The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office ordered the acquittal of exiled former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra today, on charges of malfeasance in office related to the transfer of the then secretary-general of the National Security Council Thawil Pliensri to become an advisor to the prime minister in September 2011.
The court also revoked an arrest warrant issued against the former prime minister.
In acquitting Yingluck, the Supreme Court stated that the Constitutional Court’s ruling is not binding on the Supreme Court regarding criminal liability, because the Constitutional Court considered only the issue of the qualifications of a minister and the termination of ministerial status.
As for the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling related to the case, the Supreme Court stated that the Supreme Administrative Court only considered the legitimacy of Thawil’s transfer order and has nothing to do with criminal liability, which was considered by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court also noted that the testimonies of two witnesses, Buntoon Supakkavanich and Pongsak, did not confirm that there was an ulterior motive for Thawil’s transfer and that his transfer was normal and within the authority of the prime minister.
The court also dismissed the suggestion that Thawil’s transfer, and replacement by Pol Gen Wichien, was designed to pave the way for Pol Gen Priewpan Damapong, one of Yingluck’s relatives, to be appointed as national police chief.
The court concluded that there was no evidence to prove that Yingluck had dictated or interfered with the transfer.
The transfer in question took place in 2011 when Yingluck, then the prime minister, reassigned Thawil from the National Security Council (NSC) to the position of the Prime Minister’s adviser. The cabinet at that time approved the transfer of the then-national police chief, Pol Gen Wichean Potephosree, to replace Thawil.
Yingluck then nominated Pol Gen Priewphan Damapong, her close relative, to fill Wichean’s position.
Thawil subsequently filed a petition with the Supreme Administrative Court, which later revoked the transfer order. The Constitutional Court ruled unanimously that Yingluck had abused her power by interfering in the transfer of government officials.
In 2020, the National Anti-Corruption Commission ruled that Yingluck had been dishonest in performing her duties and sought the attorney general’s assistance in filing a lawsuit against her in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office.
