- Published: 11/10/2012 at 12:00 AM
- Writer: Post Reporters
Adis Israngkura na Ayutthaya, dean of the School of Development Economics at the National Institute of Development Administration (Nida), said he will not take his case to the Ombudsman, which was one option suggested by legal experts to keep the case alive.
Instead, he will establish forums for people to exchange opinions about the pledging programme's pros and cons - starting tomorrow with farmers from several provinces.
Mr Adis, along with 146 other academics and students from Thammasat and Nida, filed a petition last week asking the Constitution Court to issue an injunction to halt the government's 405-billion-baht rice-pledging policy.
The Constitution Court yesterday rejected the petition saying it was outside its jurisdiction.
The petitioners were also not among those whose rights and liberties had been allegedly violated by the scheme, the court ruled.
Court spokesman Pimol Thampithakpong said the ruling was unanimous, with a vote of 9-0.
The petition said a pledging principle required that pledged prices be lower than market ones, to allow farmers to redeem their rice when prices go up.
Under the rice-pledging scheme, the government intentionally fixed much higher pledged prices than the market value without intending for farmers to ever redeem the rice, it said.
In doing so, the government essentially became the largest rice trader in the country - it was a monopoly and therefore destroyed free trade, affecting rice production and distorting market mechanisms, the petition argued.
The opposition Democrat Party zeroed in on unclear information from the government about its release of the 12-million-tonne stockpile.
Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said the court may have thrown out the rice-pledging petition but it does not mean the programme is problem-free.
"Both Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and Commerce Minister Boonsong Teriyapirom have been talking a lot about exporting the pledged rice but has there been any confirmation?" he asked. While Mr Boonsong said the government has entered contracts to sell 7.33 million tonnes of pledged rice, Ms Yingluck said the deals are only at a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) level, Mr Abhisit said.
The Democrat leader also questioned whether the government will be able to sell the stockpiled rice in time to keep the project going financially.
"This project will force us to grow rice only to keep it in storage. If the government was able to release that many tonnes of its stockpiles, why is it so desperate to find rice storage facilities to the point of converting Don Mueang airport or military bases into warehouses?" Mr Abhisit said.
Democrat spokesman Chavanond Intarakomalyasut also questioned the government-to-government (G-to-G) rice export figures which have been supplied. Customs Department data showed that Thailand has exported only 3.29 million tonnes of rice so far this year, all by private companies, he said.
Faced with growing questions about G-to-G rice sales, Ms Yingluck yesterday said she would order the Commerce Ministry to hold a press conference to give details on the deals.
She said certain information could be confidential but the government would make public as much as possible.
She said the Commerce Ministry will provide specific details, including which countries are at the MoU level, which are at the letter of credit opening stage and which are expecting deliveries.
Mr Boonsong, meanwhile, insisted the ministry has sold 7.33 million tonnes of rice to six countries - China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Ivory Coast, Bangladesh and Ghana - and that all shipments will be completed by the end of next year.
However, he refused to give details concerning the deals.
"The details of each deal must be kept secret both in terms of volume and selling price, in line with the country's international trade strategy," the minister said.
"Those who want to know the details can ask the buyers," he added.
The minister was also confident that the "ex-warehouse" method, in which goods are made available at a particular warehouse for a buyer to transport to where it wants, would be an effective selling system as the state does not have to shoulder transportation costs.
He refused to say whether the sales of the 7.33 million tonnes of rice were made through this method. Traders, however, are sceptical as to whether the ministry is applying this method and not secretly awarding rice deals to local exporters who then act as brokers.
Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung, who was assigned to root out corruption in the rice pledging scheme, insisted that the only alleged graft associated with the programme found so far involved low-level officials.
He said he will invite agencies including the Public Warehouse Organisation, the Marketing Organisation for Farmers and the Bank of Agriculture and Cooperatives to share information about possible corruption in the government's scheme next Monday.
