The Constitution Court yesterday tossed out the impeachment petition against Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, saying the 27 senators who filed it had failed to back up their complaint with convincing evidence linking him to the recent sale of Shin Corp by members of his family.

Pro-democracy groups cried foul and vowed to oust the eight judges out of 14 who voted in favour of Thaksin.

Paiboon Warahapaiboon, secretary-general of the Constitution Court, said the senators did not provide documented proof that Thaksin was the beneficial owner of more than 5 per cent of Shin Corp shares be-fore the company was sold to Temasek Holdings.

They also failed to show how Thaksin became involved in the Shin deal, Paiboon said.

The eight judges who voted to reject the petition were acting president Parn Jantrapan, Jumpol na Songkhla, Nopadol Heng-jaroen, Manit Witayatem, Sakdi Techacharn, Sutee Suthisom-boon, Suwan Suwanvecho and Ura Wang-orm-Klang.

The petition was accepted by the Constitution Court on Tuesday and the senators said on Wednesday that the court was obliged by the Constitution to go ahead with the review.

The petition said Thaksin was guilty of violating Article 209 of the charter and was no longer qualified to stay in office.

The article forbids conflicts of interest by ministers, including holding shares in firms or wielding influence over their management. The senators claimed Thaksin still exercised a degree of control over Shin Corp while formulating national policy.

In mid-2001, the Constitution Court accepted an assets-concealment charge against the just-elected Thaksin, but he escaped a five-year ban from politics by an eight-to-seven vote.

Weng Tojitrakarn, president of the Federation for Democracy, said it was regrettable that the court decided not to hear the case. It had shirked its responsibility to investigate the allegations against Thaksin, he said.

“It’s unacceptable as the petition is clear. It’s the duty of the court to seek evidence instead of waiting for the senators to find evidence,” Weng said.

Weng pointed to an interview given by Thaksin’s son Panthongtae, in which the Shin sale was des-cribed as an affair involving senior figures, saying it provided strong evidence that Thaksin had a role in the deal.

Sunthree Hatthisengkin, a leader of the Network of Khon Kaen People for Democracy, said she was deeply disappointed in the court.

“Civil groups have placed a lot of hope in the court. It’s unbelievable that it would reject the case,” she said.

“This shows that the state has dominant power over independent organisations.

“We have been saying all along that this government has interfered in their work.”

Suchit Boonbongkarn, a former Constitution Court judge, said he did not understand why the court would not want to clear up the issue.

“It would have been good for both sides had the court agreed to proceed with the review, as both sides would have the chance to present their information,” he said.

“I wouldn’t like to say that this will cause the situation to explode but since the constitutional mechanisms are being blocked from use, the people will increasingly turn to non-parliamentary solutions.”

Suraphon Nitikraipoj, rector of Thammasat University, expressed concern that the court’s decision would spark hostility.

“The court would no doubt have to review the petition because it was legally supposed to do so,” he said.

When the anti-Thaksin movement sees that the decision was unjustified, tension is likely to escalate into a confrontation, he said.

Constitution architect Kasem Sirisumphan said he was dismayed that the court was unresponsive to the general outcry over the deal.

“The court acted as if it didn’t accept that the public has questioned the prime minister’s transparency,” he said.

Kaewsun Atibodhi, the leader of the 27 senators, said they would meet soon to discuss their next move.

Democrat MP Sathit Wongnongtoey, as opposition chief whip, said the opposition would provide the senators with more evidence of Thaksin’s alleged complicity so they could make an appeal to the court.

Throughout the morning before the court’s announcement, Thaksin refused to talk to Government House reporters but gave an exclusive interview to Agence France-Presse, which quoted him as saying that his rivals were “trying to twist the facts”.

“They try to lie to the people. They say the shares were sold by my family outside the rules of the game,” he said.

“These rules are only understood by a very few at the top, but not at the bottom. Sometimes [financial regulations] are very difficult to explain, but they trust me, the majority of the people,” he said.

“The fact is we did everything legally, ethically, according to the rules of the game and international practice. So if the court looks into all these facts, there should be no problem,” he said.

Thai Rak Thai MPs celebrated.

“I knew at the beginning that the prime minister had done nothing wrong, and the court has proved my belief by rejecting the petition,” MP Wichit Plangsrisakul said.

Senators and the civil groups that tried to pressure the court should be ashamed, he said.

MP Suphachai Phosu said the anti-Thaksin groups should stop trying to discredit the judges who voted in favour of Thaksin. “They have no choice but to accept the court’s decision, otherwise they will insult the court,” he said.