13 years waiting for money to heal

Santika to Mountain B

Thai Rath Edition

22 Aug 2022 6:49 a.m.

share

Facebook

Twitter

Line

Copy link

record

fire incident

"Mountain B Pub, Chonburi Province" is a loss causing trauma to the families of the deceased increased to 20 people and 60-80% of the injured coma were burned to the body. Many people were hospitalized.

What to worry about after this is

Initially, the owner of the pub gave 50 thousand baht and pledged to fully help the victims.

“But the question is whether the promise will come true or not.” According to the Santika Pub fire 13 years ago, some “relatives of the deceased or injured” have not even received any compensation.

even using the legal process until

"The court has issued a final order to compensate," but the pub owner still hasn't paid the victims.

Makes many people think about the Mountain B pub, may it repeat itself or not?

This youth network reduces risk factors.

Youth and Family Foundation

Women and Men Foundation

Quality of Life Improvement Network

Alcohol Prevention and Mitigation Network

The Rights and Environment Lawyers Association hosted a forum entitled “From Santika Pub to Mountain.

B...how to fix it on the spot" to take lessons and find a way to prevent recurrence.

And help this victim.

says

Lessons in Helping Fire Victims Santika Pub has a lot of problems suing business operators, even if they can sue any amount of paper because they don't have compensation, until they bring a lawsuit against the shareholders to get part of the compensation.

with a loss angle

“The injured person has the right to a remedy” which is the basic premise for consumer protection that

“Business owners” have to deal with the problem of compensation for consumers.

But not to file a lawsuit on their own.

At that time, “

” played a role in coordinating the Lawyers Council.

Assist consumers in both civil and criminal prosecution.

Along with a lawsuit filed in the Administrative Court against the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration in the case of non-supervising of the building opened as a service facility.

Failure to inspect the condition of the equipment structure to be in accordance with the Ministerial Regulation

Building Control Act, B.E. 2522 (1979)

Subsequently, the Supreme Administrative Court sentenced 12 plaintiffs to pay more than 5 million baht, as a result, "the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration brought the budget to heal", becoming the offenders without penalty.

Although the construction of the building, the addition of the modification

"All under the supervision of government officials" were neglected until a tragedy occurred.

As for the criminal case, the Supreme Court sentenced to three years in prison, not suspended for executives.

And the referee after 7 years of fighting "almost irreplaceable for the family who lost it" Therefore, the Santika Pub incident is a lesson reflecting negligence.

breaking the law

or the neglect of government officials who have to perform their duties in this kind of business inspection at all times

But it appears that "

" do not take any action, the end result is repeated "

", causing consumers who do not know anything, just want to walk in.

When there is a problem, no serious remedy is found to be in accordance with the right that the victim should be treated fairly.

both for the injured and the dead

What would you like to offer the following?

“The service place should have a license in front of the pub clearly”, starting from the government's regulations forcing the disclosure of information about the registration of the establishment.

or inspecting the building to be safe according to the correct standards

for consumers to know before using the service

that is not licensed and kept in a caressing drawer alone

In addition, there must be a mechanism for guarantees for consumers.

“Damage insurance” to protect your rights in the event of a force majeure event.

“Consumers are compensated immediately.” No need to claim.

or sue each other for a long time

Likewise,

said that during the Kader factory fire, he used to help employees fight against their employers to pay compensation for the deceased.

and 5 hundred thousand baht per person injured (excluding legal compensation) and negotiated to 2 hundred thousand baht per person, including monthly education expenses for the deceased child until the end of the bachelor's degree

But for the “Mountain B Pub Fire”, the victims were both family pillars and some were of working age.

But entrepreneurs pay 50,000 baht each for the deceased and 10,000 baht each for the injured, which is a very small amount.

Compared to the "

" standard after 30 years, considering the inflation rate of 4-5%, "Victims of the Mountain B Pub Fire" should receive compensation of not less than a million baht.

This is important, entrepreneurs have to set up two treatment principles: 1. The victim is the pillar of the family.

2. Some people are in their working age for a long time.

In order to help the victims get justice

The bereaved family was compensated.

because of the loss of family pillars

and in the working age, many opportunities are lost

And the government must have lessons of neglect that will cause damage to the lives and properties of the people as well.

Reiterating the event, if the operators do not take into account these two remedies, the condition of the victims will be no different from the Santika Pub fire where many people have not received any compensation.

Until making the quality of life very poor, so this incident of Pub Mountain B, the victim must join together with the social sector and academics to help claim the owner of the pub or the government to compensate for the damage.

For example, the 1999 longan drying factory explosion killed 36 people, demanding that the employer pay 500,000 baht each and negotiate the remaining 200,000 baht each. Finally, the employer fled the country and had to turn to the

. It took more than 6 months to fight, resulting in a resolution to pay a special case of 2 hundred thousand baht and child education until the completion of a bachelor's degree.

In particular, "

" who has 2 legal duties: 1. Compensation under social security 2. Compensation under the Safety at Work Act.

They also have the authority to inspect the establishment.

Including this entertainment place, such as checking fire escapes, having fire drills

Or is there a safety officer at work (Jor Por.) or not?

The issue that I would like to propose is

“Currently, people feel that pubs and bars are not safe.”

There were frequent quarrels.

And there's still a risk of fire.

As such, it is considered that they must be seriously controlled.

"Don't just look at it as a place to relax" because there are many other effects that occur.

Acting Lt. Somchai Ameen, president of the Association of Lawyers for the Protection of Rights and Environment

, said what he wanted to hear from the mouth.

“Entrepreneur

is a confession.” Why is it possible to open a pub in a forbidden area?

Both converted the restaurant into a pub.

and open for service during COVID-19

It's very easy to spread in the naval area...?

Because most of the "Chonburi Province" area, the opening of such entertainment venues is only allowed in Pattaya and Bang Lamung.

“Mountain B pub has been opened in Sattahip district for 2 months.” Villagers know each other but no government agencies know.

The cause of the problem is

"Law enforcement, government officials slack," leading to many repetitive events from the past, although

“The existing laws in Thailand are very good,” but the enforcement of the law is weak.

“You have to fix yourself first of government officials.” Compensation is the final issue.

Actually, if entrepreneurs or government agencies

Comply with all the laws set forth and then the force majeure happens to be acceptable.

But in the case of a mountain pub

B made a lot of mistakes, and the officers were able to check and prevent them from the beginning.

Therefore, in this regard, “government agencies in the district level

Provinces must be responsible” and then take recourse against government officials under the law.

"To prevent the use of tax money of the people to compensate", but if it appears that there is a neglect of duty for any reason, the matter must be remitted.

NACC investigates criminal offenses as well.

If this has

“A government official who wrongfully neglects to serve a real prison sentence" should be an example for others to not dare to neglect their duties.

In the future, the problem of illegal service establishments should be improved accordingly.

This pub fire is reflected.

"many slack" which is a space for

“Safe Cost Operators” have always pushed the burden of risks on consumers… This could be a major turning point. Up again.

Read more...