Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam, who is in charge of the government’s legal affairs, was responding to calls the government should opt to file a civil suit against the suspects implicated in the scheme by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) instead.
Affected parties, including former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, are among the critics. Mr Wissanu argued a law holding state officials to account for their decisions in office has been around for the past 19 years, and adopted in many cases.
“It is not a new legal mechanism created to treat any particular party in an unfair manner,” the deputy premier said.
Taking action under this administrative law, and lodging a civil suit are both options with advantages and disadvantages, he said.
“The committee pursuing liabilities against wrongdoers in the state sector is more familiar with the liability law, having processed more than 5,000 such cases in the past years, so it went for this option,” he said.
If those affected by its decision to take action under the liability act believe they are being treated unfairly, they can take their arguments to the Administrative Court, he said.
Even if they lose the fight in a lower administrative court, they will still be able to appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court, he said.
Previous high-profile cases in which the liability law was used in the last 12 years include the Khlong Dan waste water scandal, the fire truck and boat corruption scandal, the dredger procurement scandal and the Mor Chit bus terminal development scandal, he said.
The government won in some cases and lost in others, he added.
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha received an open letter last Wednesday (Nov 11) from former prime minister Ms Yingluck, claiming she was being treated unfairly, said Mr Wissanu.
The government has to defend itself against her claim, or risk being seen as unfair after being painted by such an accusation, Mr Wissanu said.
He said if the government doesn’t address the losses incurred by the rice-pledging scandal, it will be ultimately held responsible for the losses.
Ms Yingluck yesterday (Nov 16) posted a statement on her Facebook page saying she had no choice but to fight for justice. The Finance Ministry order for her to pay compensation means “judicial power” is being prioritised over the courts, she said.
Ms Yingluck said her case – in which a former elected prime minister is forced to pay financial compensation for alleged damage done to the state – is the first of its kind.
She demanded the government explain to the public how the decision benefits the public and how the government will ensure the committee deciding on compensation will act as fairly as the courts of justice would in such a case.
Gen Prayut declined to say how much the government was seeking in financial compensation for the rice-pledging scandal.
When asked why the liability law is being used over civil law, he said the government does not have to do what the implicated suspects want it to do.
“I’m not saying the suspects have to immediately pay the compensation because of the order. He or she can always petition the Administrative Court if there is evidence to prove [the order is unjust],” said Gen Prayut.
Read original story here.