I'll get back to you on "supermarkets are bad" later.
The guy being sued is not an individual, he has/had an official position with Thai Chamber of Commerce, and I'm not justifying the lawsuit, I don't have enough information.
0
Tesco Lotus To Sue Thai Critics For One Billion Bahtthe Head of Thai Chamber of Commerce and a academician sued
Started by sriracha john, 2008-03-16 08:29
#52
Star Member Posted 2008-03-24 21:51:39
I just looked at your link. It says one case was traced back to CP, in Cambodia.
According to reports here, in Thailand, only open farms were affected, and it's their chickens that were killed by millions countrywide. CP group actually benefitted from the flu because all their competition was all but wiped out. Many cases here were traced back to handling and eating dead chickens, we have no idea how many of them were sold before the quarantine, apparently it's a normal practice. Does CP sell chickens that died from unknown disease? I doubt that. Outbreaks like that are easier to control on closed farms, don't you think? Also any outbreak would be devastating for small farmers while giants like CP can absorb losses and contain damage relatively easy, small farmers are practically forced to cover up. As for your pork lady - she is just a last step in a long chain from pig farms to your fridge. She might be nice and sweet and accomodating, but she has no control over whole production process. If something goes wrong, you can't realy hold her responsible. Some supermarket suppliers, on the other hand, advertise that you can access all information on any piece of meat they sell, from the point of origin to the shelf. If something goes wrong with Tesco, you can sue them, and they WILL come down heavily on suppliers (if they want to). In the absense of laws or law enforcement consumers have no choice but to rely on producers self-monitoring. In case of supermarkets, they have at least some initial criteria for suppliers to assure quality. In case of fresh markets, there's none. Do you know they guy who butchers your pigs? Do you know what sanitary procedures he follows? Does your pork lady know? If the slaughterhouse (most likely illegal in the first place) screws up and there's some pig flu outbreak, I can safely bet your lady won't have a clue until people start dying. Or look at it from another angle - those safety rules were put in place by Tesco because that is supposed to be the standard in the west, standard set by small farmers in the first place. They can blame Tesco for not following it because they know how it supposed to be done. When Tesco comes to Thailand, local standards are simply non-existent, comparing to them Tesco is a god of cleanliness and responsibility. As for boycott of superstores - this is not going to work. Due to lifestyle changes people do their shopping once a week and there's no way they get all their stuff from mom&pop shops. If they go to a fresh market that sells everything - it's just like Tesco with open sewers and no shopping carts. And I bet market owners are not exactly angels when it comes to dealing with their suppliers. Edited by Plus, 2008-03-24 21:53:14. #53
Star Member Posted 2008-04-13 15:23:15
Tesco sues Thai critics of £100 million expansion plan
Tesco, the supermarket group increasingly regarded by large parts of Britain as about as benign as an invading army, is finding that the reception in the more far-flung outposts of its empire is less than ecstatic, too. A small but growing number of voices in Thailand has been speaking out against the ambitious and, they claim, aggressive plans for expansion by Tesco, which already has hundreds of stores in the country. Seemingly stung by the criticism, Tesco has taken the remarkable step of launching legal actions seeking millions of pounds in damages from its critics, one a former MP and the other a newspaper columnist. The actions have been condemned by campaigners for free speech. "I think they want to intimidate me, to stop me speaking out against them," said the newspaper columnist and academic, Kamol Kamoltrakul, who is being sued for £1.6 million. Tesco took action after Mr Kamol wrote a column against its expansion plans for the supermarket, which operates 370 stores and hypermarkets in Thailand under the name Tesco Lotus. He claimed that Tesco did not invest in the country, minimised the taxes it paid to the authorities, and had no "social responsibility." The other person being sued is former MP Jit Siratranon, secretary general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce. Mr Jit is facing a claim for a staggering £16.4 million after giving a speech to a group of activists in which he said: "The large-scale expansion of the big retailers must be exercised with great care – not too aggressively and too rapidly – to reduce the potential tension, which could lead to serious conflict." He also faces two years in