The former prime minister was found guilty of malfeasance and negligence for failing to terminate phoney government-to-government (G2G) rice sales by her then-commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom, who was jailed for 42 years last month. “Yingluck acknowledged the illegality of the G2G rice trade but refused to cancel a contract with a Chinese state enterprise,” the ruling stated.

The grounds of the ruling was that Yingluck had given an interview in which she said trades had been conducted between governments. However, it was later exposed by the opposition party in a censure debate in Parliament that rice stockpiles that were supposed to be sent to China had been resold inside Thailand.

Although Yingluck set up an investigatory committee in response to the controversy, the court ruled that the former prime minister had not in good faith tried to bring her commerce minister to justice.

The court ruled that the investigatory committee members were all under Boonsong’s supervision so the investigation did not answer questions raised in the censure debate.

In another allegation related to the implementation of the rice-pledging policy, which was implemented in such a way as to allow corruption and caused massive financial damage to the state, the court ruled that Yingluck was not guilty as it could not be proved she had been negligent in preventing losses. Despite damages and rampant corruption, the court ruled that malfeasance stemmed from practices at the operational level.

Yingluck, as head of the National Rice Committee, had established regulations and preventative methods at the programme’s outset, the court found.

The judicial panel of nine judges yesterday met behind closed doors at 7am. After more than four hours of discussions, the panel returned to the bench at 11.15am to read the verdict. It took another four hours for the panel to finished reading the 90-page long verdict, which included details of the allegations, evidence and arguments from both sides. The final verdict including the five-year sentence was read at about 3pm.

Despite the significance of the case and the verdict to the country, few people showed up at the court yesterday, which was attributed to Yingluck’s absence. Less than 100 people were in the courtroom. Most of the attendees were reporters and Pheu Thai Party staff members.

Public participation is as key element in the new national reform law, which stipulates that reform committees must hold public hearings on their plans.

The natural resources and environment reform committee has opened a Line account, titled “Joining reform on environment”, to encourage members of the public to participate.

Comments and other feedback are invited and shared in the new Line group.

The committee, in its sixth meeting on Tuesday, also resolved to identify successes stories in natural resources and environment management as part of its reform pushes.

The vice chair, Theerapat Prayurasiddhi, said the reform committee had also fine-tuned its set of primary goals for the next five years to be in line with the 20-year national strategy.

The refined goals include: maintaining natural resources and their health so they can provide a foundation for the country’s social and economic development; balancing conservation and uses of natural resources to mitigate development impacts on natural resources; protecting the environment to minimise pollution and other public health and environmental impacts; and boosting effectiveness in managing natural resources and the environment to minimise conflicts and inequity, based on public participation.

The committee is one of 13 reform bodies appointed under the new charter and the National Reform Law.

Its work has been divided up among six sub-panels, covering land resources (land, mining, forests and wildlife), marine and coastal resources, water resources, biodiversity, environmental quality, and environmental management.

The reform committees have 90 days to finish their plans before submitting them to concerned parties, including the National Strategy Committee, for endorsement and implementation. The reform plans must be in line with the new long-term national strategies as required by law

Norrawit said he would first need to be contacted by Yingluck for further consultation. However, he claimed to have not heard from or spoken to her since August 25, when she was scheduled to hear the verdict but did not show up.

Yingluck, who has disappeared from public, has been punished for negligence over her government’s rice-pledging scheme, which caused multi-billion damages to the country following corruption and flaws in management.

However, the current constitution allows defendants to appeal the final verdict within 30 days to the Supreme Court. In Yingluck’s case, there may be a need to follow the conditions in a yet-to-come bill on crimes by political office holders that requires a defendant to show up to make an appeal.

Norrawit refused to anticipate any possible scenario, only reiterating that he will need to look through judgment papers in detail before making any further decision.

The fugitive politician was convicted of negligence in preventing corruption and irregularities in her government’s rice-pledging scheme prior to the 2014 coup.

The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders ruled that Yingluck had acknowledged the illegality of government-to-government rice deals but refused to cancel a contract with a Chinese state enterprise.

The court ruled that the deal involved ill-gotten gains and the dishonest discharge of official duties.

“The defendant was found guilty of the alleged offences under Section 157 of the Criminal Code and Section 123/1 of the Organic Act on Counter Corruption 1999 and was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment,” a statement from the court read.

The court will issue another arrest warrant against Yingluck, after an initial warrant was issued when she failed to appear before the court on August 25, when the verdict was originally scheduled to be read.

The nine-judge panel started reading the verdict at 11.15am and finished at 3pm.

The Supreme Court took almost four hours on Wednesday to read the verdict on Yingluck’s alleged negligence in her government’s rice-pledging scheme.

Thanyaporn Chansakulporn is the 21st defendant in the case against Boonsong Teriyapirom, who was Commerce minister in the Yingluck Shinawatra government and has been jailed for his role in the scam.

