New lead in missing Karen activist case: Kaeng Krachan National Park

[webfact]

New Lead in Missing Karen Activist Case
By Khaosod English


Photos of park officials cutting down trees in Kaeng Krachan Park. The images were discovered on a flash drive that belonged to missing Karen rights activist Porlachee "Billy" Rakchongcharoen.

PHETCHABURI – The wife of missing rights activist says she has uncovered a set of photos that may shed new light on the suspected abduction of her husband.

Porlachee "Billy" Rakchongcharoen went missing two months ago on 17 April after he was detained by park officials in Kaeng Krachan National Park in Petchburi province. Mr. Porlachee is an ethnic Karen who had been campaigning on behalf of Karen communities in national park who say they have been intimidated and abused by park officials.

Mr. Porlachee is also a key witness in a court case against former Kaeng Krachan Park chief, Mr. Chaiwat Limlikitaksorn, who has been accused of engineering the violent eviction of 20 Karen families in 2011. Mr. Porlachee's involvement in the case has led many to suspect that he was "disappeared" by park officials in an effort to silence the Karen community's accusations.

Yesterday, Surapong Kongchantuek, a human rights expert and legal adviser to Mr. Porlachee's family, said he received a set of photos from Billy's wife that show park officials cutting down trees in the national park.

According to Mr. Surapong, Mr. Porlachee took the photos and saved them on his flashdrive, which was discovered accidentally by his wife a few days ago.

Mr. Surapong said the photographed officials, who were wearing "Department of National Park" t-shirts, may have been engaged in illegal logging and it's possible Mr. Porlachee photographed the group to provide evidence of their misconduct.

Local Karens claimed that the photos were genuine and confirmed that illicit logging took place near Baan Pong Luek and Bang Kloi villages, Mr. Surapong said. He urged the authorities to swiftly clarify the matter.

The director of the National Park Department, Nipon Chotiban, said an investigation of the photos is underway.

“I have already instructed officials to investigate the background of these photos, because these days there are a lot of photoshopped images,” Mr. Nipon said. “If national officials were indeed cutting down trees illegally, I will prosecute them according to the laws.”

It's now been two months since Mr. Porchalee was last seen, but Mr. Surapon said the police investigation into his disappearance is going nowhere.

"I have been coordinating with Kaeng Krachan police, but the officers are so slow at work," Mr. Surapong said. "The case has seen no progress."

Human rights activists have accused park officials of collaborating with Mr. Chaiwat, the former park director, to cover up evidence related to Mr. Porlachee's disppearance. Mr. Chaiwat admits he detained Mr. Porchalee for carrying illegal honey on the day he went missing, but claims he released the activst on the same day.

After initial reluctance, Mr. Chaiwat requested to be transferred to another national park to provide the Karen community with "peace of mind." The Department of National Park later moved Mr. Chaiwat to a low profile post in Bangkok.

Pol.Lt.Col. Kollayut Wongpetch, an investigation officer at Kaeng Krachan Police Station, said yesterday that police have asked the Office of Public Sector Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) to launch a separate inquiry into Mr. Chaiwat for his alleged negligence of duty and abuse of power during his term as head of Kaeng Krachan Park. Mr. Chaiwat is also facing a criminal investigation for allegedly masterminding the murder of another Karen activist from Mr. Porchalee’s network in 2011.

"Furthermore, we have already sent police officers to protect witnesses and Karen residents in Baan Pong Luek and Bang Kloi villages as they have requested," Pol.Lt.Col. Kollayut said.

Source: http://en.khaosod.co.th/detail.php?newsid=1403007988&section=14


-- Khaosod English 2014-06-18

[ClutchClark]

Hopefully someone with more knowledge of the species of tree can chime in but that tree appears to be dead long enough to have lost bark. In the US that tree would not have nearly as much commercial value and a forestry official could possibly even have grounds for removing it if it was in an area that it could fall and cause damage or if it was a beetle kill or a diseased tree.

Can someone with experience of Thailand hardwoods and timber practices please provide more insight.

Terrible thing when that young man disappeared. So sorry for his wife and family.

Edited June 17, 2014 by ClutchClark

[cooked]

To my eye the tree still has its bark, the trunk next to it has a creeper on its bark and looks like the other. Don't start looking for excuses for these guys, they are guilty as hell, a lot of really evil stuff went on under the administration of Chaiwat including poaching ans stealing from a wildlife sanctuary.

[siampolee]

Interesting to note that since there has been a change in the nations administration we do seem to be seeing far more evidence appearing regarding a large number of somewhat mysterious and dubious unethical actions politically socially and environmentally wise.

