Home / News / Urgent Appeals / THAILAND: Another case of torture to obtain confession at Ayutthaya Police Station
 

THAILAND: Another case of torture to obtain confession at Ayutthaya Police Station

December 10, 2004

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM

10 December 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-170-2004: THAILAND: Another case of torture to obtain confession at Ayutthaya Police Station

Thailand: Torture, forced confession
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has obtained further information about institutionalised torture at a police station in Ayutthaya province, north of Bangkok, Thailand. The latest information relates to a case of torture and forced confession in March, involving two victims.

Earlier, one of the victims, Metta Saiphan, was referred to as the second of four victims in a September torture case from the same police station (UP-71-2004). The information now obtained is that he and a friend were arrested and tortured to obtain a confession earlier in the year, but after media publicity around other recent torture cases at the police station, his cousin lodged a complaint on his behalf. Both of the victims allegedly tortured in this case are still in detention.

Although this case is now before the court, we urge you to write to the Minister of Justice calling on him to have a separate investigation of these allegations, particularly in light of the other reports of institutionalised torture emanating from this police station. Please also urge the government of Thailand to ratify the UN Convention against Torture, and introduce it into domestic law without delay.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
-------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Victims:
1. Mr Metta Saiphan, 24, of Bang Kapi district, Bangkok
2. Mr Anucha Siriporn na Ratchasima, 28, of Ayutthaya town, Ayutthaya province
Complainant:
Rattanawalee Saiphan, 28, cousin of first victim, of Bang Kapi district, Bangkok
Alleged Perpetrators:
Police officers of Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Police Station, including some identified by another torture victim Mr Ekkawat Srimanta (UA-153-2004), who have already been suspended from service as follows:
1. Pol. Snr Sgt-Maj. Preecha Meewongsom;
2. Pol. Sgt-Maj. Winai Kampang;
3. Pol. Sgt-Maj. Somchai Raksakul;
4. Pol. Sgt Kitti Traplom;
5. Pol. Sgt Nontawat Wonghong;
6. Pol. Cpl Suwan Ruensawang;
7. Pol. Sgt Chareon Meksaen;
8. Pol. Sgt Wichit Suanchimplee.

The other police officers named on the case record are as follows:
1. Pol. Lt-Col. Suthep Srisang;
2. Pol. Lt-Col Nareunart Phutthaisong;
3. Pol. Maj. Paitoon Wansarn;
4. Pol. Cpl Kamphonsak Phakpiboon;
5. Pol. Sgt-Maj. Suwan Ruangsawang;
6. Pol. Cpl Winai Saengphet;
7. Pol. Cpl Boonlerd Khamsamui;
8. Pol. Cpl Somkiat;
9. Pol. Cpl Krisada;
10. Pol. Cpl Phoomsirin Sommongkol;
11. Pol. Cpl Kamphon Chanwong;
12. Pol. Cpl Pradit;
13. Pol. Maj. Pairoot.

According to the information available, Metta Saiphan and Anucha Siriporn na Ratchasima were both arrested and charged with theft on March 31. According to the police report, they stole a purse from a woman while on a motorcycle, and attempted to escape. The police located and arrested them at Panancheung Temple, after which they were taken to Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Police Station for questioning.

At the police station the two men were allegedly tortured and threatened into confessing for over one hour. The types of torture used included suffocation with layers of plastic bags, using pepper spray, beating on the body, and standing on the chest. The men were told that if they did not confess to the charge of theft, they would have another nine charges added against them. After this, they confessed. However, the police also did not place them in a line-up in order for them to be identified by the complainant, in accordance with procedure. 

The two men were put in detention and subsequently retracted their confessions; however, the case has gone to court (black no. 920/2547 at Pra Nakorn Sri Ayutthaya Provincial Court). During the initial hearings, they had a duty lawyer, who did not study the case nor give any good advice. After the cousin of Metta heard about the torture case of Ekkawat Srimanta in November, she also lodged a complaint of torture and forced confession on their behalf, and obtained a new lawyer to represent the men. On November 29 the new lawyer argued in the second court hearing that they had been tortured, and pointed to the procedural irregularities in the case. He also cited news reports of other torture cases, and named some of the police accused of torturing Ekkawat as among those who had tortured his clients. He asked a police officer appearing for the prosecution to match the names of the police officers facing inquiries over the torture of Ekkawat against those who had tortured his clients. However, after the lawyer made the allegations of torture, the police officer present and the public prosector both went missing during the afternoon hearing. The judgment in the case is expected on December 21. Meantime, the two men are being kept at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Provincial Prison, as neither was able to meet the 200,000 Thai baht bail set for each (about US$5,000).

Meanwhile, in the case of the other three persons reported to have been tortured in the earlier update (UP-71-2004) the information received is that two of the men had admitted privately that they were guilty of robbery, and would have confessed even without being tortured. However, they have said that they had no opportunity to do so before they were assaulted and abused by the police. It also appears that the police obtained a forced confession from the third of the accused in order to boost the charge to gang robbery under section 340 of the Penal Code. Gang robbery is a more serious offence, which requires a minimum of three persons.

