5 days after a photo posted by Mr. Pheng Sithy went viral over the salmon-and-trout case, the Consumer Protection, Competition and Fraud Repression Directorate-General (CCF) responded by imposing a transactional fine on Choronai Shop. According to CCF’s announcement, the fine ranges from 10 million to 20 million riels, in accordance with the relevant legal provision.
However, the exact amount of the fine remains unclear. CCF’s Facebook post only referred to Article 38 of the Law on Food Safety. The case also appears to involve consumer protection concerns, yet CCF relied on the Law on Food Safety rather than the Law on Consumer Protection. This raises an important question about which legal framework is more practical for enforcement.
One possible reason is that the Law on Food Safety, which was adopted three years after the Law on Consumer Protection, provides a more streamlined mechanism for imposing transactional fines. By contrast, under the Law on Consumer Protection, businesses that engage in misconduct often need to receive a written warning before the authority proceeds to a fine. This may make enforcement slower and less direct.
The case did not originally begin as an investigation into whether Choronai Shop was selling trout as salmon. It began as an inspection related to frozen meat. The situation changed only after Mr. Pheng Sithy, who represented Battambang Governor, posted a photo online showing a box labelled as trout. What was supposed to be a happy post showing that Choronai Shop did not use frozen meat from Thailand, or meat unsafe for consumption, turned into a serious consumer-protection issue. The post accidentally exposed allegations that the shop had been selling trout to consumers under a salmon label for years.
In fact, Choronai Shop is not alone. Many other shops may also be labelling trout as salmon. Yet on 22 June 2026, CCF announced only the result of the Choronai case, possibly because public attention was focused heavily on Choronai Shop. This raises a broader question about the effectiveness of CCF in protecting consumer rights. Consumer protection should not depend on accidental exposure through viral social media posts. CCF should be more proactive in monitoring, investigating, and taking action against business misconduct before consumers are misled for years.