaged party, as the land was sold to the Shinawatras at a price higher than its then appraised value (about 700 million baht).(they paid 772 million baht) Plus, for your info, the law that the Thaksin's were tried on was a law that was amended in 2007 to make what he did against the law. So please explain to me how you can be guilty of a crime that is not yet a crime. Do you need to be a fortune teller to know that what you are doing today will be illegal in 4 or 5 years are you are to be tried for something you did in 2003 that was not illegal then. You are right with your name...Amazing Thai!!!!
Judgment Day

Discussion 16 : 18/09/2009 at 02:48 AM16
Discussion #13, Amazing Thai - clearly exhibit some commonsense about law principle. His simple example has helped enlightened many "innocent folks" here.

Also, many folks here completely missed the point...

"taxsin" was convicted by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for - "Holders of Political Positions of abusing his power" while he was prime minister to help his wife's purchase of the Ratchadaphisek land at a discount in 2006.

Therefore, the land purchase was invalid because the prime minister or his spouse is prohibited by LAW from entering into a contract with a state agency.

The other issue is not so much a DISCOUNT. But rather the auction was "cornered or fixed" in the bidding process, where bidders "conspired" in such a way that mrs taxin (pojaman) ultimately won the auction. (please read the old news archive for details)

Finally, please remember that during taxsin's premiership, many independent state agencies (like the Bank of Thailand, FIDF, etc.) were heavily influenced by him & his government to do his bidding.

taxsin, like many leaders around the world, are playing such games ... BUT they can only do so when they remain in power. Once they are kicked or thrown out of government, and when state agencies's independence are restored, they will have a lot to answer for.

So the sayings go ... the rooster comes back to roost; the ghost from the past now comes back to haunt these corrupt leaders.
The New Yorker

Discussion 15 : 18/09/2009 at 02:36 AM15
Hmmm...I thought she was supposed to be in Jail by now? What ever happened to that whole episode?
Just me P

Discussion 14 : 18/09/2009 at 02:35 AM14
To The Highlander,

My understanding is that the PM's wife is prohibited from entering into a contract with a state agency. So it does not matter whether the price was fair or not.

Basically, they made this law to prevent politicians from forcing (through power of influence) the government to buy their own properties or businesses at inflated prices. Or in this case, forcing through power of influence)the state to sell its property to them.
AmazingThai

Discussion 13 : 17/09/2009 at 11:50 PM13
To BOB #5

I am no fan or enemy of the disputed parties. However,your logic seems amazing. Do you also suggest that a convicted bank robber could be completely exonerated and set free if he/she decides to return the stolen money from the bank?
D lighted

Discussion 12 : 17/09/2009 at 11:46 PM12
How long, by law, in Thailand, after the execution of a transaction, can that transaction be revoked, annulled or otherwise be cancelled?!

I bought my house 9 years ago. Tomorrow some officials tells me the seller was not allowed to sell it, or I wasn't allowed to buy it - nine years ago... I mean, c'mon!

In other words: Is Thailand a state under the rule of law, yes or no. (No, no question mark.)
Somboon

Discussion 11 : 17/09/2009 at 10:36 PM11
Bob,

Exactly as I think. Get the land back, have to return the money, and then Thaksin would not be convicted because the land was not purchased.

What the h_ll are my Thai leaders thinking? I cannot believe what I read every single day how a bunch of these highly educated professionals Thai leaders are saying, thinking, and doing!

Are they retarded or what?

1 2 Next Last