The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions ruled today that former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s six-month stay in the Police General Hospital (PGH), on the basis of claimed life-threatening illnesses, was unlawful and unjustified and ordered him to be taken back to the Bangkok Remand Prison to serve his 1-year sentence.
In arriving at such an unprecedented ruling for a former prime minister, the Supreme Court had based its judgement on three main issues.
The first issue was whether the transfer of Thaksin from the Bangkok Remand Prison directly to the 14th floor of the PGH, bypassing the Corrections Department’s hospital, on the night of August 22, 2023, was justified and lawful.
The Corrections Department had claimed that Thaksin suffered from chest pain, fatigue and high blood pressure to justify his transfer, but this was dismissed by the court as unjustified and not in accordance with the Corrections Act and related regulations.
The court further reasoned that the Corrections Department’s hospital is equipped with an electrocardiogram (ECG) machine, to check heartbeat, and medicine to reduce blood pressure. The hospital is also located only about 200 metres from the prison.
According to the regulations, such patients must first be sent to the Corrections Department’s hospital for diagnosis and treatment. If the patient’s condition does not improve, then he can be sent to a hospital outside the prison.
The second issue was whether Thaksin was ill to the extent that his condition required a prolonged stay at the PGH.
Upon his arrival at the PGH, he was not subjected to an ECG test and was not examined by a heart specialist until the next day, according to the testimony of Dr. Prasit Watanapa, a member of the Medical Council.
The court said that Thaksin’s claim of suffering chest pain was just an excuse for him to be treated outside the prison and that the Corrections Department’s hospital was fully equipped to treat his ailments.
The court also pointed out that doctors at the PGH had issued letters of recommendation to the warden of the Bangkok Remand Prison, and doctors at Corrections Department’s hospital, to use doctor’s certificates to seek the approval of the Corrections Department chief to allow Thaksin to remain at the PGH for a total of 180 days.
The doctor’s certificates claimed that Thaksin needed treatment for surgical wounds, urgent surgery for an ischemic stroke and cervical spondylosis, according to the court, which noted that Thaksin only actually had surgeries on an index finger and rotator cuff.
Summing up, the court ruled that Thaksin was not ill to an extent which required him to remain at the PGH for six months and that his transfer to the PGH was unjustified and not in accordance with the Corrections Act and related regulations.
The third issue was whether the court’s prison sentence has been enforced.
The court ruled that Thaksin was fully aware that he was not seriously ill, as he had claimed, but had some chronic ailments, which could readily be treated as an out-patient. The court pointed out that Thaksin was also involved in the decision-making processes of doctors, by refusing surgery to treat his heart disease and herniated disc, only agreeing to take medication.
In Thaksin’s case, he was immediately sent to the 14th floor of the PGH, which does not have emergency facilities and is not reserved for prisoners. Hence, it was against the regulations of the PGH.
The former prime minister had gained benefit from staying at the PGH without going back to prison until his discharge from the hospital and, for that matter, he could not claim that he was unaware of the scheming which helped him to remain in the hospital for six months, said the court.
The court then ruled that the one-year prison sentence, as commuted by Royal Command, has not yet been enforced and, therefore, Thaksin will be sent back to prison to serve his time.
In this case, the court initiated the hearing because of widespread public interest and doubts about whether Thaksin was actually seriously sick and was unjustified in being afforded the privilege of being accommodated on the 14th floor of the PGH, which is not reserved for prisoners.
During its inquiry, the court questioned 31 witnesses, including members of the Medical Council, the Corrections Department director-general, the warden of the Bangkok Remand Prison, chief doctors and other medical personnel at the PGH and the Corrections Department’s hospital. The court had also obtained the relevant documentation, such as medical records.
