NACC’s wrong turn taints the generals

In an unusual move, the national anti-graft agency has claimed the power to withdraw a case it filed against four prominent individuals deemed responsible for the deadly police crackdown on protesters in October 2008.

Among other reasons to question the claim, there is the troubling fact that one of the defendants is close to a key figure in the military government.

The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders is currently hearing the case against former prime minister Somchai Wongsawat, his deputy premier Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, former Metropolitan Police commander Suchart Muenkaew, and former national police chief Patcharawat Wongsuwan. Patcharawat is the younger brother of incumbent Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwan. They stand accused of using unnecessary force against yellow-shirt protesters demonstrating against the Somchai government.

But the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) – five of whose nine members were appointed only late last year – has decided by majority vote that it has the power to withdraw the case. This came after Somchai, Patcharawat and Suchart made a formal request for “fair treatment”. The defendants pointed out that public prosecutors had decided not to pursue the case. They also noted that, more tellingly, the NACC had not brought action against another former prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, and his deputy, Suthep Thaugsuban, for allegedly launching the deadly military crackdown on red-shirt protesters in 2010.

The NACC had originally advised the anti-graft commission to pursue the case against Somchai et al, saying the defendants could duly present their arguments in court. Withdrawing the case would put NACC commissioners at risk of being sued for malfeasance, they warned. Since then, however, the NACC has been instructed to review its position.

Former NACC member Wicha Mahakhun has pointed out that the agency has never in the past withdrawn a case it placed before the Supreme Court, and that the anti-corruption law gives the NACC no authority to do so.

Watcharapol Prasarnrajkit is the current chair of the NACC. He became caretaker national police chief after the coup of 2014 and then secretary to Deputy Prime Minister Prawit. Taking over the reins at the NACC, Watcharapol acknowledged his close ties to Prawit, but insisted he wouldn’t risk his good name by “doing something that’s not right”. And yet he was one of the six NACC members who decided they have the power to scuttle the Supreme Court proceedings against Somchai et al.

This dubious action further damages the credibility of the ruling junta, whose popularity in some circles has long been waning. The NACC is supposed to be independent, but five of its members owe their posts to the military, chosen to replace those who completed their terms last year.

To be sure, the post-coup government continues to enjoy widespread public support, yet it is this backing – based on its success in maintaining peace and tackling some instances of corruption – that gives it the confidence to wield authority in questionable and sometimes authoritarian ways.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha should never have permitted the NACC to mishandle the case before the Supreme Court. How this case proceeds represents a litmus test for his government and its legitimacy. Watcharapol joined the NACC and became its chairman under the junta’s watch, so it is the junta’s responsibility to ensure he serves the public interest and not that of an individual benefactor.

It is increasingly worrying that the generals in power are adopting the same practices (or being caught pursuing them) as the ruling politicians they ousted – nepotism, abuse of power, and conflict of interest. The faith of the public alone gives the military the legitimacy to rule. It is unwise to allow that faith to be destroyed by self-serving behaviour.