PM's order to protect rice officials

[rooster59]

PM's order to protect rice officials

BANGKOK: PRIME MINISTER Prayut Chan-o-cha has invoked his power under Article 44 of the post-coup interim charter to protect government officials working on cases stemming from the previous administration's corruption-plagued rice-pledging scheme.

Prayut issued an order in his capacity as chief of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), which was announced in the Royal Gazette yesterday.

His order guarantees protection against legal and disciplinary action to officials working honestly on the cases and related work, such as managing rice in government stockpiles and releasing rice stocks.

The protection aims to cover officials who are working on rice policy and management committee, other sub-panels, and officials involved with any cases regarding the rice-pledging scheme and former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

The order came after it was reported that involved officials are working under high pressure and fear possible legal problems.

Prayut's order became effective immediately, with retroactive effect since the NCPO's formation following the military coup on May 22 last year.

Article 44 of the interim charter gives wide-ranging powers to Prayut, as the NCPO head, to issue orders in order to help solve the country's problems.

Yingluck is facing a number of legal cases stemming from her government's rice-pledging scheme, which is estimated to have cost damages exceeding Bt500 billion to the state. She is accused of negligence, leading to the massive losses and irregularities involving the project.

Commerce Minister Apiradi Tantraporn said yesterday that the NCPO chief's order has helped increase the confidence of officials working on the rice issues, as they face high risk of being sued by persons involved with the rice-pledging scheme and of being accused of unfair practices.

"The prime minister understands well that working on the rice scheme, in particular with the huge stocks, puts officials at high risk for being sued or being influenced or threatened," said Apiradi.

Relief for officials

She said the issuing of this order should ease officials' stress about doing work in cases involving the rice agenda, especially the release of rice stocks, as it is very risky because the price of the pledging price and the current market price varies. Government officials have also been involved in investigating the high stockpiles and decisions on the appropriate time for sale.

For officials, who work based on fairness and honesty, they will not have to worry about being sued in any case. However, if any officials were found guilty of unfair practice, they could be investigated on a case-by-case basis, Apiradi explained.

Moreover, Article 44 will also help protect officials who are working on the rice cases that involve former PM Yingluck and other ministers of her cabinet over high losses from the pledging scheme, fake government-to-government contracts, and unscrupulous release of government rice stocks.

According to the ministry, the current government has already released 6.38 million tonnes of rice from government stocks worth Bt75 billion. Currently, about 13 million tonnes of rice remain in the stockpile.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/PMs-order-to-protect-rice-officials-30272016.html

-- The Nation 2015-11-01

[thelonius]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

Edited November 1, 2015 by thelonius

[zaphod reborn]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

[aussieinthailand]

Any one got the official numbers of rice harvest from 20011- 20014??? would be interesting how the numbers come up, considering Thailand average's 23million tons per year not withstanding floods or drought.

[phutoie2]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

more rubbish from junta lovers incorp, Who appointed you as judge/jury? , a farang to boot as well. She is not culpable for anything, and will walk from the show trial beginning soon.

[thelonius]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

Abhisits rice pledging scheme caused losses of 50 Billion Baht and they didn't have the unexpected negative influence of India ending it's restriction on exports of rice (2 million tonnes in 2009/2010, 2. 7 million tonnes in 2010/2011, 10.4 million tonnes in 2011/2012) thus skewing the World Market - some negligence involved there don't you think?

Edited November 1, 2015 by thelonius

[LannaGuy]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

they were the government and it's perfectly NORMAL to subsidize this is not ABOUT RICE - get it? no I doubt it because you are biased

[slapout]

Any one got the official numbers of rice harvest from 20011- 20014??? would be interesting how the numbers come up, considering Thailand average's 23million tons per year not withstanding floods or drought.

The Ag. bank mentioned a reported figure of over 30 million tons involved in the rice programs first year of corruption/ operation (this would have covered thru 2012). There was mention at the time that Thailand had never produced that quanity and raised a doubt to it being accurate.

