Govt To Take Over Illicitly Acquired Plots

[webfact]

STATE LAND

Govt to take over illicitly acquired plots by month end

By The Nation

Published on February 2, 2010

BANGKOK: -- By the end of this month, all illegally-acquired land ownership will be revoked and reclaimed by the state under a new government policy initiated by Deputy Interior Minister Thaworn Senneam.

Reportedly with a political motive, Thaworn also included the Alpine golf course issue in this national scheme, saying that the golf course was not valid for purchase after it was ruled a monasticallyowned land by the Council of State, but it is now owned by a veteran politician, who is not allied with Democrat Party to which Thaworn belong.

"I will order all illegallyacquired land ownership across the country revoked, wherever it is found by the end of this month," he said.

Asked about a coming protest against the Land Department by redshirted protestors over questionable legality of a golf course in Khao Soi Dao forest reserve in Chanthaburi, Thaworn said he ordered the scheme at his own iniฌtiative, not under pressure by the antiDemocrat protestors.

The redshirted supporters were calling for revocation of land onwership at the Khao Soi Dao golf course and resort, following their claims that it was not acquired lawfully. Their similar efforts against a home of former prime minister Surayudh Chulanont at Khao Yai Theing in Nakhon Ratchasima resulted in him having to soon return the property to the state.

He also called on holders of nontransferable Sor Khor 1 ownership document to submit their request for transferable title deeds by this Friday - the deadline for current brief process. After the end of the deadline, the process would require court scrutiny and court orders for whatever request for any type of title deeds, which would be timeconฌsuming and requiring higher costs.

As for the Alpine golf course, which is located in Pathum Thani, the permanent secretary of the Interior Ministry would further handle it, and was expected to revoke land ownership and reclaim it, he said.

Meanwhile, the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation (DNP) said it was waiting for the Land Department's decision to revoke land onwership in the Khao Soi Dao case, after an ongoing Land Department investigation completed its invesitation into the matter.

DNP directorgeneral Jatuphron Burusphat said a criminal complaint was lodged over the matter on behalf of DNP, and the Royal Forest Department, but the legal procedure had stopped at the police's and public prosecutors' step, "without explanation". Of more than 1,000 rai, 480 rai, has been illegally acquired.

-- The Nation 2010-02-02

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[Thai at Heart]

Wowee.

I bet people are running for their little black books to see who they can lean on to make this one go away.

[givenall]

Wowee.

I bet people are running for their little black books to see who they can lean on to make this one go away.

Would be hard to make it go away if you are, were Mr. T. supporter

[Thai at Heart]

Wowee.

I bet people are running for their little black books to see who they can lean on to make this one go away.

Would be hard to make it go away if you are, were Mr. T. supporter

I am not so sure.

If Surayud can get caught up in this sort of thing, plus the need to appear politically even handed, they may be fair about it. If they conduct this thing in an uneven handed way, it will throw a lot more kerosene on the fire.

[Nio]

Alpine Golf Course is nothing but a playground for a certain group of politicians loyal to you know who

The only people I ever see there are Japanese tourists and the politicians

What is fair play is fair here and the land should be returned

No loss to Alpine Golf Course area, the area is already poorer than dirt

Feel sorry for the people that bought houses in the Moo Ban directly across the street from the course

[Homers]

Deputy Interior Minister Orders Probe into Golf Course's Land Rights Scandal

Hot on the heels of the high-profile Khao Yai Thieng land encroachment case, the deputy interior minister has given the order to re-open the Alpine golf course land scandal case.

The ministry will abide by an earlier ruling handed down by the Council of State, saying that the controversial land plot belonged to a monastery and is not transferable.

The prime property located in Pathumthani province belonged to a monastery but has been sold and developed into a luxury golf course, Alpine, complete with a housing estate owned by politicians.

Deputy Interior Minister, Thaworn Senniam, said he has assigned the ministry's Permanent Secretary Manit Wattanasen to review the Alpine land rights.

The case was initiated by former Interior Ministry's permanent secretary Yongyuth Wichaidit.

The ministry will follow the Council of State's ruling that the land was a monastery property and cannot be transferred to juristic entities other than temples.

Later, the Office of National Buddhism will be in charge of the matter and help victims who have been affected by the wrongful land sales.

The deputy interior minister said the Department of Lands' Director-General will investigate the suspicious issuance of title

deeds, including the encroachment of Khao Soi Dao forest land in the eastern province of Chanthaburi, as claimed by the anti-government red-shirt protesters.

The rights over lands will be revoked if the acquisition were found to be unlawful.

Thaworn insisted that there is no double standards on the investigation and the process will be complete within this month.

Meanwhile, owners of a notification form of possessed land or Sor Kor 1 since 2005 are required to contact Department of Lands by February 8, for the issuance of legal title deeds. Otherwise, they will have to petition the court for ownership rights.

