Found the link to this article on another forum and thought it was very interesting.
http://www.chiangmainews.com/ecmn/viewfa.php?id=2121
Thailand's Police beyond reproach?
-
DawnHRD
- Legend
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:39 pm
- Location: Not always where I want to be
Thailand's Police beyond reproach?
"The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?" - Jeremy Bentham, philosopher, 1748-1832
Make a dog's life better, today!
Make a dog's life better, today!
-
DawnHRD
- Legend
- Posts: 2627
- Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 10:39 pm
- Location: Not always where I want to be
Copy & paste of above article - just in case anyone has problems with the link.
Around 1:30 a.m. on 6th January 2008, John Leo Del Pinto, a Canadian traveller, and his close friend, Carly Reisig, left a bar in the northern town of Pai, Thailand, where they had been dancing to live music. They never reached their next destination. Less than an hour later, Del Pinto was dead from gun shots to the face and the stomach, fired by a local policeman. Reisig was shot in the torso and, struggling to breathe as her lungs filled up with blood, was rushed to the town hospital, then driven three hours in an ambulance to a better healthcare facility in Chiang Mai.
The policeman in question, Sergeant Uthai Dechawiwat, claimed that he was attacked by the couple when he had tried to intervene in a fight they were having, and that he had discharged the shots accidentally during a struggle with Del Pinto over the gun. Reisig insisted the attack was unprovoked. Had two more eye witnesses not come forward to give their version of the story, we may never have known what happened that night - Reisig admitted at one point that she had been drinking, and events leading up to the shooting were 'hazy', while press statements by the investigating officer in Pai included several blatant fabrications.
But in addition to local eye witnesses who had supported Uthai's side of the story, a couple from out of town had been present at the scene that night. After seeing Uthai's statement in the Thai media, they came forward to give their account to members of the National Human Rights Commission and officers of the Bangkok-based Department of Special Investigation, explaining they had been afraid to testify before police in the northern region.
According to the couple, Carly Reisig was fighting with her Thai boyfriend, and Leo had been trying to separate the two when Uthai intervened, kicking Reisig and pointing his pistol at her. After Reisig tried to push the gun away, he shot her in the chest; then turned to Del Pinto, shooting him in the face and the stomach. At the time, said the witnesses, Del Pinto had his hands in the air, yelling at Uthai to "Stop! Stop!" The results of forensic testing backed up their account, with Thai forensic expert, Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan, declaring: "It's just not possible, what the police say. Evidence shows that the gunman was above Leo when he was shot in the head."
It was only a few weeks after the incident, when a team comprising members of the NHRC, officers from the DSI and a foreign journalist escorted Carly Reisig and her Thai boyfriend to Pai that they discovered no charges had ever been laid against Sergeant Uthai, contrary to police claims. Under their supervision, he was finally charged with murder and attempted murder at the provincial court in Mae Hong Son. His trial is still pending.
With two Canadians involved in the shooting, reporters were all over the story, and it was plastered across both Thai and English language newspapers in the days that ensued. The embassy got involved, as did the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), not to mention the devastated family of John Leo Del Pinto. Thailand's international reputation was at stake, a factor which would certainly have prompted the DSI to clean up quickly.
But though justice may still be served in this case, it is tragic that there is frequently lack of redress when Thailand's own people fall victim to the crimes of authority figures. In cases of police misconduct, errant officials too often enjoy a shocking level of impunity. Countless stories have come to light of gross police misconduct across the nation - excessive force, brutality, torture and murder - including those that have surfaced recently in the media, of repeated offences by Captain Nat Chonnitiwanich and the Border Police Patrol. In most cases of this kind, the perpetrators are either never charged for their crimes at all, or acquitted on technicalities. "It's only in high profile incidents, or ones in which the most determined plaintiffs are involved, that cases are ever seen through to trial," says Nick Cheesman of the Asian Human Rights Commission. Others simply fade into oblivion, never to be heard of again.
