The epic rice pledge case with “Yingluck Shinawatra”, the former prime minister, was the key defendant. Not over yet
Even criminal “Yingluck” Sentenced to 5 years in prison by the Supreme Court of Justice’s Criminal Division for political office
But the case for civil damage was not over. Still following the bill
But then, on April 2, 2021, the Central Administrative Court ruled to revoke the order of the Ministry of Finance for “Yingluck” to pay compensation for 35,717,273,028.23 baht.
And revoke any order, announcement or action of the Legal Execution Department Enforcement Officer Civil Legal Execution Office Bangkok Seizure and attachment of assets for auction sale Including orders of the Ministry of Finance Which raised the request for each other as a co-owner of the Amonchat Memorial, Yingluck’s husband
After the ruling of the Central Administrative Court that has reversed “Mr. Wisanu Krea-ngam” Deputy Prime Minister Head of Government Law Press the button to order an appeal immediately according to the 30 day time slot.
While “Ministry of Finance” Discuss the Comptroller General’s Department and the Attorney General Adjust the plan to fight the case, which goes back to read the details of the decision of the Central Administrative Court To withdraw orders from the Ministry of Finance, such as
– The rice pledge policy is a policy announced to the National Assembly. Alone, the former prime minister has no power to veto the rice pledging scheme.
– Yingluck has only the authority to oversee the general policy at the macro level of the project. Does not have the power and duty to enter into a state-to-state rice purchase agreement May not be aware of the information Hiding facts that should be disclosed To seek the unlawful benefit of the offender at the practical level.
– Criminal measures have been taken against the fraudsters or offenders, along with the use of administrative measures, disqualification of farmers who have participated in the rice pledging scheme. The case can be considered that
Yingluck did not ignore and neglect But had exercised reasonable care for the nature and circumstances To prevent damage to the rice pledging scheme
– There is no clear evidence in the class of civil liability review that Yingluck is the one who directs the harm or is a direct participant in the offense.
While news sources from the “Yingluck” attorney team announced their readiness to fight the case in the highest administrative court. When the authorized person appeals
And it is a good sign that the Central Administrative Court has issued such rulings. Without prejudice
The Central Administrative Court has a different ruling from a criminal decision in the Supreme Court’s Criminal Division for Persons Holding Political Positions. Because each court has independent powers And have different principles for consideration
however “Yingluck” Not out of the trap of the case “Lawyers Team” of “Yingluck” Summary of cases where the throat “Yingluck” waits for slaughter for 3 more cases
Case 1 Together with the cabinet, a total of 34 people were accused of refraining from compliance. The Budget Method Act 1959, abstaining from performing duties illegally. Causing damage to the financial and fiscal of the country in the amount of 1,921,061,629 baht
In the case of paying remedies to those affected by the 2005-2010 political demonstration without power Because there is no legal support And help their own people
Continued from January 10, 2555 and on March 6, 2012 Yingluck’s Cabinet Agree to provide remedies for those affected by political gatherings.
By using the budget from the central budget, reserve items for emergency or necessity in the amount of 2,000 million baht by issuing new rules and rates of remedies. And there is no fact that there is any law to support the payment of such remedies.
Although it is not a payment related to the performance of duties in the administration of State affairs Or is it for the public service of the state Or is it an emergency or necessary that if not action will cause damage to the government. Budget Method Act 1959
Rather, it is a payment in the form of subsidies to those affected by political events. There must be a law to support this particular case, in which the NACC has already informed the allegations.
Case 2 On July 1, 2020, the NACC passed a resolution indicating the fault of “Yingluck” against them in the case of transferring Mr. Thawin Plaisri, former Secretary-General of the National Security Council (NSC), to the prime minister’s position The civil servant department improperly
In this regard, the NACC compiled the source of the root cause and identified information from the said transfer appointment. Proceed urgently Together with the Cabinet approving the appointment Maj. Gen. Wichian Photphosri Commissioner of the National Police To hold the position of secretary-general NSC instead of Mr. Thawin
And “Yingluck” as Chairman of the National Police Policy Committee (SEC) nominated Pol. Maj. Gen. Preampun Damapong, Deputy Commissioner of the Royal Thai Police To retire on September 30, 2012
And is their own kin To hold the position of Commissioner of the National Police Instead of the vacant position to the meeting of the SEC in the meeting No. 5/2554 on October 19, 2011, where the meeting The NBTC has approved.
Case 3 The NACC passed a resolution indicating the wrongdoing of the “Roadshow Build the Future Thailand 2020” project, amounting to 240 million baht on July 22, 2020, the accused was “Yingluck” Mr. Niwat Thamrongboon. Songpaisan and Mr. Suranan Vejjajiva have criminal basis. Act to cause the government to be damaged
The case number 2-3 NCCC pointed out “Yingluck” by July 2020, causing the former prime minister to whine across the country. To the work of NCC on July 23 that year
“Today I live quietly in a foreign country like a commoner. But still have to be accused of two criminal cases in less than a month in a row to have a secret trial behind me “
“It makes it hard to think that today’s situation is consistent or the same as the misfortune in my life. Who longed for justice when it would happen to my beloved country as well I don’t want justice to have to choose sides. “
“Justice must not be inequality. If it’s a politician or a former politician, it’s always wrong. But the other party did nothing wrong. Which is against the rule of law One day or one faith Confidence to the Board NCCC may end. “
Although the rice pledge case is close to the scene “Complete” In the highest administrative court that “Yingluck” still has to wait until the end
Because if this case is closed, whether there is a happy ending or not, but the rice pledging case will run out of the lap of “Yingluck”
There are 3 remaining cases, the rest are still just starting, still waiting for a long time.