Prayut led an entourage to visit Phnom Penh in a one-day visit to hold the third Cambodia-Thailand Joint Cabinet Retreat.

Prayut planned to emphasise strengthening cooperation in border development, labour, trade and investment, connectivity, and regional and international frameworks.

Prayut and his Cambodian counterpart also planned to witness the signing of two documents on a joint declaration regarding the meeting and the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation, according to a press statement.

Amporn is also a defendant in another bombing case at Samarnmetta Mansion in Nonthaburi in 2010 that is under appeal.

The dismissed case involves a March 2014 bomb blast in a Minburi playground that caused the death of two people and damaged a motorcycle.

During their investigation, police found that Kasi Ditthanarach, a defendant in the Samarnmetta Mansion case with whom Amporn had allegedly been in contact, had hired a room for the two killed in the 2014 bombing.

Amporn was then arrested in August last year at her house in Chiang Mai, and had been under detention ever since.

The investigators said the two cases were linked, but the court decided that neither the plaintiff nor investigators had witnesses who could confirm that Amporn had committed the crimes. Other witnesses could not pinpoint her as the woman who came to meet Kasi at the rented room.

The court thus concluded that testimony of the witnesses was not consistent.

Fingerprints found in the rented room were not Amporn’s. Citing weaknesses in the witness testimony and evidence provided by the plaintiff, the court found insufficient reason to convict Amporn and dismissed the case.

Amporn had previously been arrested in the Samarnmetta Mansion bomb blasting case and charged for possession of explosives, raw materials and firearms without permission. The case was dismissed but the prosecutor has appealed the case.

The blast at the mansion resulted in four dead, and 10 others injured.

Both cases had been linked by investigators to moves by “red shirts” in the street protests of 2010 and 2014.

More than 300 governmental officers have been shifted and around 80 punished directly by Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha under Article 44 of the interim charter, the forum heard. But while the interim charter itself was defunct, Prayut’s absolute power still remained under the permanent charter.

Prasong Lertratanawisute, director of investigative news agency Isra, told the anti-graft forum that the crackdown on corruption had focused on civilians rather than the military.

“This government is hyped on eradicating corruption. Yet, only little progress has been seen on military-related cases, from Rajabhakti Park to the GT200 scandal,” Prasong said, referring to controversies over two billion-baht military procurement deals.

“They set up probing committees and the result either comes out clear or is really slow to come,” he said.

The forum, titled “New Government: Old Corruption”, was organised by the Anti-Corruption Organisation of Thailand to mark national anti-corruption day.

Charter Drafter Patara Kampitak, who shared a platform at the forum, however, argued that the use of Article 44 may not deal with graft in a sustainable manner, but it was meant to create examples on what fates corrupt officers might face.

The current charter also includes mechanisms that will prevent corrupt politicians from re-entering the political arena, as well as placing sanctions on a future parliament should it ever pass a budget or policy plan with hidden benefits for certain people, Patara said.

Prin Panichapak, a board member of the Stock Exchange of Thailand, said that while the government has lined up legal instruments to cope with corruption, these more complicated rules might actually attract more cases of graft than simpler rules.

For instance, a foreign company seeking approvals has to go back and forth between the Commerce Ministry and the Board of Investment. The more regulations required, the more the potential tendency for companies to bribe authorities or take other illegal action to facilitate their aims, Prin said.

“Civil servants themselves even complain that outdated systems in bureaucracy obstruct efficiency,” Prin said. “In this case, we may take India as an example, where the government is cooperating with the private sector in fluidising technology to help combat graft.”

He suggested that Thailand should do more at a global level, such as joining the World Chamber of Commerce, where the Kingdom could demonstrate its trade and economic transparency under international scrutiny.

Banyong Pongpanich, CEO at Kiatnakin Bank, said that Thailand’s widely-used discourse on morality may not be the most effective tool to cope with corruption.

While one of Prayut-promoted “12 moralities” says that one must take into account others’ benefits before themselves, Banyong said that this separation of public benefit and one’s own benefit may not help when a person falls into dire need and committing graft is the only solution.

He said that there should be more awareness of the link between public and personal benefits as well as the damaging results of corruption on the system and a wrongdoer’s own life.

Prasong suggested that transparency is the key to cope effectively with all sides. For instance, revealing information to the public can clarify what is going on in the bureaucracy.

The news agency director also suggested that priority should be put on matters related to public financial contributions to the state, such as procurement, the tax system and the budget. Information about justice-related processes, especially in graft-related cases, should be made public at the earliest opportunity, he said.

“I am so over him. But you [the media], you’re not. And you keep reporting [news] about him,” Prayut responded after first pretending not to hear the question and asking the reporter to repeat herself.