One of the most blatant cases in point is that of Human rights lawyer and Chairman of the Muslim Lawyers Association, Somchai Neelapaijit, who 'disappeared' after he was seen being forced into his car in Bangkok in March 2004. Somchai was a vocal opponent of the declaration of martial war on Thailand's southernmost provinces and had been defending five individuals who had been tortured by police. Five police officers were soon identified as being involved in the abduction and damning telephone evidence was submitted to the court, but later deemed inadmissible. Four of the accused were acquitted, and only one was convicted (of coercion and assault) and sentenced to three years in prison. On January 13th, 2006, then-Prime Minister Thaksin admitted that government officials were involved in Somchai's 'disappearance' and told the lawyer's wife that he had been taken to Ratchaburi. It is not known how he came by the information, nor was he never pressed by the DSI or any other investigative body to reveal as such.
In a far less publicised case, that of 17 year old Pharadon Manit from Phuket, the victim's relatives are still waiting for retribution. The boy's father, Siam, says that members of the metropolitan police had hidden alongside the highway to view a motorcycle gang race. He claims that they were drinking, and opened fire on Pharadon as he and his girlfriend - not members of the biker gang - drove by, shooting him in the hip and cervix. According to Siam, rescue workers arrived at the scene but the police were initially unwilling to let them take Pharadon to the hospital. He died shortly afterwards.
The next day, Siam and roughly 100 irate villagers set up a blockade on a major bypass road, halting traffic for four hours, until the Superintendent of Phuket City Police Station came to negotiate with them. He assured them that the suspect would not be allowed to leave the province and would be suspended from duty while the investigation was underway, but they refused to leave until he agreed to a list of additional demands, including that the officer who shot Worawut be dismissed from the police force and pay compensation to Pharadon's family.
That was in April 2007. Following the incident, the officer responsible for Pharadon's death was transferred to Krabi, not dismissed as promised, and in June the same year, he was promoted from Sergeant to Sergeant Major. No trial date has as yet been assigned to the case, and no compensation has been paid to the victim's family.
Cases of this kind are not an anomaly in Thailand. In fact, for many years the subject of police reform has been on the national agenda, without much success. The roots of today's police system go back as far as the 1950s, when the police force was set up by General Phao Sriyanond, a former army general who emerged as a powerful figure after the 1947 coup. Phao saw the police force as a fast route to personal power and fortune, and he created it to serve as such. It carried out paramilitary operations, ran the drug trade, carried out 'forced disappearances' and murders, and was used as a base of political power by Phao and his comrades. In 1980, the Administrative Committee recognised that "the police department is hated and despised by all outside of it" for its acts of corruption and severe human rights abuses. But when Thaksin Shinawatra, himself a former police colonel, came to power in 2001, the power of security forces was extended even further. In his statement announcing his 'war on drugs' policy, Thaksin quoted his predecessor, General Phao, saying: "There is nothing under the sun which the Thai police cannot do." He was referring not so much to ability, as impunity. And in August 2003, Thaksin went as far as to implicitly encourage security forces to commit extra-judicial acts of violence when he said: "From now on, if their trafficking caravans enter our soil we won't waste our time arresting them; we will simply kill them."
In January 2007, Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont's military government recognised that powerful policing reforms were needed, and stated that it would work to make those changes materialise. Later that year, the government set up a committee to investigate extrajudicial killings that occurred in 2003 during Thaksin's 'war on drugs'. After an investigation that spanned five months, the committee published a report which was never made public, but allegedly stated that 2,819 people were killed between February and April 2003. Of those deaths, 1,370 were related to drug dealing, 878 were not. At least 571 more were killed with no clear rhyme or reason. Despite many assurances that the murderers would be brought to justice, the committee has so far been unable to prosecute even a single one, and police reform has once again been taken off the national agenda.