jail if the lawsuit is successful. The controversy over the expansion of foreign retailing chains in Thailand has been such that four years ago the Thai company operating with Tesco sold its stake in the operation. "I am concerned about the 'mom and pop' stores," explained Mr Kamol, speaking last night from Bangkok. "I am worried about the millions of people who will be affected if they lose their livelihoods. I am not against Tesco but I think it should halt its expansion. I think this country should have more regulation." Last April, Tesco's Thailand operation said it would be spending more than £100 million * 6,217,459,106 Thai Baht *  on expansion.Asked about the legal actions, a Tesco spokesman said: "This follows a sustained period of attacks over a number of years. It is not something we would enter into lightly." He said the company was responding to "malicious rumours." "There comes a time when you have to defend not only yourselves but the people who work for you." - The Independent (UK) / 13 April 2008 #54
Super Member Posted 2008-04-13 22:09:08
Tesco, Carrefour, Big C and name some others. They are all the same. Driven by the wish to make as much money as possible for the shareholders. Through us, the consumers. I don't think that is a bad thing. If your company is singled out by some officials to blame you for all the perceived wrongs, I guess legal proceedings are the only way to rectify the things that were heaped on you by reps of the opposing companies that were stupid or lazy? . Tesco are operating rather on the agressive side, not only in Thailand, but everywhere, so what? Why? Because they want maximum profit! But as more people said in posts, why not attack 7-11 or the other local leeches? You really think that holding company is operating with you the consumer in their mind, through franchises? Come on, wake up!
No way you can stop this. If Tesco would disappear, some other chain would come in. Signs of the time, people. The old ways are gone forever, also in Thailand. But, Thailand does not know yet. No, I have no stocks in Tesco, and no, I am not a customer of Tesco. And I buy in other chains and in local shops that do not charge me farang prices. #55
Platinum Member Posted 2008-04-14 06:11:35
Tesco, Carrefour, Big C and name some others. They are all the same. Driven by the wish to make as much money as possible for the shareholders. Through us, the consumers. I don't think that is a bad thing. If your company is singled out by some officials to blame you for all the perceived wrongs, I guess legal proceedings are the only way to rectify the things that were heaped on you by reps of the opposing companies that were stupid or lazy? . Tesco are operating rather on the agressive side, not only in Thailand, but everywhere, so what? Why? Because they want maximum profit! But as more people said in posts, why not attack 7-11 or the other local leeches? You really think that holding company is operating with you the consumer in their mind, through franchises? Come on, wake up! No way you can stop this. If Tesco would disappear, some other chain would come in. Signs of the time, people. The old ways are gone forever, also in Thailand. But, Thailand does not know yet. No, I have no stocks in Tesco, and no, I am not a customer of Tesco. And I buy in other chains and in local shops that do not charge me farang prices. I'm not sure of your main point here? Are you saying that it is inevitable that Tescos will take over Thailand and the consumer should just Love the Machine, as it can't be stopped? Or are you saying they cannot be beaten in court as they're just too rich and powerful? Or are you just saying that the era of small independent shops and markets is over as "the old ways are gone forever"? I couldn't fathom it out, but I did gather that you don't shop at Tesco, but do go to other "chains" and local shops that don't appear to charge you "farang prices" (whatever they are?). So good, you think Tescos are more expensive than the competition and are being discerning. Same here, but I chose not to shop at Tesco not on price consideration, but on principle. I'm not worried by supermarkets per se - I use them regularly - but many of their monopolistic practices and expansion tactics do concern me. The reason I'm boycotting Tesco is simple - they are using litigation to silence critics in Thailand and it is the thin end of the wedge, as far as I'm concerned. Thus, I will take my custom elsewhere until they drop these legal suits. As simple as that. Good day! 
#56
Platinum Member Posted 2008-04-19 05:47:22
Tescos demands are gtting even more outrageous as it tries to sue a third person for libel. This person was a journalist writing a "tongue-in-cheek" humourous column in Bangkok Business News newspaper. She jokingly wrote, "Tesco Lotus doesn't love Thais". For that comment she is being sued 100 million baht in damages!!!!!
