Threat to justice
The Office of Public Prosecution or a higher authority must correct or justify the error it made last week. The Region 7 office has startled and disappointed the public over the killing of the black leopard and other protected species at Thungyai-Naresuan sanctuary in February. After a credible and somewhat timely investigation of that dreadful violation of conservation laws and decency, police proposed an 11-count indictment against the alleged leader of the hunting group. Prosecutors shockingly dropped five of the 11 charges against Premchai Karnasuta, head of the international conglomerate, Italian-Thai Development.
The announcement by Region 7’s chief of prosecutions, Somsri Watanapaisal, caused a major burst of outrage. The public has been following the case closely since the Feb 4 arrest of Mr Premchai and his three companions inside the sanctuary. The series of announcements that the protected black leopard had been killed and then had been eaten by the four men sparked a barrage of fury.
Ms Somsri and her office are now aware of the quite proper concerns of people across the country. Ms Somsri came out and attempted to appease the situation. She claimed that she and assistants had considered public opinion before deciding to drop the six charges. She defended what she called the Prosecution Office’s efficient and timely consideration of the case.
She has stated two remarkable points. First, she said that prosecutors do not take sides in such criminal cases. This is an astounding claim. Perhaps she misstated, meaning that prosecutors consider cases fairly. But it must be emphasised she and her colleagues are duty-bound to take sides, against indicted suspects. The Prosecutor’s Office is the voice, conscience and action team that seeks justice on behalf of victims and the sympathetic public. Courts and their judges do not take sides, but prosecutors must.
The prosecutor, who is currently in charge of accusing and bringing Mr Premchai and party to court, then said this: “We stand ready to answer any questions the public may have.” And then she failed to answer any questions in a helpful way. She stated that charges against Mr Premchai were dropped because prosecutors had used their discretion. That is a circular argument, hardly the explanation promised. There is no question that she and her superiors of the Office of the Attorney-General (OAG) owe one.
There is a curious omission in the six charges that the prosecutor has promised to bring against Mr Premchai. They involve illegal possession of firearms, being in a restricted area — the animal sanctuary — entering the sanctuary without permission and so on. One searches in vain for these two words: “black leopard”. This animal, likely the only one of its kind in Thailand before it was shot, gutted and eaten, is at the centre of the case and the reason for the public interest.
It’s hardly news that if Mr Premchai was at Thungyai-Naresuan, with guns, at a campsite, that he and anyone with him is guilty of breaking numerous laws. Almost all such laws carry penalties that are virtual slaps on the wrist. Information released by Ms Somsri’s office don’t indicate that the extremely influential and rich construction tycoon has been charged with killing or eating the leopard.
Criticism of dropping the five charges came from deputy police chief Srivara Ransibrahmanakul. He admitted during the investigation that he had deep respect for Mr Premchai. One hopes Pol Lt Gen Srivara will act. But a viral video showed the deep wai he gave to the businessman.
This case now demands a quick, comprehensive explanation of the decision to drop charges — or the reissuing of those charges. Otherwise, authorities risk massive and possibly disruptive public reaction. People will add this to a growing perception that a culture of corruption surrounds the military government.
A growing perception of a culture of corruption surrounds the military government.