Unlawful rule of the Ministry of Finance

Abstract

Disputes concerning the unlawful rule by an administrative agency, The Ministry of Finance is the person who has been prosecuted according to the Central Administrative Court's judgment Case No. 502/2015.

For the reason that all forms of SYSADOA (glucosamine, chondroitin sulfate and diacerein) and the injectable group of osteoarthritis (hyaluronan and its derivatives) also, the benefits of the treatment have not been conclusively proven and they are costly. The Ministry of Finance issued a rule to suspend the disbursement of those drugs. A pensioner who used civil servant rights to treat osteoarthritis and has disbursement of injections to treat osteoarthritis has filed a lawsuit against the Ministry of Finance. The Central Administrative Court used two reasons for the plaintiff and the defendant: 1. Evidence of medical science by reviewing Thai and foreign medical practice guidelines and opinions from the Royal College of Physicians but the judgment of the case was not based on the medical practice to judge alone. 2. Principles of suitability under the law, equality of medical care, not eliminating the likelihood that patients will improve under limited evidence. The Ministry of Finance argues that SYSADOA is not cost effective and has unclear efficacy, which also contradicts practical guidelines. The court held that no firm conclusions had been reached on the efficacy of the prohibited drug. The reasons for the Ministry of Finance are not yet weighted to the hearing because there are no clear and consistent academic conclusions, issuing a rule that cuts off the benefits of government personnel under the constitution. It is therefore an unreasonable and unlawful exercise of discretion. The Central Administrative Court ruled that this rule was revoked and the Ministry of Finance did not appeal, so it was considered final.