Thread: Tak Bai: Appeal Court rejects petition by victims' kin

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

However, the Songkhla Court said the protesters had suffocated as a result of an accident and that government officials who were in charge of them had performed their duties properly.

So, from this we conclude that in Thailand the proper way to transport detained people is to give them a good beating first then stack them like logs for transportation. You can only hope that one day the Songkhla court officials will one day be transported thus on their way to trial.

Hey, it's reconciliation Sumner in Thailand. Whitewash the past for political expediency. Same as it had always been.

where is calgary et el clamoring for the top man in charge at the time to be charged with murder ?

oh - thats right it was scumsucker thaksin

Ahhh, reconciliation. What a wonderful word, music to the ears of a scoundrel looking for redemption.

Contrast this feeble and weasl worded judgement defending a disgraceful abuse of government power with the lofty sentiments showered upon the victims of the red rabble insurrection a few years later in which compensation is to be so readily dispensed provided that its architect, and the man responsible for the slaughter of those Southerners, can return in all his hallowed glory.

Got to hand it to the Thai. They sure know how hypocrisy works.

Originally Posted by BKKBoet

Hey, it's reconciliation Sumner in Thailand. Whitewash the past for political expediency. Same as it had always been.

If remember rightly the reconciliation doesn't cover the period prior to 2005-6. So i believe that PT and the courts are united in giving the finger to these people.

The military men present who crammed this many people into a truck in Thai heat were sadistic and dangerous. I doubt if it was any official policy to do so. Regardless of their politics or any other factors, there is absolutely no reason for the Court or for the Army to protect men who would do something like that.

Regardless of who they were and what they were protesting about, allowing this unnecessarily cruel behavior to go unpunished regrettable decision.

Originally Posted by BobR

there is absolutely no reason for the Court or for the Army to protect men who would do something like that.

But they do all the time, repeatedly. Seems the only crime the army will punish is that of an army officer killing another in cold blood, and thats only happened a couple of times.

Unbelievable ! 78 arrested and all 78 died. That Songkhla Court decision really stinks.

Hundreds were arrested

Originally Posted by Latindancer

78 died

plus allegedly 7 from gunshot wounds

Tak Bai Incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

disgusting episode

sick, very sick

Originally Posted by baldrick

where is calgary et el clamoring for the top man in charge at the time to be charged with murder ?

Originally Posted by BobR

The military men

Originally Posted by BobR

there is absolutely no reason for the Court or for the Army to protect men who would do something like that.

Originally Posted by hazz

But they do all the time, repeatedly

The army and the courts are 2 of the biggest problems here; the politicians too, but the army and courts are institutions rather than individuals, so are far more dangerous to society...

politicians are always to blame
army is probably guilty
courts are screwed and paid by roger
2006. 1997.

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Originally Posted by baldrick

where is calgary et el clamoring for the top man in charge at the time to be charged with murder ?

Originally Posted by BobR

The military men

Originally Posted by BobR

there is absolutely no reason for the Court or for the Army to protect men who would do something like that.

Originally Posted by hazz

But they do all the time, repeatedly

The army and the courts are 2 of the biggest problems here; the politicians too, but the army and courts are institutions rather than individuals, so are far more dangerous to society...

Oh but it was there own fault that they died,

…if they strong enough when they standing in the truck, it’s ok. But they spent the whole day, doesn’t eat, doesn’t drink water, doesn’t even swallow any kind of thing, because in the month of that thing, so, they just fall on each other. And 78 die…So that’s it…Nobody intend to kill them. They die because of their physical. So, so what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with that?”

and there are users here who don't understand why that fat pig had to be kicked out..

Originally Posted by lom

Oh but it was there own fault that they died,

…if they strong enough when they standing in the truck, it’s ok. But they spent the whole day, doesn’t eat, doesn’t drink water, doesn’t even swallow any kind of thing, because in the month of that thing, so, they just fall on each other. And 78 die…So that’s it…Nobody intend to kill them. They die because of their physical. So, so what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with that?”

and there are users here who don't understand why that fat pig had to be kicked out..

..and let's not forget the quote from the main man:

Shortly after the incident, PM Thaksin Shinawatra's first response defended the army's actions and said the men died "because they were already weak from fasting during the month of Ramadan."[5]

After the moon landing I am sure you said "Imperialist forces" commie euroshite

Originally Posted by Buksida

Originally Posted by lom

Oh but it was there own fault that they died,

…if they strong enough when they standing in the truck, it’s ok. But they spent the whole day, doesn’t eat, doesn’t drink water, doesn’t even swallow any kind of thing, because in the month of that thing, so, they just fall on each other. And 78 die…So that’s it…Nobody intend to kill them. They die because of their physical. So, so what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with that?”

and there are users here who don't understand why that fat pig had to be kicked out..

..and let's not forget the quote from the main man:

Shortly after the incident, PM Thaksin Shinawatra's first response defended the army's actions and said the men died "because they were already weak from fasting during the month of Ramadan."[5]

THAILAND: Reaffirmed with the Lower Court, Appeals Court refusing to revoke post mortem inquest order made on the deaths of Tak Bai demonstrators

THAILAND: Reaffirmed with the Lower Court, Appeals Court refusing to revoke post mortem inquest order made on the deaths of Tak Bai demonstrators

Cross Culture Foundation (CrCF)

June 12, 2012

For immediate release on 8 June 2012

At 09.00 am, on 8 June 12, an order of the Appeals Court was read concerning a motion brought by the relatives of 34 slain victims of the Tak Bai incident, who filed to request the revocation of a post mortem inquest order made by the Provincial Court of Songkhla in 2009 (B.E.2552). It was claimed that the post mortem inquest order was in breach of provisions of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and previously, the motion had been dismissed by the Lower Court.

