Thai Forest Officials Will Demolish Resorts Built Illegally

[webfact]

Forest officials will demolish resorts

By PONGPHON SARNSAMAK

THE NATION

The Royal Forest Department (RFD) plans to demolish and remove resorts and private homes built illegally on Khao Phu Luang forest reserves in the Wang Nam Kheow district of Nakhon Ratchasima province if the owners do not follow orders to do so themselves within 45 days.

Six teams of forestry officials have now inspected all 22 resorts suspected of occupying forestland.

The chief of Forest Resources Management Division 8 in Nakhon Ratchasima province, Suthep Pawaredwittayalan, said his agency used a map showing forest-area boundaries and a GPS (Global Positioning System) device to determine the positions of encroaching plots in order to issue demands that the 22 developers remove their structures from the reserve.

Developers who now face orders to demolish and move have vowed to fight the RFD's legal action, saying they have documents to prove their ownership of their land.

Suthep yesterday led a group of 300 forest officials to inspect 11 of the 22 resorts suspected of occupying forestland. They were also tasked with confirming the ownership of the structures and confirming evidence from maps and aerial photographs that developers were encroaching on the Khao Phu Luang forest reserve.

The teams found that most resorts were tightly locked and the landlords absent. Some had caretakers who presenting papers to the RFD officials.

"We were unable to meet any of the owners suspected of occupying forestland during our inspection trip," Suthep said.

He said his team did not have any land documents to prove that the developers had illegally built structures in forest reserves. Officials had only a map showing forest areas and the positions of the 22 resorts measured by a GPS device.

"It is very difficult to ask the Land Development or any land-related agencies to provide us with land documents to prove [the claims to] ownership of these developers.

"So we have had to visit their resorts and ask them to show us legal land documents," he said.

"The RFD will allow them to stay if they can prove that they were occupying these areas before the Khao Phu Luang forest areas were designated as conservation reserves," Suthep said.

The RFD's checks in Wang Nam Kheow district will be completed this week and the existing evidence should be sufficient to take legal action against the alleged offenders, he said.

The department will give resort owners 15 days to submit documents affirming their ownership of the land they occupy. If they fail to prove proper ownership, they will be ordered to dismantle all improvements on their site within 45 days and leave. If they resist, officials will demolish the buildings themselves, Suthep said.

The department has filed complaints with the Wang Nam Kheow Police Station against the owners |of the 22 resorts for trespassing, he said.

Meanwhile, a developer in Wang Nam Kheow district who asked not to be named said he owned three houses in the Khao Phu Luang forest reserve, but he had lived there since 1971 - before the areas were designated as forest reserves.

However, he does not have land documents to confirm his ownership. He has only land-development tax certificates, which cannot be used to claim ownership of the land.

"I hope my mango trees, which were planted on my land more than 40 years ago, will prove my ownership of the land," he said.

RFD inspectors visited his private home on Wednesday, but did not enter his property. They measured the position of his land using a GPS device and went away, he said.

-- The Nation 2011-08-12

[JurgenG]

Here is the heart of the problem :

- He (the chief of Forest Resources Management Division) said his team did not have any land documents to prove that the developers had illegally built structures in forest reserves. Officials had only a map showing forest areas and the positions of the 22 resorts measured by a GPS device.

- A developer in Wang Nam Kheow district ... said he owned three houses in the Khao Phu Luang forest reserve, but he had lived there since 1971 - before the areas were designated as forest reserves. However, he does not have land documents to confirm his ownership. He has only land-development tax certificates, which cannot be used to claim ownership of the land. "I hope my mango trees, which were planted on my land more than 40 years ago, will prove my ownership of the land," he said.

The system of land title is a total mess and completely outdated. So before going mad in the press, shouting they going to destroy and burn avery single house in Wang Nam Khieo, the government should start first by updating and unifying the system of land title. Then ask everybody to come to exchange their old titles against a new, simplified title, under an unified management. Then people without title would be asked to go, with no contestation possible.

