Sansern spoke on Thursday after the NACC revealed that it was investigating a case filed in 2015 in which Yingluck’s Cabinet was found to have allegedly violated the budget bill by approving compensation to political victims in 2011 without proper legal grounds.

The NACC is expected to indict her in the case in September.

The NACC’s announcement came as the former premier was due to hear on August 25 the final verdict on her alleged mismanagement of her government’s rice-pledging scheme.

Rights lawyers are concerned about the impact of the NACC’s announcement on Yingluck.

However, Sansern said the two were separate cases and that the NACC was only carrying out its duties.

The rice-pledging scheme was among 13 cases the NACC had probed against Yingluck before it indicted her in the rice-pledging case and forwarded it for legal action to the court.

The NACC is currently probing 10 other cases involving Yingluck.

The other case that the NACC dismissed was the one calling for Yingluck’s impeachment for not following the Cabinet’s resolution that governmental agencies needed to record their procurement information online.

Deputy national police chief Pol General Srivara Ransibrahmanakul said yesterday that the request was made on Wednesday but he declined to elaborate or identify the suspects.

“We are waiting for a decision by the court as to whether to issue the requested arrest warrants,” Srivara said.

He said the three were among a group of people who were being monitored by police.

Srivara chaired a meeting on Wednesday to prepare for the day of the verdict.

Yingluck’s case stems from her government’s controversial rice-pledging scheme. She is charged with criminal negligence for failing to end the corruption-plagued project, which is estimated to have caused Bt500 billion in damages.

A large number of Yingluck supporters are expected to gather at the court when the verdict is read. Authorities have warned against people mobilising and possibly causing trouble.

Srivara said yesterday that the “Korakot 52” crowd-control plan, used during the 2008 political protests, would be adapted to cope with large groups of Yingluck supporters.

In the northeastern province of Sakon Nakhon, local residents voiced their objection to authorities’ efforts to stop Yingluck’s supporters from offering moral support in Bangkok.

Sakon Nakhon, like other provinces in the region, are a stronghold of support for the ex-PM and her Pheu Thai Party.

The situation in the Northeast was tense yesterday, with reports of a military presence attempting to prevent Yingluck supporters from travelling to Bangkok.

Second Lieutenant Theerapong Wongtapha, from a local military camp, met with a group of Sakon Nakhon residents on Wednesday and asked them not to go to the capital to hear the verdict.

Local villager Rassamee Thammawong, 45, from Wanon Niwat district, said she felt sorry for Yingluck and she viewed the case as “political bullying”. She said she was even sadder that the current administration is trying to stop people from showing their support to the ex-PM.

“I am not happy the soldiers tried to stop us from showing support to Yingluck. I will not go to Bangkok but I still support Yingluck over this case,” Rassamee said.

Somjit Phantula, 54, from the same village, said it was the people’s right to show support to any person they like and the authorities have no right to take that away.

“I feel sorry for Yingluck for being sued in this case. She was a very good prime minister and should not face a fate like this. I have no plan to travel to Bangkok to show my support for her, but it is not right that the Army is trying to stop people from doing so,” Somjit said.

“I only hope that the court will give her justice.”

HUMAN RIGHTS group iLaw yesterday slammed the junta-appointed National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) for not bringing about meaningful reform despite spending more than Bt1 billion of the state budget in the past 22 months.

A report by the NGO was released yesterday with the NRSA due to be dissolved at the end of this month following the promulgation of the new Constitution.

Although the NRSA has been working for more than two years and claims to have completed hundreds of plans for national reform, iLaw pointed out that more than half of its proposals were intangible.

The NRSA had submitted to the Cabinet a total of 131 reform reports, covering more than 1,300 issues. However, only some 320 of them, or 24.5 per cent, had been concrete enough for instant implementation, according to iLaw.

The rest were hazy concepts, the NGO said. For instance, the report on the promotion of “political culture of democracy” proposed an educational curriculum called “civic education” but gave no clear direction of how the curriculum should take place or what the outcome of the “political culture of democracy” should be, iLaw wrote.

In another example of vague educational reform, iLaw pointed out the NRSA had proposed a few different approaches but failed to conclude which one was the best to be adopted. More importantly, some reports had been proposed without any proper scientific support, iLaw said.

In an educational reform plan, aiming to ensure students become good people, the NRSA proposed that students take examinations on religion or ethics in their admission to university, iLaw said.

However, the NRSA did not provide any scientific support for why such an approach would help, it added.

