• 
• 

Published on September 9, 2007

The hullabaloo was actually stirred up out of the blue after Thaksin himself protested, via the Swiss newspaper Mittelland Zeitung, that his accounts at various Swiss banks had been frozen.

"My money is clean," he claimed.

One day later, his lawyer-cum-spokesman in Bangkok claimed that it was an error on the part of the media. His boss never had any Swiss bank accounts. Thaksin's public-relations man in London also issued a statement to confirm the same thing.

But it was odd that Thaksin should talk to the Swiss press and complain about Swiss bankers and their failure to keep their clients' business in strict confidence like in the old days when tyrants and crooked politicians kept numbered accounts in Swiss banks.

That tradition was broken after the Philippines' Committee for Good Government sought a Swiss court order for banks there to open their vaults so that the country could reclaim what had been stolen by a dictator and his family during their long years in power.

But the Thaksin case was odd. Thai authorities, including the Assets Examination Committee, were unaware that Swiss banks had taken such an action. Swiss authorities, including the embassy in Bangkok, denied any knowledge of the issue.

One thing raised suspicions. Why did Thaksin go to the Swiss newspaper in the first place? It was unlikely that anybody misunderstood the talk. The interview took place in Switzerland, presumably Zurich. If the man in exile was there, it certainly wasn't because he wanted to get an expensive watch fixed.

The hasty denial of the existence of the Swiss bank accounts had to be made because Thai authorities began to suspect that something was quite fishy and did not sound right. If a request for a subpoena is sought from the Swiss Court to seek Thaksin's financial records and bank accounts, there could be some uneasy times in Zurich.

Well, the fact is that Thaksin does have Swiss bank accounts. As an extremely wealthy man, he has maintained accounts at several banks over the years, with all deposits carried out by his financial representatives in private banking.

Now that he has to do it all alone, unpleasant incidents occasionally arise, as was the case with his hard-luck story about having the US equivalent of Bt1.6 million stolen by a thief at a McDonald's outlet in Moscow earlier this year.

According to an insider familiar with the incident, the uproar and Thaksin's testiness over the Swiss banking incident was due to his lack of first-hand experience. After opening his numbered some years back, Thaksin only made deposits into them. He never had any need to make a withdrawal.

The story goes like this. Thaksin showed up at a Swiss bank, identified himself and sought to make a withdrawal.

The gnomes of Zurich would not have been familiar with him or with this manner of making a withdrawal. Usually, clients show up with numbers to make withdrawals. For fund transfers, there are codes that are changed at different intervals, and the transaction can only be completed once the numbers are verified.

When Thaksin showed up, his name and presence would have had no effect on the officer in charge, because he does not walk in and out every other day. The numbers count, of course. Certainly he did not need cash urgently for some luxury shopping. Upset by not being able to complete the transaction, it was natural for Thaksin to blow his top and complain to the Swiss media, blaming the banks, rather than his unfamiliarity with transaction procedures.

Because of his tantrum, the formerly secret existence of his Swiss bank accounts became known publicly, necessitating swift denials from his spokesmen here and in England.

If Thaksin had no Swiss bank accounts, why in the world was he there and talking negatively about Swiss banking? The lame clarification offered, that the Swiss press had misunderstood and that Thaksin was referring to the freezing of his assets in Bangkok, would have only impressed his naïve admirers.

Now that the matter is no longer a secret, it depends on Thai authorities to decide what they intend to do to find out how much wealth Thaksin has stashed, especially via cash deposits in Swiss banks, and how he got that money. When the extent of his wealth is truly uncovered the number could be staggering and shocking.

By the time Thai authorities can get their act together, it would be too late. Funds could be moved in just minutes, if not seconds, through wire transfers. An expert in money-laundering disclosed years ago that it took him just 11 seconds to move large funds to a network of accounts, while it would take authorities 11 months to trace the funds, if the authorities could locate them at all.

The time required now could be much less. Thai authorities need to seek expert advice instead of fumbling around in a half-hearted manner as Cabinet members wait for the day they can leave and spend their twilight years in serenity, though without any claims to fame during their tenure.

So much for the lost opportunity for national restructuring following the coup. Especially dreadful is the scenario that some of the funds from Zurich could be spent to help Thaksin's cronies and political nominees regain power in government and wreak more havoc on this land.

Sopon Onkgara