Today, there are still few channels through which Thai victims of police transgressions can seek justice. The DSI, which was established as a quasi-independent agency, was nevertheless from the beginning overseen by a policeman and, in many cases, has proved ineffectual at bringing those responsible for human rights abuses to justice. Although the Witness Protection Office was established under the justice ministry, its duties fall by default to the police. Small wonder that trials are frequently overturned for lack of evidence, says Nick Cheesman, with witness protection largely in the hands of the police. "There is so much fear and intimidation amongst Thai people when dealing with any case involving a police officer," he explains. "Police officers have good local networks, so they generally know when someone starts asking questions, and so most people are reluctant to come forward to give evidence against them. And who can blame them? When you're faced with a choice of either accepting a bribe or possibly being tortured to death, it's not surprising that most witnesses buckle."
A case which vividly illustrates the climate of fear in which Thai witnesses live is that of Kalasin Province, in North Eastern Thailand. Kalasin is particularly sinister for its sheer scope: the Asian Human Rights Commission alone has identified some 24 killings between 2004 and 2006. The true number is thought to be far higher - some bodies have never been found; others have been reduced to ashes before proper identification. In many of the cases, victims were young or underage individuals accused of motorbike theft, drug dealing or other small crimes. Add to this the cruelty of the methods employed (many of the victims were tortured to death, and had their testicles burned, crushed or electrocuted) and things start to look very ugly indeed.
With the sole exception of Kietisak Thitboonkrong's case, the DSI has not deemed the Kalasin killings to be worthy of their attention. After examining the evidence in Kietisak's case, DSI officials conceded that there appeared to be a pattern amongst the Kalasin killings, including similarities in the way ropes had been tied around the necks of the victims and in the methods used to cover up the crimes. However, despite ongoing investigations, strong evidence against the police and repeated calls by human rights organisations for the prosecution of those involved, no officers have as yet been charged for the crimes.
When Kietisak was 16 years old, he was charged with motorcycle theft, and despite his claims that he had been tortured and his confession forced, was sentenced to one year in jail. After serving his time, he returned to Kalasin and went to live with his grandmother, Sa, not far from the local police station. On 16th July 2004, when he didn't come home, a neighbour told Sa that he had again been arrested for motorcycle theft. The next day, the police took her to watch Kietisak being interrogated at the public prosecutor's office. That was the last time she saw Kietisak alive. The next day, the police called her to say that his bail had been posted by a municipal official. She went to wait at the police station for her grandson's release, but at around 5 p.m. the police told her to go home and that they would contact her when he was free to go. Roughly an hour later, Kietisak called her and told her in a trembling voice: "They didn't tell the truth to you Grandma. They are going to take me away and kill me. Hurry come and help me, I'm on the second floor." After that the line went dead.
At the police station, Sa was told by a high ranking police officer that Kietisak had already been released. She could hear her grandson crying out from above, but the police refused to allow her up to the second floor.
A few days later, on July 26, a police officer came to tell Sa that Kietisak's body had been found some 30 kilometres away. Witnesses who had seen his body being recovered said that the boy's feet were not dirty, despite the fact that the surrounding area was muddy due to the monsoon weather. Sa took the body to the Central Institute of Forensic Science in Bangkok, who told her that Kietisak had been tortured to death. His body appeared to have been dragged along the ground by the neck and by handcuffs, causing deep cuts on his wrists. His body was covered with wounds and his testicles had been crushed.
On 29th July, the police phoned the witness whose phone Kietisak had borrowed to call his grandmother. They told her that the phone was police property and that she was to tell that to anyone who asked her about it. When she replied, "I'll say whatever I saw," she was told "Go ahead. If you talk, you'll hang like that kid."
So what makes the perpetrators of such crimes, holders of authority positions, behave in such a way? "Violence is a basic drive of mankind," says Dr Paritat Silpakit of Suan Prung Psychiatric Hospital. "And the fact that policemen carry guns makes it more likely that they will express violence through that medium." He also believes that stress and other mental problems play a role in some cases of police violence. "Many policemen are under a great deal of stress due to the nature of their work and relative lack of remuneration, and in some cases it gets to the point that they no longer control their reaction. That is not to excuse the violence, but it can help to explain it." Because of Thailand's gender and cultural norms, Dr Paritat believes it is difficult for male police officers to admit to having emotional issues and so, instead, many of them deal with their problems by drinking. "By WHO standards, probably as much as 50 per cent of Thai policemen suffer from alcohol problems, but sadly, hardly any of them come to seek help," he says.
