Tax ghost keeps haunting us

To cut a long story short, the judges presiding over the case against the five officials decided that the defendants did not work in cahoots with Pojaman and the other suspects in the tax-evasion case. The court's president, Cheep Julamond, in his documented arguments, thought otherwise.

To summarise Pojaman's case: She was accused of using "her own" money to buy "her own" shares for her stepbrother Bhanapot Damapong so that he would not have to pay Bt273 million in tax (which would have been charged if she had given him the shares directly). She was found guilty of tax evasion and falsifying documents and received three years in jail.

Yesterday's acquittal ruling was based on the following points: 1) The tax officials, including former Revenue Department deputy director general Sirote Swasdipanich, were only giving their legal opinions regarding whether the controversial share transfer needed to be taxed. 2) The officials did not hold the power of collecting or auditing taxes. 3) The officials didn't receive any benefits or enjoy suspicious career advancement after determining that the share transfer did not warrant taxation, and they only got usual promotions afterwards. 4) There was no evidence of corruption or intent of causing damage to the state.

In his publicised arguments, Cheep gave the following opinions: 1) Corruption or charges of negligence covers acts that wrongly benefited others and not necessarily benefited those who committed the acts. 2) The tax officials ignored a strong reservation from another senior official directly involved with the Pojaman-Bhanapot tax question, who felt strongly that the share transfer must be taxed. 3) A suspicious transfer of that official, then deputy department director-general Prayuth Pathummarak, to a lesser post allowed Sirote to be in the position to give his crucial "opinion" that ultimately benefited Pojaman and Bannapot.

4) Sirote, in fact, did not simply give his "opinion", but it was an order that was improperly issued at a time when he was acting director-general in the absence of the department's incumbent head. 5) The order was issued in a rush, in contrast with the department's working traditions.

How much weight Cheep's opinions will have on the prosecutors' appeal process remains to be seen.