DSI to re-investigate case of smuggled timber
Play
The Department of Special Investigation has decided to reopen investigation into former DSI chief Tarit Pengdith's decision four years ago not to indict those who tried to import teak unlawfully into Thailand and give them back the Bt204 million worth of
Deputy Justice Ministry permanent secretary Dussadee Arayawuth said yesterday that a senior DSI official and three other agents who were handling the investigation and were later transferred would be returned to their positions in the DSI subdivision in the North. He said the investigation could still go ahead even though public prosecutors were told by Tarit not to indict the executives of Anton Co Ltd who had allegedly imported the timber from Myanmar.
Dussadee claimed five irregularities in the case:
l Tarit said he found that the company had no intention of evading tax;
l The timber was returned in a rushed manner – Tarit revoked the seizure of the shipment on February 16, 2012, while the public prosecutors issued the decision not to indict on February 21;
l Tarit cited the Barcelona Convention as the reason for not indicting the company staff, which was in violation of the Commerce Ministry’s regulations and policies of the border security board, which overrules the Barcelona Convention for any timber being brought in from Myanmar;
l The transfer of the four DSI agents resulted their being sued by the company for Bt40 million in damages. A court later decided to drop the lawsuit as the company lacked necessary documents;
l A recent statement from a staff member of Anton Co claimed that the firm had failed to produce essential documents showing that the timber was imported from Myanmar.
This statement is vital evidence that never appeared in the DSI’s investigation report, and will be used as new evidence, allowing a new investigation regardless of the public prosecutors’ decision not to indict the executives.
A Justice Ministry source said the DSI could immediately reopen the case without waiting for approval from the DSI board, as the original case had already been considered a special one.
