Man Who Brought Map Ta Phut Down Targets Yingluck

[webfact]

AFTER FLOODS

Man who brought Map Ta Phut down targets Yingluck

Kesinee Teangkhieo

The Nation

Srisuwan set to sue govt on behalf of flood victims

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and 10 other senior officials are facing a serious challenge over their poor management of the flood crisis from the very man who brought 76 industrial projects in Map Ta Phut to a complete halt a few years ago.

Srisuwan Janya, president of the Stop Global Warming Association (SGWA), returned to the Central Administrative Court yesterday to demand justice for people hit by the recent flood disaster.

"We have asked the court to order inefficient and negligent officials to jointly compensate the plaintiffs based on the actual cost of the damage," he said.

Up to 352 flood victims have given SGWA the authority to represent them in court and each of the plaintiffs is demanding more than Bt100,000 in compensation.

Those being sued are Yingluck; Justice Minister Pracha Promnok, who led the Flood Relief Operations Centre (FROC); Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut; Interior Minister Yongyuth Wichaidit; Royal Irrigation Department director general Chalit Damrongsak; Bangkok Governor Sukhumbhand Paribatra; director-general of the Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Department; direc?tor-general of the Water Resources Department; director-general of the Pollution Control Department; director of the National Disaster Warning Centre; and director-gen?eral of the Department of Public Works and Town & Country Planning.

"Due to their grave negligence and inefficiency, huge volumes of run-off water ravaged so many provinces from the lower North to the Central Region including Bangkok," he said.

Srisuwan said Theera had kept too much water in dams in the hope of supporting the government's rice-mortgage scheme and the water released from the overwhelmed dams later seriously worsened flooding.

"Why didn't the prime minister appoint a water-management expert to lead FROC? Why did she choose the justice minister for the post? Pracha is only experienced in police work," he said.

Sukhumbhand, meanwhile, was blamed for only protecting Bangkok without any regard to people living in nearby provinces.

In his court petition, Srisuwan listed down what the SGWA sees as grounds to hold all 11 officials responsible for the flood crisis. This year's severe flooding was considered one of the country's worst floods, claim?ing hundreds of lives and causing massive damages.

"Apart from demanding compensation for the victims, we have asked the court to order these officials to prepare tangible measures for flood prevention both in the short and the long term," Srisuwan said.

In the petition, the SGWA also called on the Central Administrative Court to order the government to earmark at least Bt2 billion a year for the Flood Victim Rehabilitation Fund.

"This budget should increase in response to the inflation rate," Srisuwan said. "The fund should be managed by the people's sector and other stakeholders."

The court, which accepted the petition yesterday, said it would decide later on whether it would rule on the case.

Srisuwan said this was another historic case because it marks the first time hundreds of people have taken legal action against relevant officials, including the PM, over floods.

However, historic cases are noth?ing new for the SGWA and Srisuwan.

In 2009, the Central Administrative Court issued an injunction that put 76 industrial projects in Rayong's Map Ta Phut area on hold in response to a petition submitted by the SGWA and a group of locals.

That case brought attention to the need to abide by the Constitution's environmental protection cause and strict compliance with laws when developing industrial projects.

-- The Nation 2011-12-22

[OzMick]

(Bangkok Governor) "Sukhumbhand, meanwhile, was blamed for only protecting Bangkok without any regard to people living in nearby provinces."

That suit might be a hard row to hoe.

[Moruya]

(Bangkok Governor) "Sukhumbhand, meanwhile, was blamed for only protecting Bangkok without any regard to people living in nearby provinces."

That suit might be a hard row to hoe.

Maybe deliberately so.

[Buchholz]

The class action suit by 353 adversely affected by the flood could easily add millions to their lawsuit against the incompetence of FROC.

The families of over 700 dead souls from the flood could also bring significant claims.

.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Buchholz

[Moruya]

This could grow arms and legs.

More than 2 million affected by the floods and the lure of free money to the Thais could see this baloon.

[marquess]

Good luck to them! The government need to be sued big time, it might make them take more responsibility for their actions in the future. A measly 5,000 Baht when people have lost their lives.

[Moruya]

When you start looking at lost lives then the whole issue of the verbally agreed (TS) compensation for the deceased Red Shirts or Tak Bai dead (very little). Who will get more? why?

[geriatrickid]

The class action suit by 353 adversely affected by the flood could easily add millions to their lawsuit against the incompetence of FROC.

The families of over 700 dead souls from the flood could also bring significant claims.

.

Another frivolous and exaggerated statement that demonstrates a lack of common sense. How exactly are the estates of "700" souls going to make a claim when many of the deaths involve people drowning while fishing, or walking in restricted areas, or attempting to drive around barriers and into the water? How exactly will you make the case for those electrocuted because their home's electrical systems ignored proper building methods? if those 700 souls died because there was a deluge of water because the government opened the gates of a dam without warning, you could make your case, but many of the deaths are attributable to the behaviour of the dead or were people in already compromised health situations. How exactly do you plan to blame the government for the drunk that drowned trying to swim across a flooded area? How about the guy that decided to turn on an appliance in his flooded house?

