The Criminal Court dismissed the second of three complaints of perjury against Thaksin brought by businessman William Monson.

The court ruled that the statute of limitations on the alleged 1995 offence had expired.

The court at South Bangkok made a similar ruling on the first complaint a week earlier.

Monson is now left with one complaint of perjury and can appeal the first two rulings.

A preliminary hearing into the third complaint has been set down for November 13. Meanwhile, Monson and his lawyer, Pramest Sutabutr, may go public with allegations of Thaksin's "lies while under oath".

They may hold a news media conference where they would "reveal the evidence they had intended to present to the court.

"If they're for real then they should discuss the truth and not use the statute of limitations tactic," an angered Pramest told reporters after yesterday's ruling.

This echoed earlier remarks from caretaker Senator Kraisak Choonhavan last Friday. He labelled the prime minister as "pathetic" for resorting to legal technicalities instead of defending himself against allegations he lied.

But, Somboon Kuptimanas - one of Thaksin's defence team - denied this and said he would fight the allegations if other defences failed.

Thaksin and Monson have been engaged in litigation since 1989.

A disappointed and tired Monson told The Nation: "I would rather have the facts before the court. I'm fighting for the truth."

Pramest alleged he had recently discovered what he claimed were "additional alarming details" of Thaksin's alleged perjury.

These included Thaksin identifying himself as "board chairman of IBC" while under oath. This allegedly false statement was made at the trial of Monson for embezzling IBC broadcasting equipment. Monson was acquitted.

Pramest claimed a document available shortly before that October 1989 testimony showed Thaksin and his wife had by then sold all their IBC shares, possibly to nominees.

"He had already resigned," Pramest said. "It's like the hidden-shares scandal. Someone else is legally in place, but the real man [running the show] is still him."

A witness set to appear for Monson yesterday described Thaksin as "a devil".

Delores Wills, an executive at Monson's bank at Enumclaw, Washington was to testify that evidence given by Thaksin in 1989 was false.

He told the court at that time IBC had not been paid by Monson for television-transmission equipment. Wills would produce records of 1988 bank transfers from Monson to Thaksin in the amount of US$5,000 (Bt186,677) a month for 12 months.

"This Thaksin is a devil," Wills, who has met Thaksin, said after yesterday's proceedings.

Monson and Pramest yesterday suggested previous counsel for Monson may have been "bought off" to hijack his case against Thaksin.

They claimed Monson's second representative did not litigate the matter "aggressively", in spite of being retained for eight years.

Pramest adopted the matter in April and said he inherited a poorly-prepared case missing details and documents. "[The original complaint] didn't even detail what sort of lies were made under oath and their significance."

Meanwhile, Monson attributed his former cable-television business partner's alleged lies to "greed".

"Thaksin saw the business plan and how much he could make and he got greedy," he alleged yesterday.

He claimed when he confronted Thaksin about the false embezzlement allegations - and other "betrayals and dishonouring of contracts" - Thaksin told him face-to-face: "This is Thailand."

Pravit Rojanaphruk

The Nation