Perhaps the controlling hand(s) on the B.I.B. the D.S.I. and other claimed law enforcement agencies has or is losing its grip.

[chainarong]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Hopefully someone with more knowledge of the species of tree can chime in but that tree appears to be dead long enough to have lost bark. In the US that tree would not have nearly as much commercial value and a forestry official could possibly even have grounds for removing it if it was in an area that it could fall and cause damage or if it was a beetle kill or a diseased tree.

Can someone with experience of Thailand hardwoods and timber practices please provide more insight.

Terrible thing when that young man disappeared. So sorry for his wife and family.

It really doesn't matter, the removal of actually any material from a Thai national park is prohibited , included any house without permission.

[ClutchClark]

To my eye the tree still has its bark, the trunk next to it has a creeper on its bark and looks like the other. Don't start looking for excuses for these guys, they are guilty as hell, a lot of really evil stuff went on under the administration of Chaiwat including poaching ans stealing from a wildlife sanctuary.

It has absolutely nothing to do with making excuses for anyone, its called a defense, more specifically reasonable "deniability". Its called spin. Guys who are crooked are very good at spin so you have to consider what their spin will be and look for ways to disprove it.

I see forestry workers cutting up a tree. Do forestry workers cut up trees as part of their jobs?

You are allowing your bias, which you have made clear in your post, shadow your judgement.

[ClutchClark]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Hopefully someone with more knowledge of the species of tree can chime in but that tree appears to be dead long enough to have lost bark. In the US that tree would not have nearly as much commercial value and a forestry official could possibly even have grounds for removing it if it was in an area that it could fall and cause damage or if it was a beetle kill or a diseased tree.

Can someone with experience of Thailand hardwoods and timber practices please provide more insight.

Terrible thing when that young man disappeared. So sorry for his wife and family.

It really doesn't matter, the removal of actually any material from a Thai national park is prohibited , included any house without permission.

Thanks, that is the kind of detail about Thailand I was unfamiliar with.

So if a tree falls or is diseased or insect ridden then forestry personnel do not remove them to prevent further spread of the problem.

In that case, this photo becomes more difficult to explain IF it can be proven it occurred in a National Park.

[Emptyset]

Interesting to note that since there has been a change in the nations administration we do seem to be seeing far more evidence appearing regarding a large number of somewhat mysterious and dubious unethical actions politically socially and environmentally wise.

Perhaps the controlling hand(s) on the B.I.B. the D.S.I. and other claimed law enforcement agencies has or is losing its grip.

Not really, there was a lot about this case in the media pre-coup. Of course you're going to hear about cases that involved the last govt more, like Ekayuth. As for Billy's case, a lot depends on who this park chief was connected to. And it's local police who are involved in the case so far, not the DSI. Police aren't all connected to Thaksin, you know, especially not in the southern provinces. But perhaps the DSI should be involved if local police are deliberately stalling.

[cloudhopper]

[cooked]

To my eye the tree still has its bark, the trunk next to it has a creeper on its bark and looks like the other. Don't start looking for excuses for these guys, they are guilty as hell, a lot of really evil stuff went on under the administration of Chaiwat including poaching ans stealing from a wildlife sanctuary.

It has absolutely nothing to do with making excuses for anyone, its called a defense, more specifically reasonable "deniability". Its called spin. Guys who are crooked are very good at spin so you have to consider what their spin will be and look for ways to disprove it.

I see forestry workers cutting up a tree. Do forestry workers cut up trees as part of their jobs?

You are allowing your bias, which you have made clear in your post, shadow your judgement.

Bias? Do some reading about this guy. Stealing wood from the forest that he is supposed to be looking after is very small beer compared with what he is otherwise accused of.

So, to take your questions seriously: Sawn wood is usually stored with its bark attached until it goes through a saw mill. There are no signs of removed bark on the forest floor and if you think about it this would be a pretty pointless exercise anyway unless there was insect infestation or similar.

Forestry workers will often prepare logs in this way, especially in tropical countries where the wood is so very heavy and of course doubly so in national parks where there are not supposed to be loggers' roads and corresponding heavy machinery.

[ClutchClark]

To my eye the tree still has its bark, the trunk next to it has a creeper on its bark and looks like the other. Don't start looking for excuses for these guys, they are guilty as hell, a lot of really evil stuff went on under the administration of Chaiwat including poaching ans stealing from a wildlife sanctuary.

It has absolutely nothing to do with making excuses for anyone, its called a defense, more specifically reasonable "deniability". Its called spin. Guys who are crooked are very good at spin so you have to consider what their spin will be and look for ways to disprove it.