Fascinating that the person bring suit is considered a hero, but was vilified as a commie rat bastard when he was fighting the industrial development. I'm all for this chap representing people that have been harmed. However, what we see here is someone staking out a negotiating position and attempting to regain some credibility after having pissed off some very heavy hitters with his actions on the industrial estate. It won't help him, but I wish him well.

Edited December 22, 2011 by geriatrickid

[whybother]

Another frivolous and exaggerated statement that demonstrates a lack of common sense. How exactly are the estates of "700" souls going to make a claim when many of the deaths involve people drowning while fishing, or walking in restricted areas, or attempting to drive around barriers and into the water? How exactly will you make the case for those electrocuted because their home's electrical systems ignored proper building methods? if those 700 souls died because there was a deluge of water because the government opened the gates of a dam without warning, you could make your case, but many of the deaths are attributable to the behaviour of the dead or were people in already compromised health situations. How exactly do you plan to blame the government for the drunk that drowned trying to swim across a flooded area? How about the guy that decided to turn on an appliance in his flooded house?

Fascinating that the person bring suit is considered a hero, but was vilified as a commie rat bastard when he was fighting the industrial development. I'm all for this chap representing people that have been harmed. However, what we see here is someone staking out a negotiating position and attempting to regain some credibility after having pissed off some very heavy hitters with his actions on the industrial estate. It won't help him, but I wish him well.

There were restricted areas? And barriers?

[hellodolly]

Another frivolous and exaggerated statement that demonstrates a lack of common sense. How exactly are the estates of "700" souls going to make a claim when many of the deaths involve people drowning while fishing, or walking in restricted areas, or attempting to drive around barriers and into the water? How exactly will you make the case for those electrocuted because their home's electrical systems ignored proper building methods? if those 700 souls died because there was a deluge of water because the government opened the gates of a dam without warning, you could make your case, but many of the deaths are attributable to the behaviour of the dead or were people in already compromised health situations. How exactly do you plan to blame the government for the drunk that drowned trying to swim across a flooded area? How about the guy that decided to turn on an appliance in his flooded house?

Fascinating that the person bring suit is considered a hero, but was vilified as a commie rat bastard when he was fighting the industrial development. I'm all for this chap representing people that have been harmed. However, what we see here is someone staking out a negotiating position and attempting to regain some credibility after having pissed off some very heavy hitters with his actions on the industrial estate. It won't help him, but I wish him well.

There were restricted areas? And barriers?

home's electrical systems ignored proper building methods.

This is Thailand isn't it? Even in Canada those proper methods keep changing.

Notice I put the ? at the end of the sentence not in the middle of a non questioning word.

[rixalex]

Another frivolous and exaggerated statement that demonstrates a lack of common sense. How exactly are the estates of "700" souls going to make a claim when many of the deaths involve people drowning while fishing, or walking in restricted areas, or attempting to drive around barriers and into the water? How exactly will you make the case for those electrocuted because their home's electrical systems ignored proper building methods? if those 700 souls died because there was a deluge of water because the government opened the gates of a dam without warning, you could make your case, but many of the deaths are attributable to the behaviour of the dead or were people in already compromised health situations. How exactly do you plan to blame the government for the drunk that drowned trying to swim across a flooded area? How about the guy that decided to turn on an appliance in his flooded house?

Fascinating that the person bring suit is considered a hero, but was vilified as a commie rat bastard when he was fighting the industrial development. I'm all for this chap representing people that have been harmed. However, what we see here is someone staking out a negotiating position and attempting to regain some credibility after having pissed off some very heavy hitters with his actions on the industrial estate. It won't help him, but I wish him well.

Clearly two very different situations - i wouldn't deny that or argue otherwise - but it is nevertheless interesting to compare the difference in terms of what you consider to be state responsibility, with regards red protesters who were warned repeatedly, day after day, week after week, to leave the protest area for their own safety, and yet did not, compared with flood victims, some of whom were given warning to leave, and some of whom were not.

In my area the evacuation call came when the water was already up to neck level, and by which time, evacuation had become pretty fraught with danger - especially for the young or elderly. The day before, the information we were getting from the state was that the area would only flood up to knee level. It was based on this false information that people had stayed in their homes. And it was based on this false information, that some suffered injury or worse. If the state didn't know, or weren't able to predict, they should have held their hands up and said so. They didn't. People trusted them, and for that, some of them paid. I certainly did, although mercifully, only in terms of my pocket.