-- Tan Network 2010-02-01

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[hammered]

The old red side should have seen the Alpine one coming. That has been the most well known land usurpage by the elite in recent history. Just because it was by you know whos guys and hence the red shirts were never ever going to demonstrate against it didnt mean it wasnt going to be noticed.

[Ricardo]

Beware of demanding justice, you might just get it, and find that you don't like it !

Sad that it needs a crack-down, to do what the various government-departments should always have been doing, but then TiT.

[Samuian]

I was waiting for that one to blow right into the faces of the guy's who started this mudslinging...

I wonder it had taken such a long time!

And strange destiny, was it the dems under chuan who had to hand the rudder to TRT in 2001 over a land scandal - full circle?

[CLOD]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

[ratcatcher]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

For what reason?

[somluck]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

For what reason?

Surayud commanded troops during Bloody May, the violent 1992 crackdown on anti-government protestors. Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the streets

[boris52]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

For what reason?

Surayud commanded troops during Bloody May, the violent 1992 crackdown on anti-government protestors. Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the streets

That plus the recent land thing he was involved with

[bkkjames]

Glad I had the opportunity to play Alpine last year. Great track.

Will this be like the Elite Card - auction it off to the lowest bidder?

[hammered]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

For what reason?

Surayud commanded troops during Bloody May, the violent 1992 crackdown on anti-government protestors. Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the streets

I'll take it you would also like to see Thaksin there for his orgy of death called the drug war

[scorecard]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

For what reason?

Surayud commanded troops during Bloody May, the violent 1992 crackdown on anti-government protestors. Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the streets

That plus the recent land thing he was involved with

I just checked with some very knowledgeabel Thai work coleagues. Surayud was not involved in any way in the 92 coup and events that followed. So would you like to explain your comments further, thanks.

[Meridian007]

Now I see why the Surayud case went through so quickly. Thaksin and his cronies made their own trap once again. "Ask, and ye shall receive!" :D

Even though I don't agree with all of his actions, I have to hand it to Abhisit and the current government. They have turned more of Thaksin's ploys around on him than any other group, (and leader), in Thailand could. A good education has its uses...

[scorecard]

Why isnt Surayad in the Hilton?

If you believe Surayud should be in the Hilton (Bkk jail) for the land stuff, then I guess you would readily agree that Thaksin should be before the international courts for crimes against humanity for openly supervising the assassination of 2,500 fellow Thais.

Fair?

[animatic]

Surayud commanded troops during Bloody May, the violent 1992 crackdown on anti-government protestors. Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the streets

I just checked with some very knowledgeable Thai work colleagues. Surayud was not involved in any way in the 92 coup and events that followed. So would you like to explain your comments further, thanks.

He can't explain further.

Yes, this is nothing more than the disinformation campaign in full swing.

Anyone involved with being anti-Thaksin will get lies and innuendo

spewed at them like, well, like bags of excrement.

And hope that it sticks in the minds of the uninformed.

This also plays well to the near term future as they hope

to embarrass the army on the world stage by creating

scenes of over the top military violence against Reds.

Of course this worked so well during last Songkrans festivities

that they want to try it once more....

innuendo and out the other... and into a lil red bag.

[CLOD]

And abisit for his Human Rights Abuse.

[scorecard]

And abisit for his Human Rights Abuse.

You raise 'human rights abuses' and 'jail'. So I guess that's a confirmation from you that thaksin should be in jail for the cold blooded shoot on site murder of 2,500 fellow Thais. (In fact he should be taken before the international courts for crimes against humanity.)

And seeing that you claim gen surayud should be in jail for land encroachment*, then I guess you would agree that thaksin and sanoh (and probably others) should also be in jail for the alpine golf complex land violations.

Would you like to confirm?

(* Guess you forgot that the Forestry beaurocrats have confirmed that gen surayud wrote to them, before he bought the land, and asked for a ruling on whether it was appropriate for him to buy, and they replied that it was OK.)

[Steve2UK]

Surayud commanded troops during Bloody May, the violent 1992 crackdown on anti-government protestors. Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the streets

That plus the recent land thing he was involved with

I just checked with some very knowledgeabel Thai work coleagues. Surayud was not involved in any way in the 92 coup and events that followed. So would you like to explain your comments further, thanks.

Leaving aside the question of whether Surayud's command responsibilities during Bloody May 1992 or any later actions of his warrant a stay in "the Hilton", I suggest that your "very knowledgeabel Thai work coleagues" and others who are so clear-cut about Surayud's non-involvement in "events that followed" would do well to Google "Surayud 1992". Many references, including:

Surayud was appointed Commander of the Special Warfare Command in 1992, where he was the commanding officer of Sonthi Boonratklin. During Bloody May, the violent crackdown 1992 on anti-government protestors, Surayud's men were seen shooting protesters and dragging them through the bloody lobby of the Royal Hotel. He later claimed that he never gave orders for his soldiers to shoot. According to a later interview, "It convinced me that the army should never be involved in politics." Days later he told a national television audience that he deplored the loss of life and that he had not given any orders to shoot.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surayud_Chulanont )

http://www.time.com/time/asia/2003/heroes/..._chulanont.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5392722.stm

http://www.prachatai.com/journal/2006/10/9967

[animatic]

Sorry, but Wiki is editable by anyone that feels like it

and is not a valid source for political and historical slams.

