(9 August) Court of
Appeals dismissed the case of a former policeman accused of firing RPG at the Ministry of Defence
building during the turbulent month of March 2010.
Mr. Bundit Sitthitam was arrested and
charged with the attacks on the Ministry just as the Redshirts protests were beginning in Bangkok.
Prosecutors argued that he was a Redshirt sympathiser who launched the attacks along with
other individuals in order to terrorise the government at the time to dissolve the Parliament as a
part of the Redshirts tactics to cause violent, chaotic situations in the capital city.
RPG missile missed its target and hit into telephone cable equipment operated by TOT Communication Company
instead, causing 39,421 baht in damage according to the police.
The Criminal Court
initially found him guilty in December 2011 and sentenced him to 38 years in jail. However, Mr.
Bundit insisted he was innocent and appealed the decision.
Today, the Court ruled in Mr.
Bundit′s favour, noting that witnesses failed to agree on even the identity of the attackers and
there were many questionable details in the case.
For example, some witnesses claimed Mr.Bundit was
the driver of the car at the scene, while some argued that he was a passenger. Moreover, some
believed he was wearing a hat, but some others told the court he was not.
Since it could not
be proven beyond reasonable doubt that Mr. Bundit was the attacker, the judges said, they decided to
acquit Mr. Bundit.
However, the prosecutors said they would fight the case to the Supreme
Court, and the Court of Appeals has ordered that Mr. Bundit remain in jail as the case is being
processed up to the higher court.
Nevertherless, Mr. Bundit was visibly overwhelmed
by the Court′s decision to acquit him; he started to cry as the judges read the verdict throwing out
the case. He told our correspondent while he was being escorted back to the jail that “I have been
waiting for this day for so long. It proves that justice still exists”.
Mr. Bundit repeated
that he had not done anything wrong and will fight until the end.
As for the Amnesty Bill, he
believed it would be difficult to pass through the Parliament, as the politics is still divided into
two conflicting camps.
He refused to comment about the suggestions from Democrat Party MPs
that the amnesty should not be given to criminals and those who had been convicted by the court like
him. However, he thought it is acceptable to give amnesty to Mr. Abhisit Vejjajiva, the Prime
Minister at the time of his arrest, if the move ‘brings peace to the society.’