'Drug war' death to go to The Hague

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- A network of police-brutality victims yesterday requested help from the Democrat Party in filing complaints with the International Criminal Court over the death of a teenage boy at the hands of Kalasin-based police during the first Thaksin Shinawatra government's "war on drugs".

A Thai court recently convicted the officers of killing 17-year-old Kiattisak Thitbunkhrong in 2004.

The groups are led by an aunt of Kiattisak. She said she and several other members would be joint complainants in a number of lawsuits against Thaksin filed by the Democrat Party.

Democrat secretary-general Chalermchai Sri-on said a briefing would be held next week to report on the progress of the party's own efforts to lodge complaints and get compensation from the Yingluck government.

The network's Phikul Phormjan said more than 300 unidentified bodies had been found along the Thai-Cambodian border, and that a number of them were believed to be members of the Lahu hilltribe. It is believed they might be victims of police brutality during the Thaksin's notorious crackdown on suspected drug dealers.

Democrat spokesman Chavanond Intarakomal-yasut said many of the 2,559 people killed during the crackdown were murdered by police, and their relatives deserved full compensation of Bt7.75 million - the amount given to families of red shirts killed during violent protests in Bangkok two years ago.

-- The Nation 2012-08-08

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

So it's ok to kill your Mum as long as you can make a few quid out of it? Have you any idea how ridiculous your post is?

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

So it's ok to kill your Mum as long as you can make a few quid out of it? Have you any idea how ridiculous your post is?

Maybe you should read it again?

Maybe you should read my reply in context? I was responding to chiang mai's assertion that 'pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.'

Edited August 7, 201213 yr by endure

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

So it's ok to kill your Mum as long as you can make a few quid out of it? Have you any idea how ridiculous your post is?

That's ridiculous and you do need to read the article again. What it advocates is that the same ammount should be paid for the 2004 killings as was paid out as a result of the 2010 killings, in that respect it's becomming lucrative. Nobody is even hinting at the notion that they should have their own relatives killed!

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

So it's ok to kill your Mum as long as you can make a few quid out of it? Have you any idea how ridiculous your post is?

That's ridiculous and you do need to read the article again. What it advocates is that the same ammount should be paid for the 2004 killings as was paid out as a result of the 2010 killings, in that respect it's becomming lucrative. Nobody is even hinting at the notion that they should have their own relatives killed!

You need to read your post again. "pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.".

Are you kidding, i have 2 brother in laws that i will be driving to the next "Pep Rally"!

If my grammer and verbage on this point upsets you so much, let me rephrase it so that the message is crystal: "it is becomming a lucrative business where a realtive is killed by the authorities", <deleted>!

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

So it's ok to kill your Mum as long as you can make a few quid out of it? Have you any idea how ridiculous your post is?

That's ridiculous and you do need to read the article again. What it advocates is that the same ammount should be paid for the 2004 killings as was paid out as a result of the 2010 killings, in that respect it's becomming lucrative. Nobody is even hinting at the notion that they should have their own relatives killed!

You need to read your post again. "pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.".

Have a cup of coffee and come back when your awake and coherent. You're way of base here pal.

If my grammer and verbage on this point upsets you so much, let me rephrase it so that the message is crystal: "it is becomming a lucrative business where a realtive is killed by the authorities", <deleted>!

It doesn't upset me at all. If you have something to say it's probably a good idea to make it 'crystal' in the first place rather than assuming that people can read your mind.

Have a cup of coffee and come back when your awake and coherent. You're way of base here pal.

I'm not your pal and I don't need coffee.

Well since you put it that way: a natural extention of course to it being a highly lucrative business is that no doubt there will be people who are inclined to arrange or manufacture such deaths, at the cost of a relatives life and solely for financial reward.

What a very sad state of affairs.

it would be great to see the victims of the drug war get justice.

it's quite sickening to see both sides using the deep tragedies suffered by families, whether it's from the war on drugs or from the 2010 unrest, for politicial gain.

Yes it is, but life is cheap here and money is all powerful, unlike some western countries where life is expensive and money is all powerful!

This case deserves to go to the hague

but IMO a ot of the complainants are looking for a large pay out

and not looking for justice for those responsible

Maybe you should read my reply in context? I was responding to chiang mai's assertion that 'pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.'

chiang mai's assertion is bang on and your inability to grasp that is ridiculous.

Edited August 8, 201213 yr by VictorMeldrewBKK

Maybe you should read my reply in context? I was responding to chiang mai's assertion that 'pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.'

chiang mai's assertion is bang on and your inability to grasp that is ridiculous.

IMHO the family involved here seem to be quite serious about justice, and if the case is accepted by the international court and if there is a verdict in their favor / a verdict which moves towards punishment for either or both the police involved and the mastermind, then that's probbaly a very big step forward for the rule of law in Thailand.