The complainants decided to appeal the case and the Appeals Court made the ruling today that “Reviewing issues to deliberate, the Criminal Court decision should it have jurisdiction over the case. It was deemed that the post mortem inquest order had been made by the Provincial Court of Songkhla, and Ms. Masta and others have filed a motion against the order with the Court. The Appeals Court deems that it does not have the right to review the motion, since it is prohibited as per Section 15 of the Law for the Organization of Courts of Justice, B.E. 2535. The Appeals Court thus reaffirmed with the Lower Court to not to accept to review the case filed by Ms. Masta and others, altogether 34 persons, and dismisses the case”.

The case stems from an order made by the Provincial Court of Songkhla on 29 May 2009 for a post mortem inquest regarding the deaths of 78 demonstrators while they were transferred from the demonstration site in front of the Tak Bai Police Station in Narathiwat to the Ingkhayuth Borihan Army Camp in Nong Chik District, Pattani on 25 Oct 2004 (BE 2547). In the order of the Court, it was ruled that the 78 people had died of suffocation while being held in custody by officials who had carried out their official duties.

Relatives of the victims found the order unjust and in breach of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand including: Sections 3, 27, 28, 32, and 197 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) including: Articles 2, 6, 7, and 14 and in breach of Section 150 of Thailand’s Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).

According to these provisions, state officials have to carry out their duties based on the rule of law and respect for human dignity, liberty and equality. But according to testimonies of witnesses in this case, it was found that the act of duties by government officials, which caused many deaths in custody during the transportation of the Tak Bai demonstrators, had not been conducted correctly and fairly. Thus, on 29 June 2009, 34 relatives of the victims decided to file a case to revoke the post mortem inquest order made by the Provincial Court of Songkhla citing their rights provided by the Constitution and given that the Criminal Court has universal jurisdiction all over the territory. According to Section 150 of CPC, the post mortem inquest order of the Provincial Court of Songkhla shall be treated as final and therefore a motion of appeals could not have been filed with the Court of higher instance there. Earlier the Criminal Court decided to dismiss the motion claiming that since the Criminal Court and the Provincial Court of Songkhla are both the Courts of Justice of the First Instance, the Criminal Court could accept to review the case. Then, on 29 July 2009, the relatives appealed the case and then came the order of the Appeals Court as mentioned above.

For more information, please contact;

Mr. Ratsada Manooratsada, attorney, phone 081-4394938
Ms. Pavinee Chumsri, attorney, phone 083-1896598

Originally Posted by nostromo

politicians are always to blame
army is probably guilty
courts are screwed and paid by roger
2006. 1997.

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Originally Posted by baldrick

where is calgary et el clamoring for the top man in charge at the time to be charged with murder ?

Originally Posted by BobR

The military men

Originally Posted by BobR

there is absolutely no reason for the Court or for the Army to protect men who would do something like that.

Originally Posted by hazz

But they do all the time, repeatedly

The army and the courts are 2 of the biggest problems here; the politicians too, but the army and courts are institutions rather than individuals, so are far more dangerous to society...

I am under no false illusions about the Army, but no matter how corrupt it is, killing these people was not good for it's cause. Ideally the men involved should be punished because they did something morally wrong, but if that punishment comes only because of the damage they did to the Army itself and it's cause, that would be better than nothing.

Thailand: Government fails to provide justice for the victims of Tak Bai killings

(August 1, 2013) A ruling by Thailand’s Supreme Court shows how the authorities have failed to provide justice for 85 people that died at the hands of the security forces in Tak Bai, Amnesty International said.

“Today’s ruling ignores the actions of security forces and officials involved in events that led to deaths of 85 people. Their actions were either intentional or negligent and therefore those involved should be brought to court. Families have been waiting for more than eight years for justice,” said Isabelle Arradon, Amnesty International’s Deputy Asia Pacific Director.

On 25 October 2004 security forces opened fire on protesters demonstrating outside Tak Bai police station in the southern province of Narathiwat.

Seven were shot dead, and a further 78 were suffocated or crushed to death in army vans transporting them to a military detention camp. Some 1,200 people were also held in military custody for days without medical attention, many of whom were severely injured.

The Supreme Court today upheld previous court rulings on the incident, saying that despite the deaths, security personnel were blameless and had only been performing their duties.

“State impunity is rife in Thailand, in particular in the southern provinces. Today’s ruling by the Court will do nothing to ensure that these incidents cannot simply happen again. The authorities have a duty under international law to bring those responsible to justice, and provide full reparations to those affected – the truth of what happened in Tak Bai must be acknowledged,” said Isabelle Arradon.

Thailand’s three southernmost provinces have been ruled by an emergency decree since 2005, which was renewed again by the government in June 2013.

The decree prevents security forces from being held to account for human rights violations.

“There is a continual problem of violence in the three southern-most provinces,” said Arradon. “Measures to bring about peace in the region must go hand in hand with a real and sustained effort to bring perpetrators of past human rights violations to justice and ensure that victims can receive reparations. The Thai government should, as a very first step, repeal the Emergency Decree.”

Background

In 2009, following the result of an inquest into the 78 deaths in Tak Bai, the Songkla Provincial Court in the South of Thailand ruled that the deaths were caused by suffocation, but did not elaborate on the manner of death as required by law. Relatives of the victims subsequently challenged the Provincial Court’s ruling at the Central Criminal Court, the Appeal Court and later at the Supreme Court.

Today’s ruling by the Supreme Court stated that the relatives should submit their challenge to the Songkla Provincial Court, not to the Central Criminal Court. The consequence of this decision is to uphold the previous court ruling of Songkla Provincial Court, which stated that the 78 died only from suffocation and that security personnel were blameless and had only been performing their duty.

prachatai.com