One of the problem is the land titles are issued by at least three independant government departments with obviously not much coordination between them. It's clear from the article that there is a fight going on between the RFD and other departments "It is very difficult (for the RFD) to ask the Land Development or any land-related agencies to provide us with land documents "

The people should not suffer from internal fights between government departments. The government should first sort out its mess and clarify and update the system of land titles. Then look for the responsible of this corruption scandal but I'm not sure that villagers should be the first one to be investigated.

[HAL9000]

That's a very well thought out post Jurgen. My first impression on seeing the headline was surprise that this is not being resolved in the traditional Thai middle way manner. For those found legitimately guilty by your criteria I'd expect some kind of work-out plan along the lines of offering fines and a lease. Even a government takeover with intent of government operation or leasing out to someone else would avoid the waste of the resources expended to build them.

[maxtingtong]

And so, why demolish themselves if the government will do for them? It's unclear who will pay the bill

[KhunBJ]

Would like to see this happen, could set a precedent for other provinces too , in too many places encroachment of nature areas has happened and in many places land offices have been happy to "upgrade" land titles to Chanote titles for a small fee ... but getting to the bottom of this would probably take decades .. but nice to see somebody take the law seriously, may he live to see the results too.

[Dag]

Will never happen.....guaranteed......can of worms too big.

[Ricardo]

Would like to see this happen, could set a precedent for other provinces too , in too many places encroachment of nature areas has happened and in many places land offices have been happy to "upgrade" land titles to Chanote titles for a small fee ... but getting to the bottom of this would probably take decades .. but nice to see somebody take the law seriously, may he live to see the results too.

Former-PM Sorayud also set another good example last year, when his house was found to be illegal, he demolished it as-ordered by the court. An example to other poo-yais, let-alone more-normal people, IMO.

The Thai land-rights system is a complex mess, and does need sorting-out, sad that no government in-recent-times has felt up-to the task. Perhaps things will change, but don't hold your breath, waiting for it to happen !

[KhunBJ]

Would like to see this happen, could set a precedent for other provinces too , in too many places encroachment of nature areas has happened and in many places land offices have been happy to "upgrade" land titles to Chanote titles for a small fee ... but getting to the bottom of this would probably take decades .. but nice to see somebody take the law seriously, may he live to see the results too.

Former-PM Sorayud also set another good example last year, when his house was found to be illegal, he demolished it as-ordered by the court. An example to other poo-yais, let-alone more-normal people, IMO.

The Thai land-rights system is a complex mess, and does need sorting-out, sad that no government in-recent-times has felt up-to the task. Perhaps things will change, but don't hold your breath, waiting for it to happen !

Been here for 15 years, seen many "funny" thing with land trades, and also recall murders of land officials , because so much money is involved ... just hope the guy survives ...

[OzMick]

Old Jugs is pretty good with the strawman arguments! The only person who HAS to provide land title documents is the person living there. When or how he came to be living there is completely irrelevant, (who would buy land without a title?) as is the testimony of his bloody mango trees. If you own land, you have a title. If you don't have a title, and the land is classified an national park or forest, then you havn't got a case.

If you DO have a title, but the land is otherwise designated, I'm sure that a very close look will be taken at the signatures of the officials there-on. They might even get to join you in the can.

The thai middle way is a wonderful system where deals get cut, encroachers get to keep "their" land, officials get tasty kick-backs, and the national parks get smaller every year until they finally disappear. It is another name for corruption in progress.

[JurgenG]

Would like to see this happen, could set a precedent for other provinces too , in too many places encroachment of nature areas has happened and in many places land offices have been happy to "upgrade" land titles to Chanote titles for a small fee ... but getting to the bottom of this would probably take decades .. but nice to see somebody take the law seriously, may he live to see the results too.

