In what was entirely expected from Thaksin Shinawatra, twist, turns and attempted delays are now coming forth. As you read into what Thaksin is saying, it is all about changing the issue, painting things in a distorted light, and completely missing the fact that he is guilty of a crime under Thai law. There is also no mention at all of the failed bribe that sent his lawyers to jail for 6 months.
Thaksin has little hope with educated people at this point. A general conceptual understanding of the law and hearing how the court came to it’s decision is all it takes. Thaksin understands that if you do ‘x’ you violate the law, however his letter below seems to talk about every other letter in the alphabet except ‘x’. Keep in mind when you read Thaksin’s letter that Thaksin has used violence to get his way on more than one occasion, this letter is an attempt to put the innocent ‘Who me?’ look on.
Note: The letter below is exactly as published with several typo errors including spelling, spacing and punctuation. Seeing that Thaksin normally is very through and leaves no lose ends, this suggests he is scared, anxious and panicking. Translation; Thaksin knows he is wrong, and he is grasping at straws to justify his actions.
Disclaimer: The original form of the letter is unknown and the errors may be by a third person transposing the letter.
22 of October, 2008
Dear My Friends in International Media,
I am writing to you today to clarify few facts, The news headlines have reported that I have been convicted of corruption for two years stemming from the purchase of land by my wife, Khunying Potjaman Shinawatra.
What you have read is true, I was convicted for two years, but not because of corruption charge. The only reason I was sentenced to Jail is because at the time my wife bought the land through the open bid, I was the Prime Minister.
I listened to the judgment yesterday and even now I am still confused ; there is no evidence of fraud, corruption nor abuse of power in relation to the bid in question; my wife was the one who involved and made decision to bid for the land, offered a lot more seller, Financial Instit ution Development Fund (FIDF), than other bidders, signed the contract with the seller, paid for the land with no involvement from her husband except when he was required to sign a spousal consent form.
In terms of any alleged influence I may have had no direct supervisory power over the FIDF. Interestingly, the Court did not find the sale transaction of my wife unlawful or illegal, they did not convict her because she is not a politician; nevertheless, I was . I trust that you will independently verify the above facts as professional journalists often do.Unfortunately, most of you professsional colleagues in Thailand refuse to do so.
The best. I can comprehend is that I was convicted simply because I was a politician . In that case I was quite quite guilty cause I was quite a successful politician, I got elected twice by the majority of thai people as Prime Minister.
If I were to be guilty of anything, that would be what I have shown to the Thai people, especially those underprivileged rural thais that they can, and have the right to, demand their government to provide effective policy and programs to improve their lives.
I received this judgment with mixed feeling; relief for my wife as I pulled her into enough troubles because of my politcal ambition to bring greatness and well-being to my country and my people, amused and bitter with the illogical of the judgment, and worry for those politicians in Thailand that they could go to jail simply because their unhappy spouses may sought to manipulate the law.
For those of you who may not be too familiar with Thailand, state offices and enterprises in Thailand are doing so many businesses from telecommunication, banking, power generator or even owning gas stations.
I do not know should I laugh or cry to see the direction Thailand is moving forward: a democratically elected leader was put out of job because he cooked on a TV show but those who unlawfully trespassed and occupying the government house got protection from the Court.
Whatever happen to me is a political driven actions collaborated by various group of privileged elites who believe in anything but democracy. I am a threat to them because I represent the principle of liberal democracy which promote hope and pride of the poor of my country.
Thailand is and will remain a great and beautiful country. Few people cannot face the face,obstructing the will of majority of the people. I believe that at the end Thai people will win over this struggle. And the end of their nightmare is not far.
I thank you for the opportunity to share the facts with you.
Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra
In response to Thaksin’s letter, at least one member of Parliament has decided to come straight out and set Thaksin straight. The open letter below goes into more detail and clearly show the contrast and deliberate deception Thaksin is trying. The bottom line is very clear on Thaksin.
Dear Dr Thaksin,
It has been some time since we last spoke, but I felt the urge to write to you having seen your ‘open letter’ to your ‘friends’ in the international media, dated October 22, 2008.
Given the fact that you chose not to face the various criminal and corruption charges against you in Thailand, and given that you are in the process of seeking asylum in the UK, I can understand why you wrote what you did. It’s a shame though, since, once again, you feel compelled to harm the country of your birth in order to protect and promote your own personal interests.
It would have been so much better had you been more honest in your assessment of your predicament. Specifically related to the land procurement case in which you were found guilty of conflict of interest, we would have been interested to hear why it was that your legal team was caught and convicted of blatant attempts to bribe court officials. Furthermore, you are fully aware that the law you broke was the highest law of the land, being an infringement in a key article in the Constitution designed to penalise acts considered criminal on the part of those who hold political office. Indeed, it was a breach of both the 1997 constitution you love as well as the current 2007 Constitution that was accepted in a nationwide referendum.
You referred to the ruling against Khun Samak, your chosen heir, and portray the case as a ruling against the fact that he cooked on TV when you know full well that the actual crime was his breach of the Constitution barring those in office from holding paid employment. Your definition of ‘facts’ leaves a lot to be desired and I worry that you actually believe what you are saying.
It is precisely because it is so difficult the world over to actually catch clever politicians with their hands in the till that we have laws against conflicts of interests – it is a reflection of our society’s desire for good governance, not dissimilar to codes of conducts in most leading corporations in the private sector.
It may be true that there are the so-called elites who don’t like you, but I can assure you that there are plenty of grass-root members of the Thai population who are also not too keen on having leaders who cheat. You got away early in your political career with an ‘honest mistake’ when you failed to properly disclose your assets, but how many more of these ‘honest’ mistakes do you think the Thai people should allow you? You are once again charged with hiding assets even now, not least the money you used to buy Manchester City. After all, you no longer even try to pretend that it was not your own money that was used to buy the football club, even though you never disclosed, as was legally required, that you ever had any money overseas.
I won’t go into details about your wife being convicted of tax fraud and the fact that the government you support is still doing everything they can to distort the course of justice here in Thailand. Frankly, if you really wanted to present facts, you should provide these details yourself. You are right in saying that all Thais are concerned about the direction the country is taking, but I believe that the situation would be much improved if you were to leave us alone to clean up the mess you left us in.
Member of Parliament