Of amnesties and royal pardons
Source: The Nation
Once again, Thaksin Shinawatra has sent legal pundits and novices
alike scrambling for law books in a collective frenzy. Has he ever done
anything in his life that needn't be interpreted? I wonder. Let's get
started on the issues of royal pardons and amnesty bills.
CAN HE GET THEM, AND WHAT ARE THEIR DIFFERENCES?
Thaksin was referring to the royal pardon in his long-distance
speech to his supporters last Saturday. This has to do with the
two-year jail sentence laid down by the Supreme Court in connection
with the Ratchadaphisek land case.
But since it was highly unlikely he would receive a royal
pardon, for reasons we will discuss later, the People Power Party has
been spinning the issue into a campaign to draft an amnesty bill for
the 111 Thai Rak Thai executives banned from politics as a result of
the party-dissolution ruling.
In short, a royal pardon would be for the Ratchadaphisek land
case (imprisonment), whereas an amnesty would be for the
party-dissolution case (ban from politics).
WHAT EXACTLY ARE THE CHANCES OF A ROYAL PARDON?
Thailand's legal and political traditions require petitioners to
show remorse for their crimes. You can decide for yourself if Thaksin,
who has spent most of his time in exile telling the world how bad the
Thai courts are, is qualified in this regard.
There are different opinions, though, on whether one must have
"served" punishment before receiving royal clemency. Writing yesterday
in Matichon newspaper, a senior Law Council of Thailand official cited
Article 265 of the Criminal Code, which stipulates an absolute and
unconditional pardon means "punishment shall not be served or has to be
immediately stopped". This strongly implies one can receive a royal
pardon before punishment is served.
WHAT ABOUT LEGAL AMNESTY THEN?
The biggest problem is how a bill can be drafted without being seen
as an attempt to override the Constitution Court. The charter is clear
on the final and absolute power of Constitution Court rulings, which
are legally binding on the government, Parliament, judiciary and all
independent organisations.
A smaller obstacle, which is still huge, is the legal rules and
convention against "selectiveness" of legislative enactment. Of course,
any amnesty bill in nature must be earmarked for specific groups or
individuals, but an amnesty for Thai Rak Thai executives found guilty
of electoral fraud will prompt serious questions if anyone - for
example, other politicians convicted of similar crimes - is left out of
the bill.
Those are the legal hurdles, and we have not even mentioned the People's Alliance for Democracy yet.
| 