[tragickingdom]

Another Johnny the self kicker. Maybe he should sue God for letting it rain. Or the people who make artificial rain they are to blame too. Maybe the democrat party too because they rule Bangkok forever. NEver heard from the idiot anyhow when rural areas were flooded, it might be of course because he never set foot in Izan or the Deep South simply because he wast to be the hero of city folks. Good luck with it, he has little else to do no he cannot take bribes anymore from closed down factories. I assume we will soon find many more people helping out the citizens that had to deal with the flood, they will do it for 20% of the damages paid ..... ONly the sun comes up for free.

[hammered]

Im sure the dude loves his big man status

[chuang]

Is this moron a member of the Democrat Party...

[whybother]

Is this moron a member of the Democrat Party...

No.

[witsawakorn]

Another Johnny the self kicker. Maybe he should sue God for letting it rain. Or the people who make artificial rain they are to blame too. Maybe the democrat party too because they rule Bangkok forever. NEver heard from the idiot anyhow when rural areas were flooded, it might be of course because he never set foot in Izan or the Deep South simply because he wast to be the hero of city folks. Good luck with it, he has little else to do no he cannot take bribes anymore from closed down factories. I assume we will soon find many more people helping out the citizens that had to deal with the flood, they will do it for 20% of the damages paid ..... ONly the sun comes up for free.

I don't think anybody will get very much. Look at the example of the legal actions taken against the US Army Corps of Engineers after the post Katrina flooding of New Orleans caused by the ACE's failure to maintain and ugrade the canals and levees that were supposed to protect N.E. It ended up in Supreme Court I think and the ruling passed down was that the ACE was let off the hook. The Sumpreme Court is supposed to be politically neutral I think but who knows? Perhaps the judges decided that taking nearly $80 billion out of the National defence budget to pay N.E. wasn't in the national interest. I'm sure the same thing could happen here. It will be harder to point the finger at one culprit here. People are pointing the finger at the Bangkok Governor for taking actions that favoured Central Bangkok over outlying areas. Well if he did then he was probably following his job description wasn't he.? As far as I know the Inner Bangkok flood defenses worked as designed and the CBD and the MRT feeding Employees into it never stopped functioning as far as I know. About 20 staff in my office were directly impacted by the floods at home but most of them said that it would have been so much worse if the office had closed and/or they couldn't ride the MRT to get to work. Oh and FYI the guy didn't close down factories in Maptaphut he forced them to hold construction until they had complied with an existing law requiring Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and a new law requiring Health Impact Assessments (HIAs). Facilities that complied with those requirements were allowed to continue constuction

Edited December 22, 2011 by witsawakorn

[wxyz]

good luck with that, i doubt they will get much of anything.

[Buchholz]

Man who brought Map Ta Phut down targets Yingluck

Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and 10 other senior officials are facing a serious challenge over their poor management of the flood crisis from the very man who brought 76 industrial projects in Map Ta Phut to a complete halt a few years ago.

Srisuwan Janya, president of the Stop Global Warming Association (SGWA), returned to the Central Administrative Court yesterday to demand justice for people hit by the recent flood disaster.

"We have asked the court to order inefficient and negligent officials to jointly compensate the plaintiffs based on the actual cost of the damage," he said.

Up to 352 flood victims have given SGWA the authority to represent them in court and each of the plaintiffs is demanding more than Bt100,000 in compensation.

Those being sued are Yingluck; Justice Minister Pracha Promnok, who led the Flood Relief Operations Centre (FROC); Agriculture Minister Theera Wongsamut; Interior Minister Yongyuth Wichaidit; Royal Irrigation Department Director-General Chalit Damrongsak

Cabinet Transfers Irrigation Department Director-General

Cabinet has approved the transfer of Royal Irrigation Department Director-General Chalit Damrongsak to the post of Agriculture deputy permanent-secretary, most likely as a result of last year's flood crisis.

Current Agriculture Deputy Permanent-Secretary Lertviroj Kowatana becomes the new Director-General of the Royal Irrigation Department.

-- Tan Network 2012-02-22

[DeepInTheForest]

Perhaps readers (and posters) could use some info on Srisuwan Janya. It is surprisingly somewhat difficult to find any entries or biographical information on the English internet. He has a a history of public advocacy, who admits he is not a saint in terms of his own energy use. His career may be of interest to readership.

http://www.asiathisweek.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&aid=5853&ptid=9

"Srisuwan said many residents in flood-affected areas said their electricity bills had gone up despite the fact that many had abandoned their homes and had not consumed electricity."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Petition-to-challenge-electricity-price-policy-30173242.html

This post sees him as aligned with former PAD members, who are interested in destabilizing the government:

http://thaipoliticalprisoners.wordpress.com/2011/11/12/preparing-to-throw-out-another-elected-government/

From the New York Times, on the Map Ta Phut situation, and pollution in Thailand:

http://facthai.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/no-citizen-safety-in-industrial-zones-ny-times/