Cheesman agrees that stress may play a role in police misconduct, saying the dependency of the Thai police on self-financing naturally breeds stress and corruption, but he maintains that the problem runs deeper than this, and that it is not so much individuals who are to blame for police atrocities, but the very system itself and the policies that keep it in place that are at fault. "Thailand's historical background has caused policing problems to become very firmly entrenched. The same in-built problems have existed since 1950, and the culture of fear means that nobody wants to take these issues head on - so the system just keeps on replicating itself."
These stories, and the scores of others like them, are clear evidence that Thailand's police system needs a major overhaul. But exactly what needs to be done to institute the necessary changes? The AHRC believes the solution must include a combination of legal and institutional reforms, the establishment of an entirely independent complaints mechanism for victims and witnesses, and an increased onus on superior officers to take responsibility for the acts of their subordinates. But most of all, says Cheesman, it is essential that the Thai government don't ignore the dark elements in its security agencies. "When you go about denying that atrocities happen, how do you understand the concept of crime itself?" he asks. "When the state declines to take responsibility for an accurate record of criminality, declines to deal appropriately with those acts that do occur, declines to create a historical basis for what happened, then how do we understand events in 20 years time? And how do we establish what has been learned from them?"
Recently, Thailand's newly elected Interior Minister, Chalerm Yubumroong, also a former a police officer, announced that he would be launching the third phase of the 'war on drugs' - a war in which over 2000 people have so far been killed, many of them by police officials. His announcement comes in the light of statements by anti-drug organisations that the war has done nothing to solve the problems associated with narcotics - only forced them underground. But not one member of Thailand's new government has yet voiced any concern about those countless acts of violence committed by members of Thailand's security forces, nor any intention to bring them to justice. It seems, for now at least, that denial will remain the government's preferred tactic and the real criminals will remain at large, protected by their badges and the guns at their sides.
by Cindy Tilney
Around 1:30 a.m. on 6th January 2008, John Leo Del Pinto, a Canadian traveller, and his close friend, Carly Reisig, left a bar in the northern town of Pai, Thailand, where they had been dancing to live music. They never reached their next destination. Less than an hour later, Del Pinto was dead from gun shots to the face and the stomach, fired by a local policeman. Reisig was shot in the torso and, struggling to breathe as her lungs filled up with blood, was rushed to the town hospital, then driven three hours in an ambulance to a better healthcare facility in Chiang Mai.
The policeman in question, Sergeant Uthai Dechawiwat, claimed that he was attacked by the couple when he had tried to intervene in a fight they were having, and that he had discharged the shots accidentally during a struggle with Del Pinto over the gun. Reisig insisted the attack was unprovoked. Had two more eye witnesses not come forward to give their version of the story, we may never have known what happened that night - Reisig admitted at one point that she had been drinking, and events leading up to the shooting were 'hazy', while press statements by the investigating officer in Pai included several blatant fabrications.
But in addition to local eye witnesses who had supported Uthai's side of the story, a couple from out of town had been present at the scene that night. After seeing Uthai's statement in the Thai media, they came forward to give their account to members of the National Human Rights Commission and officers of the Bangkok-based Department of Special Investigation, explaining they had been afraid to testify before police in the northern region.
According to the couple, Carly Reisig was fighting with her Thai boyfriend, and Leo had been trying to separate the two when Uthai intervened, kicking Reisig and pointing his pistol at her. After Reisig tried to push the gun away, he shot her in the chest; then turned to Del Pinto, shooting him in the face and the stomach. At the time, said the witnesses, Del Pinto had his hands in the air, yelling at Uthai to "Stop! Stop!" The results of forensic testing backed up their account, with Thai forensic expert, Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan, declaring: "It's just not possible, what the police say. Evidence shows that the gunman was above Leo when he was shot in the head."
