A group of fishermen from Samut Songkhram continued their pursuit of justice this week against government agencies and a private company, which they have accused of being responsible for releasing an invasive species of fish into public water resources years ago.
In September, 1,400 fishermen sued 18 parties including the Fisheries Department and agro giant Charoen Pokphand Foods (CPF) in civil court, seeking over 2.4 billion baht in compensation for the economic losses caused by the surge in numbers of blackchin tilapia, which have infested many national waterways including aquatic farms.
On Monday, they were informed that they would have to wait for another two months as the Samut Songkhram provincial court had adjourned. The court will announce its decision on whether to hear the case in January. The petitioners thus turned to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) to lodge their complaint against officials in the Fisheries Department for negligence in not properly controlling a private firm conducting research into "alien" species.
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) conducted a probe in 2017 and found that the Department of Fisheries, which only granted permits to import this fish species, "failed in its duty to ensure that the agro giant had abided by the rules".
It is a tough fight because the public's attention has gradually waned, and the government does not seem bothered about finding out the truth. This will only corrode people's trust in the integrity of state agencies. It will also affect the level of biodiversity protection and controls in Thailand. It also begs several questions: How many lab tests with foreign fish species are conducted locally? And are state agencies qualified to control private researchers in following the applicable safety standards?
At present, most of the news about the blackchin tilapia relate to menus and dishes the government has promoted in the hope of raising consumption of the species.
The Fisheries Department, with the help of CPF, has been active in reducing the number of blackchin tilapia by incentivising fishermen to catch them, and by releasing more predators into the waterways to consume them. Needless to say, the department claims these moves are making solid progress.
Regardless, how can the public trust the department now and take it at its word, especially after it has ignored the warnings from local fishermen for many years?
To rebuild this lost trust, the government and the department should establish a national body to monitor the impact of the blackchin tilapia on biodiversity and include the impacted fishermen in this mission.
So far, the species has reportedly been located in about 20 provinces. A reliable and neutral team of academics must monitor their impact and provide verifiable data to generally placate the public.
The government must be sincere in protecting biodiversity. It should follow the recent recommendation by a House of Representatives sub-committee urging state agencies to pursue legal action against state officials and the company responsible for violating Section 97 of the National Environment Quality Promotion and Protection Act 1992.
The subcommittee's study into the spread of the fish also pointed to some of the individuals behind it. Meanwhile, an examination of the blackchin tilapia's DNA showed they likely originated from the lab in question.
The top priority must be finding those responsible.