'Dubai man' had his day in court
Play
Unfortunately, Somsak Pola's defence of the Dubai man is mostly incorrect.
The fact of his then wife buying the government’s land while her spouse was the chief executive of the government can never be defended as proper even if it is not illegal. The 5-4 guilty decision from professional judges is in substance irrefutable.
Second, contrary to Somsak’s belief, the case was handled by the Attorney-General’s Office and not prosecuted by enemies like the Joan of Arc trial.
Third, even though the court for political office holders is not subject to a three-tier court system, within 30 days the guilty still has the right to appeal. This is similar to the tax court. But the guilty party here elected to flee.
Fourth, it was not a show trial like Nuremberg but televised only on the day of judgement because of public interest.
Somsak is right on only one count – that there was a coup. However, without that coup, this whole episode and many others would not have come to light because of the then constitution disallowing a no-confidence
vote against a prime minister.
If Somsak used to hate the Dubai man for “using tax money to buy himself the Air Force One” during his heyday, it is somewhat too kind to turn a blind eye to his misdemeanours.
Songdej Praditsmanont
Bangkok