Despite spending nearly Bt1.1 billion, the NRSA had failed to deliver fresh reform ideas. iLaw claimed that some of the proposals were only a brushed-up version of work previously done by other agencies.

Some proposals had been made despite them already being put into practice, according to iLaw.

The use of electronic monitoring or EM, which tracks prisoners on house arrest, was raised. iLaw explained that legislation has already been made, that prisoners in some cases could use the EM to ease prison overdensity.

Apart from that, iLaw also touched on the fact that some NRSA proposals had provoked controversy and could have steered the country backwards.

The agency mentioned the contentious media regulatory draft bill, that had been criticised as putting the media under governmental control, as well as the controversial suggestion of NRSA’s president Tinapan Nakata that the junta should use the sweeping power of the Article 44 to enact some 36 pieces of legislation.

In the past year and 10 months that the NRSA had been in office, iLaw calculated that it had used up almost Bt1.07 billion. The sum is derived from the salary of the members as well as the cost of operations and other expenditures such as allowances and the organisation of seminars.

HOUSES, CONDOMINIUMS and 37 land plots belonging to former premier Yingluck Shinawatra have been frozen by the Department of Legal Execution as part of the government’s civil liability lawsuit seeking Bt35-billion compensation over her alleged wrongdoing in her government’s rice-pledging scheme. The combined value of the properties has not been disclosed, according to Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam.

However, Yingluck reported in 2015 after leaving public office that she had total assets worth Bt610.8 million. In the report filed with the National Anti-Corruption Commission, Yingluck’s assets included Bt14.2 million in cash, Bt24.9 million in bank deposits, Bt115.5 million in investments, Bt108 million in loans, Bt117 million in land plots, and Bt162 million in other properties.

The Legal Execution Department had told Yingluck’s banks to transfer deposits from her seven accounts to the agency on July 19, Yingluck’s lawyer Noppadon Laothong said yesterday. He said he was not aware of the exact amount of the deposits.

Yingluck has been notified by Bangkok Bank of the action, but she has not been informed by her other banks, the lawyer said.

Meanwhile, the Administrative Court has ordered the Legal Execution Department and the Finance Ministry to explain to the court within 15 days why they need to seize money from her bank accounts, the court’s deputy spokesman, Terdpong Kongchan, said yesterday.

Yingluck has petitioned the court, seeking an injunction after learning that authorities had started seizing her assets.

Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha urged the public to avoid misunderstandings over the separate criminal and civil liability actions being taken against the ex-premier, since it could be abused to create public unrest.

Yingluck wrote on her Facebook page that some money in her bank accounts had already been seized by authorities as part of the civil-liability lawsuit filed against her over alleged wrongdoings.

The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders will deliver a verdict on August 25 on Yingluck’s alleged negligence of official duty while implementing the rice-pledging scheme that resulted in corruption and a huge loss to the state.

Prayut explained that these are two separate actions against the former premier. The Finance Ministry’s civil liability lawsuit, which has led to authorities freezing Yingluck’s assets, including her bank accounts, is pending a final court decision on compensation claims totalling Bt35 billion to the state.

The other action is the criminal lawsuit, on which the Supreme Court will deliver its verdict on August 25.

Regarding Yingluck’s assets, deputy premier Wissanu said the Department of Legal Execution had requested that the Department of Land freeze the former premier’s land plots and other properties so the ownership could not be transferred at this stage.

However, these properties have not yet been seized by the state and would be seized only after a final verdict in the civil liability case that demands a compensation from Yingluck to cover losses suffered by the state due to alleged corruption and negligence of official duty in the management of the rice pledging scheme.

Earlier, Yingluck’s 16 bank accounts were also frozen by the Department of Legal Execution, with some deposits in five bank accounts already withdrawn by the agency.

Wissanu said the agency is empowered to do so, but the case is not final so the funds, amounting to several hundreds of thousands of baht, have not been transferred to the Finance Ministry.

Asked if Yingluck would get the funds back if the Supreme Court ruled her not guilty on August 25, Wissanu explained that verdict was separate from the civil liability action being taken by the government.

Yingluck has petitioned the Administrative Court to issue an injunction on the civil liability case so that seizure of her assets could be put on hold, pending a final judgement.

Wissanu said the government would suspend freezing of Yingluck’s assets until the court delivers its verdict on the criminal case late next month.

In a related development, National Anti-Corruption Commission secretary-general Sansern Poljeak said yesterday that a separate case against former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, stemming from his government’s rice price-guarantee project, was being investigated by an NACC subcommittee.

