Pheu Thai candidate Srettha sues over tax evasion allegations from Chuwit

In a recent turn of events surrounding the Pheu Thai Party, Srettha Thavisin, the prime ministerial candidate, commanded his legal counsel to start a legal battle against the well-known whistleblower Chuwit Kamolvisit. This move comes in response to allegations raised by Chuwit that Srettha was complicit in tax evasion incidents related to land acquisitions by the property giant, Sansiri Plc.

Srettha’s legal representative, Winyat Chatmontri, clarified that initiating legal proceedings against Chuwit wasn’t intended to intimidate him. It was more a necessary step taken to safeguard his client from the damaging accusations being levied against him.

The defamation lawsuit to be brought against Chuwit will see testimony from seven to eight witnesses, all of whom are linked to real estate transactions and their subsequent tax implications. Winyat mentioned that he holds substantial documented proof in support of his client, which is set to be presented during the court hearing. Additionally, a libel suit will also be lodged against Chuwit, with Srettha eyeing a hefty compensation sum of 500 million baht for the damages incurred.

Winyat ardently defended Srettha, ex-CEO of Sansiri Plc, emphasising that his client’s role didn’t encompass the buying and selling of properties. These matters were taken care of by the company’s dedicated land procurement team.

Srettha, as the company’s top executive, merely oversaw the proceedings and his decision-making was contingent on the data presented to him, enabling the company to mobilise the property effectively. The legal custodian was confident in his claim that all tax-related matters were handled ethically by the sellers as per their agreement with the company.

On the subject of a particular land deal being facilitated in 12 separate batches, Winyat counteracted the tax evasion claims, asserting that the move was more about “tax planning.” He went on to add that such an action was neither illegal nor harmful to the state’s interests.