The story is here..... http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/ap.../tesco.medialaw Methinks that the negative publicity that these ridiculous antics by Tesco drum up in Thailand and elsewhere will cause it to lose a lot of business in the long run. It could turn nasty for them, if nationalists turn their attention to it, as happened with Temasek after it bought up Shincorp. They will also get bad publicity in UK too from this, which will fan the flames of the many people who strongly dislike this company in any case and more will boycott it. It's vindicated my original decision to boycott Tesco and hope others will join me...... as this is now purely about free speech being at stake. #57
Star Member Posted 2008-04-19 07:29:01
Tesco-Lotus Sues Plachon for 1.2 Trillion Baht
Official company spokesman for Tesco-Lotus, Somchai Readsalottaporn, today announced that the company has launched a 1.2. trillion baht lawsuit against Internet user plachon. He stated that this was in response to plachon's attempts to encourage people to boycott Tesco-Lotus for bringing lawsuits against its critics. "We're a big multi-national corporation so WTF does this punk think he's doing?" stated Tesco-Lotus Vice-President in Charge of Intimidation Charles Donotmesswithme from company headquarters in the UK. Mr. Readsalottaporn reiterated that anyone attempting to stifle their expansion into Thailand would receive the same. "What we do is nobody's business. Our business is our business. Get in the way and we'll sue until the water buffalos come home," Khun Somchai stated as the company grand-opening of its fourth mega-store in the tiny provincial capital of Amnoet Charoen (pop. 21,000). Bangkok Herald-Examiner *Disclaimer: While the implied intent of the article should be taken seriously, the actual specifics are made-up. If that seems obvious and the need for this disclaimer seems unnecessary, well... for some it is.* #58
Platinum Member Posted 2008-04-19 16:56:30
Tesco-Lotus Sues Plachon for 1.2 Trillion Baht Official company spokesman for Tesco-Lotus, Somchai Readsalottaporn, today announced that the company has launched a 1.2. trillion baht lawsuit against Internet user plachon. He stated that this was in response to plachon's attempts to encourage people to boycott Tesco-Lotus for bringing lawsuits against its critics. "We're a big multi-national corporation so WTF does this punk think he's doing?" stated Tesco-Lotus Vice-President in Charge of Intimidation Charles Donotmesswithme from company headquarters in the UK. Mr. Readsalottaporn reiterated that anyone attempting to stifle their expansion into Thailand would receive the same. "What we do is nobody's business. Our business is our business. Get in the way and we'll sue until the water buffalos come home," Khun Somchai stated as the company grand-opening of its fourth mega-store in the tiny provincial capital of Amnoet Charoen (pop. 21,000). Bangkok Herald-Examiner *Disclaimer: While the implied intent of the article should be taken seriously, the actual specifics are made-up. If that seems obvious and the need for this disclaimer seems unnecessary, well... for some it is.* 55555555!  I wouldn't put it past them SRJ, judging by recent moves made by this democratic bastion of fair play, competition and free speech. I mean, they should just put an advert in all Thai papers saying that any journalist not writing positive news about Tesco can expect to be sued for hundreds of millions of baht and then get their true intent out in the open. It would save them a lot of trouble serving writs and then the media and general public would be in no doubt where they stand. 