It was only a few weeks after the incident, when a team comprising members of the NHRC, officers from the DSI and a foreign journalist escorted Carly Reisig and her Thai boyfriend to Pai that they discovered no charges had ever been laid against Sergeant Uthai, contrary to police claims. Under their supervision, he was finally charged with murder and attempted murder at the provincial court in Mae Hong Son. His trial is still pending.
With two Canadians involved in the shooting, reporters were all over the story, and it was plastered across both Thai and English language newspapers in the days that ensued. The embassy got involved, as did the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), not to mention the devastated family of John Leo Del Pinto. Thailand's international reputation was at stake, a factor which would certainly have prompted the DSI to clean up quickly.
But though justice may still be served in this case, it is tragic that there is frequently lack of redress when Thailand's own people fall victim to the crimes of authority figures. In cases of police misconduct, errant officials too often enjoy a shocking level of impunity. Countless stories have come to light of gross police misconduct across the nation - excessive force, brutality, torture and murder - including those that have surfaced recently in the media, of repeated offences by Captain Nat Chonnitiwanich and the Border Police Patrol. In most cases of this kind, the perpetrators are either never charged for their crimes at all, or acquitted on technicalities. "It's only in high profile incidents, or ones in which the most determined plaintiffs are involved, that cases are ever seen through to trial," says Nick Cheesman of the Asian Human Rights Commission. Others simply fade into oblivion, never to be heard of again.
One of the most blatant cases in point is that of Human rights lawyer and Chairman of the Muslim Lawyers Association, Somchai Neelapaijit, who 'disappeared' after he was seen being forced into his car in Bangkok in March 2004. Somchai was a vocal opponent of the declaration of martial war on Thailand's southernmost provinces and had been defending five individuals who had been tortured by police. Five police officers were soon identified as being involved in the abduction and damning telephone evidence was submitted to the court, but later deemed inadmissible. Four of the accused were acquitted, and only one was convicted (of coercion and assault) and sentenced to three years in prison. On January 13th, 2006, then-Prime Minister Thaksin admitted that government officials were involved in Somchai's 'disappearance' and told the lawyer's wife that he had been taken to Ratchaburi. It is not known how he came by the information, nor was he never pressed by the DSI or any other investigative body to reveal as such.
In a far less publicised case, that of 17 year old Pharadon Manit from Phuket, the victim's relatives are still waiting for retribution. The boy's father, Siam, says that members of the metropolitan police had hidden alongside the highway to view a motorcycle gang race. He claims that they were drinking, and opened fire on Pharadon as he and his girlfriend - not members of the biker gang - drove by, shooting him in the hip and cervix. According to Siam, rescue workers arrived at the scene but the police were initially unwilling to let them take Pharadon to the hospital. He died shortly afterwards.
The next day, Siam and roughly 100 irate villagers set up a blockade on a major bypass road, halting traffic for four hours, until the Superintendent of Phuket City Police Station came to negotiate with them. He assured them that the suspect would not be allowed to leave the province and would be suspended from duty while the investigation was underway, but they refused to leave until he agreed to a list of additional demands, including that the officer who shot Worawut be dismissed from the police force and pay compensation to Pharadon's family.
That was in April 2007. Following the incident, the officer responsible for Pharadon's death was transferred to Krabi, not dismissed as promised, and in June the same year, he was promoted from Sergeant to Sergeant Major. No trial date has as yet been assigned to the case, and no compensation has been paid to the victim's family.
