BANGKOK, Thailand – A Chinese man, represented by lawyer Sittra Biabungkerd (also known as “Lawyer Tum”), has filed a complaint with the Attorney General, requesting an investigation into a senior prosecutor for allegedly having an affair with his former Thai wife, which led to a significant financial loss, Sep 25.
Lawyer Tum accompanied Mr. Ken, the Chinese national, to submit the complaint, which accuses a deputy chief prosecutor of engaging in a romantic relationship with Mr. Ken’s ex-wife, Ms. Chisa (aka Eva), before their divorce on July 9. Evidence reportedly includes photographs of the prosecutor and Ms. Chisa in an intimate embrace at a restaurant. Witnesses also claimed that the couple planned to break up Mr. Ken’s marriage, even though the prosecutor was warned that Ms. Chisa was already married to a Chinese man. Despite this, the prosecutor allegedly continued the affair and gave Ms. Chisa a white BMW Z4, registered in another woman’s name, though it was widely known to belong to the prosecutor.
The complaint requests that the Attorney General and the Prosecutor’s Disciplinary Committee conduct a thorough investigation. If found guilty, Lawyer Tum is calling for the prosecutor to be dismissed or fired.
Mr. Ken also suspects that some of his assets may have been funneled through Ms. Chisa to the prosecutor. Alongside the disciplinary complaint, Lawyer Tum plans to file a civil lawsuit against both Ms. Chisa and the prosecutor for damages and use the evidence in a criminal case against Ms. Chisa for embezzlement.
In response, Mr. Prayut Petchkun, spokesperson for the Attorney General’s Office, confirmed that the complaint will be forwarded for preliminary investigation. However, it is unclear how long the process will take.
Additionally, the prosecutor in question had previously been implicated by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) for allegedly soliciting a bribe of 500,000 baht from a Chinese individual using a fake passport. According to the deputy spokesperson for the Attorney General’s Office, Mr. Watcharin Phanurat, the prosecutor was charged with accepting a bribe under Section 143 of the Penal Code, and this case is still pending a decision from the Attorney General.
As for why the prosecutor has not been suspended, Mr. Prayut explained that under the law, an investigative committee must be established to determine whether disciplinary action is warranted. Should the prosecutor face formal criminal charges, a suspension could be enacted under the regulations governing serious misconduct cases. (TNA)