#59
Star Member Posted 2008-04-22 07:59:21
Journalists to investigate Tesco Lotus
The Thai Journalists Association (TJA) will play a major role in investigating the business operations of Tesco Lotus and its Thai operator, Ek-Chai Distribution Systems (Thailand). The move is aimed at determining whether the operations comply with the Foreign Business Act (FBA). The decision was announced yesterday after discussions about Tesco Lotus's libel suits against Krungthep Turakij senior editor Nongnart Harnvilai, Krungthep Turakij columnist Kamol Kamoltrakul and Jit Siratranont, a former MP who is now vice general secretary of the Thai Chamber of Commerce. Tesco Lotus is claiming combined damages of 1.2 Billion Baht. The reports in question were related to the hypermarket operator's rapid growth. They criticised alleged trouble in communities caused by Tesco Lotus's expansion, including traffic problems. "We believe Tesco Lotus is not after the money," said TJA vice president Wanchai Wongmeechai. "Rather, Tesco Lotus is exploiting the legal system to silence the freedom of the press in presenting facts and criticisms about its business plans and effects on communities. These matters are in the public interest." The FBA allows a foreign retailer to operate in Thailand through a Thai-registered company. However, foreign interests must not own more than 49 per cent of the company. The TJA also invites reporters, columnists and Thai citizens facing charges by Tesco Lotus to contact the association for joint discussions on protecting freedom of speech and continuing to criticise under the framework of the Constitution. The association said Thai journalists viewed Tesco Lotus's damage claim as an action to silence reports on its rapid expansion in Thailand and criticism of its impact on small retailers. The TJA is also planning a public conference to educate the public on the business operations of giant foreign corporations. - The Nation (today) #60
Star Member Posted 2008-04-22 09:24:56
TJA slams Tesco over lawsuits
The Thai Journalists Association (TJA) has slammed giant retailer Tesco Plc for filing lawsuits against its critics, saying the firm is trying to gag the media. Wanchai Wongmeechai, the association's vice president on press freedom, said the National Press Council and the TJA viewed the legal move by Ek-chai Distribution Co Ltd, which runs the Tesco Lotus discount store chain in Thailand, as an attempt to silence the Thai media which has been critical of its rapid expansion. The firm is demanding 1.2 billion baht in combined damages through three separate libel and defamation lawsuits it has filed against Nongnart Harnwilai, the marketing news editor of Krungthep Turakij, Kamol Kamoltrakul, a guest columnist of Krungthep Turakij, and Jit Siratranont, vice secretary-general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce. Mr Wanchai yesterday released a statement saying the TJA and its allies would check to see if Tesco Lotus and Ek-chai Distribution have carried out their business in Thailand lawfully under the 1999 Foreign Business Act. Public forums would also be held on the issue. Mr Wanchai asked news reporters, columnists and Thai citizens who have been sued by Tesco Lotus to report their cases to Continued here: http://www.bangkokpo...2008_news11.php #61
Senior Member Posted 2008-04-22 10:30:52
A couple of key points:
Tesco will not have a monopoly (mono => one) with the likes of Big C, Carrefour etc around. At worst it could result in an Oligopoly. People quote the UK: Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda, Morrison's, etc. From time to time these companies have price wars, and additionally are always striving to be best value for money. Otherwise people go to one of the alternatives. One spin-off is the advent of "own brand" products which are comparable but cheaper. The comparison of Thailand with the UK differs in some key respects: - Mom and pop shops: butchers, bakers etc in the UK used to do reasonably well and make a good standard of living. The Uk started from more even welath distribution. - In Thailand, mum and pop shops generally live on the poverty line, particularly up country. The wealth distribution starts from being unequal. In reality there are a few Thai individuals/companies/govt organisations that really do have monopolies. And we are talking monopolies not oligopolies or any form of choice. Tesco are at least offering alternatives, and giving some people at least a chance to get off the poverty line. It will also force much needed economic change, and redistribution of wealth. Mom and pop shops will be able to buy in bulk from Tesco cheaper than existing suppliers. Tesco is by no means in every village in Thailand... Take a couple of examples: - Rice. Who makes all the money there? Certainly not the farmers...In other industries: - Mobile phone networks: 2 main choices. For mainy years just one - Cable TV: 1 main "choice". These are real Thai monopolies At worst Tesco are offering realistic choices to ultimately Thai owned monopolies. Bottom line is it's probably more a Thai elitist issue than anything. Plus those defending vested Thai monopolies. The people of Thailand will ultimately be better off. I'd agree for the Uk it is debateable. UK went from a functional fair old system, where people did quite well, and reasonably fair wealth distribution, to a new different one. For Thailand the existing system is hardly functional, not fair, many people do badly out of it, and struggle to keep heads above water, while a few key people do extremely well. Edited by AFKAFSinLOS, 2008-04-22 10:35:10. #62
Platinum Member Posted 2008-04-22 15:39:29
Every little hurts...................bad publicity that is...............and in the age of globalisation, what Tesco does to silence critics and suppress rights to free speech in one country, will come back to haunt it at home...........from today's Guardian...........