Cases of this kind are not an anomaly in Thailand. In fact, for many years the subject of police reform has been on the national agenda, without much success. The roots of today's police system go back as far as the 1950s, when the police force was set up by General Phao Sriyanond, a former army general who emerged as a powerful figure after the 1947 coup. Phao saw the police force as a fast route to personal power and fortune, and he created it to serve as such. It carried out paramilitary operations, ran the drug trade, carried out 'forced disappearances' and murders, and was used as a base of political power by Phao and his comrades. In 1980, the Administrative Committee recognised that "the police department is hated and despised by all outside of it" for its acts of corruption and severe human rights abuses. But when Thaksin Shinawatra, himself a former police colonel, came to power in 2001, the power of security forces was extended even further. In his statement announcing his 'war on drugs' policy, Thaksin quoted his predecessor, General Phao, saying: "There is nothing under the sun which the Thai police cannot do." He was referring not so much to ability, as impunity. And in August 2003, Thaksin went as far as to implicitly encourage security forces to commit extra-judicial acts of violence when he said: "From now on, if their trafficking caravans enter our soil we won't waste our time arresting them; we will simply kill them."
In January 2007, Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont's military government recognised that powerful policing reforms were needed, and stated that it would work to make those changes materialise. Later that year, the government set up a committee to investigate extrajudicial killings that occurred in 2003 during Thaksin's 'war on drugs'. After an investigation that spanned five months, the committee published a report which was never made public, but allegedly stated that 2,819 people were killed between February and April 2003. Of those deaths, 1,370 were related to drug dealing, 878 were not. At least 571 more were killed with no clear rhyme or reason. Despite many assurances that the murderers would be brought to justice, the committee has so far been unable to prosecute even a single one, and police reform has once again been taken off the national agenda.
Today, there are still few channels through which Thai victims of police transgressions can seek justice. The DSI, which was established as a quasi-independent agency, was nevertheless from the beginning overseen by a policeman and, in many cases, has proved ineffectual at bringing those responsible for human rights abuses to justice. Although the Witness Protection Office was established under the justice ministry, its duties fall by default to the police. Small wonder that trials are frequently overturned for lack of evidence, says Nick Cheesman, with witness protection largely in the hands of the police. "There is so much fear and intimidation amongst Thai people when dealing with any case involving a police officer," he explains. "Police officers have good local networks, so they generally know when someone starts asking questions, and so most people are reluctant to come forward to give evidence against them. And who can blame them? When you're faced with a choice of either accepting a bribe or possibly being tortured to death, it's not surprising that most witnesses buckle."
A case which vividly illustrates the climate of fear in which Thai witnesses live is that of Kalasin Province, in North Eastern Thailand. Kalasin is particularly sinister for its sheer scope: the Asian Human Rights Commission alone has identified some 24 killings between 2004 and 2006. The true number is thought to be far higher - some bodies have never been found; others have been reduced to ashes before proper identification. In many of the cases, victims were young or underage individuals accused of motorbike theft, drug dealing or other small crimes. Add to this the cruelty of the methods employed (many of the victims were tortured to death, and had their testicles burned, crushed or electrocuted) and things start to look very ugly indeed.
With the sole exception of Kietisak Thitboonkrong's case, the DSI has not deemed the Kalasin killings to be worthy of their attention. After examining the evidence in Kietisak's case, DSI officials conceded that there appeared to be a pattern amongst the Kalasin killings, including similarities in the way ropes had been tied around the necks of the victims and in the methods used to cover up the crimes. However, despite ongoing investigations, strong evidence against the police and repeated calls by human rights organisations for the prosecution of those involved, no officers have as yet been charged for the crimes.
When Kietisak was 16 years old, he was charged with motorcycle theft, and despite his claims that he had been tortured and his confession forced, was sentenced to one year in jail. After serving his time, he returned to Kalasin and went to live with his grandmother, Sa, not far from the local police station. On 16th July 2004, when he didn't come home, a neighbour told Sa that he had again been arrested for motorcycle theft. The next day, the police took her to watch Kietisak being interrogated at the public prosecutor's office. That was the last time she saw Kietisak alive. The next day, the police called her to say that his bail had been posted by a municipal official. She went to wait at the police station for her grandson's release, but at around 5 p.m. the police told her to go home and that they would contact her when he was free to go. Roughly an hour later, Kietisak called her and told her in a trembling voice: "They didn't tell the truth to you Grandma. They are going to take me away and kill me. Hurry come and help me, I'm on the second floor." After that the line went dead.