It's not so easy to upgrade the land title to Chanote, you need a government decision, can't be done at local level. And it's not really one piece of land that is upgraded but a whole area. So it really depends if your representative in the parliament is fighting for it or not, and what is his influence. It has been a major subject of conversation in Wang Nam Khieo since I start visiting the area a few years ago.

This is really a national problem There is a huge mass of land in Thailand that is idle because of this problem. The development of Isaan and more generally of rural areas in Thailand is definitively linked to this land title problem being solved

[TAWP]

Here is the heart of the problem :

- He (the chief of Forest Resources Management Division) said his team did not have any land documents to prove that the developers had illegally built structures in forest reserves. Officials had only a map showing forest areas and the positions of the 22 resorts measured by a GPS device.

- A developer in Wang Nam Kheow district ... said he owned three houses in the Khao Phu Luang forest reserve, but he had lived there since 1971 - before the areas were designated as forest reserves. However, he does not have land documents to confirm his ownership. He has only land-development tax certificates, which cannot be used to claim ownership of the land. "I hope my mango trees, which were planted on my land more than 40 years ago, will prove my ownership of the land," he said.

The system of land title is a total mess and completely outdated. So before going mad in the press, shouting they going to destroy and burn avery single house in Wang Nam Khieo, the government should start first by updating and unifying the system of land title. Then ask everybody to come to exchange their old titles against a new, simplified title, under an unified management. Then people without title would be asked to go, with no contestation possible.

One of the problem is the land titles are issued by at least three independant government departments with obviously not much coordination between them. It's clear from the article that there is a fight going on between the RFD and other departments "It is very difficult (for the RFD) to ask the Land Development or any land-related agencies to provide us with land documents "

The people should not suffer from internal fights between government departments. The government should first sort out its mess and clarify and update the system of land titles. Then look for the responsible of this corruption scandal but I'm not sure that villagers should be the first one to be investigated.

But you are still wrong - ownership is deemed by having the land-title, not by the opposition failing to have it themselves.

So, unless a claimed owner can prove that they are owners by holding land deeds, they are not the owners and all buildings should be removed.

Anything else is just appeasing people that took advantage of a confused system, knowing full well that they did infact not hold a land title for the area in question.

[JurgenG]

Here is the heart of the problem :

- He (the chief of Forest Resources Management Division) said his team did not have any land documents to prove that the developers had illegally built structures in forest reserves. Officials had only a map showing forest areas and the positions of the 22 resorts measured by a GPS device.

- A developer in Wang Nam Kheow district ... said he owned three houses in the Khao Phu Luang forest reserve, but he had lived there since 1971 - before the areas were designated as forest reserves. However, he does not have land documents to confirm his ownership. He has only land-development tax certificates, which cannot be used to claim ownership of the land. "I hope my mango trees, which were planted on my land more than 40 years ago, will prove my ownership of the land," he said.

The system of land title is a total mess and completely outdated. So before going mad in the press, shouting they going to destroy and burn avery single house in Wang Nam Khieo, the government should start first by updating and unifying the system of land title. Then ask everybody to come to exchange their old titles against a new, simplified title, under an unified management. Then people without title would be asked to go, with no contestation possible.

One of the problem is the land titles are issued by at least three independant government departments with obviously not much coordination between them. It's clear from the article that there is a fight going on between the RFD and other departments "It is very difficult (for the RFD) to ask the Land Development or any land-related agencies to provide us with land documents "

The people should not suffer from internal fights between government departments. The government should first sort out its mess and clarify and update the system of land titles. Then look for the responsible of this corruption scandal but I'm not sure that villagers should be the first one to be investigated.

But you are still wrong - ownership is deemed by having the land-title, not by the opposition failing to have it themselves.

So, unless a claimed owner can prove that they are owners by holding land deeds, they are not the owners and all buildings should be removed.

Anything else is just appeasing people that took advantage of a confused system, knowing full well that they did infact not hold a land title for the area in question.

