All too often, Thailand's criminal defamation provision and the Computer Crime Act are used as a weapon by anyone accused of misconduct to gag media reporting.
The latest instance involves claims that certain parties were involved in attempts to bring about a favourable court ruling in relation to excise duty payable on the import of Toyota Prius parts into Thailand. The duty amount involved is USD 350 million.
The issue came to light following an internal investigation by Toyota and its disclosure to the US SEC that its Thailand operations may have violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. A grand jury has been empanelled in Texas to examine the issue.
In response, all named parties have threatened criminal defamation proceedings and action under the Computer Crime Act against parties involved in the initial reporting. Some parties have also made the same threat against Toyota and anyone who shares the reporting on social media. The result of these threats is two-fold - it gags media not wanting to be dragged into criminal proceedings but also amplifies interest in the issue.
The Court of Justice has indicated that it will investigate the issue. This seems odd given that there is a National Anti-Corruption Commission in Thailand and the issues raised would seem to fall within their authority. The NACC is apparently investigating allegations that Rolls Royce paid bribes to Thai Airways.
Bribery is endemic in certain South East Asia countries. At times, it is quite sophisticated, involving offshore payments dressed up as consulting arrangements or interposed entities in joint ventures allowing share participation.
It often involves the purchase of equipment at inflated prices. One of the odd outcomes of this type of arrangement is bribes being depreciated as a component of a balance sheet asset due to the relevant asset's higher initial carrying value.
The grand jury investigation in the US may shine an uncomfortable light on certain dealings in Thailand..
June 2021
© PELEN 2021
The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.