Today (February 23) at the Central Criminal Court for corruption and misconduct in Taling Chan, the Court made an appointment to hear the order of the Black Case No. Or Tor 23/2566 at Ratchada Suriyakul Na Ayutthaya, former director-general of the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation, filed a lawsuit against Gen. Maj. Jaroonkiat Pankaew, Commander of the Prevention and Suppression of Corruption and Misconduct (Criminal Investigation Commissioner), including the arrest team and Chaiwat Limlikitaksorn. Director of the Office of Conservation Area 9 (Ubon Ratchathani) and a total of 7 people are defendants in the Central Criminal Court for corruption and misconduct cases. on offenses of unlawful performance of duties by officials, offenses against liberty, making false evidence, pretending to be punished by officials, trespassing, stealing thieves’ dens, violating the Personal Data Protection Act (2019)
At 8:20 a.m., Ratchada, accompanied by a lawyer, arrived at the court and stated that today the court made an appointment to investigate the prosecution’s side. After previously sending a lawyer to file a lawsuit against all 7 people, he confirmed that he did not claim benefits from government officials under the alleged affiliation. He has always denied
Ratchada went on to say that The reason why he was arrested by the police and Chaiwat in the office It is expected that Chaiwat was dissatisfied with having set up a committee to investigate the disbursement of the 4,200-rai reforestation project in honor of His Majesty the King for more than 14 million baht in 2019, and the case is still at the level of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. (NACC), which is about to expire on March 29, 2023.
However, it was reported that for the arrival of the plaintiff’s Ratchada party As a result of all the defendants’ cases, there was a plan to deceive them to receive money. And also disseminating the video recording data for the media to distribute to the public. cause damage discredit
The court scheduled to listen to orders or verdicts today. There is an order for the plaintiff to solve the lawsuit on the following issues:
1. Because the plaintiff has a request for punishment according to Personal Data Protection Act 2019, Section 79, which is just a penalty But in the complaint of the plaintiff did not describe clearly the circumstances alleging that the 7 defendants committed any offense under any section to be punished under section 79, including the penalty provision under section 79, as mentioned, is the penalty of Therefore, the plaintiff must explain clearly how all 7 defendants are ‘personal data controllers’ in accordance with the law, rules, regulations or orders and have duties accordingly. How does this Act and what is considered personal data according to How and how did the 7 defendants commit an offense under this Act that would make the 7 defendants liable under Section 79 of this Act?
1.1 Because the plaintiff requested punishment according to the 2017 Constitution, Sections 25, 28 and 33, with the plaintiff stating that it was only referring to the plaintiff’s rights under the constitution. did not wish to be punished Therefore, amend the petition at the end of the lawsuit by cutting out the text about the 2017 constitution.
2. Ask the plaintiff to present facts and point out evidence by himself on February 23 at 9:30 a.m. on the issue of offenses under the Criminal Code sections 157, 164, 179, 200, 210, 310, 364 and 365 regarding the previous circumstances. And after the plaintiff was arrested more Because the plaintiff, who is aware of such facts on their own
3. The court will issue a letter to the Central Investigation Bureau. National Police Agency along with a copy of the arrest memorandum of Ratchada Suriyakul Na Ayudhya, dated December 27, 2022, for clarification and delivery of documents
3.1 The cause and details of the circumstances before and during the search and arrest of Ratchada Suriyakul Na Ayutthaya, Director General of the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation on December 27, 2022 at the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation according to the copy. arrest record
3.2 Was the search and arrest of Ratchada according to item 3.1 carried out with a search warrant and an arrest warrant?
3.3 Was there a recording of images and sounds during the search and arrest of Ratchada? If so, was there a video of the incident? and who is the publisher And it is an act that is contrary to the Police Code, not related to the case type 29, confidentiality, item 1 or not, how?
4. In addition to the arrest of Ratchada Suriyakul Na Ayudhya and the seizure of 98,000 baht in cash, according to a copy of the arrest record attached herewith. Other intermediaries were seized. from the plaintiff on that day again or not, how
However, the court scheduled to listen to orders or verdicts on March 30 at 9:30 a.m.
The post Ratchada testifies in court Claim against the arrest suit Including Chaiwat Confirmed that he had never called for government benefits under his affiliation appeared first on THE STANDARD.
