Home / News / Urgent Appeals / UPDATE (Thailand): Please attend another post-mortem inquest into 2004 killings
 

UPDATE (Thailand): Please attend another post-mortem inquest into 2004 killings

May 24, 2007

UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Update on Urgent Appeal

25 May 2007

[RE: UA-398-2006: THAILAND: Three army officers identified as responsible for killings; UP-028-2007: THAILAND: No progress into prosecution of army officers for killings; UP-069-2007: THAILAND: General responsible for killings not prosecuted but reinstated]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-075-2007: THAILAND: Please attend another post-mortem inquest into 2004 killings

THAILAND: Extrajudicial killing; impunity
---------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information about another post mortem inquest into the killings of people by the security forces in southern Thailand. The inquest concerns the police killing of 19 young men in at Sabayoi in southern Thailand on 28 April 2004. It relates to the Krue Se Mosque killings inquest, about which the AHRC has reported previously (UA-398-2006). The next hearings are scheduled for May 29 and 30.

On 3 and 4 May 2007 the inquest in Songkhla Provincial Court heard about the killing of the 19 young men by heavily-armed police on 28 April 2004 near a police checkpoint in Sabayoi municipality market.

The police have justified shooting the men to death as self-defence. According to the police officers who were stationed at the checkpoint, on that morning, two men on a motorcycle stopped and one of them walked towards a police officer with what appeared to be a knife; the officer fired immediately and shot him down. He has then claimed that five or six more men came and attacked him, whereupon he fired into the sky and the young men fled to a nearby restaurant and a teachers' residence (on a school campus). According to the police testimony, 12 more policemen were sent to the scene as reinforcements, armed with M16 guns.

According to the owner of the restaurant and villagers who witnessed the incident, three young men, all unarmed, ran towards the restaurant and teachers' residence; at that time about ten to twenty persons were gathering around the restaurant. They have recalled that the police fired for about an hour towards these premises; as a result 19 men died in the restaurant. The details of each are as follows:

1. Sakariya Hadkache, 30, shot by Pol. Sgt. Maj. Charnnarong Nueluen nearby police checkpoint
2. Somsak Bangsaman, 23, shot by Pol. Sgt. Maj. Charnnarong Nueluen nearby police checkpoint
3. Yahya Mahingta, 34, shot by Pol. Sgt. Chokchai Ruenyotha in the Suayna restaurant
4. Samit Soeponair, 19, shot by Pol. Sgt. Chokchai Ruenyotha, Pol. Sgt. Pattana Tukprik, Pol. Sgt. Sarayuth Sitthiboon, Pol. Lt. Col. Somporn Kaewkong & Arun Lamsoh (assigned official) in the Suayna restaurant
5. Pasoree Dahayor, 25, shot by Pol. Sgt. Chokchai Ruenyotha, Pol. Sgt. Maj. Pattana Tukprik, & Arun Lamsoh in the Suayna restaurant
6. Roman Ruemaiting, 32, shot by Pol. Sgt. Somporn Kaewkong, Pol. Sgt. Chokchai Ruenyotha, Pol. Cpl. Sarayuth Sitthiboon, Pol. Sgt. Pattana Tukprik & Arun Lamsohi n the Suayna restaurant
7. Sarapoo Yongmakae, 19, shot by Pol. Sgt. Somporn Kaewkong, Pol. Sgt. Chokchai Ruenyotha, Pol. Sgt. Sarayuth Sitthiboon, Pol. Sgt. Pattana Tukprik and Arun Lamsoh in the Suayna restaurant
8. Adnan Deesatham, 19, shot by Pol. Snr. Sgt. Maj. Somwang Mingmuhamwong in the Suayna restaurant
9. Makta Hormamoh, 18, shot by Pol. Snr. Sgt. Maj. Somwang Mingmuhamwong in the Suayna restaurant
10. Saronee Kalor, 18, shot by Pol. Snr. Sgt. Maj. Somwang Mingmuhamwong and another four officers in the Suayna restaurant
11. Usman Salae, 22, shot by Prapas Boonmak (assigned official) in the Suayna restaurant
12. Nirup Raesa-ae, 26, shot by Prapas Boonmak in the Suayna restaurant
13. Hami Lohpusa, 25, shot by Pol. Snr. Sgt. Maj. Somwang Mingmuhamwong, Prapas Boonmak, Pol. Sgt. Phongphat Naekamucha & Pol. Sgt. Maj. Warapong Sakulrat in the Suayna restaurant
14. Duerae Dueramae, 30, shot by Pol. Sgt. Phongphat Naekamucha in the Suayna restaurant
15. Maroning Yongmakae, 21, shot by Pol. Snr. Sgt. Maj. Somwang Mingmuhamwong in the Suayna restaurant
16. Abdulbazis Manputae, 21, shot by Pol. Sgt. Somporn Kaewkong & Arun Lamsoh in the Suayna restaurant
17. Abdulhalem Luemusor, 26, shot by Pol. Sgt. Somporn Kaewkong and Arun Lamsoh in the Suayna restaurant
18. Malayee Arbutadsa, 26, shot by Pol. Sgt. Saktawee Sanmuang in the area of the teachers' accommodation
19. Kamaruding Maeprommi, 23, shot by Pol. Snr. Sgt. Maj. Jint Wandee & Pol. Sgt. Saktawee Sanmuang in the area of the teachers' accommodation

According to a medical doctor who has appeared at the inquest as an expert witness for the victims' families, most of the victims had gunshot wounds in their heads or upper bodies.

The hearings are due to continue with testimony from families of the deceased. The AHRC urges all human rights defenders and concerned persons in Thailand to please attend if possible. The details are as follows:

Next hearings: 29-30 May 2007, 9am - 4pm
Place: Songkhla Provincial Court, Platha Road, Boyang Subdistrict, A. Muang, Songkhla
Case No.: Black No. Chor. 30/2547
Under: Criminal Procedure Code Section 150

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

The killings in Sabayoi were part of a series of incidents on 28 April 2004 in which at least 107 civilians were killed by the security forces in the name of self-defence. In the Krue Se Mosque on the same day, 32 people were killed on the orders of General Pallop Pinmanee and his subordinates. The inquest in that case should have been followed by a criminal inquiry into those officers, but so far there is no evidence of any inquiry, and instead Gen. Pallop has been reappointed to a senior position (UP-069-2007; UP-028-2007).

For further information, please refer to the AHRC webpage on the Emergency Decree in southern Thailand, and links from there: http://thailand.ahrchk.net/edecree.

Thank you.

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

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Update
Document ID :
UP-075-2007
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.