The 'Thaksingate' verdict is a victory against AMLO

The 'Thaksingate' verdict is a victory against AMLO

The Nation, Bangkok

The Administrative Court handed down a historic ruling on Monday,
and the much-anticipated verdict on the "Thaksingate" scandal was
delivered in the most unequivocal manner. The Anti-Money
Laundering Office, the court said, carried out an illegal probe
into the bank transactions of journalists critical of the
government, and the investigation infringed on civil rights.
Considering the political implications of the case, which rocked
the administration a few months ago, the court's ruling stands as
a barometer of the progress of the country's checks-and-balances
mechanism.

Nation Multimedia Group's senior editors were the plaintiffs
in this case. Their petition was filed with the Administrative
Court in April following news leaks that AMLO had ordered banks
to give it transaction data of the editors and their family
members. The legal action was taken because we believed AMLO was
being used as a political tool, that the senior journalists were
being intimidated or discriminated against because of their
criticism of the prime minister, and that nothing they had done
was in violation of the AMLO law.

As the directly affected party, we would only like to put the
court opinions here for the record. Judge Wisanu Waranyu ruled
that the steps taken by AMLO were illegal because the law did not
empower its information director, Sihanart Prayoonrat, to order
banks to hand over the transaction data of the editors and those
close to them, nor did the law empower AMLO Secretary-General
Peeraphan Prempooti to assign Sihanart to take such action.

Only AMLO's transaction committee can initiate such a probe,
the court noted. By keeping the committee in the dark, both
Sihanart and Peeraphan broke the law.

But the court went beyond that and touched upon the very heart
of the issue: Was it an abuse of state power?

The court said that apart from failing to abide by AMLO's
established procedures, Sihanart based his "suspicion" about the
journalists purely on an anonymous leaflet which vaguely accused
them of money laundering.

"Anonymous leaflets must be treated carefully with the fairest
of minds because they could be used to smear people," Judge
Wisanu said. "Worse is the possibility of anonymous leaflets
being [fabricated] to justify the abuse of power. This would be a
danger to the rights and liberty of the people."

The court noted that Sihanart had pursued the investigation
despite the fact that a check on the AMLO's own database turned
up nothing to back the charges made in the leaflet. Grounds for
suspicion "must come from the 'outside'," ruled the judge, "not
from the personal feelings of the enforcers of the law."

The ruling followed another judge's advocacy statement on the
case. Last Thursday Judge Chaidej Tantiwes, acting under the
unique checks-and-balances rules of the Administrative Court,
declared AMLO's move unlawful and urged the court to revoke the
transaction probe. He stressed that as the AMLO law can affect
civil rights and liberty, it requires the most discreet and
unambiguous enforcement.

"For the administrative branch to exercise power or carry out
activities which could affect individuals' rights, the action
must be carried out under clear-cut laws, and invocation of those
laws must be done unequivocally," the judge said.

The court's message is clear. AMLO's power is a double-edged
sword, so those who use it must be honest and extra careful.

There has been an argument that those who have nothing to hide
should not be worried. But the real point of this case is that if
we condone groundless, politically-motivated probes into our
lives, we will in effect endorse the idea of a police state.

The fight against the AMLO, therefore, is much more than a
fight to guard figures in a bank account.