Also if this case was accepted, and there was a verdict against the police / the mastermind, then it opens the door for more cases linked to the paymasters war on drugs to be taken to the same court.

And before anybody says if, if it was accepted then it's quite possible that the same court may well accept charges against abhisit and suthep in regard to the 2010 events. And if they are proven guilty in a fair trial again, a step forward for the rule of law in Thailand.

It would also very probably be a wake up call for judges to get more ethical.

I see that as much more important than whether or not they get any payout.

Edited August 8, 201213 yr by scorecard

it would be great to see the victims of the drug war get justice.

it's quite sickening to see both sides using the deep tragedies suffered by families, whether it's from the war on drugs or from the 2010 unrest, for politicial gain.

What hypocrisy.

You and others have been bleating for a long time about the Red Shirt deaths.

Never once heard any mention of the civilian and armed forces deaths from the same riots.

Now when Thaksin's crimes get to the Hague we mustn't policicise it?

Hang your head in shame.

Edited August 8, 201213 yr by Moruya

it would be great to see the victims of the drug war get justice.

it's quite sickening to see both sides using the deep tragedies suffered by families, whether it's from the war on drugs or from the 2010 unrest, for politicial gain.

What hypocrisy.

You and others have been bleating for a long time about the Red Shirt deaths.

Never once heard any mention of the civilian and armed forces deaths from the same riots.

Now when Thaksin's crimes get to the Hague we mustn't policicise it?

Hang your head in shame.

i don't want to get banned, so i won't respond in the way i feel this post deserves it.

You paid this much when you killed that person so you have to give me the same ammount for killing my relative, pretty soon it's going to be quite lucrative to have a relative killed by the authorities and everyone will be getting in on the act.

So it's ok to kill your Mum as long as you can make a few quid out of it? Have you any idea how ridiculous your post is?

That's ridiculous and you do need to read the article again. What it advocates is that the same ammount should be paid for the 2004 killings as was paid out as a result of the 2010 killings, in that respect it's becomming lucrative. Nobody is even hinting at the notion that they should have their own relatives killed!

Unfortunately you're wrong here. A while ago I was pointing out that the red protest were able to get more people that the democrats or PAD ones, a couple of angry democrats sympathisers replied me it was because of the government money they will get if if they were killed. It was obvious that it was a rumor that has been widely circulated by a certain press

Ridiculous ? Totally ! Surprising ? Not really ...

Edited August 8, 201213 yr by JurgenG

I give up,. I'm sorry I even read this article in the first place, it seems to have spawned a low IQ day.

The whole thing seems an impossible mess, firstly to sort out the just from unjust killings and then to put an actual price on what human life is worth. Also this case seems a bit cheapened by putting an exect figure of Bt7.75 mil rather than simply wanting justice. One thing is for sure though if you let a loon buy his way to the top and hillbillies buy uniforms this is the unfortunate end result.

I can´t wait to see Thaksin in the ICC.

A Thai court recently convicted the officers of killing 17-year-old Kiattisak Thitbunkhrong in 2004?

Really? I thought the decision is not final yet.

A Thai court recently convicted the officers of killing 17-year-old Kiattisak Thitbunkhrong in 2004?

Really? I thought the decision is not final yet.

They were convicted. They appealed.

Wasn't there an article yesterday about Thailand's petition to become a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council? Ha. The irony!

it would be great to see the victims of the drug war get justice.

it's quite sickening to see both sides using the deep tragedies suffered by families, whether it's from the war on drugs or from the 2010 unrest, for politicial gain.

What hypocrisy.

You and others have been bleating for a long time about the Red Shirt deaths.

Never once heard any mention of the civilian and armed forces deaths from the same riots.

Now when Thaksin's crimes get to the Hague we mustn't policicise it?

Hang your head in shame.

i don't want to get banned, so i won't respond in the way i feel this post deserves it.

Do you think the Red Shirt deaths were policicized?

Have you ever expressed sympathy with the non-Red Shirts who died?

Some might want to take of their yellow-tinted sunglasses and actually read something about this period of Thai history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra#The_.27War_on_Drugs.27

I'm not going to quote anything from that wiki.

Very few of the deaths where by police. While a doubling on drug related violence is dramatic, it should not be unexpected. We are very often reminded of the strict punishment for drug possession, so there is a huge incentive for making sure your not caught. That is where the majority of deaths came from, gangsters killing gangsters to cover their own backs.

I have no doubt there where police killings that can not see the light of day. That is part of the deal when you hand guns to the police. In the US there is 4-500 people killed by the police every year. For some reason there is no accurate statistic. Even in countries where police only can carry guns in special situations there is police officers that get reprimanded for unnecessary shootings.

If you really want to limit the amount of cases like this one, do not let thai police carry guns. Have a strict protocol for when police can arm themselves. I very much doubt the right-wing-mindset of the yellow color in Thailand would sanction such a change.