CIVIL COURT RULES TOUR SCAM SUSPECTS CAN KEEP ASSETS

>> The Civil Court last week threw out a petition seeking to seize assets worth almost 4 billion baht from a group of people allegedly linked to the “zero dollar” tour scandal.

The petition was lodged by the prosecution and challenged by six members of the Rojrungrangsi family and the five companies they manage, including OA Transport, a firm that operates a tour bus business catering to mainly Chinese tourists.

In its ruling handed down on Feb 21, the court rejected the asset seizure request, citing a lack of evidence proving the assets and their owners were connected with illegal criminal activities and money laundering.

The dispute stemmed from the AntiMoney Laundering Office (Amlo) investigation into the business transactions and assets of Fuan Travel Co which was accused of operating the “zero dollar” tour scheme which sold unusually cheap tour packages.

However, tourists were allegedly forced to buy overpriced products and services from shops with ties to the package sellers. The suspects included executives of Fuan Travel Co and those of OA Transport.

According to the ruling, the prosecution’s witnesses failed to prove that those facing the asset seizure collaborated with Fuan Travel Co in conducting illegal activities.

The court said the evidence only showed they were business partners. The court said the prosecution could not establish as fact that the group forced tourists to purchase unusually expensive souvenirs and services during their stay.

The court also ordered the return of assets which had been frozen by Amlo, including 76 bank accounts worth 3.65 billion baht.

However, the prosecution can appeal the ruling within 30 days.

In August last year, the Criminal Court dropped all charges against 13 people, citing insufficient evidence. Some of the defendants were involved in the asset seizure dispute.

The court said it saw no strong evidence, or complaints from the alleged victims, to back up the charges. The prosecution already lodged an appeal in November.

The defendants faced several charges including collusion to unfairly reap benefits from tourists and laundering money.