So far, the only confused person is you.

You obviously have no understanding of the problem at hand.

So, please, before wasting everybody's time, try to learn a little bit more about the subject.

Then we can talk.

[harrry]

I understand a person who has lived on land for 10 years has a claim to it here regardless of chanote.

[Dag]

I understand a person who has lived on land for 10 years has a claim to it here regardless of chanote.

yeah....but not forest or national park land......otherwise do you think there would be any at all left ??

[Farang0tang]

Just wait until compulsory land purchases(grabs) are made, to lay the new high-speed rail links.

Its gonna upset a lot of folks who dont have the legal docs!

[jamescollister]

Would like to see this happen, could set a precedent for other provinces too , in too many places encroachment of nature areas has happened and in many places land offices have been happy to "upgrade" land titles to Chanote titles for a small fee ... but getting to the bottom of this would probably take decades .. but nice to see somebody take the law seriously, may he live to see the results too.

Local Government does not issue charnote, it's the National Government. Provisional Government can issue a land title which gives ownership. Amphors really only give permission to use. It's a mess, but they have started on a national land data base and I think may may be in for a shock. Jim

[TAWP]

Here is the heart of the problem :

- He (the chief of Forest Resources Management Division) said his team did not have any land documents to prove that the developers had illegally built structures in forest reserves. Officials had only a map showing forest areas and the positions of the 22 resorts measured by a GPS device.

- A developer in Wang Nam Kheow district ... said he owned three houses in the Khao Phu Luang forest reserve, but he had lived there since 1971 - before the areas were designated as forest reserves. However, he does not have land documents to confirm his ownership. He has only land-development tax certificates, which cannot be used to claim ownership of the land. "I hope my mango trees, which were planted on my land more than 40 years ago, will prove my ownership of the land," he said.

The system of land title is a total mess and completely outdated. So before going mad in the press, shouting they going to destroy and burn avery single house in Wang Nam Khieo, the government should start first by updating and unifying the system of land title. Then ask everybody to come to exchange their old titles against a new, simplified title, under an unified management. Then people without title would be asked to go, with no contestation possible.

One of the problem is the land titles are issued by at least three independant government departments with obviously not much coordination between them. It's clear from the article that there is a fight going on between the RFD and other departments "It is very difficult (for the RFD) to ask the Land Development or any land-related agencies to provide us with land documents "

The people should not suffer from internal fights between government departments. The government should first sort out its mess and clarify and update the system of land titles. Then look for the responsible of this corruption scandal but I'm not sure that villagers should be the first one to be investigated.

But you are still wrong - ownership is deemed by having the land-title, not by the opposition failing to have it themselves.

So, unless a claimed owner can prove that they are owners by holding land deeds, they are not the owners and all buildings should be removed.

Anything else is just appeasing people that took advantage of a confused system, knowing full well that they did infact not hold a land title for the area in question.

So far, the only confused person is you.

You obviously have no understanding of the problem at hand.

So, please, before wasting everybody's time, try to learn a little bit more about the subject.

Then we can talk.

How surprising that you fail to take the opportunity to teach everyone here why anyone would without deed of the land would think they are the true owners and think they can build and sell it as they see fit.

Don't tell me, you built land on contested land that belongs to your GF, even though it was only mean for farming as per instructions of the land papers?

[JurgenG]

[

How surprising that you fail to take the opportunity to teach everyone here why anyone would without deed of the land would think they are the true owners and think they can build and sell it as they see fit.

Don't tell me, you built land on contested land that belongs to your GF, even though it was only mean for farming as per instructions of the land papers?

I've posted in every single thread related to this subject for the past month or so.

I've explained, the best I could, what the problem was, with reference to all related laws.

It's easy to check.

Then you come. No knowledge, no understanding of the problem at hand

And when challenged, you reply with personal attacks.

