The EC decided not to prosecute ‘Thanathorn’ for holding V-Luck media shares should the Electoral Commission sue after the Constitutional Court ruled that he had been disqualified as an MP.

The Sor Sor Sor ruled not to prosecute “Thanathorn” for holding V-Luck media shares after the Constitutional Court ruled that he was incompetent. Thailand’s Election Commission sent people to prosecute criminal charges, pointing out that the evidence was not strong enough.

At 11:00 am on November 30, Mr Trump Charlie Chan, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office and Kosolwat Mr Intuchanyong Deputy Spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office said a joint statement of the Thung Song Hong Police Station case by the Election Commission Thailand (ECT) with Mr. Padungwit Padungsan, the attorney-in-fact File legal proceedings against Mr Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit Former leader of the Future Party Organic Act on the Election of Members of the House of Representatives BE 2561, Section 151 in conjunction with Section 42(3) to the prosecutor public Office of Criminal Cases Received criminal investigation report No. 467/2563 on the charge of knowing that He is not entitled to stand for election. Due to a lack of qualifications or having prohibited characteristics, he or she is eligible to apply to be elected as a member of the House of Representatives. has applied for an election or issued a letter of consent to a political party nominating his name for a party list election In case of holding shares of V-Luck Media Co., Ltd. (media shares)

Later, the Office of Criminal Cases prosecutor has considered, there is a legal order, which is an order not to prosecute Mr. Thanathorn. Therefore, Rungrueangkit, the accused, was charged with the crime of knowing that he was not eligible to stand for election. due to a lack of qualifications or being prohibited from exercising the right to stand for election as a member of the House of Representatives or submitting a letter of consent to a political party nominating his nomination for a roster form election According to the Organic Act on the Election of Members to the House of Representatives, 2018, Section 42 (3), 151, paragraph one, then send the file to the Royal Thai Police for consideration in accordance with Section 145/1 of the Criminal Procedure. Code.

Later, the Royal Thai Police had a conflicting opinion. then send the case to the Attorney General to consider the definitive opinion under the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 145/1, paragraph two

In this case, the Attorney General That case has been considered. He is of the opinion that the prosecution of the accused for the crime of knowing that he has no right to stand for election due to a lack of qualifications or characteristics prohibited from exercising the right to stand for election as members of the House of Representatives having applied for an election or announced letter of consent for a political party to nominate his name for a party list election According to the Organic Act on the Election of Members to the House of Representatives 2018, Section 42(3), Section 151, paragraph one, which is an offence, of the all evidence that the accused has committed the alleged offence. True or not as provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In this case, the facts appeared that the accused has transferred the name shares in which he holds shares to his mother And he is a director with management authority instead of V-Luck Media Company Limited on January 8, 2019, with 3 people as witnesses and with documents Instrument of transfer of shares, register of shareholders of V-Luck Media Co, Ltd as a documentary witness to continuously support. being a transfer of shares in accordance with the Company’s Articles of Association and the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 1129

That is, evidence of the transfer of shares must be submitted in writing and signed by both the transferor and the transferee. and have been notified Transferred to the register of shareholders Which, according to the law, presumes to be valid evidence under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 1141, despite the fact that the investigation Witnesses of the person accused, will the Constitutional Court sees that there is doubt. It is doubtful about the facts of the testimony of the accused’s witness. unilaterally But in a criminal case, the complainant must have other evidence. To show or use as evidence for the court to believe without doubt that the person accused has committed a crime according to the charge?

According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 227, paragraph two, the two suspects the accused, the law does not provide for any presumption of the law. Therefore, the doubt of witnesses on the side of the accused cannot be used as considered by the Constitutional Court as evidence to confirm that the accused has only committed the alleged crime.

In addition, the facts did not appear. and/or any other evidence showing that the accused has any conduct related to V-Luck Media Co., Ltd. after the date indicating that the shares were transferred which would give rise to a reasonable belief that the accused was still in stock. at the time of the incident or did not transfer their shares to Mrs Somporn in any way The accused person is also not a person with managerial authority on behalf of V-Luck Media Co, Ltd so he has no power or duty to notify the change of the list of shareholders according to the Bor Or Jor.5 form to the Registrar of the Company’s Partnership ■ Has the power to control rather than V-Luck Media Co, Ltd has late notified the Registrar of the Company’s Partnership about changing the list of shareholders to the Registrar of Partnership the Company.

therefore they still cannot be listened to as a detrimental effect on the accused In addition, in this case, the accused has always denied, therefore, the evidence is not strong enough to prosecute and prove the guilt of the several accused.

The Attorney General has issued a definitive order not to indict Mr. Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, the accused, for the crime he already knew.does not have the right to stand for election due to lack of qualifications or having characteristics prohibited from exercising the right to stand for election as a Member of the House of Representatives to be a candidate for an election or to submit a letter of consent to a political party offering his name to be a candidate for party list election under the Organic Act onElection of Members of the House of Representatives, 2018, Section 151 in conjunction with Section 42 (3)

Mr. Trump said When the prosecutor orders not to prosecute in a criminal case Mr. Thanathorn is therefore not guilty of criminal charges. That is, the evidence is not enough to order a prosecution in this case. But in terms of the decision on qualifications to be a member of the House of Representatives (MP), which has been canceled by the Constitutional Court The result must be in accordance with that. However, it must be noted that it is a consideration of different laws. This prosecutor is only considering the criminal charges part. In which the prosecutor looked at the intention of all the evidence, it was found that it was likely that Mr. Thanathorn no crimes. And I would like to reiterate that it is not a matter for the Constitutional Court’s consideration that it has decided on Mr Thanathorn’s prohibited qualifications for being a member of the House of Representatives (MP).

Read related news.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.