Asked whether he was also “over” his former boss – former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, who is believed to have recently fled the country – the general said he was “over” everyone from conflicting parties. But that did not mean he disrespected them, he said.

“By getting over them, I mean I don’t think of them. I don’t give importance to this kind of stuff, because I’m not like they say I am,” he said.

He said he “got over” these people on his first days in office, and now he just wanted justice to prevail.

Clearly upset, Prayut continued: “I’d really like you to do the same and start asking better questions. Ask about my trip to join the BRICS meeting. Ask me if I’m tired or how much Thailand is welcome there. But you never care.”

The prime minister went on to say issues had been neglected in the past, which had resulted in people coming out into the streets to fight one another.

He asked whether the media was trying to provoke people again. Clearly irritated, Prayut said that finally the blame would be placed upon him.

Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the Democrat Party, who was also mentioned in the poll, said yesterday that there was a need to boost people’s faith in political parties.

The poll of more than 33,000 people 18 years old and above ranked groups with political influence. It was conducted between April 24 and May 15.

The major parties ranked low in the recent survey. The Democrat Party – which is the oldest in the country – ranked lowest at 36.3 per cent, with non-governmental organisations at 38.3 per cent, and Pheu Thai Party at 39.4 per cent.

Losing credibility

Abhisit said all political parties were in a situation where they were losing credibility.

“I have always stressed that political parties must try to regain confidence and faith among the people. Partly, it will be clearer after political activities are allowed again,” he said. “In the meantime, we can take time to think about how we will change, as the people have been dissatisfied with our work.”

The survey revealed on Tuesday that Thaksin was the most popular and credible prime minister in the past 15 years.

Thaksin’s popularity rating was highest at 87.8 per cent in 2003 while Prayut’s was 87.5 in 2015, a year after he seized power.

Although the general’s peak rating was lower than Thaksin’s by 0.3 per cent, Prayut is shown in the poll to have better popularity than Thaksin during the downturn.

He received 84.8 per cent in 2017 while Thaksin’s plunged to 77.2 in 2006.

PRIME MINISTER Prayut Chan-o-cha has defended his decision to suspend the Bt40-billion Stung Nam hydropower dam project, saying mishandling the venture would affect relations with Cambodia where he will hold a joint Cabinet meeting today.

“We should not broaden the issue. Prime Minister Hun Sen aims to develop Cambodia, and Thailand will develop our own country. If there are any [mutual benefits] we will not [halt the project], otherwise we will put it on hold. This is the nature of international relations,” Prayut said yesterday.

The premier suspended the project because the 24-megawatt hydropower dam would generate expensive electricity and require a huge investment to divert fresh water from Cambodia’s Koh Kong province to supply the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC).

The dam would supply about 300 million cubic metres of fresh water annually, which would mainly be diverted to industrial and service users in the EEC special economic zone covering Rayong, Chon Buri and Chachoengsao provinces.

According to a memorandum of understanding signed with Cambodia, Thailand agreed to buy electricity from the Stung Nam project situated near the border at the relatively high price of Bt10.75 per unit, while the country would also receive about 300 million cubic metres of fresh water free of charge.

The cost of building the dam is estimated to be Bt10 billion, with the electricity it produces costing only about Bt2.6 per unit, and three cubic metres of water being used to produce each unit of electricity.

While the fresh water released from the dam would be free of charge, Thailand would need to build a 200-kilometre pipeline to transport it, which would cost an additional Bt30 billion.

“Indeed, Cambodia is very kind to us as they would give us free water, but we have to invest a lot to take the water, therefore we must think about that,” Prayut said.

“We have to calculate this based on national interest, not the personal interest of any individuals,” he said, suggesting he was not familiar with the investor. “If I make a decision, the Cabinet does not need to consider [the project].”

The government in Phnom Penh commissioned Steung Meteuk Hydropower Co to work on the project with the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. There has been no Cambodian reaction so far to Prayut’s decision.

Critics have said the project should be presented in a more transparent manner since the separate prices of electricity and fresh water were not clear, but hidden in the electricity tariff that was set at Bt10.75 per unit, compared to the average power tariff of less than Bt4 per unit in Thailand.

‘Reasonable price’

Prasert Sinsukprasert, deputy chief of the National Energy Policy Office, reiterated yesterday that the premier had decided to suspend the agreement due to conflicting information about the project, its cost and the water supply.

Earlier, the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives concluded that the project was not necessary as the country would have sufficient water resources over the next decade. Prasert said fresh water in Thailand would satisfy demand for 12 years, but the industrial and agriculture sectors in the Eastern region might need more water in the next 50 years.

