Lawyer Sittra case highlights inequality in Thai justice system

Only about 5% of police complaints lead to legal action in Thailand, with access to justice weighted strongly in favour of wealthy or influential individuals.

Meanwhile, complaints lodged by poor or middle-class citizens rarely proceed as far as investigation or prosecution.

This discussion is not aimed at defending Sittra Biabungkerd or any other famous lawyer, but rather at highlighting the inconsistency and inequality within law enforcement, a topic rarely addressed. Sittra, known as the “people’s lawyer” for his career built on challenging injustice, has been accused of fraud by a multimillionaire Thai living abroad.

After consulting with legal experts, I have identified several points of concern regarding the handling of celebrity Sittra’s case:

Police overreaction?

If any wrongdoing is found in Sittra's case, it would appear to be a simple fraud case between individuals, not a matter of public fraud with multiple victims. These cases typically allow for civil settlement.

Although money laundering allegations have been made, the evidence presented in the media is sparse. However, police actions include surveillance disguised as Grab drivers, a grand-scale arrest, and a house search – measures more commonly seen in terrorism or organized crime cases.

Contrast this with other cases in which poor people are the victims, including farmers being deceived into selling their land. The police rarely pursue these cases, even when there is clear evidence.

High-ranking officers let off

In another case, two high-ranking officers involved in an online gambling ring were summoned but faced no serious consequences, despite solid evidence. This stands in stark contrast to the forceful measures taken against Lawyer Sittra before a warrant was even issued.

Historical police practices:

In previous cases involving cheque fraud, it was common for victims to bribe police officers in exchange for arrests, with suspects often jailed over weekends unnecessarily. This outdated practice highlights systemic issues that still persist today, even though laws on cheque fraud have been amended to remove criminal penalties.  Yet, in Sittra’s case, the excessive measures persist.

Public interest and media influence:

Police claim they took swift action against Sittra due to "public interest", yet one must question whether this level of response is applied to every case or if less-publicised cases are neglected.

I raised these issues with Pol Col Wirut Sirisawasdibutr, a former Deputy Inspector General who has extensive experience in investigations and currently serves as Secretary-General of the Institute for Justice Reform (IJR). Here’s what Col Wirut had to say:

A standard offence of fraud (not public fraud) carries a prison term of up to three years. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, police cannot immediately seek an arrest warrant. However, the money laundering charge added in Sittra’s case carries a 10-year sentence and allows them to request an arrest warrant from the court.
The question is whether the charge was added just to obtain a warrant.

On this point, I’d like to add that a prosecutor from the Special Case Division was “astonished” by the police charge linking fraud with money laundering, saying he had never seen such a connection made during all his years in the field. The money laundering law covers “habitual fraud”, but it’s questionable whether Sittra’s actions showed a pattern of habitual fraud. The prosecutor, however, acknowledged the police’s creativity in constructing this charge.

Wirut emphasised that modern judicial principles enshrined in Thailand’s recent constitutions presume innocence for the accused. Authorities cannot treat suspects as guilty from the outset. So, if a suspect is available to hear charges, why issue an arrest warrant? Sittra had previously met with investigators and stated his willingness to acknowledge the charges, so there was no need for an arrest warrant.

Wirut’s comments apply not only to Sittra’s case but also to the iCon pyramid scheme, where arrests were made and bail refused even after the main suspect, “Boss Paul”, gave himself up to investigators.

The dramatic operation to arrest Sittra, despite him being unarmed and with his wife, seemed intended to justify denial of bail with argument that he was attempting to flee.

Wirut noted that travelling in the morning, even to seek privacy, is a normal occurrence and doesn’t imply fleeing. Rather than assuming the worst, authorities could have followed Sittra discreetly or alert immigration checkpoints. Instead, they jumped to the conclusion he was attempting to escape. 

If Sittra was genuinely fleeing, wouldn’t he be travelling at night or using a different vehicle to be less conspicuous, Wirut asked.

It’s pertinent to note that when former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra fled the country in the rice-pledging case – a major scandal that resulted in over 500 billion baht in national losses and her conviction – the police took no dramatic action. Despite her being found guilty, there was no surveillance team assembled, nor were any border arrests made. Yingluck left the country unimpeded, with a senior police officer reportedly driving her vehicle. Has any disciplinary action been taken in relation to this? The public deserves an update on the progress of this matter.

Wirut also shared some critical insights:

Currently, for every 100 complaints filed with police, only five actually receive a criminal case number for legal investigation – typically cases involving wealthy or powerful individuals. The remaining 95% of complaints, mainly by poor or middle-class citizens, are recorded but no investigation or case file is submitted to prosecutors.

Furthermore, if a poor person reports fraud, they’re often told it’s a civil matter and advised to file the court case themselves, as it’s unlikely the police will see any “benefits” from assisting in these cases.

This painful truth comes directly from a former police officer who’s seen and worked on many such cases firsthand.

Pakorn Puengnet