PM signs order to claim compensation for rice scheme
PRIME MINISTER Prayut Chan-o-cha has endorsed an administrative order seeking compensation from former commerce minister Boonsong Teriyapirom and five others for a Bt20-billion loss from the previous government’s allegedly bogus government-to-government r
Wissanu said reports that Prayut had refused to sign the administrative order fearing a counter-suit were false.
The government-to-government rice deals were part of the Yingluck Shinawatra |government’s rice-pledging scheme that |was allegedly plagued with corruption, causing the state a loss of more than Bt500 billion.
Wissanu said the Council of State had |suggested that both Prayut and Commerce Minister Apiradi Tantraporn sign the order.
“The law states that the fact-finding panel is appointed by the minister of the ministry facing the most losses but it also states that in the case where the accused are ministers, the PM needs to endorse the setting up of the fact-finding panel. In this case the PM must also endorse the order,’’ he said.
Wissanu added that if the accused are former officials, they can appeal to the commerce minister, but if they are former ministers, they must appeal to the Administrative Court.
He also said the administrative order had not yet been delivered to Boonsong and the other five officials.
The order clearly identifies how much each of the six former officials must pay in compensation, he said. “As far as I know, Boonsong has been asked to pay the least amount as compensation. It is not that the six of them share the Bt20 billion loss equally,’’ he said.
Wissanu said the civil liability panel led by the Comptroller-General has not yet finished issuing the administrative order seeking compensation from former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra. The statute of limitations in her case lasts until next February.
“Once the panel issues the order, the PM and the finance minister will endorse it. If Yingluck does not appeal against the order by the Administrative Court, officials can confiscate her assets with a statute of limitation of 10 years,’’ Wissanu said. He added that people might object to the confiscation on the grounds that the assets do not belong exclusively to Yingluck. Assets such as money in the bank, land or condominiums have registered owners, he said, but the owners of assets such as gems, jewellery and gold are more difficult to identify.
“We can confiscate assets that can change hands but may not get hold of all of the assets. There are many cases in which the state wins the court cases but cannot get hold of the assets,’’ |he said.
