Videos appear to be more than a set-up or sting operation | Bangkok Post: opinion

THINK PRAGMATIC

Back in 2001, the Constitution Court's reputation was in question after it voted 8:7 to acquit then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra of assets concealment. The court ruled that the evidence presented by the National Counter Corruption Commission was insufficient to determine beyond reasonable doubt that the accused (Thaksin) had known of assets held by his spouse under other people's names at the time he filed the assets statement.

However in a similar case against Prayuth Mahakitsiri, a Thai Rak Thai list MP, which was brought against him also by the NCCC, he was found guilty by the Constitution Court for filing false statement about his assets.

While the public welcomed the acquittal verdict for Thaksin as shown in an opinion poll conducted after the announcement of the verdict, the Campaign for Popular Democracy, a political pressure group, denounced the ruling and demanded clarification from the court. One of the questionable points was that seven judges had ruled Thaksin intentionally filed a false asset statement while four believed otherwise with the other four believing Article 295 of the constitution which prescribes penalties for political office holders could not be enforced against Thaksin.