Leader: A need for clarification

The Assets Scrutiny Committee must clarify why it suspects the frozen Thaksin assets were ill-gotten and why they need to be temporarily put on hold.

-----------------------------

The Council for National Security-appointed Assets Scrutiny Committee (ASC) appears to share the opinion commonly held by drug busters everywhere that the most effective means of dealing with drug barons and corrupt politicians is to hit them where they hurt the most - in their bank balances.

After eight months of painstaking investigation into various dubious mega-deals and corruption allegations against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his cronies, the ASC decided on Monday to temporarily freeze about 52 billion baht worth of suspected ill-gotten wealth belonging to Mr Thaksin, his family and relatives still held in the country. The committee secretary, Kaewsan Atipho, said it was necessary to have the assets temporarily frozen to prevent further diversions after it was discovered that some 20 billion baht worth of assets had disappeared.

He also asserted repeatedly that the ASC action was not politically motivated but one which was legally justified to prevent further disappearance of the remaining assets.

The frozen assets are the remainder of the 73 billion baht obtained by the former prime minister from the sale of his company, Shin Corp, to Singapore's investment arm, Temasek, about a year ago. They are in 21 bank accounts held in the names of Mr Thaksin, his wife Potjaman, his children and close relatives.

It came as no surprise that the ASC's explanation was rejected outright by Mr Thaksin and his faithful followers in Thailand. Mr Thaksin's family lawyer, Noppadon Pattama, said the exiled prime minister felt he was again persecuted and unfairly treated because the rationale given by the ASC to justify its decision was flimsy.

The lawyer added that charges would be lodged against the committee members. Thaksin loyalists, especially PTV leaders who have been holding daily protests to topple the Council for National Security (CNS), also shared their beloved leader's bitterness toward the ASC and the military junta. They vowed to carry on their protest, claiming that they did not need financial support from Mr Thaksin.

As history goes, the ASC action is not unprecedented. Former prime ministers Thanom Kittikachorn and Chatichai Choonhavan, and cabinet members, had their assets frozen after they fell from grace, while former military strongman Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat had his assets frozen after his death.

What the committee, headed by Nam Yimyaem, needs to do to follow up on Monday's decision is to clarify to the public why they thought the frozen assets were ill-gotten and why they need to be temporarily put on hold. This means that details which are not confidential or where disclosure of them will not affect the cases must be revealed to the public.

Perhaps the ASC should follow the example of the Constitution Tribunal which paid attention to every detail to back up their electoral fraud cases against the Thai Rak Thai party.

The Nam committee should ignore the hard-core Thaksin disciples who will not accept any explanation from the panel or its claim that its decision was not politically motivated. But there are other people, including many Thai Rak Thai supporters, who are not as hard-core but who still believe that the ASC action was dictated by the CNS.

And their suspicion is not unjustified because the ASC decision came just one day after Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont went on air to slam the Thaksin regime for massive corruption - his harshest criticism ever. And it came two days after PTV-led protesters marched to the army headquarters in a show of bold defiance against the CNS. For this reason, the ASC owes these people a full explanation and clarification to do away with any lingering doubt.

As for Mr Thaksin and his family, the ASC's decision provides them with a golden opportunity to prove to the world that their massive wealth was not ill-gotten, but legally and honestly acquired. Just show them the receipts that his assets are as clean as a sheet of linen.

It is a simple task unless, of course, there are no receipts which will make matters complicated.