Share your thoughts
- Discussion 1 : 12/10/2012 at 03:57 PM
-
@Disc 14 Bula - Majority of the rice farmers do not pay any income tax. Yes they pay their fair share of VAT if that is what you mean. I think you are stretching farmers contribution too much. Yes they deserve respect for working under such hard conditions. But the PT does not because they are bankrupting the nation. No one said farmers are bad, they just don't realize how badly PT's policy hurts the country.
- Discussion 2 : 11/10/2012 at 06:23 PM
-
Rice from other countries has been seen amongst the rice stacks, so they are actually buying rice from abroad. TIT
- Discussion 3 : 11/10/2012 at 04:35 PM
-
Sooner or later the Thai people will have to pay for this corrupt scheme. All of us are losers except the fugitive and his cronies.
- Discussion 4 : 11/10/2012 at 03:27 PM
-
I think most of us in the forum supports the poor farmers and are willing to help them, but the problem is the poor farmers do not benefit from the rice scheme.
A few months ago this media printed an article showing poor farmers protesting as they claim all the money goes into the wrong already rich hands and not to the farmers.
As far as I recall the article also told that only farms bigger than a certain size is under the scheme….so by supporting the scheme you accept that your money goes into the pockets of somebody already rich.
The rice scheme is another fake advertising in the name of vote buying, nothing else
- Discussion 5 : 11/10/2012 at 02:59 PM
-
"She said certain information could be confidential but the government would make as much as possible public".
Why didn't she do so from the beginning and thus avoiding all this uncertainty?
"Deputy Prime Minister Chalerm Yubamrung,who was assigned to root out corruption in the rice pledging scheme,insisted that the only alleged graft associated with the programme found so far involved low-level officials".
No surprise here. He has never been able/willing to catch the big fish.
- Discussion 6 : 11/10/2012 at 02:14 PM
-
The rice buying scam, er, scheme - is a disaster. I'm glad there are voices speaking out against it, and this stunt is surely bringing the issue to the forefront - but I believe the best way to answer it is to not only take it to the people rhetorically, but along with viable alternatives to these destructive, pandering policies.
- Discussion 7 : 11/10/2012 at 01:23 PM
-
"this 'scheme' is very popular with the majority of the Thai people." Rice farmers have not been the majority of the population for many years. Out of nearly 70 million Thais (Ministry of Foreign Affairs figure), no more than 25 million are farmers of any kind these days.
- Discussion 8 : 11/10/2012 at 11:42 AM
-
Disc9 - Better do some research.
Farming (ALL farming, not just rice) will bring in less than 1 trillion baht this year.
Bangkok is by far the most productive and valuable area of Thailand accounting for the lion's share of the country's GDP. Industry, electronics, communications, service and tourism sectors all dwarf agriculture. Why is so much emphasis given to a sector which can't sustain its workers?
- Discussion 9 : 11/10/2012 at 11:16 AM
-
Or perhaps more accurately: "Good Governance Set Back".
- Discussion 10 : 11/10/2012 at 11:01 AM
-
It is insulting to the rice farmers that they don't contribute to the economy of Thailand - not taxpayers. Rice farmers pay taxes in various forms. Their purchases also keep our manufacturers, exporters, traders continuing their businesses. These businesses resulted in shopping malls and trades. These successful businesses resulted in Thailand's revenues and progress. Rice farmers are also an integral component in food security. They deserved a better quality of life and respect.
- Discussion 11 : 11/10/2012 at 10:25 AM
-
no doubt nobody in the rice industry will come forward except the brokers , they all live in fear and intimidation and will be excluded in compensation,the losers are the tax payers, but the new boss of rice has never paid his taxes, so it another earner for the family
- Discussion 12 : 11/10/2012 at 10:09 AM
-
" ...and the academic who brought the suit said he will take his case to the people."
Dear Mr. Academic, "Yes, a good idea: take it to the people..." It's called an election & the current government won! Additionally, with all of its obvious problems, this 'scheme' is very popular with the majority of the Thai people.
- Discussion 13 : 11/10/2012 at 09:39 AM
-
I wish tax payers would revolt .Refuse to pay tax when it is just handed off to others in exchange for loyalty .
- Discussion 14 : 11/10/2012 at 09:06 AM
-
kadfarang - When has esarn ever paid for a shopping mall to be built in Bangkok?