A cost paid out was mentioned as equal to 30,000 baht a ton for Paddy, thus the request for additional funds to contine the corruption as was being enjoyed by everyone but the farmers.

These are numbers that i remember from newspaper reporters and bank spokesmen interviews

Edited November 1, 2015 by slapout

[halloween]

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

Abhisits rice pledging scheme caused losses of 50 Billion Baht and they didn't have the unexpected negative influence of India ending it's restriction on exports of rice (2 million tonnes in 2009/2010, 2. 7 million tonnes in 2010/2011, 10.4 million tonnes in 2011/2012) thus skewing the World Market - some negligence involved there don't you think?

What did the Rice Policy Committee do when India "unexpectedly" began selling rice? Did they arrange for a budget allocation to cover "unexpected" losses, reduce the extent of the scam to reduce losses, wait for the Chairperson to show up, or get her to tell lies about the scheme's success?

Do you even understand the meaning of "negligence"?

Edited November 1, 2015 by halloween

[EnglishJohn]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

more rubbish from junta lovers incorp, Who appointed you as judge/jury? , a farang to boot as well. She is not culpable for anything, and will walk from the show trial beginning soon.

Ha ha ha - an intelligent comment followed by a rant which reads like it came from a 6 year old.

Now which one will I take more seriously .......

[lucky11]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

they were the government and it's perfectly NORMAL to subsidize this is not ABOUT RICE - get it? no I doubt it because you are biased

It's not about rice, its about bribing your voting base in order to get elected to attempt to get 1 man his amnesty (thank god it failed) and actually went some way to bringing this illegitimate government down.

According to the PTP the scheme put 870 billion (870,000 million) baht into the pockets of farmers and only cost 500 billion so that is a healthy profit of 370 billion baht plus they still have millions of tons of rice tin stockpiles that the government can sell for profit. Not sure how they worked that one out but the result is extremely impressive!!

[Vandadavid]

I think his having rice dreams poor fella

[Thai at Heart]

Not sure what to make of this. So, if they provide evidence that convicts Yingluk they are worried about being used? What if the case fails?

If is ridiculous when people finding evidence are worried that they might get sued. But what is to stop them concocting whatever they like?

[Ks45672]

Not sure what to make of this. So, if they provide evidence that convicts Yingluk they are worried about being used? What if the case fails?

If is ridiculous when people finding evidence are worried that they might get sued. But what is to stop them concocting whatever they like?

Nothing... Welcome to article 44

[oneday]

This is so wrong on so many levels.

[oneday]

This is so wrong on so many levels.

[wabothai]

protection has several meanings

[phoenixdoglover]

The inquisitors shall be blameless.

[ResandePohm]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

they were the government and it's perfectly NORMAL to subsidize this is not ABOUT RICE - get it? no I doubt it because you are biased

LannaGuy why do you persist in continually writing unadulterated balderdash. Of course it is normal to subsidize agriculture and many countries do that. However this was not a subsidized scheme as it was intended to be a self financing but because it was incompetently managed by people led by Yingluck and despite them being informed that it was riddled with corruption at every level they did nothing and it subsequently made enormous losses.If they had attempted to remove or stop the corruption then there would be no issue. However they chose to do nothing and allow the corruption to continue. In fact their, so loved, leader didn't even attend the meetings that she was head of.

Your continual attempts to twist the facts in this case show an immature and ignorant understanding of the issues. If through your incompetence and negligence you cause unprecedented financial losses then of course you are culpable. That is the real issue. So please stop referring to it as a subsidy which it most certainly was not. Subsidies are planned and budgeted for. This was an unplanned loss cause by negligence and incompetence.

[MZurf]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

more rubbish from junta lovers incorp, Who appointed you as judge/jury? , a farang to boot as well. She is not culpable for anything, and will walk from the show trial beginning soon.