“Consultations between the Water Resource Department and Irrigation Department could not reach a consensus over domestic demand and the supply of fresh water,” he said. “It would be better to study more.”

The electricity cost of Bt10.75 per unit might appear expensive, but if the value of the free water was factored in, the price was reasonable, he said. “With such a formula, the electricity would be Bt2.6 per unit and the water just Bt2.8 per cubic metre.”

Energy Minister Anantaporn Kanjanarat said his ministry would comply with Prayut’s instruction and the national strategic plan for water management. “Cooperation with Cambodia on this matter is a loose cooperation without a timeframe, so we can implement it when it is necessary,” he said.

Prayut will pay a one-day official visit to Phnom Penh today for the 3rd Thailand-Cambodia Joint Cabinet Retreat meeting. He planned to emphasise strengthening cooperation in border development, labour, trade and investment, connectivity, and regional and international frameworks.

During the visit, Prayut and his Cambodian counterpart Hun Sen plan to witness the signing of two documents on a joint declaration regarding the meeting and the Agreement for the Avoidance of Double Taxation, according to a press statement.

Deputy Government Spokesperson Lt-General Werachon Sukhondhapatipak said energy-related agendas, including the power plant, would not be raised today.

“When the time comes, everything will unfold. The person who took Yingluck from the country needs to take responsibility,” he said.

However, he said he neither knew Yingluck’s whereabouts nor who helped her escape.

Prasong Lertratanawisute, director of Isra News Agency, said that Yingluck’s ability to escape from the Kingdom a few days before the final verdict reflected a failing in Thailand’s process of justice.

“No matter what deal might or might not have been done to help her escape, the fact that Yingluck could flee from legal action means that the justice process is hindered by some circumstance, disabling it from dealing effectively with people involved in such controversial cases,” Prasong said.

Yingluck has not been seen since failing to appear at a verdict reading in the case related to her government’s rice-pledging scheme on August 25. The court has set a second date of September 27 to read the verdict, in which the ex-premier faces a possible 10-year jail term if convicted of criminal negligence related to the rice scheme.

Meanwhile, Deputy Government Spokesperson Lt General Werachon Sukondhapatipak said he did not know whether Yingluck’s name would be raised during Thursday’s joint cabinet meeting between Thailand and Cambodia, given that the neighbouring country is seen as her possible escape route.

“Senior officers should be the best to address this matter,” he said.

An initial report claimed that Yingluck fled Thailand to Cambodia before flying to Singapore and Dubai, where her brother Thaksin lives in self-exile has a home.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and Prawit are due to attend the meeting in Cambodia on Thursday.

In a related development, junta spokesman Colonel Winthai Suvaree denied the military had received any information from police about Yingluck.

Deputy police chief Pol General Srivara Rangsibrahmanakul yesterday said police had sent investigation information to the military.

Kittisak Sumsri, who is in jail on a separate charge, was accused of possessing illegal firearms and carrying them in public areas without permission after a car containing nearly 20 firearms was found abandoned in Ram Intra area in mid-May 2010. The cache was later linked to Kittisak and two other defendants.

The first court dismissed the case on the grounds that witness statements and other evidence did not carry enough weight to convict him. The court said that witnesses’ testimonies were not consistent, and that DNA checks and fingerprints found on the weapons did not match Kittisak’s.

The Appeal Court agreed and upheld the verdict.

Kittisak’s lawyer, Winyat Chatmontri, thanked the court and said he would use this verdict in an appeal on the other case.

Winyat said the firearms in this case were claimed by several witnesses to have been used in the “men in black” operations that resulted in Kittisak being jailed for 10 years on another charge.

A court early this year sentenced Kittisak and another man, Preecha Yooyen, each to 10 years for possessing illegal firearms and carrying weapons in public without permission in the case related to clashes on April 10, 2010. Another three defendants were acquitted due to a lack of evidence.

The then-government, led by Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, started an operation to “reclaim public areas” following weeks of street protests by the red shirts affiliated with the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD).

The clashes led to at least 27 deaths – 22 of them civilians and five military officers, including Colonel Romklao Thuwatham, deputy chief-of-staff of the Second Infantry Division of Royal Guards. Japanese photojournalist Hiroyuki Muramoto, who worked for Reuters news agency, was among those killed on that day near the protest site at the Democracy Monument.

Witnesses reported seeing armed men in black, some wearing hoods to conceal their identities, who fired at military officers with assault rifles and grenade launchers, prompting the case to be dubbed the “men in black” case.

However, in the court verdict the convicted men were not clearly identified as assailants in the deadly shootings in April, 2010. None of the five defendants in that case was charged with murder.

