Written closing statements on the rice pledging case have reached by Supreme Court

Both the public prosecutors and the defence lawyers of former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra have separately submitted their written closing statements on the rice pledging scheme case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Offices.

The judges will have 10 days to peruse the two closing statements of the two parties and then write their separate opinions before the judgement day on Aug 25.

Mr Surasak Srirattrakul, director-general of the Prosecution Department, is confident that their written closing statement has covered every aspect and issue of the case, including the defence lawyers' challenges and the weak points of the defence witnesses.

Meanwhile, the defence lawyers are also confident that their closing statement responds every issue of the charges against their client, especially the confirmation of the innocence of Ms Yingluck in the implementation of the rice pledging scheme.

The defence's written closing statement is not much different from Ms Yingluck's verbal closing statement made before the court on Aug 1 except that the verbal statement refers to Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha and the National Council for Peace and Order, according to an informed source close to the defence lawyers.

The gist of the written closing statement is all about legal issues with emphasis on Ms Yingluck's plea for justice; the merits of the rice pledging scheme; government's statement in the parliament about the rice policy; and the creation of committees to investigated alleged corruption in the scheme although the government then did not suspend the pledging scheme.

One key aspect in the defence closing statement is the testimony of former Pheu Thai MP Chalerm Yubamrung challenging the allegations of former Democrat MP Warong Detkitvikrom and Ms Supa Piyajitti, former chair of a subcommittee closing the rice pledging scheme account.

In accordance with the Supreme Court's procedure, every judge deliberating the case must verbally read their written opinion before they take a vote to acquit or convict Ms Yingluck. A resolution is determined by a majority vote.

After a resolution is adopted, the court will write a common ruling which will be read as the court's verdict

Source: Thai Public Broadcasting Service (Thai PBS)