Anything to stay in his good books

The division has already tried Thaksin and his wife Khunying Pojaman over the controversial Ratchadaphisek land purchase. More cases investigated by the Assets Examination Committee have been submitted to the court, including the one about the Exim Bank loans to Burma, the two- and three-digit lotteries and the government's rubber sapling project.

PPP's Lop Buri MP Suchart Lainamngern proposed that politician's cases be treated like ordinary ones so they can go through all three courts.

However, the Constitution's Article 219 says cases against political office holders can only be ruled upon by the Supreme Court's division, while Article 278 says cases ruled upon by the division can only be appealed within 30 days after the ruling and only when new evidence is put forward.

Former charter drafter Seri Suwanpanont, who helped with both the 1997 and 2007 charters, said the objective of these Articles was to keep the legal process in cases against corrupt politicians short and sweet. Besides, he said, judges at the Supreme Court were experienced and reliable.

"Each case concerning political office holders is overseen by nine judges, no fewer than the number of judges each case would see if it went through the ordinary channels. That is three judges each at the Criminal Court, Appeal Court and Supreme Court," he said, adding that the Constitution could not be challenged on this front.

A parliamentary committee is currently considering the organic law on legal proceedings for cases against political office holders. The Supreme Court judges were the first to call for an updating of the law, which was issued in 1999. The judges say the amendment should specify the procedure exactly, an action that is absolutely not against the Constitution.

After being criticised both within and outside the party for his proposal, Suchart backtracked, saying he only meant for the tri-level trial system to be used for others involved in the case, not the politicians.

However, Seri said a separate case to try a non-political office holder involved in a politician's case was unnecessary, and that both people could be tried at the Supreme Court at the same time. Besides, he said, he wasn't sure if amending the existing law would actually help Thaksin.

Despite all this, Suchart has the freedom to propose what he wants without worrying about whether it makes any sense. PPP MPs pushing to amend the law and do other things, all to stay in Thaksin's favour appear to be so ubiquitous nowadays.