- Discussion 15 : 11/10/2012 at 08:22 AM
-
Discussion 7: Whatajoke, I did not check your numbers but assuming there are correct it would be interesting to have the geographical repartition of those 50 000 B tax paying individuals. Pretty sure most of them would be in Bangkok. So yes, Bangkok would have to pay for Esarn. Nothing wrong with that. After all, it is just returning some of the money on which Bangkok, its shopping malls, its marble floor towers ... have been built.
- Discussion 16 : 11/10/2012 at 07:56 AM
-
"The details of each deal must be kept secret both in terms of volume and selling price, in line with the country's international trade strategy," - I understand but there is no reason why the sum total of all the deals cannot the made public. Thus it is as simple as: ' We have sold to six countries. The total tonnes sold is x, the net value realised in y. z tonnes will be shipped before the end of 2012 with the balance in 2013. The basis of sale is ex warehouse, FOB, CIF (delete as appropriate)'. What is so difficult?
- Discussion 17 : 11/10/2012 at 07:27 AM
-
D1: the problem with your assertion, is that the minority pay the vast majority of the taxes that is financing this, it's grand larceny of state money since it is a market mechanism policy that can't possibly succeed without incurring massive loss. Better to just write out cheques for poor farmers, calling it 'social subsidy', I doubt the public in Bangkok would have as much problem with that, but presently it looks obvious that the scheme will fail on many levels, most of all, making sure the money ends up in the pockets of the poor. Putting it in perspective, if the full extend of the likely losses occurs, it will mean about 10,000 baht out of the pocket of every family in this country, or more specifically about 50,000 baht lost per tax paying individual (or their corporate employer's contribution). That will likely add 'years' to the national debt.
- Discussion 18 : 11/10/2012 at 07:09 AM
-
"The details of each deal must be kept secret both in terms of volume and selling price, in line with the country's international trade strategy," the minister said.
So Thailand's international trade strategy is basically "We won't tell you (the Thai people) how much we've sold or for what price!" The perfect conditions for corruption. And our taxes pay these jokers salaries!!
- Discussion 19 : 11/10/2012 at 06:48 AM
-
It is good news that Mr Adis will establish forums for people to exchange opinions about the pledging programme's pros and cons - starting tomorrow with farmers from several provinces. This is constructive. I hope the forum's objectives include helping the government address the possibility of corruptions, fraud. Inform the farmers on the correct procedure of the scheme and identify fraud and report to authority.
- Discussion 20 : 11/10/2012 at 06:17 AM
-
My concern relies actually with the Thai media. Investigative reporting is not a strong characteristic of Thai newspapers while I doubt the independence of Thai TV stations. Will the Press, for example, investigate beyond interviewing Red Shirt leaders? Will they try to find out the selling prices of the rice? I doubt it. But not to worry! We can trust Khun Chalerm to root out all the corruption and to ensure that the scheme runs smoothly as planned. Hopefully he is not in love after his recent family vacation to Hong Kong.
- Discussion 21 : 11/10/2012 at 06:01 AM
-
The farmers aren't complaining.
- Discussion 22 : 11/10/2012 at 05:29 AM
-
This decision is regrettable, democracy or not, giving away money raised by taxes is just plain wrong, especially when it's part of an elaborate vote buying scheme. There are likely some very powerful people in Thailand enraged at how their tax money is being squandered, should be interesting to see what they do.
- Discussion 23 : 11/10/2012 at 04:28 AM
-
This is hardly a surprise. Sure, the scheme is anti-free market, disrupting price mechanism, and will most likely cause heavy financial loss to the taxpayers, however, in Democracy, the Majority rules. So, this is nothing more than a growing pain as a Democracy. Hopefully, after the damage is done as predicted, enough of those in the Majority will be persuaded not to support a similar anti-free market scheme in the future. What the minority, through the Court, can do is to make sure that all necessary legal procedures are followed with no irregularities (corruptions). Hopefully, Thailand will emerge from all this a more mature and stronger Democracy.
Bangkok Post