 
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

In recent times, there has been growing discussion in Thailand over how the investigation of crimes is completely in the hands of the police. The investigating procedure is widely recognised as flawed because the police are only interested in getting a confession, not in proper investigation. This case is a clear instance of that observation, and how torture is used for the purposes of obtaining the confession. That the police involved in the case didn't even bother to conduct a line-up, stacked the records with the names of officers not actually involved in the case, and sent an officer who was not really involved in the to court as a witness all indicate contempt for procedure. As the purpose of procedure is to protect the rights of citizens, when it is so thoroughly undermined the same can be said of fundamental human rights. 

A recent initiative by the Minister of Justice to change the procedure and have the police and public prosecutor jointly investigate special cases is most welcome. The first two cases to be investigated in this way are in fact two recent cases of torture and inhuman treatment reported by the AHRC (UA-153-2004). However, in many police stations the practice of torture has evidently been deeply institutionalised, and greater efforts will be needed to address it. At very least, this means ratifying the UN Convention against Torture and bringing it into domestic law, along with an agency to oversee its implementation by way of investigation and prosecution of police and other security personnel alleged to have tortured detainees.


SUGGESTED ACTION:

Please send a letter, fax or an email to the Minister of Justice urging him to order an independent investigation of these allegations, in conjunction with those currently under way by the Department of Special Investigation (see UP-78-2004), and to ensure protection and compensation for the victims. Please also urge him to see that the government of Thailand ratifies the UN Convention against Torture.

Sample letter:

Dear Mr Pongthep,

Re: Alleged torture of Mr Metta Saiphan and Mr Anucha Siriporn na Ratchasima at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Police Station
 
I am deeply concerned by information I have received regarding another case of torture committed by officers of the Royal Thai Police at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Police Station. 

According to the information I have received, Metta Saiphan (24) and Anucha Siriporn na Ratchasima (28) were both arrested and charged with theft on March 31. According to the police report, they stole a purse from a woman while on a motorcycle and attempted to escape. The police located and arrested them at Panancheung Temple, after which they were taken to Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Police Station for questioning.

At the police station the two men were allegedly tortured and threatened into confessing for over one hour. The types of torture used included suffocation with layers of plastic bags, beating on the body, using of pepper spray, and standing on the chest. The men were told that if they did not confess to the charge of theft, they would have another nine charges added against them. After this time, they confessed.

The two men were put in detention and subsequently retracted their confessions; however, the case has gone to court (black no. 920/2547 at Pra Nakorn Sri Ayutthaya Provincial Court). In the first hearings they had a duty lawyer, who did not study the case nor give any good advice. After the cousin of one of the victims heard about the torture case of Mr Ekkawat Srimanta in November, she also lodged a complaint of torture and forced confession on their behalf, and obtained a new lawyer to represent the men. On November 29 the new lawyer argued in the second court hearing that they had been tortured, and pointed to the procedural irregularities in the case. He also cited news reports of other torture cases, and named some of the police accused of torturing Ekkawat as among those who had tortured his clients. He asked a police officer appearing for the prosecution to match the names of the police officers facing inquiries over the torture of Ekkawat against those who had tortured his clients. However, after the lawyer made the allegations of torture, the police officer present and the public prosector both went missing during the afternoon hearing.

The judgment in the case is expected on December 21. Meantime, the two men are being kept at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Provincial Prison, as neither was able to meet bail.

As the lawyer for the two men has already intimated in court that their confessions were obtained through torture, I urge you to ensure that an independent investigation be undertaken into these allegations, in accordance with Thailand's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This could be done in conjunction with the investigations of the accused police officers that you have already ordered to be carried out under the Department of Special Investigation and in cooperation with the Office of the Attorney General.

Finally, I urge the government of Thailand to ratify the UN Convention against Torture and introduce it into the domestic law without delay.
 
Yours sincerely,

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

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:

Mr Pongthep Thepkanjana
Minister of Justice
Office of the Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Justice Building
22nd Floor
Chaeng Wattana Road
Pakkred, Nonthaburi
Bangkok 11120
THAILAND
Tel: +66 2 502 6776/ 8223
Fax: +66 2 502 6699/ 6734/ 6884

PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:

1. Dr Thaksin Shinawatra
Prime Minister
Government House
Pissanulok Road, Dusit District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Tel: +66 2 280 1404/ 3000
Fax: +66 2 282 8631/ 280 1589/ 629 8213
Email: thaksin@thaigov.go.th, govspkman@mozart.inet.co.th

2. Dr Bhokin Bhalakula
Minister of Interior
Office of the Ministry of Interior
Thanon Atsadang
Bangkok 10200
THAILAND
Tel: +662 224-6320/ 6341
Fax: +662 226-4371/ 222 8866
Email: webteam@moi.go.th

3. Pol. Gen. Kowit Wattana
Commissioner-General
Royal Thai Police
1st Bldg, 7th Floor
Rama I , Patumwan,
Bangkok 10330
THAILAND
Tel. +662 205-1313/ 205-220/ 205-1840-9
Fax: +662 251-5956/ 205 3738/ 255 1975-8

4. Professor Saneh Chamarik
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission of Thailand
422 Phya Thai Road
Pathurn Wan District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Fax: +66 2 219 2940
Email: commission@nhrc.or.th

5. Prof. Manfred Nowak
Special Rapporteur on the question of torture
Attn: Mr. Safir Syed
C/o OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9230
Fax: +41 22 917 9016 (general)
E-mail: ssyed@ohchr.org


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-170-2004
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
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.