Court dismisses Yingluck's request for injunction

[webfact]

Court dismisses Yingluck's request for injunction

The Nation

 

File photo : Yingluck Shinawatra

 

BANGKOK: -- The Central Administrative Court has dismissed former premier Yingluck Shinawatra’s petition for an injunction concerning a pending civil liability lawsuit in which the government is trying to seize her personal assets to partly pay for alleged financial damages resulting from her government’s rice-pledging scheme.

 

The court said in a statement that the asset seizures had not taken place so there was no need for a court injunction at this stage. 

 

The government has filed a civil liability suit against Yingluck seeking compensation of Bt280 billion from the former premier for failing to prevent abuses and a huge loss to the state while supervising the ricepledging scheme during her tenure.

 

Under the civil liability law, state officials are potentially liable for official misconduct that results in damage to the public and can face compensation lawsuits in which the Department of Legal Execution is empowered to seize personal assets if a court rules against the defendant.

 

In the Yingluck case, financial damages from the ricepledging scheme are estimated to be as much as Bt500 billion, but Yingluck’s lawyers have disputed the amount.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30311918

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-04-11

[SOUTHERNSTAR]

Control the courts the army and the civil service and you control the country. The constitution becomes apiece of paper that can be spat on and redrawn every coup.

[Ulic]

Well if that is the law in Thailand there is no doubt she is guilty. That said, all Thai politicians are

guilty of some kind of malfeasance.

[hansnl]

41 minutes ago, SOUTHERNSTAR said:

Control the courts the army and the civil service and you control the country. The constitution becomes apiece of paper that can be spat on and redrawn every coup.

Think you mean that Shin clan.

[Bluespunk]

Good. 

[ballpoint]

If her lawyers are disputing the amount then why not tell us what the actual amount was?  While providing evidence, of course.  The fact that no auditable trace of what was spent, and to whom it was given to, exists is the single biggest piece of evidence against them.  For those arguing that other governments provide subsidies to farmers, ask your selves what would happen if those governments simply handed out money to anyone claiming to have grown a product without keeping centralised records of the amounts of money paid and product subsidised, let alone without properly checking if the seller did indeed grow the product themselves, rather than purchasing it from a neighbouring country - if it even exists at all.  Even ignoring the allegations of imported rice being bought under the scheme, dodgy transport deals, fake sales contracts, poor storage facilities, and intentionally misleading stacks of sacked rice, at the very least, they should be able to tell us just how much was paid, and how much rice was allegedly purchased, but even those simple numbers are in dispute.

[AGareth2]

1 hour ago, SOUTHERNSTAR said:

Control the courts the army and the civil service and you control the country. The constitution becomes apiece of paper that can be spat on and redrawn every coup.

recent events may set a different precedent

[yellowboat]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

Under the civil liability law, state officials are potentially liable for official misconduct that results in damage to the public and can face compensation lawsuits in which the Department of Legal Execution is empowered to seize personal assets if a court rules against the defendant.

And this will be done by a military government which has no civil liability.   History will show who damaged Thailand more.

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

asset seizures had not taken place so there was no need for a court injunction at this stage. 

Another bent in the twisted court decisions one sees in Thailand.

An injunction is preventive - it places on hold or stops an action from taking place. It does not repair or reverse an action taken.

[Eric Loh]

18 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

If her lawyers are disputing the amount then why not tell us what the actual amount was?  

There will never be an actual figure. On the other side of the ledger are revenue gains for duties and taxes from purchases by the farmers. The junta has conveniently overlooked those credit gains. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ballpoint]

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

There will never be an actual figure. On the other side of the ledger are revenue gains for duties and taxes from purchases by the farmers. The junta has conveniently overlooked those credit gains. 

 

Every farmer who brought their rice to an accredited wholesaler was issued a receipt.  Sometime later, that receipt was able to be taken back and exchanged for cash.  Why is it so hard to tell us the total value of receipts issued and the total tonnage of rice they were issued for?  I also know for a fact that, for at least one wholesaler, there was no independent check of whether the correct amount was written on the receipt.  The rice was weighed, the apple corer style knife used to poke a hole in each sack to inspect a small sample of the rice, and a sack chosen at random to be emptied for a fuller visual inspection of the contents, and check the moisture content, but this was all done by employees of the wholesaler, with the usual cutting of the total weight to account for moisture or bad grains or debris in the rice.  I assume that when the wholesaler took the rice to an official store, they were also issued a receipt for the total tonnage delivered, with similar checks?  Why not start by telling us the total value of receipts issued to farmers, vs the total value of receipts issued to the wholesalers?  This number should be instantly available now.  The fact that it has never been disclosed points to either shoddy accounting practices, or incriminating evidence against the scheme.

[Cuchulainn]

Good. Moving in the right direction. Total liquidation and decimation of that family of leeches and thieves.

[sawadee1947]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

The Central Administrative Court has dismissed former premier Yingluck Shinawatra’s petition

Did she really expect to get justice in her case? The army rules all institutions. Best to join her brother and leave the army struggle alone to move Thailand forward....as they promised.

