The true, secret origin of the anti-monarchy conspiracy revealed-Bangkok Post
June 1, 2012
On the RECORD
Origin of monarchy overthrow chart remains a mystery
Bangkok Post: May 26, 2012
The pressure has been piling on Tarit Pengdith since the Department of Special Investigation recommended the probe into the so-called “overthrow the monarchy chart” be suspended.
In an interview with Amornrat Mahitthirook on the Joh Luek Tua Thai radio programme, the DSI director-general explained that the suspension of the probe was the correct decision because the people who drew up the chart could not be identified.
Former deputy premier Suthep Thaugsuban said he cannot accept the DSI’s decision not to recommend indictment of the people named in the chart. What do you say to that?
We merely notified prosecutors that we’ve suspended the investigation in the case. If new evidence comes to light, the case can be revived.
During the political violence of 2010, I agreed with the steps the Abhisit Vejjajiva government had taken to end the unrest. I was also a member of the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES) which worked to stop the bloodshed.
I’m proud to have delivered on policies under Mr Abhisit and Mr Suthep. I think both of them made timely and fitting decisions to quell the emerging unrest. If they hadn’t done what they did, the scale of damage would be unimaginable.
Mr Suthep, who chaired both the CRES and the Special Cases Committee, proposed that the chart be looked at and treated as a special case.
Now, two years on, Mr Suthep may be upset that the case is suspended. I would be too, if I were him. He has filed charges against me, my deputies and the staff. But I can understand his reasons.
Many security agencies worked together on investigating the names on that chart. We felt disturbed that a movement could be plotting the overthrow of the monarchy.
The chart provides the names of 39 juristic persons and individuals. Seven prosecutors and more than 20 DSI officials jointly worked on the case.
The probe found two names were at risk of having committed lese majeste.
Of the 39 names on the chart, 23 are of private individuals.
It is incorrect to say the chart case is dissolved. Related cases are being pursued. It would also be untrue to think there are no wrongdoers among the 39.
Who are the 23 names?
They include Jakrapob Penkair and Somyos Prueksakasemsuk. The investigators believed there were reasons that could explain how the names came to be on the chart.
However, as the probe deepened, no party or individual admitted to having drawn up the chart. The police and the military were interviewed but we didn’t get any answers.
Mr Suthep provided a broad picture about the significance of the chart but could not say who made it.
You questioned Col Sansern Kaewkamnerd, the CRES spokesman. Did you receive any information?
Col Sansern brought the chart to a press conference. He said the chart originated from a security agency but did not specify where it came from.
What was the security agency in question?
Col Sansern said he has no idea because he received the chart from someone else.
We haven’t been able to establish the source of the chart. It’s important to have witnesses before we can get to the bottom of anything. In criminal investigations, we need to prove a case beyond all doubt and this requires accounts from witnesses.
Back in 2010, the conflicts between the red shirts and the CRES may have led to the chart being used to discredit opponents. Could this be true?
I decline to comment and I don’t confirm it. I don’t wish to pour petrol on the fire and widen the rift.
Our investigation into the 39 names on the chart lacked evidence. After proceeding with the probe for a while, we decided we should halt it for now.
Does it mean Section 112 was being invoked to cease the unrest and stop certain elements from acting?
The DSI is not an independent organisation. We’re one of the organs of the state. We work under the government.
The DSI executes government policies and we don’t comment on whether they are right or wrong.
In 2010, when people were beginning to resort to using violence against one another, the government at the time preferred decisive enforcement of the law to contain the situation at hand.
The current government subscribes to a policy of national reconciliation and we, as state officials, are duty-bound to follow their policies.