I see forestry workers cutting up a tree. Do forestry workers cut up trees as part of their jobs?

You are allowing your bias, which you have made clear in your post, shadow your judgement.

Bias? Do some reading about this guy. Stealing wood from the forest that he is supposed to be looking after is very small beer compared with what he is otherwise accused of.

So, to take your questions seriously: Sawn wood is usually stored with its bark attached until it goes through a saw mill. There are no signs of removed bark on the forest floor and if you think about it this would be a pretty pointless exercise anyway unless there was insect infestation or similar.

Forestry workers will often prepare logs in this way, especially in tropical countries where the wood is so very heavy and of course doubly so in national parks where there are not supposed to be loggers' roads and corresponding heavy machinery.

I am not talking about the history of forestry management in Thailand and whether its corrupt or whether theft occurs. This is a photo of work being performed. I do not see anything more in this photo than two guys in forestry ( or Park) uniforms sawing up a tree.

I am talking about this photo and this tree and my questions are clear:

1) Was this photo taken in a national Park?

2) Do forestry personnel cut down trees as part of their daily work?

3) Does anyone else see that the bark is removed from the tree and there is not bark laying below it which there would be if the bark was peeled after it was felled.

If you see details in this photo I am missing then please point them out. I am well aware of the history of illegal logging.

Thanks

[cooked]

To my eye the tree still has its bark, the trunk next to it has a creeper on its bark and looks like the other. Don't start looking for excuses for these guys, they are guilty as hell, a lot of really evil stuff went on under the administration of Chaiwat including poaching ans stealing from a wildlife sanctuary.

It has absolutely nothing to do with making excuses for anyone, its called a defense, more specifically reasonable "deniability". Its called spin. Guys who are crooked are very good at spin so you have to consider what their spin will be and look for ways to disprove it.

I see forestry workers cutting up a tree. Do forestry workers cut up trees as part of their jobs?

You are allowing your bias, which you have made clear in your post, shadow your judgement.

Bias? Do some reading about this guy. Stealing wood from the forest that he is supposed to be looking after is very small beer compared with what he is otherwise accused of.

So, to take your questions seriously: Sawn wood is usually stored with its bark attached until it goes through a saw mill. There are no signs of removed bark on the forest floor and if you think about it this would be a pretty pointless exercise anyway unless there was insect infestation or similar.

Forestry workers will often prepare logs in this way, especially in tropical countries where the wood is so very heavy and of course doubly so in national parks where there are not supposed to be loggers' roads and corresponding heavy machinery.

I am not talking about the history of forestry management in Thailand and whether its corrupt or whether theft occurs. This is a photo of work being performed. I do not see anything more in this photo than two guys in forestry ( or Park) uniforms sawing up a tree.

I am talking about this photo and this tree and my questions are clear:

1) Was this photo taken in a national Park?

2) Do forestry personnel cut down trees as part of their daily work?

3) Does anyone else see that the bark is removed from the tree and there is not bark laying below it which there would be if the bark was peeled after it was felled.

If you see details in this photo I am missing then please point them out. I am well aware of the history of illegal logging.

Thanks

Deary me, please read more than the first two lines of my previous post. The bark has NOT been removed.

[ClutchClark]

Bias? Do some reading about this guy. Stealing wood from the forest that he is supposed to be looking after is very small beer compared with what he is otherwise accused of.

So, to take your questions seriously: Sawn wood is usually stored with its bark attached until it goes through a saw mill. There are no signs of removed bark on the forest floor and if you think about it this would be a pretty pointless exercise anyway unless there was insect infestation or similar.

Forestry workers will often prepare logs in this way, especially in tropical countries where the wood is so very heavy and of course doubly so in national parks where there are not supposed to be loggers' roads and corresponding heavy machinery.

I am not talking about the history of forestry management in Thailand and whether its corrupt or whether theft occurs. This is a photo of work being performed. I do not see anything more in this photo than two guys in forestry ( or Park) uniforms sawing up a tree.

I am talking about this photo and this tree and my questions are clear:

1) Was this photo taken in a national Park?

2) Do forestry personnel cut down trees as part of their daily work?

3) Does anyone else see that the bark is removed from the tree and there is not bark laying below it which there would be if the bark was peeled after it was felled.

If you see details in this photo I am missing then please point them out. I am well aware of the history of illegal logging.

Thanks

Deary me, please read more than the first two lines of my previous post. The bark has NOT been removed.

Lord have mercy, I can't say for sure with my old eyes and that is why I asked.

Can you answer any of the rest of my questions? The funny thing about a photo is it captures one moment in time.