As far as I'm concerned you're a bozo.

Now it's up to everybody to judge.

[TAWP]

[

How surprising that you fail to take the opportunity to teach everyone here why anyone would without deed of the land would think they are the true owners and think they can build and sell it as they see fit.

Don't tell me, you built land on contested land that belongs to your GF, even though it was only mean for farming as per instructions of the land papers?

I've posted in every single thread related to this subject for the past month or so.

I've explained, the best I could, what the problem was, with reference to all related laws.

It's easy to check.

Then you come. No knowledge, no understanding of the problem at hand

And when challenged, you reply with personal attacks.

As far as I'm concerned you're a bozo.

Now it's up to everybody to judge.

No, you have made several allusions to the rules being confusing, crackdowns supposedly being unfair, the allocations of the national parks being unfair to farmers etc - which is all very much besides the point.

Rule of law must prevail - if you lack the proper land deed then you are not the owner and cannot use the land for whatever you feel entitled to.

Anything else is excuses.

[JurgenG]

I understand a person who has lived on land for 10 years has a claim to it here regardless of chanote.

yeah....but not forest or national park land......otherwise do you think there would be any at all left ??

Not so simple.

If someone can prove he used/occupied the land before the National park was established, he has some right on it.

Then, there are different government department that can issue land title, without much coordination between them.

So, to determine if someone has a legitimate right to a land is far from easy and straight forward

[jdinasia]

If the land grants went to farmers and the land was zoned for farming only, the resorts should be torn down. Zoning laws are exactly what they are ... and if we want to see land go to landless rural farmers in the future, then obviously this is action that must be taken. People (rightly) screamed about Suthep being involved in some hinky land distribution in the past and the powerful using the poor to defraud the Thai people should be stopped.

edit --- this would mean that RESORTS on land granted for agriculture must go ... other uses? Probably will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis. People building multiple homes but still doing agriculture? Deed,no deed? Proof of ownership etc ...

[webfact]

Resorts must produce land ownership papers or face demolition: RFD

By THE NATION

The Royal Forestry Department's inspection of 22 resorts in Nakhon Ratchasima's Wang Nam Kheow district has found that they had encroached on 700 rai of forest reserve land.

If the landlords do not present land ownership papers to the authorities within 15 days their buildings will face demolition, a senior official said yesterday.

The RFD's Forest Management Division 8 director, Suthep Porwaretwittayalan, said that so far no one had claimed to be landlords of the questionable plots, or submitted land ownership papers to the authority. Only several land caretakers had presented land tax receipts to the authority, he said. The caretakers have been told to present land ownership papers within 15 days or the officials will demolish the buildings there, with the demolition costs to be borne by the landlord.

Suthep said the RFD would next week inspect another 17 resorts. These are accused of encroaching on district Zone C's steep mountainous forest reserve, using the same approach and criteria as during the inspection of the 22 resorts.

The RFD chief, Suwit Ratanamanee, said that one resort, accused of encroaching on the Phu Luang Forest Reserve, claimed to have a Sor Por Kor 4-01 land title deed that was issued for agricultural use. The RFD will ask the Agricultural Land Reform Office if it is true and question them on how they could issue the title deed for reserved forestland.

The RFD will gather evidence and report on the progress to the new Natural Resources and the Environment minister Preecha Rengsomboonsuk next week, he said. A committee led by his deputy, Cholathit Suraswadi, was set up to propose remedial measures for various affected groups to the minister soon.

Wang Nam Kheow police also yesterday sent the landlords of the 22 resorts warrants for their land ownership papers to be used in the lawsuits later on. Wang Nam Kheow district chief Chaiyong Homphirom said the inspection of resorts was a normal procedure. Inviting people to visit the district, he admitted that recent developments had caused confusion and locals were worried about their work.

-- The Nation 2011-08-13

[TAWP]

Resorts must produce land ownership papers or face demolition: RFD

JurgenG>> Told you so. This is the clear legal angle. You try to muddle it with emotions or allusions to statuses being 'unclear'.