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/ap...co.supermarkets and if you are really interested in the truth behind your friendly neighbourhood supermarket, then check out this website...... http://www.tescopoly.org/ Support local businesses, boycott Tesco! #63
Senior Member Posted 2008-04-22 16:16:56
Active objection is not a futile gesture. When the intention to open a branch of Tesco-Locust in Kamphaeng Phet was announced the campaign launched by local traders was successful in stopping it even being built. Power to the People! Local traders good, choice bad. Local traders good, choice bad. Local traders good, choice bad. This sounds like from The Simpsons or Animal Farm by Goerge Orwell. Forum rules stops me from adding the expletives I do feel is required to add. Communism rule! It will move us all ahead to a prosperous future, where you can go to by poor quality, out of date goods (if you can find them at all) in dirty little stores, often at higher prices. Why not let people choose by using their Baht? Edit: Forgot to mention that niche shops can happily co-exist next to supermarkets, IF THEY HAVE SOME ADDED VALUE. This happens in my home town in Scandinavia, where for instance the local fish minger is doing very well indeed in competition with several powerful supermarket chains. Same is for several other types of shops in the city center. Provide what the customer wants, and you can compete. Is this so difficult to understand? Edited by MeaMaximaCulpa, 2008-04-22 16:22:16. #64
Titanium Member Posted 2008-04-22 16:22:46
I think as several posters have pointed out, people go to the stores that offer a clean environment, marked prices, in date goods and wide choice. Until local traders start doing that then as far as I'm concerned I know where I will shop. To the smaller traders it's either shape up or shut up, if they had been providing it in the first placed then companies like 7-11, Tesco, Carefour etc would not be targetting the small convenience market with such effect.
#65
Senior Member Posted 2008-04-22 17:26:49
I would like to add, so I am not taken as an advocate for Tesco/Lotus (or Big C or C4). I do not like their stores, I prefer stores with better quality stuff. But I want to fight for their right to do business, as long as they follow the rules and laws.
And if you allow me to ramble on a bit, to show I am not all a corrupted capitalist, but have a soft side as well. During my young days at our beachside summerhouse (40+ years ago), we used to have regular visits of the following, at least once per week: -Butchers/meat truck -Vegetable truck -Prawn fishermen on their way back to harbour. -Other local fishermen (selling fish like plaice, sole and mackerel) -A boat selling newspapers, ice cream and fresh bread on weekend mornings -There were probably some others, also neighbours coming by with mushrooms and berries they had picked and wanted to share. Do I miss these? Of course I do, but barring the supermrket by force is not going to bring them back. A few still excist, and I do think a few more will emerge in the near future. BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT THEM. #66
Super Member Posted 2008-04-22 18:06:47
Tesco LOTUS is a Thai Company 51% Thai owned... You can be assured that the decision to proceed with this case was greenlighted from London. If it wasn't, Tescos overseas subsidiaries are out of control, which is an even more valid reason to boycott Tescos until they get their house in order.  I fear I'm responsible for any misunderstanding. As a non-Brit and being totally unfamiliar with Tesco or Tesco Lotus until arriving here, I thought they were all interchangable. To clarify, as the actual OP report clearly states, it is Tesco that is suing the Thai critics, and not Tesco Lotus. I apologize for inadvertantly adding Lotus into the title when I wrote it.... (can a Mod please remove it)  Actually you were right the first time. A Tesco spokesmen questioned on BBC last night denied that the attempt to sue The Guardian in the UK as well as the libel actions in LOS was a co-ordinated effort from Tesco UK. He stated categorically that the libel actions in LOS were reached independently by the Thai Lotus group........yeah  Lets pay homage... Attached Files
Edited by roamer, 2008-04-22 18:07:57. #67
Platinum Member Posted 2008-04-24 17:40:55
I think as several posters have pointed out, people go to the stores that offer a clean environment, marked prices, in date goods and wide choice. Until local traders start doing that then as far as I'm concerned I know where I will shop. To the smaller traders it's either shape up or shut up, if they had been providing it in the first placed then companies like 7-11, Tesco, Carefour etc would not be targetting the small convenience market with such effect. That's your perogative where to shop, although I would point out that the vegetables in Thai open air markets are invariably fresher, cheaper and offer a wider choice that any supermarket I've seen in Thailand. It's called competition and it's healthy. Less competition, less choice. Use the fresh markets and small traders or lose them. End up with a sterile mall shopping culture like in US if you want. It's simple. However, as I've pointed out before, this thread is not about the merits and demerits of Tesco or supermarkets per se. It is about the right to free speech and the role of a free media in a healthy and vibrant society to operate without fear of being served crippling law suits for the sake of a few critical sentences. If Tesco were to win these cases, every consumer in Thailand would suffer I can assure you, as no journalist would dare to take a large company to task and it would be a victory for the rich and powerful over the ordinary citizen's right to information.  Same as Shincorp vs Supinya case. It's about the type of global society we want to live in.
