Campaigns fizzle, legal tactics blocked, as Yingluck's court day nears
Play
A campaign aimed at showing symbolic support for former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra by wearing red shirts last Sunday appears to have caused less trouble for the junta than expected.
No one claimed responsibility for the initiative – but since news of the campaign circulated on social media two weeks ago, the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) and security agencies have kept a close eye on it.
As it turned out, the movement was subdued and made little noise.
Only some Pheu Thai members, former ministers and Yingluck’s
relatives, including her brother Thaksin, joined in the campaign by posting pictures of themselves wearing red shirts on social media.
On his @thaksinlive Instagram account, the fugitive former prime minister said he was wearing a red shirt to show moral support for those who love democracy and seek justice.
In contrast to her brother, Yingluck wore a grey blouse as she posed for a photo with her son posted on her Facebook, and said nothing linked to the campaign.
Despite Thaksin’s call to wear red, however, there were no reports of people doing so en masse – even in Pheu Thai’s stronghold of the North and Northeast.
The Shinawatra family should not blame its supporters for their small numbers as they may have received confusing signals from their leaders. While Thaksin called for the red shirts to come out, another red-shirt leader, Jatuporn Promphan, asked them not to.
The result might have caused relief for the junta but it surely upset Thaksin and his sister, Yingluck, who is facing a criminal case over her rice-pledging scheme in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.
Yingluck has been charged with dereliction of duty causing damage and failure to perform her duty as a state official to stop corruption in the rice-pledging scheme.
Political observers see the campaign as an attempt to test the popularity of support for the Shinawatras and the Pheu Thai party, believing there’s nothing wrong in the move.
Prior to Yingluck’s court case – as well as a possible compensation case – the Shinawatras did everything they could to delay the proceedings or ask for more justice and support.
What was more interesting was the tactics of the Shinawatras in dealing with the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO).
Early this month, Yingluck wrote open letters to Prayut calling for fair treatment and specifically to let the compensation case go through normal court proceedings, instead of through the use of an administrative order to claim compensation from her for losses incurred in the scheme, which could cost Bt500 billion.
In her letter, she also accused Prayut of being a “stakeholder” who was currently addressing rice issues disagreeing with her rice policy.
Her move led prompted the government to distance Prayut from the case as he might be sued by Yingluck. Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam said Prayut would not pen the order but left it with the finance minister instead.
Moreover, a fact-finding committee set up to probe Yingluck over the scheme has given her an additional 30 days to explain her actions.
The former premier was also allowed by the Supreme Court to permit testimony from more witnesses, such as outspoken former minister Chalerm Yoobamrung, who did not have a chance to give a statement to the National Anti-Corruption Commission.
Her tactical move appeared to give her the upper hand in her dual with Prayut, but she may have forgotten that her adversary is a coup leader with a powerful weapon.
In his capacity as NCPO chief, Prayut has invoked his powers under Article 44 of the post-coup interim charter to protect government officials working on the rice cases from legal and disciplinary action. It was the first time the NCPO had invoked such a power for the rice-pledging scheme.
With this order, all government officials, including the premier, would be immune from prosecution. Also, all cases related to the scheme would be accelerated.
So, Yingluck’s judgement day could be sooner rather than later. The court will hear the first witness testimony on January 15 and the final testimony in November. The verdict date was tentatively set for early 2017.
As long as Article 44 remains a silver bullet in the junta chief’s gun, it will be too difficult for the Thaksin camp to make any effective move.
But the junta could also be criticised for granting itself a “blanket” amnesty.
