No hard evidence against Thaksin leaves court in a quandry

The case is being presided over by the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders.

So far, testimonies by virtually all witnesses from the state-controlled Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), who auctioned the land, suggest that there is no hard evidence showing that Thaksin had misused his authority because FIDF supposedly had a certain level of independence from the government.

Unless the court comes up with some concrete evidence today it will be difficult to pass a guilty verdict.

Another key issue on the table would be whether there's any proof that inside information about the minimum bidding price had been leaked to Pojaman. Again, testimonies by various witnesses appear to have failed to prove it beyond any doubt.

Now the court has to prove that it is fair - a task made even more difficult considering the deeply divided views held by opposing political groups. The fact that the Assets Examination Committee (AEC) was appointed by the junta also means that the court would have to try doubly hard to prove to sceptics that it is not part of a systematic attempt to purge Thaksin from the political landscape.

There's no doubt that people feel that it was a major political faux pas for Pojaman to have bought the land from FIDF for Bt772 million, an arguably low price, while her husband was prime minister.

But guilty or not, it is the convincing details and judgement passed by the court that will matter today.