#68
Senior Member Posted 2008-04-24 19:39:04
[.. However, as I've pointed out before, this thread is not about the merits and demerits of Tesco or supermarkets per se. It is about the right to free speech and the role of a free media in a healthy and vibrant society to operate without fear of being served crippling law suits for the sake of a few critical sentences. ... I'm not quite sure why you repeat this. You might be interested in only one aspect. For me and obviously others, the articles had several themes, including: 1) The right to free speech: As far as I can see, no-one even including Tesco seems to be disagreeing with that right. What Tesco are disagreeing with and contesting is people using that free speech to spread mistruths and misinformation which negatively impact reputations. They are not pursuing anything that was said accurately and was factually correct. They are pursuing (albeit some might say heavy-handedly but still legally) statements that adversely affect their reputation and which were incorrect. That's their legal right to do so, and they are entitled to at least question whether the Thai critics comments were slander or libel. You and I might not like that, but that's Thai rules in Thai society. One would be naive not to at least question whether the Thai critics did this deliberately or not, and what their motives were. It could be an honest mistake, but it would be naive to assume that automatically. You are questionning Tesco's motives. They are questionning the Thai critics, just in different ways. 2) The free speech exercised by the Thai critics was clearly about the merits and demerits of Tesco and its (adverse in their view) impact on Thai society. Quote Siratranont said: 'The aggressive policy of expanding business in Thailand, not only in the big cities but also in the districts and sub-districts, is a contentious issue. The large-scale expansion of the big retailers must be exercised with great care - not too aggressively and too rapidly - to reduce the potential tension, which could lead to serious conflict. There is also the need for the small retail traders to adjust to changes. Tesco Lotus must take all of this into account.' Hence there is a sub-theme raised in the article. Seems natural to meet that people reply to both (and more) aspects of the article. Also makes the thread a bit more interesting and gives it some context...
Edited by AFKAFSinLOS, 2008-04-24 19:47:58. #69
Star Member Posted 2008-04-24 20:07:42
EDITORIAL
Seeking justice or intimidation? Media organisations are up in arms against what they view to be intimidation of press freedom, in light of the multi-national discount store chain Tesco Lotus' staggering 1.2 billion baht court action. Through its Thailand representative, Ek-chai Distribution, Tesco Lotus has filed separate defamation lawsuits against Jit Siratranont, vice secretary-general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, Krungthep Turakij guest columnist Kamol Kamoltrakul, and Nongnart Harnvilai, Krungthep Turakij's marketing news editor, demanding altogether 1.2 billion baht for the damage allegedly caused to its reputation and business by their published articles. Tesco Lotus' 1.2 billion baht lawsuits provide a grim reminder of the tactic employed by politicians who use criminal defamation charges and multi-million-baht civil defamation lawsuits to intimidate and silence media, the press in particular, which are critical of their conduct or are deemed unfriendly to them. A case in point is the 400-million-baht defamation lawsuit lodged against Thai Post newspaper and media reform campaigner Supinya Klangnarong by Shin Corp, which was owned by then PM Thaksin Shinawatra, over her published remark that Shin Corp had benefited from the Thaksin government's policies. In the Supinya case, it turned out that in the eyes of the public it was Shin Corp and Thaksin who came under scrutiny. The criminal court subsequently dismissed the defamation suit, and Shin Corp, whose ownership had changed hands to Singapore's Temasek Holdings, then withdrew its civil suit for damages. Tesco Lotus' decision to sue members of the media and others for their criticism - which has been deemed fair and in compliance with free expression as guaranteed by the Constitution - seems ill-advised and will unnecessarily put the giant store chain in a negative light. Certainly, Tesco Lotus is fully entitled to make its case heard in court to protect its name, if it honestly thinks its rights have been violated. And while there are no legal limits to the amount of compensation one may demand, the 1.2 billion baht it seeks in this matter is outrageously unrealistic. As such, the company has unwittingly put itself in the same league as those politicians who are intolerant of criticism and who do not hesitate to resort to the courts to silence the media. Continued here: http://www.bangkokpo...2008_news18.php #70
Senior Member Posted 2008-04-24 21:19:42
The interesting part about the new article on 24 April, is that it effectively has nothing new to say, compared to the one of a month or so back...
