This article was originally published on Prachatai.
The Civil Court on March 24 ordered the Akara Resources Public Company Limited, a mining company which has operated mines in Phichit and Phetchabun, to pay damages to local communities affected by the company’s gold mining operation.
The lawsuit, filed by 4 representatives on behalf of 382 members of local communities in Phichit and Phetchabun with the Civil Court’s Environmental Division in 2016, is said to be the first environmental class action lawsuit in Thailand.
According to the Lawyers Council of Thailand, which represented the community members, the Civil Court ruled that the communities have been affected by leakage from the company’s waste material storage facility, which contaminated local farmland and waterways. They are also affected by air pollution caused by mine blasting and excessive sound pollution.
The Court ordered the company to pay the 382 villagers up to 200,000 baht in damages for those aged 15 and under with excessive heavy metal levels, and 100,000 baht for those over 15. Those whose metal levels did not exceed the standard will be paid 100,000 if they are 15 years old and under, or 50,000 baht if they are over 15.
The company is also ordered to pay damages for mental distress caused by mining operation. Those with excessive heavy metal levels are to be paid 20,000 baht each, while others are to be paid 10,000 baht.
Each of the locals are also entitled to 5,000 baht each for medical expenses, living expenses, and to compensate for the loss of public water resources and way of life. The company must also cover their medical expenses for up to 2 years after the verdict is reached.
The Court ordered the company is restore the area surrounding the mine, including local waterways and reservoir, and ensure that there is no more contamination. It must also fill up one of its pits and waste storage facilities with soil.
Somchai Ameen, a lawyer for the plaintiff, noted that the court allows any affected locals who did not join the lawsuit to bring evidence before the Legal Execution Department so they can be considered for damages by a committee. He also said that it is likely that the company will appeal the ruling.