Chaikasem: We won't take sides

Q : The Attorney-General seems to be at odds with the Assets Examination Committee on many cases. Previously, the office had agreed to file the controversial Ratchadaphisek land case in court. Is it a coincidence that the disagreements have happened after you became Attorney-General?

A : Attorneys have to maintain their standard. Whether the cases are from the AEC or the National Counter-Corruption Commission [NCCC], we have to treat them in the same way. We have worked on the cases with the NCCC - which is based on similar laws to the AEC - for many years. We never had a problem.

Actually, the groups working on the cases before and after I took this position are the same, except for some retired members.

Lately, the standard of cases reported by the AEC was different from the past.

There also were problems about interpretation of the laws. The AEC also had time constraints.

Meanwhile, the Attorney-General has to plug any holes in a case before sending it to the court. We cannot take a risk.

There is a difference of opinion in the interpretation of the law that allows the AEC to file the case directly to court if it has an opinion different from that of the Attorney-General. To what extent could there be different opinions on a case? It could be on whom to sue and whom not to sue. But the AEC thinks just different opinions on whether it should investigate more or not suffices to take recourse to the option of sending a case directly to court.

 

Q : Could such agreement hurt the image of the Attorney-general when it has the duty to file cases to court?

A : I haven't said I wouldn't file the case. I just said the AEC should have had its report complete. But the AEC insisted and showed it wanted to file cases directly to court.

 

 Q : Has there been disagreement between the Attorney-General and the NCCC on cases in the past?

A : On many occasions the Attorney-General had differences with the NCCC regarding a case, but the NCCC never directly filed the case. When concern was raised, the NCCC complied with the recommendation.

I cannot see the point why the AEC has to over expedite the cases. The law said the NCCC will have to take over the cases left unfinished by the AEC. Anyway, it's not against the law for the AEC to file the case itself. 

 

Q : Do you have a close relationship with former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, as alleged?

A : I know Thaksin well, as he was a prime minister. We met once at a meeting on Suvarnabhumi Airport construction, but we have never talked personally. We then met at events sometimes. Besides that, I don't have any close relationship with any politician.

In fact, Thaksin might not be pleased with me. I was an arbitrator in the dispute between iTV and the Office of the PM's Secretariat. And I was among those who opposed iTV.

 

Q : What will you say for the criticism that an attorney should not be a board member for state enterprises or private organisation?

A : Nothing is wrong with being a board member. I became a board member as I am experienced. I can help the organisation prevent any mistake that might happen, when it is related to my field of experience.

Now that I was indicted as involving in the CTX case as I was a board member, I will accept such posts offered.

Q : Do you guarantee that you will not favour people close to Thaksin while deciding on cases?

A : The situation is critical and conflicts are everywhere. We have to be cautious. We must be able to justify our decision. What can I do? If I favour powers that be today and the government is changed in the next two days, how can I survive then?

Q : Have anybody tried to lobby you about the cases?

A : Yes, it is Thai tradition. But my answer to them would be the only one, stick to the principle. The constitution has protected the attorney's honest decision. It was an auspicious time for the attorneys to respond.

 

Q: Do you feel bad about the AEC indicting you in relation to the CTX bomb-scanner purchase? Do you think the indictment is unfair and, if so, do you have any bad feelings towards the AEC and its work?

A : I admit I don't feel very good about the AEC's work. But one's feelings and the investigation and legal proceedings must be kept separate.

Moreover, I don't work alone. And the attorneys have such standard as I said. Everything must be explainable and open. People must judge my work.

 

Q : What do you plan to do about the CTX case? Will you order sending the case to court?

A : When the AEC files the case against me, I will have to find a lawyer [to defend me]. Meanwhile, I will take a leave of absence at the time and let the acting Attorney-General do the job and handle the case.

Q : What about the proceeding for the Chart Thai and Matchima Thipataya parties dissolution cases?

A : The attorneys have to maintain standard, which must be as close to the Thai Rak Thai dissolution case as possible. 

Q: What would you do if the government let the attorney-general defend it against the cases investigated by the AEC, claiming state attorneys have to defend the government?

A : I will have to discuss with the attorneys' team. I don't work alone.

Personally, I cannot talk about the cases that I haven't seen the reports. However, if I find anybody should not be sued for the case, but accused by the AEC, I must consider defending them.