Again questionning real motives here... Interesting that Bangkok Post could also get its facts right..
#71
Super Member Posted 2008-04-29 22:32:38
Thai Tesco 'won't silence me'
By Becky Branford BBC News A Thai journalist being sued by Tesco has vowed to continue his campaign against the multinational retailing giant. A shopper in a Tesco Lotus shop in Thailand Tesco is a major player in the Thai retail market Tesco's Thai subsidiary, Tesco Lotus, is seeking damages of 100m baht ($3.2m; £1.6m) from columnist and academic Kamol Kamoltrakul. It says he was behind a "sustained and malicious campaign" which seriously defamed the store. It is also suing Thai politician Jit Siratranot and another journalist, Nongnart Harnwilai, fellow critics of the company's rapid expansion in Thailand. But in an interview with the BBC, Mr Kamol claimed the company's action aimed "to silence me" and other critics. Tesco has been operating in Thailand for a decade. In addition to the 370 stores it already operates, it planned to open a further 162 in 2007-8, according to its annual review published on its website. Error Mr Kamol says the suit filed against him concerns an article he penned for Bangkokbiznews on 29 October, in which he claimed superstores were driving out local so-called "Mom-and-Pop" stores and threatened to ruin the fortunes of millions of Thais. Kamol Kamoltrakul, a Thai journalist being sued by supermarket giant Tesco Tesco know I don't have that kind of money, so why do they do it? The only thing I can think is that they want to silence me Kamol Kamoltrakul In the same article, Mr Kamol alleged Tesco was guilty of so-called "creative accounting" - the practice of creating complex accounting structures which permit the lowest possible level of tax to be paid. He also claimed that Tesco's Thailand operation provided the company with 37% of its global income. Mr Kamol now admits he was mistaken in the last allegation, acknowledging that the true figure is closer to 3.7%. But he says Tesco is exploiting his error in order to "scare other journalists". "I was shocked that I was sued for this amount of money," Mr Kamol - a neat, bespectacled, softly-spoken man in his late 50s - told the BBC News website. "It's nonsense. Tesco know I don't have that kind of money, so why do they do it? The only thing I can think is that they want to silence me." Mr Kamol says he is worried Tesco could win - and says that if they do, under Thai law he could lose his home.  http://news.bbc.co.u...fic/7367127.stm #72
Nocturnal Spooner Posted 2008-04-30 00:06:26
Tesco's Thai subsidiary, Tesco Lotus, is seeking damages of 100m baht ($3.2m; £1.6m) from columnist and academic Kamol Kamoltrakul. Is this the same Kamol who used to post on soc.culture.thai? #73
Star Member Posted 2008-05-09 08:36:47
Rights seminar warns Tesco Lotus over libel suits
Tesco Lotus came under fire yesterday as the National Human Rights Commission and the Foundation for Consumers held a seminar on the hypermarket chain's negative impact on communities and the mass media's freedom of expression. Narong Chokewattana, a member of the Board of Trade, told the seminar that it was unwise for the UK-based firm to have recently filed libel lawsuits demanding a combined Bt1.2 billion against its critics, including two Thai newspaper columnists. Nongnart Harnvilai, a senior editor of Thai-language business daily Krungthep Thurakij, is facing a Bt100-million suit over a column she wrote, questioning whether Tesco Lotus "loved" Thailand because it was planning to expand with 130 new outlets without caring about whether mom-and-pop stores could compete against the chain. Two more libel suits were lodged against Kamol Kamoltrakul, another Krungthep Thurakij columnist, and Jit Siratranont, a former MP and now deputy secretary-general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, seeking damages of Bt100 million and Bt1 billion, respectively. Narong believes that Tesco Lotus's image will suffer in the end because of its legal actions against critics. Saree Ongsomwang of the Foundation for Consumers said communities had the right to voice criticism against retail giants as mom-and-pop stores have suffered from their unrelenting expansion. Suthichai Yoon, editor in chief of Nation Multimedia Group, told the seminar that Tesco Lotus's recent libel suits could be seen as a "classic" case study on multinational firms' ethical conduct as far as public sentiment and social responsibility are concerned. Suthichai said the public and mass media had the right to express their opinion in good faith. As a result, these critics, wanting to protect a minority in society (the traditional trade), should not face such intimidation. The Campaign Committee for Human Rights also issued a strongly worded statement criticising Tesco Lotus and urging the public to boycott its business. - The Nation (today) #74
