Court accepts farmer’s lawsuit against Thai govt over rice payment

[webfact]

Court accepts farmer’s lawsuit against govt over rice payment
By Digital Content



BANGKOK, Feb 21 – Thailand's Central Administrative Court has accepted a farmer’s lawsuit against the government for its failure to pay for the rice she delivered under the rice pledging scheme.

Lamyai Srithong sued the Commerce Ministry with the court on Jan 30, saying she delivered rice from the 2013/2014 crop and was given a receipt to cash with the Bank of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC).

She was rejected payment at the bank, she said.

Four co-defendants in the case were the Finance Ministry, the Budget Bureau, the National Economic and Social Development Board and the BAAC.

The five defendants were instructed by the court to submit their counter-statement and evidence within 30 days. (MCOT online news)


-- TNA 2014-02-21

[Bakseeda]

And the band played on.... all passports of these criminals should be confiscated until this is resolved... Hang-em High.

[djjamie]

Lamyai Srithong must not have heard yinglucks speech. She can't sue the PTP. The rice scheme is a success apparently.

Demonize her. Intimidate her. Call her a fake farmer. She must be a DEM supporter. This is politically motivated. She hired the tractor because they all look the same. She's not poor. She is a fascists. Must be one of those PDRC thugs. Brainwashed farmer.

I'm glad I support the DEM.s I don't need to think up excuses on a daily basis. I rely on facts not rhetoric.

As Abhisit said in his famous speech that stands alongside those other great speeches by JFK and Martin Luther King and I quote him here "As the leader of the Democrat Party, I must share the blame for the failed politics"

Some could take a leaf out of his book and admit fault.

[chainarong]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And the band played on.... all passports of these criminals should be confiscated until this is resolved... Hang-em High.

Passports confiscated, Good idea , we do not want a repeat of the last time , I hold the democrats as much to blame for all this as the Thaskin PTP , for letting the Spiv go to Beijing while on bail. The black hawk is standing by , what's that for.

.

[ramrod711]

Four co-defendants in the case were the Finance Ministry, the Budget Bureau, the National Economic and Social Development Board and the BAAC.

Freeze the assets of all the ministers and directors immediately!

[soalbundy]

These are poor farmers so they should get a verdict in say,oooooooh 5 years?

[Melyn]

These are poor farmers so they should get a verdict in say,oooooooh 5 years?

We seem to now have a judicial system for the people by the people.

No wonder they were slow before with over 25,000 corruption cases against PTP

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Scamper]

Hopefully, Thailand's Central Administrative Court with have more luck getting cooperation from the defendants than the NACC has had with Yingluck.

[tezzainoz]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

And the band played on.... all passports of these criminals should be confiscated until this is resolved... Hang-em High.

Passports confiscated, Good idea , we do not want a repeat of the last time , I hold the democrats as much to blame for all this as the Thaskin PTP , for letting the Spiv go to Beijing while on bail. The black hawk is standing by , what's that for.

.

Open your eyes and read posting 3 before you blabber

Edited February 21, 2014 by tezzainoz

[bangon04]

Confusing.. is she trying to sue the government or the Thai Civil Service? eg the Finance Ministry, which presumably carries out the instructions of its "elected" political masters.

I know "collective responsibility" doesn't mean much here, but how can you sue a civil service department without naming names ?

[rickirs]

"She was rejected payment at the bank, she said." The story line is a little lacking in detail to draw any concrete conclusions on possible guilt. Hopefully, more will come out the lawsuit itself and during the trial.

I understood that the government had borrowed funds from the Government Bank who in turn provided the proceeds to BAAC to be used for farmer payments. Certainly, if BAAC never got those funds, then the cash voucher is No Sufficient Funds and payment for the voucher must be rejected. Fault then lies with either the Government Bank failing to transfer funds to BAAC, or with the government failing to transfer funds to the Government Bank.

But I had read a story a couple days ago that the BAAC did receive funds from the Government Bank but chose to return them on its own volition and without notification. This not only blind-sided the government, BAAC also violated its fiduciary responsibility to make payments from funds provided to it. That might be considered a breach of contract with the Government Bank and government. However, Thailand follows civil law and not common law so nothing can be predicted under any set of facts other than farmers remained unpaid.

[Dogmatix]

LOL

[Dogmatix]

"She was rejected payment at the bank, she said." The story line is a little lacking in detail to draw any concrete conclusions on possible guilt. Hopefully, more will come out the lawsuit itself and during the trial.

I understood that the government had borrowed funds from the Government Bank who in turn provided the proceeds to BAAC to be used for farmer payments. Certainly, if BAAC never got those funds, then the cash voucher is No Sufficient Funds and payment for the voucher must be rejected. Fault then lies with either the Government Bank failing to transfer funds to BAAC, or with the government failing to transfer funds to the Government Bank.

But I had read a story a couple days ago that the BAAC did receive funds from the Government Bank but chose to return them on its own volition and without notification. This not only blind-sided the government, BAAC also violated its fiduciary responsibility to make payments from funds provided to it. That might be considered a breach of contract with the Government Bank and government. However, Thailand follows civil law and not common law so nothing can be predicted under any set of facts other than farmers remained unpaid.

