Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Thailand): A Commander tries to exonerate himself and his men over an Imam's death

UPDATE (Thailand): A Commander tries to exonerate himself and his men over an Imam's death

July 21, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-042-2008

21 July 2008

[Re: AHRC-UAU-017-2008: UPDATE (Thailand): First Inquest into the death of Imam Yapa in Narathiwat]
------------------------------------------------------
THAILAND: A Commander tries to exonerate himself and his men over an Imam's death

ISSUES: Torture; custodial death; arbitrary arrest and detention; emergency decree
------------------------------------------------------

END EMERGENCY DECREE IN SOUTHERN THAILAND
http://thailand.ahrchk.net/edecree

------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been informed about the post-mortem court inquiry on June 30 into the death of an Imam while in military custody. It confirmed the earlier autopsy report that his broken ribcage and punctured lungs were a result of severe beatings. The Acting-Commander is trying to exonerate himself and his men from any responsibility for the death.

UPDATED INFORMATION:

The post-mortem inquest into the custodial death of ImamYapa Kaseng has already been held on June 30 in Narathiwat Provincial Court (AHRC-UAC-055-2008, AHRC-UAU-017-2008, AHRC-UAU-038-2008). Both the Cross Culture Foundation (CrCf) and the Muslim Attorney Center (MAC) were involved in the inquiry.

During the inquiry, three persons gave their testimonies in court. They are, Major Wicha Phuthong.  He was the acting- commander of the Special Task Force, Unit 39, when the victim was held in his custody for days. The doctor, Dr. Suphawit Pakdichoke, who had performed the postmortem on the victim.  And Nima Kasent, the victim's wife.

TESTIMONY OF Major Wicha Phuthong

In his testimony, Major Wicha claimed that although he was the acting -commander of the unit when the incident happened, he had already assigned officers to their respective duties. He tried to give the impression to the Court that he was not aware of who was on duty and who took the detainees into custody at the time.

Major Wicha, did, however, admit to having seen several persons taken into camp following their arrest on 19 March 2008. We had reported in our previous appeal, that Imam Yapa was arrested together with his two sons and a nephew shortly after the soldiers went into their village, supposedly searching for evidence relating to bomb -making (AHRC-UAC-055-2008).

Major Wicha claimed that none of the persons he had seen taken into their camp were injured.  He said that he saw them being held inside a truck together with other detainees.
They were all waiting for transfer to another army camp, Ingkayuthaboriharn Army Camp in Pattani province.

Major Wicha, denied knowing the names of those officers on duty holding the detainees and the soldier who was in charge of the keys of the truck. He mentioned that the soldier in charge of the keys, and his superior in charge, who changes daily, were given instructions by a Commander whose name he did not produce. On March 19 to 21, 2008, the said Commander had given verbal orders to a soldier on duty, a sentry, to keep the keys. Major Wicha admitted that the soldier had been able to keep the keys, but did not give the soldier's name.

He also added that, usually, sentries working in front of his camp or in other places in the camp were given orders by the Commander in writing. When he was asked whether the Special Task Force, Unit 39, maintained the records of those who were on duty on March 19 to 20, he avoided giving a clear answer. Instead, he said that even though such arrangements should have been observed, the records of those on tour of duty are not kept for long. They are thrown away once the sentries completed their duties. His testimony implies that the records of March 19 to 20 might also have been thrown away and do not exist anymore. 

It's ironic that Major Wicha actually admitted that his Unit did not keep the records of those on tour of duty, although he did say that his Unit maintains such records. Keeping such records is quite important to prevent possible violence in the camps. For this purpose, the sub-section 1 of Principle 12 of Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment clearly mentions that the State has to duty to record, (a) The reasons for the arrest; (b) The time of the arrest and the taking of the arrested person to a place of custody as well as that of his first appearance before a judicial or other authority; (c) The identity of the law enforcement officials concerned and (d)The precise information concerning the place of custody.

The AHRC is gravely concerned about such deliberate and illegal destruction of these records taking place in camps in the southern provinces in Thailand. This would subsequently allow on-going widespread violations against the rights of the detainees and allow impunity for the violators. You can also read a column on this issue: Mechanics of murder in a Thai army camp.

Major Wicha mentioned the names of four soldiers, namely; Sub Lieutenant Sirikhet Wanichbamrung, Sergeant Major 1st Class Narongrith Harnwech, Sergeant Bundit Thinsuk and Sergeant Major 1st Class Reurngnarong Bua-ngam, who were on duty on March 20 at the time the victim was held. When asked about the duties of these four officers on March 20, he replied that he did not know them in detail. According to him, Major 1st Class Reurngnarong Bua-ngam is responsible for supervising the detainees held in custody. However, he again claimed that he could no longer remember whether the latter had been on duty on March 20 or not.

Major Wicha also claimed that he had no knowledge about the wounds and injuries on the body of Imam Yapa. This, despite the fact that he himself was present when the doctor came to perform the postmortem examination on the victim's dead body. He maintained that he was not close enough to Yapa's body when the examination was performed.

Major Wicha's testimony to the Court presents two scenarios. The first scenario is, that he does not in fact know anything about what the duty arrangement was and what happened in the camp on March 19 to 20, although he was the Acting -Commander. The second scenario is, that he tries to exonerate himself and his men over the Imam's death, although he knows the truth about what happened.  In either case, he cannot avoid a Commander's responsibility over the Imam's death.

TESTIMONY OF Dr. Suphawit Pakdichoke

 Dr. Suphawit Pakdichoke , of Rueso district hospital, who performed the post-mortem on the Imam's body, has given his findings in Court. As an expert witness, he testified that the victim's cause of death was due to strong' blunt force trauma' which broke his ribcage, causing bone to puncture his lungs. He also found long abrasion marks on the body which indicated that the victim could have been dragged over a hard, rough surface. There were also bruises and wounds all over his body including his eyes, forehead and lips.

TESTIMONY OF Mrs. Nima Kaseng

The victim's wife, Nima Kaseng, testified that a group of soldiers took her husband together with her two sons and a nephew from their house on March 19. At the time the soldiers took her husband into custody, he was in good physical health. Those arrested were first detained at the Ruesoh Police Station for about two hours before being transferred to the Muang District of Narathiwat Province where they were presented before the media for a press conference. Shortly after, they were taken to the soldier's camp in Narathiwat. Imam Yapa and his two sons, his nephew and three other people were detained together in a police truck inside the camp. On March 21, Nima's sons informed her that their father was dead.

FURTHER INQUEST DATES:
The rest of the hearings will be held in the Narathiwat Provincial Court. The Asian Human Rights Commission urges all human rights defenders and concerned persons in Thailand to please attend the hearings. Details are as follows:

Dates:
August 14, 15
September 29, 30
Time: 9am to 4:30pm daily
Venue: Narathiwat Provincial Court, Kokkean Subdistrict, Muang District, Narathiwat Province
Case No.: Or.Chor 9/2551


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
AHRC-UAU-042-2008
Countries :
Issues :
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.