Sabai Sabai Member Posted 2008-05-09 08:55:31
Rights seminar warns Tesco Lotus over libel suits Tesco Lotus came under fire yesterday as the National Human Rights Commission and the Foundation for Consumers held a seminar on the hypermarket chain's negative impact on communities and the mass media's freedom of expression. Narong Chokewattana, a member of the Board of Trade, told the seminar that it was unwise for the UK-based firm to have recently filed libel lawsuits demanding a combined Bt1.2 billion against its critics, including two Thai newspaper columnists. Nongnart Harnvilai, a senior editor of Thai-language business daily Krungthep Thurakij, is facing a Bt100-million suit over a column she wrote, questioning whether Tesco Lotus "loved" Thailand because it was planning to expand with 130 new outlets without caring about whether mom-and-pop stores could compete against the chain. Two more libel suits were lodged against Kamol Kamoltrakul, another Krungthep Thurakij columnist, and Jit Siratranont, a former MP and now deputy secretary-general of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, seeking damages of Bt100 million and Bt1 billion, respectively. Narong believes that Tesco Lotus's image will suffer in the end because of its legal actions against critics. Saree Ongsomwang of the Foundation for Consumers said communities had the right to voice criticism against retail giants as mom-and-pop stores have suffered from their unrelenting expansion. Suthichai Yoon, editor in chief of Nation Multimedia Group, told the seminar that Tesco Lotus's recent libel suits could be seen as a "classic" case study on multinational firms' ethical conduct as far as public sentiment and social responsibility are concerned. Suthichai said the public and mass media had the right to express their opinion in good faith. As a result, these critics, wanting to protect a minority in society (the traditional trade), should not face such intimidation. The Campaign Committee for Human Rights also issued a strongly worded statement criticising Tesco Lotus and urging the public to boycott its business. - The Nation (today) questioning whether Tesco Lotus "loved" Thailand because it was planning to expand with 130 new outlets without caring about whether mom-and-pop stores could compete against the chain" In light of the way that this word can be construed, I would reckon they have committed libel. It is the law that takes libel to be crimminal, not the case per se that is so stupid. As long as the libel law is crimminal, freedom of the press is severely compromised in this country. Add in keeping face and it is not a good law at all. Remember the cracks in the runway. People lost their jobs over that because of the threat of this stupid law which would have ruined the newspaper. Now they have a tricky problem. Issue an apology and lose face, or take it court and probably lose and face absolute ruin. If nothing else, it will probably get the law changed if these blokes are found guilty of cimminal libel. Judge should probably find them guilty, fine them one baht and then get them to be pardoned of their alleged crimes. #75
Star Member Posted 2008-06-15 09:12:08
Tesco faces commerce backlash
Retail giant asked to drop lawsuits The chambers of commerce in the Northeast are opposed to multi-national discount store chain Tesco Lotus' court action against its critics and will stop doing business with the company unless it drops the suits. The move came after the UK-based retailer filed separate defamation lawsuits against three Thai critics through its Thailand representative, Ek-chai Distribution Company, for comments which the company claimed damaged its reputation and business. Somchai Kraikrutree, a member of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, who heads a committee on economic development in the Northeast, said the chambers of commerce in 19 northeastern provinces recently met in Buri Ram and resolved to push for the charges to be withdrawn. They will hand a letter opposing the court action to the British embassy and the UN office in Thailand. They have also announced they will stop engaging in any activities with the company unless it withdraws the suits. Continued here: http://www.bangkokpo...2008_news03.php |
Sponsored by ... |
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