GSB had to recall the inter-bank loan to BAAC because it suffered a run on its deposits equivalent to over 3% of its deposit base in two days. If that had continued much longer GSB would have been insolvent and would have had to be bailed out by the government.

[Stan7444]

Rice farmers have been paid, in many cases, but many others have not. Understandably they are pi**ed as I would be in such case. However, with such caretaker gov’t not having the freedom to pay them without making a future gov’t incurring an illegal financial commitment, has hamstrung anyone in the gov't from taking action to ensure punctual payments as promised and desired.

Gov’t should not be involved as the primary buyer of any products in any country, and let the free market control purchases. However, farm subsidies have been the standard practice in many countries around the world to help farmers survive the low income periods, especially since they provide food upon which we all survive. This has typically not been construed as “vote buying”, although the farmers would probably favor the party that pass such laws to keep the money flowing.

[h90]

Rice farmers have been paid, in many cases, but many others have not. Understandably they are pi**ed as I would be in such case. However, with such caretaker gov’t not having the freedom to pay them without making a future gov’t incurring an illegal financial commitment, has hamstrung anyone in the gov't from taking action to ensure punctual payments as promised and desired.

Gov’t should not be involved as the primary buyer of any products in any country, and let the free market control purchases. However, farm subsidies have been the standard practice in many countries around the world to help farmers survive the low income periods, especially since they provide food upon which we all survive. This has typically not been construed as “vote buying”, although the farmers would probably favor the party that pass such laws to keep the money flowing.

No the government has the freedom to pay them from their funds. Just there was so much mismanagement and/or corruption that there are no funds available...so borrow money would be necessary.

Yes let the free market do it and if you need to give money for the farmers, do it additional....like cheaper diesel, or extra payment per kg rice, or money for organic farming, etc etc

[iancnx]

"She was rejected payment at the bank, she said." The story line is a little lacking in detail to draw any concrete conclusions on possible guilt. Hopefully, more will come out the lawsuit itself and during the trial.

I understood that the government had borrowed funds from the Government Bank who in turn provided the proceeds to BAAC to be used for farmer payments. Certainly, if BAAC never got those funds, then the cash voucher is No Sufficient Funds and payment for the voucher must be rejected. Fault then lies with either the Government Bank failing to transfer funds to BAAC, or with the government failing to transfer funds to the Government Bank.

But I had read a story a couple days ago that the BAAC did receive funds from the Government Bank but chose to return them on its own volition and without notification. This not only blind-sided the government, BAAC also violated its fiduciary responsibility to make payments from funds provided to it. That might be considered a breach of contract with the Government Bank and government. However, Thailand follows civil law and not common law so nothing can be predicted under any set of facts other than farmers remained unpaid.

And your point is?

[AbuBacon]

Kangaroo dung again. Free and fair trial..... Not a common occurrence in the land of childish pig headed adults in color coded shirts

Sent from my Lenovo A516 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[soalbundy]

Rice farmers have been paid, in many cases, but many others have not. Understandably they are pi**ed as I would be in such case. However, with such caretaker gov’t not having the freedom to pay them without making a future gov’t incurring an illegal financial commitment, has hamstrung anyone in the gov't from taking action to ensure punctual payments as promised and desired.

Gov’t should not be involved as the primary buyer of any products in any country, and let the free market control purchases. However, farm subsidies have been the standard practice in many countries around the world to help farmers survive the low income periods, especially since they provide food upon which we all survive. This has typically not been construed as “vote buying”, although the farmers would probably favor the party that pass such laws to keep the money flowing.

No the government has the freedom to pay them from their funds. Just there was so much mismanagement and/or corruption that there are no funds available...so borrow money would be necessary.

Yes let the free market do it and if you need to give money for the farmers, do it additional....like cheaper diesel, or extra payment per kg rice, or money for organic farming, etc etc

What free market ?..........in Thailand ? where the Chinese/Thai millers have stitched it up.

[Chang_paarp]

Confusing.. is she trying to sue the government or the Thai Civil Service? eg the Finance Ministry, which presumably carries out the instructions of its "elected" political masters.

I know "collective responsibility" doesn't mean much here, but how can you sue a civil service department without naming names ?

Fairly simple commercial transaction. The lady sold her rice crop to a vendor who offered the best price for her product, in this case a government department. The vendor paid with a promissory note. The promissory note was presented to the appropriate bank for redemption into cash and rejected. Now the Applicant is suing the the defendant for a breach of contract and possibly attempted fraud. It is just like pursuing someone for a bounced cheque.

In real terms it is a relatively simple commercial case, however as there are political ramifications that take it to a whole different level.

[ikurauni]

It looks like the farmers don't have any other choices. It is so bad that the government could not keep the promise.

I don't care about the yellow or the red or whatever the political parties they belong.

But I really feel sorry for the poor farmers who have been screwed. I hope that the farmers will get paid soon.