Pheu Thai claims PM remarks on rice scheme affect justice process

In a statement, the party cited Prayut’s remarks in relation to Boonsong Teriyapirom, who served as commerce minister in the Pheu Thai-led administration. 

The comments cited in the statement quoted Prayut as saying that Boonsong “should wait until he leaves jail” and that he should “finish his case before suing me”. Prayut had made the comments in reaction to the former minister’s threat to sue him. 

The party claimed that by exercising absolute power under the interim charter’s Article 44 to exempt relevant authorities from dealing with the legal cases, Prayut introduced changes to the “ordinary legal process”. 

In his capacity as head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), Prayut is empowered by the interim charter to issue orders for the benefit of national reforms with powers over the administrative, legislative and judicial branches.

Pheu Thai said Prayut’s remark could affect the ongoing case against Boonsong, who is facing an administrative order seeking civil liabilities stemming from the corruption-plagued rice-pledging scheme.

“The NCPO chief seems to be predicting that Boonsong will be sent to jail. This interferes with the judicial process. Judges must be allowed to work independently. It is improper for the NCPO chief to influence the justice process,” the statement said. 

Meanwhile, NCPO spokesman Colonel Piyapong Klinphan dismissed Pheu Thai’s claims, saying no moves were being made to influence the justice system. 

“The justice system is functioning fine with courts and relevant state agencies. The NCPO chief is part of the administration and he is doing his work to the best of his ability, without any moves to influence the justice system,” Piyapong said.

The spokesman also rejected a claim from critics that the post-coup government was persecuting certain politicians and treating them unfairly. 

In a related development, Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam said yesterday that he did not think those required to pay civil damages in connection to the rice-pledging scheme would be sent to jail if they failed to find enough funds to pay. 

He said those people would be given a specific period of time to cover their civil liabilities, such as 10 years, and if they did not have any assets for the payment, then they would be declared bankrupt. However, he said, it does not mean that they would be imprisoned. 

“This is not a criminal offence,” he said.