Ha ha ha - an intelligent comment followed by a rant which reads like it came from a 6 year old.

Now which one will I take more seriously .......

John, here you go again calling people stupid without actually using the word. What have I told you about why that's not such a good idea?

[MZurf]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

they were the government and it's perfectly NORMAL to subsidize this is not ABOUT RICE - get it? no I doubt it because you are biased

It's not about rice, its about bribing your voting base in order to get elected to attempt to get 1 man his amnesty (thank god it failed) and actually went some way to bringing this illegitimate government down.

According to the PTP the scheme put 870 billion (870,000 million) baht into the pockets of farmers and only cost 500 billion so that is a healthy profit of 370 billion baht plus they still have millions of tons of rice tin stockpiles that the government can sell for profit. Not sure how they worked that one out but the result is extremely impressive!!

" It's not about rice, its about bribing your voting base in order to get elected to attempt to get 1 man his amnesty (thank god it failed).."

Yep, that failed but the junta was however hugely successful in granting themselves one.

"..and actually went some way to bringing this illegitimate government down."

Please tell me that you know the former government was legally elected and was overthrown in a coup, making the present government.....well, you'll figure it out in the end, I'm sure.

[FangFerang]

Now matter which side you cheer for it is a bit of a dirty move. The very millers and warehouse operators who were legally responsible under the agreement to monitor the volumes, care for them, and keep ledgers are now free from being prosecuted for their dereliction.

The rest of the world is having a belly laugh.

[scorecard]

Presumably this same protection will be afforded to officials investigating the Abhisit Government Rice Scheme NACC investigation? Perhaps Art.44 could be used to force the government agencies to provide the evidence that apparently has been delaying proceedings;

He said the NACC’s investigation of the Abhisit government’s rice guarantee has been delayed due to insufficient evidence despite the NACC’s repeated requests for documents from related government agencies.

http://www.pattayamail.com/news/nacc-member-rules-out-double-standard-in-rice-graft-probe-35351

or perhaps not.........................

The accused persons in the corruption investigation under Abhisit are mostly the same ones being investigated under Yingluck, which are warehouse operators, rice millers and smugglers. Abhisit and his cabinet were not accused of corruption in the program. For, that matter, neither is Yingluck. She is accused of negligence and mismanagement which allowed losses to exceed 500 million baht. There was never parliamentary approval to spend that sum on the program, rendering it unconstitutional, and, hence, her culpability for the losses.

they were the government and it's perfectly NORMAL to subsidize this is not ABOUT RICE - get it? no I doubt it because you are biased

You say "... you are biased...".

Well I guess you are well qualified to know who is biased.

[candide]

So it means that:

- officials working on providing evidence against Yingluck and other PTP related people,

- and those managing the remainings of the rice scheme after the coup and the new Junta rice policies,

are guaranteed protection against legal and disciplinary action

Hmmmmm......

[Srikcir]

ResandePohm said:

“This was an unplanned loss cause by negligence and incompetence.”

This was an unplanned loss caused by the world market price never rising to the pledge price level. It was Yingluck's intent to withhold rice from the market to shorten supply and drive prices higher, thus recouping the excessive prices pledged to farmers. But since 2012 world market prices continued to drop due largley to increased rice volumes from India.

The Prayut regime has now started a similar rice program. The Commerce Ministry, in cooperation with the Thai Rice Exporters Association, has launched measures to prevent rice prices falling during the upcoming main-crop harvest. Rice will be purchased at almost 200% of current market prices during the next four months. It will not be traded in the market, but will be stocked for three months to ensure that there is no oversupply during the harvest season.

Prayut’s rice purchase program isn’t much different from Yingluck's rice pledge program. Under both programs the rice farmers get guaranteed higher than market prices intended to sustain a profit. Except the Prayut regime has granted itself immunity from any prosecution for any of its actions should they result in damage to the nation. Such power was unavailable to Yingluck under the 2007 Constitution.