Sansern said he did not know exactly what progress has been made in the investigation on alleged irregularities involving the project.

The National Legislative Assembly (NLA) on Thursday passed the Ombudsman draft bill required under the new charter, with 143 members backing the draft and seven abstaining.

The present members of the Office of Ombudsman, however, will be allowed to continue until their term ends.

The draft bill is the fourth of 10 organic laws to be passed by the NLA.

Under the new charter, concerned parties would be given at least 10 days to review the law and raise objections if they view any clause as unconstitutional. The process could pave the way for the setting up of a tripartite law review committee, prolonging the forwarding of the law for royal endorsement.

The members of the Election Commission and the National Human Rights Commission will have to vacate their positions as a result of the new law. The EC is now taking its case to the Constitutional Court.

The NLA, however, spared the members of the Office of Ombudsman, saying they would have less authority under the new law, and hence their qualifications need not be as high as that of the other agencies.

They would become an advisory body on state practices, without the authority to probe the ethics of political office holders.

He added that he did not know the exact amount of money.

Yingluck had been notified of the order by Bangkok Bank, where she has seven accounts, but not by her other banks, he said.

The Administrative Court has ordered the Legal Execution Department and the Finance Ministry to explain to the court within 15 days why they needed to seize her bank accounts, the court’s deputy spokesman Terdpong Kongchan said yesterday.

Yingluck has petitioned the court for an injunction after learning that authorities began sequestering her assets.

The new Constitution allows an appeal against a judgement by the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders, Wissanu said. The 2007 charter and its organic law on the legal procedures against political office holders had already been invalidated, he explained.

However, the new organic law was passed by the National Legislative Assembly (NLA) only this month and it would not come into effect until passed by the Cabinet and royally endorsed.

There have been concerns that the former PM might not be able to submit an appeal in time if the court verdict is delivered before the law is enacted.

Wissanu said he believed the provisional clauses would give way for proceedings in such a case.

Yingluck has been accused of dereliction of duty in managing her government’s controversial rice-pledging scheme.

The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders will deliver its verdict on August 25.

The authorities have not paid special attention to the red-shirt movement, either domestic or overseas, Prawit said. There are also no reports suggesting possible violence so far, he added.

However, Prawit admitted that authorities have interviewed some key pro-Yingluck figures.

“But we didn’t suspend them,” he said.

Police and military have also coordinated to take care of the “overall orderliness” arising from the verdict, the deputy said.

“People do not need to gather en mass to provide [Yingluck] moral support. Only half of them [coming] will do or they can simply cheer [her] at home,” he said.

Meanwhile, Police chief General Chakthip Chaijinda insisted that the police have prepared for possible scenarios as well as monitoring online movements in social media.

Chakthip also said he has ordered his deputy, Pol General Srivara Ransibrahmanakul, to estimate the number of Yingluck supporters and prepare for measures that might be used August 25.

“I can’t think on behalf of those people, but I believe that they should know where the legal boundary is,” he added.

Deputy Police Chief General Srivara Ransibrahmanakul on Thursday said that the people had committed the alleged infraction on Wednesday. However, he refused to elaborate further, including identifying those involved.

Srivara only said that they were detected by the police intelligence.

The court is considering whether to issue the arrest warrants, Srivara said.

In related news, police held a meeting on Wednesday to prepare for August 25, the day that the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division will deliver a verdict in the case of Yinluck. The former prime minister was charged for alleged dereliction of duty and criminal negligence for failing to prevent corruption in the controversial rice-pledging scheme.

The “Korakot 52” crowd-control plan, used in the 2008 political protest, will be adapted to cope with mass groups of supporters expected to come to support Yingluck on the day.

Yingluck wrote on her Facebook page that some money in her bank accounts were taken away by authorities.

The Supreme Court’s Division on Criminal Offences of Political Office Holders will deliver a verdict on August 25 in the case against Yingluck for alleged negligence of official duty while implementing the rice-pledging scheme, resulting in corruption and a huge loss to the state.

Prayut said there are two separate cases against the former premier. The freezing of Yingluck’s assets, including bank accounts, follows the Finance Ministry’s administative actions taken under the Article 44 on seizure of assets to cover the Bt35-billion compensation to the state.

The other case is the criminal lawsuit in which the highest court would issue a verdict next month. Prayut said the public should avoid any misunderstanding that could be abused to create unrest.