Thanyaporn and several other defendants were due in court on Wednesday to hear the verdict and be formally sentenced.

She had also skipped the reading of the verdict on August 25, when her father, Apichart Chansakulporn, was sentenced to 48 years in prison for malfeasance, having helped Boonsong set up the fake rice deal.

Her absence that day triggered the first arrest warrant.

Pairoj Polem, secretary of the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Holders of Political Office, said the judges on Wednesday decided in Thanyaporn’s absence to not read the verdict against her.

The panel of judges, headed by Supreme Court vice president Thanarirk Nitaseranee, assumed, however, that she must have learned about the verdict when it was read on August 25.

The judges decided as a result that a second arrest warrant should be issued.

Thanyaporn was sentenced to four years in prison and fined Bt40,000.

The court also ordered Thanyaporn’s firm, Keetha Property Co Ltd, named as 20th defendant in the case, to pay the government Bt1.294 billion in compensation.

Metropolitan police chief Lt-General Sanit Mahathavorn, who took charge of security operations at the court at 9am on Wednesday, said he was confident it would be possible to reason with the dozens of supporters waiting right in front of the court if the verdict goes against the former premier.

Although there are no signs of tension as of now, Sanit said the police are prepared for all scenarios.

Contrary to the situation on August 25, supporters on Wednesday have been allowed to gather outside the court as the police do not see the need to block traffic in the Government Complex due to small number of Yingluck supporters.

“However, the compound is under the court’s authority. Any violator could face six-months imprisonment or a Bt500 fine,” he added.

Norrawit said that he had not been contacted by Yingluck or her team since she disappeared before the verdict reading late last month.

The lawyer declined to speak about his plan after the verdict is read and whether Yingluck’s absence would impinge on her constitutional right to appeal the verdict.

“We will wait and see what the verdict is,” he said.

The ruling to be read on Wednesday was postponed on August 25 after Yingluck fled the country. The court has issued an arrest warrant for the former premier.

Although the court has scheduled the verdict reading for 9am, it is expected to be delayed as the judicial panel first has to confer and reach a consensus.

The reading could take hours as the judges would cite accounts and evidence provided by witnesses of both the plaintiff and the defendant before handing down the final ruling.

The personal judgement of each of the nine judges would be published later.

There are three possible outcomes in the case:

 Yingluck could be found guilty and sentenced to a year to 10 years in jail, a Bt2,000 to Bt20,000 fine, or both;

 Yingluck could be found guilty but sentenced to a suspended jail term;

 The former prime minister could be acquitted.

The verdict could be appealed if new evidence or facts are presented, according to the new Constitution.

But there has been debate whether Yingluck would be allowed to appeal an adverse ruling. While the 2017 Constitution allows an appeal, the new law on criminal procedures for political office holders, which would lay out the conditions for an appeal, has not been promulgated.

Yingluck is not expected to show up at court today. If she is sentenced to a jail term, another arrest warrant will be issued for her.

Prayut was invited by US President Donald Trump during a phone call in April.

The schedule was confirmed by both the Thai government and the White House yesterday following speculation that the visit, originally proposed for July, had been postponed.

Trump looks forward to reaffirming the relationship between the United States and a “key partner and longstanding ally in Asia”, according to a White House statement. Prayut and Trump would discuss strengthening and broadening bilateral relations and enhancing cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region, the statement said.

Prayut will lead a large Thai delegation to Washington for talks on security, the economy, trade and investment, as well as regional issues, deputy government spokesperson Lt-General Werachon Sukondhapatipak said yesterday.

Deputy Prime Minister Somkid Jatusripitak and the ministers of foreign affairs, interior, commerce and defence would accompany Prayut, he said.

The meeting comes ahead of next year’s commemorations of the 200th anniversary of Thai-US relations.

The Trump administration has been keen to bolster bilateral ties in East and Southeast Asia amid rising tensions over North Korea’s development of nuclear and missile arsenals.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch (HRW) slammed the visit, saying it showed that Trump took little account of human rights.

“Doubtless Trump fails to realise that this propaganda victory for Prayut and the junta will come at the expense of the people of Thailand, who will pay for it in the form of intensified repression and human rights abuses when the general gets home,” said HRW Asia director Brad Adams.

Trump will be the second top US official Prayut has met after he shook hands with US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in August. The meeting will also take place a month before leaders of Asean countries and their partner nations attend a summit in the Philippines.

The acting US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian Affairs Susan Thornton has said the US wanted Thailand to crack down on North Korean companies in the Kingdom as well as put pressure on its diplomatic mission.

While the United Nation General Assembly appears to have done little to alleviate Korean peninsula tensions, Prayut said yesterday that he was not afraid that Thailand would be seen as leaning too much towards the US.

“Thailand will adhere to [international] resolutions,” Prayut said.