Pojaman excused from court hearing

KESINEE TAENGKHIO

THE NATION

The Supreme Court yesterday excused the absence of Khunying Pojaman Shinawatra during the Ratchadaphisek land case trial after a requested from the defence.

The high court also ruled for the defence to submit written testimonies of legal experts in lieu of

summoning them to the witness stand.

In a March ruling, co-defendant and ex-premier Thaksin Shinawatra had received the court's permission to be absent from witness hearings.

The court will today complete the examination of evidence before scheduling the dates to hear the prosecution and defence witnesses.

Pojaman, accompanied by her children and about 300 supporters, appeared before the high court's Criminal Tribunal for Political Office Holders, the special court for graft charges.

She submitted a final defence writ denying all charges and will summon about 30 defence witnesses, including former central bank chief MR Pridiyathorn Devakula, who had oversight of the land deal in 2003.

The prosecution contends that Thaksin and Pojaman abused power in violating a ban against office-holders and spouses to enter into a state contract. Authorised by Thaksin as spouse, Pojaman bought a Bt772-million plot on Bangkok's Ratchadaphisek Road from the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF).

Lead defence lawyer Pichit Chuenban said the defence rebuttals would focus on six issues.

Firstly, Thaksin had no supervisory role over the FIDF and was not a contractual party to the deal made by his wife as a private citizen, and had no conflict of interest.

Second, the Assets Examination Committee (AEC) had no mandate to look into the land deal.

Third, the Council for National Security violated the rule of law to form the AEC for the arbitrary enforcement of law against Thaksin and his family.

Fourth, the FIDF was not an injured party affected by the deal and it failed to adhere to the Criminal Procedural Code when lodging a complaint against the co-defendants.

Fifth, the anti-graft law was suspended because of the 2006 coup when the proceedings were launched.

Finally, the prosecution request to seize the Bt772-million payment for the deal upon the conviction of the co-defendants violated the provisions on freedom as enshrined by the 2007 constitution.