In the poll conducted on more than 30,000 people between April 24 and May 15, the Democrat Party – which is the oldest in the country – ranked the lowest at 36.3 per cent, while the Non Governmental Organisations was at 38.3, and Pheu Thai Party 39.4.

Abhisit, however, pointed out that all political organisations were in a situation where they were losing credibility.

“I have always stressed that political parties must try to regain confidence and faith from the people. Partly, it will be clearer after political activities are allowed again,” the Democrat leader said. “In the meantime, we can take the time to think about how we will change, as the people have been dissatisfied with our work.”

Asked how his party would boost people’s faith, he said he personally would prioritise economic issues.

However, the key problem in the country remained corruption, and political parties must prove their transparency, he said.

Although new mechanisms were being created to curb fraud, Abhisit appeared to doubt their effectiveness.

“There’s little progress in dealing with the issue. There’s no guarantee about the extent to which the new mechanisms would work,” the former PM said.

Abhisit also expressed concern over the use of the sweeping powers available under Article 44.

“People might feel the exercise of Article 44 is decisive. But unless the system [that fosters the issue] is improved, questions of transparency and discrimination will persist,” he said.

Regarding his party, Abhisit said he had emphasised that members be more disciplined when it came to expressing opinions in media interviews.

“I am so over him. But you [the media], you’re not. And you keep reporting [news] about him,” Prayut responded after first pretending not to hear the question and asking the reporter to repeat herself.

Asked whether he was also “over” his former boss – former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, who recently fled the country – the general said he was “over” everyone from conflicting parties. But it did not mean he disrespected them, he said.

“By getting over them, I mean I don’t think of them. I don’t give importance to this kind of stuff, because I’m not like they say I am,” he said.

He said he “got over” these people since his very first days in office, and now he just wanted justice to prevail.

Clearly upset, Prayut continued: “I’d really like you to do the same and start asking better questions. Ask about my trip to join the BRICS meeting. Ask me if I’m tired or how much Thailand is welcome there. But you never care.”

Prayut said that matters involving the Shinawatra siblings were being handled in the judicial process.

He said the best thing was to forget them and leave them to the justice system. If not, the country would not go anywhere.

“Do you get that there are wrongdoings there? Please report so,” he said. “For my part, I can only tell the international community about the wrongdoings. Whether or not they are guilty depends on the justice system. But because of their flight, they cannot proceed with the cases. That’s it.”

Prayut said the government did not want to “go after” anyone, but the wrongdoings had occurred before he took power.

The prime minister went on to say that the issue had been neglected in the past and this had resulted in people coming out into the streets to fight one another.

He asked whether the media was trying to provoke the people again. Clearly irritated, Prayut said that finally the blame would be put on him.

“Don’t think that I do not follow your [the media] work. I always do. But I only read what matters and I skip the nonsense,” Prayut said.

Before leavingm he added: “I want to know why you never asked whether I’m tired, whether I will be back, where I have been. But don’t ask me now. It’s too late. I’m back here and the first thing I get is these questions. It’s you that never get over them.”

King Prajadhipok’s Institute’s most recent survey revealed on Tuesday that fugitive former prime minister Thaksin was perceived as the most popular and credible prime minister in the past 15 years, slightly surpassing current PM Prayut.

Thaksin’s popularity rating was highest at 87.8 per cent in 2003, while Prayut’s was 87.5 in 2015, a year after he seized power. Thaksin’s government also scored above Prayut’s, with 92.9 in 2003 compared to 78.8 in 2015.

Although the general’s peak rating was lower than Thaksin’s, Prayut was more popular during the downturn. Prayut scored 84.8 per cent in 2017, while Thaksin’s dropped to 77.2 in 2006.

Meanwhile, former premiers Abhisit and Yingluck rated between 50 and 60 per cent. Abhisit received 61.6 and 51.2 per cent in 2010 and 2011 respectively, while Yingluck’s rating was at 69.9 per cent in 2012, down to 63.4 during 2013 and 2014.

When it came to the credibility of individuals or groups of individuals, the people surveyed laid their trust best in state medical staff, who socred more than 85 per cent, followed by private medical staff on 85.6, the military (85.1), the PM (84.8), civil officials (82.3), and the National Council for Peace and Order, 82.1.

Political parties, on the contrary, ranked among the lowest receiving less than 40 per cent.

He said he doubted whether the premier would set up a party to run in an election.

Abhisit said the Democrats still intend to work with other parties, which have similar work approaches and policies.

However, if the party wins a major support, it can push its policies by itself, meaning forming its own government, but if there was not enough support, it would then look at the possibility working with others to form a government.