'No evidence' shows Yingluck made gain

A judge who solely ruled in favour of ex-prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra in her famed rice-pledging case pointed out there was no evidence to show why the former premier assisted a company found to have unlawfully gained benefits from the discharge of the state grain.

The Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions on Sept 27 ruled 8-1 to hand Yingluck a five year prison term for criminal negligence and malfeasance in her administration's government-to-government (G2G) rice stock sales.

The court recently released individual and central verdicts by the nine judges adjudicating the case. Pisol Pirun was the only judge who ruled in favour of Yingluck. Citing Section 157 of the Criminal Code and Section 123/1 of the Organic Act on Counter-Corruption, Mr Pisol said the offenders must either have motives or intention to cause damage to other parties or commit malfeasance to seek benefits for themselves or others.

Based on his statement, no evidence has suggested the defendant benefited from the discharge of the state rice, he said. Citing another court ruling on the fake G2G rice scheme, including Siam Indica Co, found guilty for unlawfully reaping benefits from the rice discharge, Mr Pisol noted no evidence showed the defendant had a hand in the offence or failed to stop the rice-pledging scheme because she was keen to give the company a favour.

Although there is a photo showing the company's founder, Apichart Chansakulporn, with the defendant's brother, Thaksin, in Hong Kong, this evidence was not substantial enough to suggest the defendant and Apichart were in a close relationship which could have led the former premier to help the firm. No evidence has shown the defendant has a relationship with Siam Indica or Apichart, he said. According to him, arguments that the defendant has a motive or intention to seek a benefit for Siam Indica or Apichart unlawfully were legally unsound.

According to the central verdict, Yingluck was aware of damage incurred by fraud in relation to the G2G rice deal, as alerted by state agencies, parliamentary inquiries, no-confidence debates, politicians and the media. The defendant, who also served as the chairwoman of the National Rice Policy Committee, assigned Weerawut Wajanaphukka, former assistant secretary to the commerce minister, to sit on several committees in connection with the scheme. He was later found guilty in the fake G2G rice deal case.

Despite being notified by Warong Dechgitvigrom, a former Democrat MP, in a parliamentary debate on fraud in the discharge of state rice on Nov 26, 2012, the delivery of the grain under four purchase contracts linked with the bogus G2G rice deal still went on until February 2013, the verdict reads.