Shinawatras produce documents to prove claims
27-03-2010
Appeals to Supreme Court call for overturning verdict in assets-seizure case
In their appeal to the Supreme Court against its ruling in the assets-seizure case against ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra, lawyers for the Shinawatra family on Friday submitted documents involving the transactions of Shin Corp to show that Panthongtae and Pinthongta were the beneficiary owners.
The fresh documents about Shin Corp's transactions with UBS and Temasek Holdings of Singapore also involve Aspen Holdings and Cedar Holdings, the two firms set up by Temasek to acquire Shin Corp stocks.
The documents claim to show that Panthongtae and Pinthongta were the authorisers of the Shin Corp deal with Temasek during the whole process.
Yesterday, the Shinawatras' three lawyers - Chatthip Tanthaprasat, Somporn Pongsuwan and Kittiporn Arunrat - worked frantically to beat the one-month deadline by filing separate appeals to the Supreme Court.
The appeals seek to overturn the February 26 ruling, which ordered the seizure of Bt46 billion from the proceeds of the Shin Corp sale.
The Supreme Court will form a five-member panel to deliberate the appeals before submitting a recommendation to the 142-member body of Supreme Court judges to determine whether to accept them.
The lawyers also produced documents involving the transactions of Ample Rich Investment, an offshore company, which held 10 per cent of Shin Corp stocks between 1999 and 2005. These documents were not used during the trial.
The Shinawatra family is appealing to the Supreme Court judges to accept the joint plea, override the charges of the public prosecutors and revoke the ruling of the Supreme Court's Criminal Division of the Political Office Holders, which ordered the seizure of Bt46 |billion.
They are also requesting that the order to freeze the bank accounts of the Shinawatra family be lifted.
Most important, the joint appeal requests that the legal execution process to transfer Bt46 billion from the bank accounts of the Shinawatras to the state coffers be delayed until the appeal process is completed.
The appeal has been lodged in accordance with Article 278 of the Constitution.
The appeal documents of Thaksin cover 246 pages, against 60 pages for his former wife Pojaman na Pombejra, 35 pages each for Panthongtae and Pinthongta, 49 pages for Yingluck Shinawatra and 29 pages for Bhanapot Damapong.
The Supreme Court ruled that Panthongtae, Pinthongta, Yingluck and Bhanaphot had acted as |nominees for Thaksin and Pojaman, who were the real beneficiary owners of Shin Corp while Thaksin served as premier between 2001 and 2006.
Chatthip said he expected the Supreme Court would take the appeal into consideration because fresh documents had been submitted in accordance with the law.
He said there was a possibility that Worachet Pakeerut, a Thammasat law lecturer, would be willing to testify in the case.
The appeal, the lawyers said, would also assert the testimonies of other key witnesses from the securities registrar, officials of the Stock Exchange of Thailand, permanent secretaries, and directors-general of government agencies.
These testimonies were not taken into account by the Supreme Court during the trial, so they can be resubmitted as fresh evidence, the lawyers argue.
Moreover, they argue that the Supreme Court's rulings were not accurate, such as regarding the transfer of the Shin Corp shares to Panthongtae and Pinthongta for Bt1 apiece.
The transfer of the shares of the children did not need to involve money transactions, but the Supreme Court deemed that it was an effort to use the children as nominees.
asianewsnet.net