[ad_1]
Transport-Railroad found a box to fight Hopewell’s case, hoping not to have to pay a stupid $ 2.5 billion fee to present to the Administrative Court to dismantle the case. After the Constitutional Court ruled that the resolution of the General Assembly of the Administrative Court was unconstitutional Legal clues and age counting, “Sak Siam” established a working group to prepare information to prosecute criminals.
The reporter reported that After the Supreme Administrative Court ruled the Hopewell Project dispute on April 22, 2019, Hopewell (Thailand) Co., Ltd. won the case according to the arbitration award. Let the government sector of the Ministry of Transport and Railways of Thailand (SRT) pay a total compensation of 11.888 million baht at 7.5 percent interest per annum or approximately 25 billion baht within 180 days of the case final.
Subsequently, communications and SRT filed with the Ombudsman’s Office. The resolution of the General Board of Magistrates of the Supreme Administrative Court No. 18/2002, of November 27, 2002, did not proceed in accordance with the procedure of the law, it was not submitted to the Chamber of Deputies for examination and it was not published in the Government Gazette. Considered illegal and cannot be enforced under the Establishment of Administrative Courts and Administrative Procedures Act of 1999, Section 5, Section 6, and Section 44
Including the determination to start counting the age of administrative cases from the day the Administrative Court was opened as of March 9, 2001, based on the Law of Establishment of the Administrative Court and the Administrative Court Procedure 2542 Section 51 to start counting the period The age of the administrative case from the date the cause of the accusation was known or should have been known
The Ombudsman submitted it to the Constitutional Court for consideration in late 2020, most recently on March 17, 2021, the Constitutional Court ruled that the vote was majority. The resolutions of the General Meeting of the Administrative Courts of November 17, 2002 issued regulations in accordance with the Law of Establishment of Administrative Courts and Administrative Procedures of 1999, Section 44, but not proceeding under Section 5 and Section 6, paragraph one, is contrary or inconsistent with the Constitution, Section 3 paragraph two and Section 197 paragraph four.
Transport Minister Sak Siam Chidchob said the Constitutional Court’s decision was a good sign. Make transport and The Royal Thai Army has a plan to continue fighting the case. Now awaiting the central decision sent by the Ombudsman. The working group will then adopt the aforementioned resolution to proceed. Including taking action against officers But the payment of compensation according to the order of the administrative court has not yet occurred. Therefore, without starting to count the age that still has time to process
“This has happened since 1989. We will fight hard. Because it is considered a government budget. It is money from the popular tax. It is legal to pay the money. “
SRT Governor Nirut Maneepun said he would like to see the Constitutional Court’s decision and the defense guidelines of the Transport Ministry working group first. Because it is bound by all organizations But it is considered a good trend and reported to the SRT Board of Directors (Board).
Regarding the judgment, will it be clear at all that no compensation is required? Mr. Nirut said I must say that such a judgment is likely to be more appropriate. For legal reasons Especially about age In fact, it should be from the date of damage. If it does not show up within the legal age, this problem should be ruled out. What is the issue that the Administrative Court said that the court’s opening date is March 9, 2001 as the date for the computation of the trial time.
A source from the Transport Ministry said the Constitutional Court ruling was not directly related to the state’s compensation to Hopewell. Because the matter was submitted to the Ombudsman’s Office to know the resolution of the general meeting of judges in the Supreme Administrative Court And the age of the claim that Hopewell came to cry on the day of its expiration.
“I found a new clue about the resolution of the General Board of the Administrative Tribunal that is unconstitutional. Because it was not published in the Official Gazette. The Administrative Court considered that it was not a law that governed the opportunity to submit to the Supreme Administrative Court to request the reactivation of a new case, so it is highly probable. You have to see the attitude of the court that whether the issue of the decisions of the Constitutional Court for consideration will comply with the laws of the administrative court or not. There is still no talk about whether or not to pay 25,000 million baht because there are new issues that may lead to the recovery of the case ”.
[ad_2]