Pratahchai:

"...Surayud later denied that he gave any orders for his troops to shoot and expressed public regret over the events.

He also claimed that the May 1992 episode made him realize that coups were futile...."

"In 1997, apparently about to retire, then PM Chuan Leekpai made General Surayud army commander.

In this position, General Surayud gained a reputation for cracking down on mafia-like criminal activities within the army,

for promoting modernization of the armed forces and for beginning the development of

a military professionalism that was supposed to end coups. At the same time,

he worked hard to restore the status that the military lost in 1992."

There is also nothing that says now Gen. Sonthi was party of the shooting group.

No doubt some got shot, and that's horrible, but not all officers or soldiers were

doing all the bad things done. It only takes a small groupo to kill many.

If it is not verifiable fact that he did something, then it can't be assumed he did.

Fair play.

TIME:

"He had been lobbying his superiors to resolve the situation without using force,

but his men had also been seen dragging protesters through the lobby of the Royal Hotel.

Days later he told a national television audience that he deplored the loss of life

and that he had not given any orders to shoot,

an account that was never disputed."

Dragging protesters out, is not killing protesters.

No doubt under orders from above to clear the hotel.

Edited February 4, 2010 by animatic

[Steve2UK]

Sorry, but Wiki is editable by anyone that feels like it

and is not a valid source for political and historical slams.

<snip>

Always interesting (if only slightly) to see such spirited defences mounted against presumed attacks that I am not making. My earlier post was in specific response to scorecard's quoting Thai colleagues saying that Surayud was "not involved in any way" in "events that followed" the 1992 coup. Being commander of the Special Warfare Unit that is identified as (let's say) dealing with the protesters = "not involved in any way"? Curious logic and not applied to some other examples I see. Is this some new version of the Yamashita defence?

The more substantial Wikipedia entries cite verifiable sources. I agree with others that TVF is not a court of law nor is it even subject to the requirements usually applied to PhD theses - Wikipedia does not and cannot guarantee absolute truth. But that's no reason to dismiss it as a resource here (I also have no idea what a "slam" might be in this context). There's also http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/01/world/as...ai.2992962.html and more saying the same (and more) as the Wiki quote.....

It's not clear what justifies a "nice" snippet of the full Prachatai article (to which I linked before) being extracted* (and embellished*) - given that its title is "General Surayud Chulanont: A man and his contradictions". I daresay he also likes children and is kind to animals, but none of that is relevant to the issue at hand. The relevant paragraph appears immediately above the "nice" one - handily corroborating the earlier (now challenged) Wikipedia quote - as follows:

"Another remarkable contradiction is seen in the bloody crackdown on civilian demonstrators in May 1992. Surayud was then commander of the army's Special Forces. Men under his command were involved in vicious attacks on peaceful demonstrators, shooting, kicking and beating them. On this black day, about 50 people were killed, many went missing and more than 100 were injured. Surayud later denied that he gave any orders for his troops to shoot and expressed public regret over the events. He also claimed that the May 1992 episode made him realize that coups were futile."

( http://www.prachatai.com/journal/2006/10/9967 )

Similarly, the selective* (and embellished*) quoting from the full Time article (to which I linked before) - which itself also states much the same as the earlier (now challenged) Wikipedia quote:

"On May 17, 1992, soldiers fired on a crowd of pro-democracy protesters in Bangkok, killing 52 and wounding more than 100. Surayud was then commander of the élite special forces. He had been lobbying his superiors to resolve the situation without using force, but his men had also been seen dragging protesters through the lobby of the Royal Hotel. Days later he told a national television audience that he deplored the loss of life and that he had not given any orders to shoot, an account that was never disputed. Still, the realization that he couldn't prevent the carnage crystallized decidedly contrarian views that had been gelling since he last saw his father: "It convinced me that the army should never be involved in politics."

( http://www.time.com/time/asia/2003/heroes/..._chulanont.html )

Regarding merely "dragging protesters" out, the video clips linked in my earlier post clearly demonstrate that the actions of the troops involved rather more than that. Here's another:

Finally, the only mention made of Sonthi is within the Wiki quote I used; scorecard didn't introduce his name - so why would I? Given that the Wiki mention of it was brief and that cutting it out might even invite yet more inspired accusations of "creative editing", I left it in. Five lines defending him against what wasn't said looks like "wishful reading" to me.

*As a rule, I try to quote complete sections/paragraphs - subject to my judgment of sensibly balancing relevance/clarity/length - and I avoid embellishing them. Where the quote is not readily editable, I'll usually provide just links with an introduction and leave it to TVF members to decide whether/ how much to explore them. Cherry-picking "nice" bits from the full context to present as if they constitute some form of "rebuttal" is IMO somewhere between lame and desperate.

[SomTumTiger]

Yawn.