Yingluck’s 10-billion rice pledge compensation likely delayed

On 22 May 2025, Thailand’s Supreme Administrative Court delivered a landmark political ruling, declaring unlawful the Ministry of Finance’s administrative order demanding former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to pay over 35 billion baht in damages related to the rice pledging scheme. This amount represented 20% of the total claimed damages and was deemed legally invalid.

The court’s key finding was that the administrative order was unlawful because the demanded compensation of 35 billion baht exceeded the actual damages caused by corruption in the government-to-government (G2G) rice sales contracts, which were estimated at around 20 billion baht. Yingluck was held responsible for only 50% of that loss, amounting to approximately 10.028 billion baht.

To put it simply, the court recognised that the concrete financial loss from corruption in four G2G rice contracts totalled about 20 billion baht. Yingluck was found negligent for allowing this corruption to occur and therefore must compensate 50% of that amount, roughly 10 billion baht.

Legally, the administrative order is final. The next step requires the Ministry of Finance to establish a new committee to assess liability based on the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling before seeking further compensation from Yingluck.

It is important to note that this compensation claim dates back 8–9 years, originating during General Prayut Chan-o-cha’s government when he was Prime Minister and head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). Under Section 44 of the interim constitution, a fact-finding committee was appointed, chaired by Jirachai Moolthongroy, then Secretary-General of the Prime Minister’s Office, along with legal and financial experts.

The committee concluded the rice pledging scheme caused damages of approximately 170 billion baht, based on just the 2012/13 and 2013/14 production seasons. This figure contrasts with Jirachai’s testimony in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Political Office Holders, where he suggested losses might be as high as 280 billion baht.

Ultimately, the committee submitted the 170 billion baht figure to the Ministry of Finance, which used it to calculate that Yingluck should be liable for about 20% of the damages, approximately 35 billion baht, due to her policy role. The remaining 80% was attributed to operational staff, and the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) was tasked with pursuing lower-level officials for recovery.

In early 2017, while still in Thailand to fight the rice pledging case at the Supreme Court, Yingluck filed a lawsuit at the Central Administrative Court seeking to annul the Ministry of Finance’s order demanding 35 billion baht in damages. She also requested a temporary injunction against the seizure of her assets by the Department of Enforcement. At the time, outside the court, she famously declared again the now-iconic phrase: "I could never pay off the debt in a lifetime."

The Central Administrative Court initially accepted her case but denied the temporary injunction against the asset seizure. The court cited evidence of Yingluck’s asset transfers, including a reduction of funds in 16 bank accounts from around 24.9 million baht to just 1.9 million baht within a year—a loss of over 92%. The court believed Yingluck had indeed engaged in asset transfers, which was a key reason for rejecting her injunction request. This decision was upheld later by the Supreme Administrative Court.

Later in 2023, the Central Administrative Court ruled to annul the Ministry of Finance’s order, declaring it unlawful and relieving Yingluck from paying damages related to the rice pledging scheme. However, her relief was short-lived. On 22 May 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court overturned that ruling, reinstating the order but reducing the amount Yingluck must pay from 35 billion baht to about 10 billion baht, reflecting the actual damages estimated at 20 billion baht.

A key question now is whether Yingluck will still have to pay damages related to the scheme.

The answer depends on when the Ministry of Finance forms a new committee within 60 days, as mandated by the court’s ruling, to reassess liability and calculate the new damage amount.

This Supreme Administrative Court ruling came during the “Red” government era, led by the Pheu Thai Party with Prime Minister Paethongtarn Shinawatra—daughter of Thaksin Shinawatra and niece of Yingluck—while the Ministry of Finance is firmly controlled by key Pheu Thai figures: Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Pichai Chunhavajira, along with two deputy finance ministers, Paophum Rojanasakul and Julapun Amornvivat, both senior Pheu Thai members.

The next question is how long the Ministry of Finance will take to form a new committee to assess liability and carry out the Supreme Administrative Court’s ruling. The court did not explicitly order Yingluck to pay damages; rather, it ruled that the previous demand of 35 billion baht was excessive since the actual damages were around 20 billion baht, meaning she should only pay about 10 billion baht.

Initially, on May 27, 2025, Finance Minister Pichai said he had instructed the legal team to thoroughly review the facts before proceeding. When asked whether a new committee would be established to recalculate the damages, he responded that they would first study the court’s decision in detail and assess the timeline before taking any action.

Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, upon hearing the news, said he had spoken with Yingluck but that the case must continue to be fought as it is a civil matter, not criminal. Regarding whether this ruling would affect Yingluck’s return to Thailand, Thaksin said, “We need to wait for things to calm down. There are people stirring up trouble, but the storm will pass. I don’t know who they are, but it will end soon.”

Given these attitudes, the process of demanding damages from Yingluck over the rice pledging scheme appears to be a long saga. The administrative court case has concluded, but it is now up to the Ministry of Finance—currently firmly controlled by the “Red” faction—to pursue the compensation. They may introduce new evidence, such as previous sales of old stock rice promoted by Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Phumtham Wechayachai, or other documentation on rice sales that could potentially reduce the damages owed.

Finally, if the Ministry of Finance issues a new order demanding compensation from Yingluck, she retains the right to file another administrative lawsuit seeking to annul that order, potentially causing the case to loop back to square one, as it did from 2017 to 2025.

Therefore, by the time this process truly starts, it might already be too late to resolve the issue quickly.