At the police station, Sa was told by a high ranking police officer that Kietisak had already been released. She could hear her grandson crying out from above, but the police refused to allow her up to the second floor.
A few days later, on July 26, a police officer came to tell Sa that Kietisak's body had been found some 30 kilometres away. Witnesses who had seen his body being recovered said that the boy's feet were not dirty, despite the fact that the surrounding area was muddy due to the monsoon weather. Sa took the body to the Central Institute of Forensic Science in Bangkok, who told her that Kietisak had been tortured to death. His body appeared to have been dragged along the ground by the neck and by handcuffs, causing deep cuts on his wrists. His body was covered with wounds and his testicles had been crushed.
On 29th July, the police phoned the witness whose phone Kietisak had borrowed to call his grandmother. They told her that the phone was police property and that she was to tell that to anyone who asked her about it. When she replied, "I'll say whatever I saw," she was told "Go ahead. If you talk, you'll hang like that kid."
So what makes the perpetrators of such crimes, holders of authority positions, behave in such a way? "Violence is a basic drive of mankind," says Dr Paritat Silpakit of Suan Prung Psychiatric Hospital. "And the fact that policemen carry guns makes it more likely that they will express violence through that medium." He also believes that stress and other mental problems play a role in some cases of police violence. "Many policemen are under a great deal of stress due to the nature of their work and relative lack of remuneration, and in some cases it gets to the point that they no longer control their reaction. That is not to excuse the violence, but it can help to explain it." Because of Thailand's gender and cultural norms, Dr Paritat believes it is difficult for male police officers to admit to having emotional issues and so, instead, many of them deal with their problems by drinking. "By WHO standards, probably as much as 50 per cent of Thai policemen suffer from alcohol problems, but sadly, hardly any of them come to seek help," he says.
Cheesman agrees that stress may play a role in police misconduct, saying the dependency of the Thai police on self-financing naturally breeds stress and corruption, but he maintains that the problem runs deeper than this, and that it is not so much individuals who are to blame for police atrocities, but the very system itself and the policies that keep it in place that are at fault. "Thailand's historical background has caused policing problems to become very firmly entrenched. The same in-built problems have existed since 1950, and the culture of fear means that nobody wants to take these issues head on - so the system just keeps on replicating itself."
These stories, and the scores of others like them, are clear evidence that Thailand's police system needs a major overhaul. But exactly what needs to be done to institute the necessary changes? The AHRC believes the solution must include a combination of legal and institutional reforms, the establishment of an entirely independent complaints mechanism for victims and witnesses, and an increased onus on superior officers to take responsibility for the acts of their subordinates. But most of all, says Cheesman, it is essential that the Thai government don't ignore the dark elements in its security agencies. "When you go about denying that atrocities happen, how do you understand the concept of crime itself?" he asks. "When the state declines to take responsibility for an accurate record of criminality, declines to deal appropriately with those acts that do occur, declines to create a historical basis for what happened, then how do we understand events in 20 years time? And how do we establish what has been learned from them?"
Recently, Thailand's newly elected Interior Minister, Chalerm Yubumroong, also a former a police officer, announced that he would be launching the third phase of the 'war on drugs' - a war in which over 2000 people have so far been killed, many of them by police officials. His announcement comes in the light of statements by anti-drug organisations that the war has done nothing to solve the problems associated with narcotics - only forced them underground. But not one member of Thailand's new government has yet voiced any concern about those countless acts of violence committed by members of Thailand's security forces, nor any intention to bring them to justice. It seems, for now at least, that denial will remain the government's preferred tactic and the real criminals will remain at large, protected by their badges and the guns at their sides.
by Cindy Tilney
"The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?" - Jeremy Bentham, philosopher, 1748-1832
Make a dog's life better, today!
Make a dog's life better, today!