MGR Online — Special case investigators have confirmed they are not putting the "Senate secret society–money laundering case" in neutral, continuing the investigation in accordance with the Special Case Prosecutor's instructions, and have hinted that the number of suspects may exceed the initial batch of eight.
Today (28 Jul.), a report from the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) disclosed that opposition party members — led by Mr. Parit Wacharasin, also known as "Aitim," a party-list MP and deputy leader of the People's Party, along with Mr. Yingcheep Atchanont, also known as "Pao," director of the Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw) project — had made public certain witness testimonies and documents they claimed were related to the Senate election bid-rigging case. The disclosed content referred to the purchase of airline tickets, the arrangement of accommodation, the taking of some candidates on an activity aboard a boat cruising along the Chao Phraya River, as well as meetings and the preparation of vote-tallying cheat sheets for the Senate election. In response, the DSI stated that under investigation principles, if a witness provides information or testimony during the investigation phase, such details are already recorded as part of the case file. The DSI has never disclosed details contained within its case files. Furthermore, the body of evidence in the DSI's case file (the Senate secret society–money laundering case) and the case file of Central Investigation and Inquiry Sub-Committee No. 26 (the Senate bid-rigging case) constitute the same set of evidence.
The report from the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) further revealed that the Senate secret society–money laundering case is still in the process of gathering additional evidence in accordance with the Special Case Prosecutor's instructions. Additional witnesses have been interviewed, and financial transaction records from banking institutions of those involved in the case have already been obtained and examined. Initially, the DSI had issued indictments against a total of eight individuals — comprising six members of a major political party network and two actual sitting senators — however, the prosecutor took the view that the number of accused persons was not yet consistent with the body of evidence, and accordingly ordered further investigation. In the end, case files may be compiled to prosecute additional suspects whose financial trails are linked to the nationwide Senate election bid-rigging operation, meaning the number of accused persons may not remain at the original eight.
"In this regard, because the prosecutor has ordered the consolidation of the case file with the ECT's case file as well, this is a key reason why the special case investigation team for the Senate secret society–money laundering case still needs to await the ruling of the Election Commission of Thailand (ECT) board — specifically, how many accused persons the ECT recommends for prosecution, which individuals those are, and on what charges — so that the DSI can incorporate the relevant facts and evidence into the case file before finalising and submitting the Senate secret society–money laundering case file, along with its recommendation to prosecute, to the Special Case Prosecutor for further consideration."
The report from the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) further explained that the proceedings of the ECT and the DSI are separate legal processes. The ECT considers violations under election law, while the DSI pursues criminal charges on counts of being a secret society, money laundering, and other related offences. Even though the ECT's findings will ultimately be incorporated into the case file, they do not serve as the final determination of criminal proceedings in the DSI's case file, which must still weigh the evidence according to legal process.
The report from the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) added that the special case investigation team continues to interview witnesses and gather documentary evidence in accordance with five recommendations made by the Special Case Prosecutor — including consolidating the case file with those of other co-offending groups, incorporating key evidentiary material from the ECT's inquiry case file, as well as the opinion of Central Investigation and Inquiry Sub-Committee No. 26 — which had previously voted to prosecute all 229 accused persons — and the opinion of Issue Resolution and Dispute Sub-Committee No. 36 — which had previously voted not to prosecute all 229 individuals on grounds of no prima facie case — before the opinions of both sub-committees were forwarded to the ECT commissioner board.
Nevertheless, in witness interviews conducted thus far, witnesses have continued to affirm the financial trail evidence linking the accused network. However, in the interest of fairness and as a matter of procedure, the special case investigation team also finds it necessary to await the ECT board's resolution, which will determine whether or not it recommends prosecution of any offenders under election law, since any such resolution must be accompanied by the reasons supporting the decision. Therefore, regardless of the outcome of the ECT board's internal deliberations, the special case investigation team will be required to incorporate those findings into the criminal investigation case file for the Senate secret society–money laundering case as well.