I have been, through extended, family involved in land trades in both the area mentioned and others to the east. And in most cases people knew exactly what was going on, but in some cases used expressions as 'the land deeds will be upgraded soon' - and have no qualms selling or buying *lent* land deeds (because that is basically what many of these are, lent from the government to farmers to start a small farming operation) and so on.

But ofcourse they will all claim ignorance when the government knocks on the door asking to see true land deeds and how come they thought it was ok to build resorts on the land...

[JeffreyMcCollum]

Mango trees as proof !

Why didn't I think of this !

[JurgenG]

Mango trees as proof !

Why didn't I think of this !

You can fake a piece of paper but can you fake a tree ?

These tree don't grow naturally, someone had to plant them and take care of them.If the trees are 40 years old, it shows that someone has been taking care of the land for at least 40 years, In some circumstance, it's good enough to give you ownership.

Laws that govern land ownerships are complicated but, as everywhere, they reflect the mentality of the society and it's evolution. If you try to understand them, you can also understand the evolution of the Thai society, where it comes from and where it's heading to.

[moe666]

So the guy has trees he must be farming which seems to be a legal activity on some of this land if you where issued the permission for this activity.. It seems that some are supporting the use of this land by wealthy Bangkok absentee landlords. These same people also support absentee PM.

[TAWP]

Mango trees as proof !

Why didn't I think of this !

You can fake a piece of paper but can you fake a tree ?

These tree don't grow naturally, someone had to plant them and take care of them.If the trees are 40 years old, it shows that someone has been taking care of the land for at least 40 years, In some circumstance, it's good enough to give you ownership.

Laws that govern land ownerships are complicated but, as everywhere, they reflect the mentality of the society and it's evolution. If you try to understand them, you can also understand the evolution of the Thai society, where it comes from and where it's heading to.

Having trees cared for isn't proof of any right, that is just inane.

If no proof of ownership or right to farm exists on paper then no rights is to be had.

Most people understand this, unless they have a horse in the race...that is when you see the emotional arguments crawl out.

[TAWP]

So the guy has trees he must be farming which seems to be a legal activity on some of this land if you where issued the permission for this activity.. It seems that some are supporting the use of this land by wealthy Bangkok absentee landlords. These same people also support absentee PM.

I think you will find that the only ones expressing support for illegal plantations, resorts or occupations have been red shirt supporters...even when resorts most likely wasn't built by a poor farmer.

[JurgenG]

Mango trees as proof !

Why didn't I think of this !

You can fake a piece of paper but can you fake a tree ?

These tree don't grow naturally, someone had to plant them and take care of them.If the trees are 40 years old, it shows that someone has been taking care of the land for at least 40 years, In some circumstance, it's good enough to give you ownership.

Laws that govern land ownerships are complicated but, as everywhere, they reflect the mentality of the society and it's evolution. If you try to understand them, you can also understand the evolution of the Thai society, where it comes from and where it's heading to.

Having trees cared for isn't proof of any right, that is just inane.

If no proof of ownership or right to farm exists on paper then no rights is to be had.

Most people understand this, unless they have a horse in the race...that is when you see the emotional arguments crawl out.

If law were so simple, why do you think lawyers make so much money ?

Beside, you're the one getting emotional, not me.

As I said before, there are a lot of laws in Thailand that belong to the past. But you can't change them all at the same time, you need to proceed one by one.

For a free market society, land ownership is the basis. So let's start here.

[zzaa09]

Would like to see this happen, could set a precedent for other provinces too , in too many places encroachment of nature areas has happened and in many places land offices have been happy to "upgrade" land titles to Chanote titles for a small fee ... but getting to the bottom of this would probably take decades .. but nice to see somebody take the law seriously, may he live to see the results too.

Agreed. It's a start.