[Intl-tobacco] Thailand: Govt 'can be sued' for tobacco abuses (fwd)

[Robert Weissman]

Govt 'can be sued' for tobacco abuses
by Arthit Khwankhom / THE NATION
Source: The Nation (th), Saturday, 8/11/01

Lawyers yesterday urged members of the public to sue the Government for
violating the Constitution on the basis that its tobacco monopoly abuses
Thai peoples' right to be healthy.

Speaking at a seminar on the product liability of cigarette manufacturers
in Thailand, Phijaisakdi Horayangkura, a Chulalongkorn University law
lecturer and a health-promotion activist, said that the Constitution
guaranteed the right to good health for all Thais.

The state-run tobacco monopoly, he said, churns out products that pose a
virulent threat to the health of citizens.

Therefore, he said, any citizen is entitled to act as a plaintiff in
lodging a complaint with the Administrative Court citing the Government's
malpractice or negligence against its people.

Citizens can also sue the Royal Thai Police for failing to enforce the law
against smoking in public places

 Since the law has come into effect, Phijaisakdi explained, the
authorities have not seriously observed it.

Lawyer Somsak Trakulbisut of the Office of the Council of State said that
Thailand so far had no direct law governing product liability that would
allow cigarette-smoke sufferers to win a lawsuit against a tobacco
company, as has occurred for example in the United States.

Under civil law those who want to sue firms for compensation because of
defective products must accept that the burden of proof lies with them.
This is very hard to achieve in court, and in most cases the plaintiff is
defeated because of the failure to win this uphill battle, Somsak said.

On the other hand, he added, "a new ray of hope is coming to Thai
consumers, and also smokers, as the product-liability draft has been
approved by the Cabinet, and the State Council is going to approve the
draft soon."

With this act, Thai citizens will soon have the same right to sue tobacco
companies as in other countries.

 However, whether or not a product liability act in Thailand will be
enforced as competently as in developed countries will depend on the
court's discretion, he said.

In the US, for example, courts have ruled in favour of plaintiffs despite
the consumption-risk theory which states that smokers must be aware of the
risk of cigarette-smoking.

The legal argument is usually that the tobacco companies have failed to
provide to consumers with the complete details of tobacco's virulence,
Somsak said.

Learning from the example of tobacco lawsuits in other countries, Dr
Hathai Chitanont, director of the Thai Health Promotion Institution, said
there were many gains to be made from such action.

Consumers are compensated for harm, tobacco companies are forced to
disclose the facts about their products, and smoking habits change as a
result of higher cigarette prices imposed after a tobacco firm loses money
in a suit, Hathai noted.