Bangkok: Ruangrai Leekitwattana, a prominent lawyer, has asserted that the National Anti-Corruption Commission's (NACC) decision to dismiss the case against Saksayam Chidchob aligns with the law. He highlighted the necessity for criminal cases to meet the standard of being beyond doubt, drawing a parallel with the Constitutional Court's previous ruling that removed Yingluck Shinawatra from office while sparing her from criminal charges.
According to Thai News Agency, Ruangrai expressed his views during a segment of "Kom Chad Luek," a program broadcasted on April 23, 2026. He detailed that the NACC's explanations and documentation were credible and indicative of a thorough investigation. The investigation focused on the multiple asset declarations submitted by Saksayam, which showed consistency, and the listings for several land sales.
Ruangrai acknowledged the criticism faced by the NACC but emphasized that its deliberations must adhere to its legal authority and responsibilities, prioritizing facts and evidence. He referenced a court ruling involving Yingluck Shinawatra, highlighting that decisions by the Constitutional Court or the Supreme Administrative Court do not universally bind the Criminal Court, as they address different issues.
He further clarified that a distinction exists between rulings on ministerial status and criminal offenses. The Constitutional Court may rule for removal from office without implying a criminal offense. Ruangrai explained that criminal cases demand stricter evidence standards, requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and if doubt remains, it benefits the accused. He noted that cases concerning qualifications or ethics operate under different criteria.
In the case of Saksayam Chidchob, the NACC is evaluating the issue of "intentionally concealing asset declarations," necessitating clear proof of intent. Insufficient evidence can lead to the rejection of a criminal case by prosecutors or its dismissal in court. The NACC continues to investigate the ethical dimensions, which might yield different outcomes compared to criminal cases. Ruangrai advised that societal disagreements with the NACC's decision should be addressed through legal channels rather than emotional judgments. He cautioned that reopening similar cases requires consistent standards to prevent a double standard in the justice system.