[elgordo38]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

Under the civil liability law, state officials are potentially liable for official misconduct that results in damage to the public and can face compensation lawsuits in which the Department of Legal Execution is empowered to seize personal assets if a court rules against the defendant.

I am sure this will be in the new constitution with possibly the death penalty attached. 

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

There will never be an actual figure. On the other side of the ledger are revenue gains for duties and taxes from purchases by the farmers. The junta has conveniently overlooked those credit gains. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So why have PTP never revealed audited Profit & Loss accounts and Balance Sheet of the scheme then Eric?

[Baerboxer]

1 hour ago, sawadee1947 said:

Did she really expect to get justice in her case? The army rules all institutions. Best to join her brother and leave the army struggle alone to move Thailand forward....as they promised.

 

Justice doesn't necessarily mean the Shins always getting their own way either. 

[Eric Loh]

14 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So why have PTP never revealed audited Profit & Loss accounts and Balance Sheet of the scheme then Eric?

The NACC seem to be in a hurry to convict her in spite of the public prosecutors cautioned that they simply not enough evidence. The NACC even rejected more witnesses. So what chance for the Yingluck's team to present any more evidence. NACC was the judge. jury and  executioner with an agenda. 

[Baerboxer]

16 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The NACC seem to be in a hurry to convict her in spite of the public prosecutors cautioned that they simply not enough evidence. The NACC even rejected more witnesses. So what chance for the Yingluck's team to present any more evidence. NACC was the judge. jury and  executioner with an agenda. 

 

So, why haven't PTP ever, or ever offered, to provide the actual audited financial and management accounts, including P&L and BS the Eric?

 

Offering a procession of, in some cases seemingly irrelevant, repetitive "character" witnesses, who all want to say how lovely Yingluck really is, understandably gets short shrift.

 

So come on, why haven't they made the accounts public ?

[wakeupplease]

This has corruption written all over it (green style), if I was her I would say up yours retire to a far off place and wait for the Inevitable.

 

Looks like she is holding up well under this garbage strain, but girl you only live once sod them and go as the clock never stops ticking

[thesetat2013]

And this will be done by a military government which has no civil liability.   History will show who damaged Thailand more.

no it won't! history is written and changed and rewritten in Thailand to please those in power and to shed good light on leaders and decisions made. Just look at the history books used now and you would know this

[Eric Loh]

16 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So, why haven't PTP ever, or ever offered, to provide the actual audited financial and management accounts, including P&L and BS the Eric?

 

Offering a procession of, in some cases seemingly irrelevant, repetitive "character" witnesses, who all want to say how lovely Yingluck really is, understandably gets short shrift.

 

So come on, why haven't they made the accounts public ?

Would be a world first to capture all the farmers transactions in the P&L and BS. But at least we agree that the "money" was not lost or kept by the farmers under the pillow but spent into the wider economy. That seem to reflect in the GDP numbers that peaked in 2013 and since then was on a decline. Also that the tax revenue was highest in 2013 and following years could not match that 2013 revenue collection achievement when the rice scheme was abolished by the coup government. 

[sawadee1947]

16 hours ago, thesetat2013 said:

no it won't! history is written and changed and rewritten in Thailand to please those in power and to shed good light on leaders and decisions made. Just look at the history books used now and you would know this

well, that's true. But Thailand is not the hub of world. So history will tell indeed, but not maybe for Thais. There is no army junta who can rule a country better than a legitimate democratic elected civilian government. In this way the failure of this junta is already history.

[JAG]

17 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

So, why haven't PTP ever, or ever offered, to provide the actual audited financial and management accounts, including P&L and BS the Eric?

 

Offering a procession of, in some cases seemingly irrelevant, repetitive "character" witnesses, who all want to say how lovely Yingluck really is, understandably gets short shrift.

 

So come on, why haven't they made the accounts public ?

The rice subsidy scheme was a government scheme. The accounts which you talk about, if they still exist, if they ever existed, are government figures, and are therefore held by the government. PTP are not in government.and therefore have no access to those accounts. I somehow doubt that if the present regime holds any figures which may be of any use to Yinglucks defence, that they would be prepared to make them available.

[Srikcir]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

I somehow doubt that if the present regime holds any figures which may be of any use to Yinglucks defence

As an example, in July 2014 the rice inspection committee reported to the Rice Policy Committee chaired by Prayut that 10% of rice stockpiles had spoiled and only some sacks were missing, while 80% was in still good condition. But in December 2014  PM's Office Minister Panadda Diskul said just 12.2% of rice stored in government warehouses under the rice-pledging scheme was up to standard.

 

Furthermore, Yingluck's impeachment was based not on concrete evidence or fact but rather on estimated
financial loss and potential corruption’ from Thailand Development Research Institute TDRI policy analysis. The junta's pursuance of Yingluck for a costly rice-pledging scheme was less about the cost of the program (wherein Prayut borrowed funds to payoff the farmers that resulted in deficit spending and followed up with his own rice subsidy programs) than about the democratization of an elected government. An objective that both the junta and former Democrat PM and PDRC Protest Leader Suthep shared.