I still see no proof that a crime is being committed here.

There is no proof its on Park property.

There is no proof they don't have a perfect right to be cutting it.

If you see these things then please provide evidence.

Thanks again

Edited June 18, 2014 by ClutchClark

[Seastallion]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Hopefully someone with more knowledge of the species of tree can chime in but that tree appears to be dead long enough to have lost bark. In the US that tree would not have nearly as much commercial value and a forestry official could possibly even have grounds for removing it if it was in an area that it could fall and cause damage or if it was a beetle kill or a diseased tree.

Can someone with experience of Thailand hardwoods and timber practices please provide more insight.

Terrible thing when that young man disappeared. So sorry for his wife and family.

It really doesn't matter, the removal of actually any material from a Thai national park is prohibited , included any house without permission.

Take only photos, leave only footprints.

[stickylies]

illegal cutting of trees has always been rampant in thailand, it used to be organised crime run by big army folks (timber and opium) with cronies in myanmar.

everything is possible in thailand and minorities like the karen should know their position in thai society: bottom.

[Badbanker]

I remember being here when Thailand's forestry industry was shut down officially in 1988, if I remember correctly during the administration of Prime Minister Chatchai Choonavan. Almost all sawmills died overnight except for people milling imported logs from Cambodia by sea.

This was done so that Thailand's forests that had been decimated for the past 50 odd years could grow back some what.

There is no forestry done except for trees that have been planted for harvesting. Small farmed trees and Teak and Eucalyptus plantations.

It is illegal to have a chainsaw with a longer than 12 inch blade.

If you do, it must be licensed in a similar manner to a gun is licensed and only used for a specific purpose under Department of Forestry supervision.

[cooked]

I believe that ALL chainsaws must be licensed now.

[Bluespunk]

"I have already instructed officials to investigate the background of these photos, because these days there are a lot of photoshopped images, Mr. Nipon said. If national officials were indeed cutting down trees illegally, I will prosecute them according to the laws.

Ha, ha, ha, yeah right. The fact this guy has already started talking about photoshopped images says a lot about how far he wants this to go.

[Robby nz]

Bias? Do some reading about this guy. Stealing wood from the forest that he is supposed to be looking after is very small beer compared with what he is otherwise accused of.

So, to take your questions seriously: Sawn wood is usually stored with its bark attached until it goes through a saw mill. There are no signs of removed bark on the forest floor and if you think about it this would be a pretty pointless exercise anyway unless there was insect infestation or similar.

Forestry workers will often prepare logs in this way, especially in tropical countries where the wood is so very heavy and of course doubly so in national parks where there are not supposed to be loggers' roads and corresponding heavy machinery.

I am not talking about the history of forestry management in Thailand and whether its corrupt or whether theft occurs. This is a photo of work being performed. I do not see anything more in this photo than two guys in forestry ( or Park) uniforms sawing up a tree.

I am talking about this photo and this tree and my questions are clear:

1) Was this photo taken in a national Park?

2) Do forestry personnel cut down trees as part of their daily work?

3) Does anyone else see that the bark is removed from the tree and there is not bark laying below it which there would be if the bark was peeled after it was felled.

If you see details in this photo I am missing then please point them out. I am well aware of the history of illegal logging.

Thanks

Deary me, please read more than the first two lines of my previous post. The bark has NOT been removed.

Lord have mercy, I can't say for sure with my old eyes and that is why I asked.

Can you answer any of the rest of my questions? The funny thing about a photo is it captures one moment in time.

I still see no proof that a crime is being committed here.

There is no proof its on Park property.

There is no proof they don't have a perfect right to be cutting it.

If you see these things then please provide evidence.

Thanks again

If you read the OP it says photos, that's right plural meaning there are more than one.

From the one provided it is obvious they are cutting the log into board sections.

That would indicate they are going to remove said boards.

It would be impossible to remove a log that size from the forest without specialized heavy machinery which would be extremely obvious.

There is every chance these photos would have been taken in the national park.The fact that they have been brought forward as evidence of wrongdoing by park employees would uphold that.

Therefor it would be illegal to cut up any tree and remove the timber whether it was felled of dropped on its own.

The rider on that would be the cutting of a tree that had dropped over and was blocking a road or important track, even then removing the timber would be illegal.

I would add:

I see no proof that it is not on park property

I see no proof that a crime is not being committed.

I see no proof that they had any right to be cutting the log

[ClutchClark]

Repost Later

Edited June 20, 2014 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

I am not talking about the history of forestry management in Thailand and whether its corrupt or whether theft occurs. This is a photo of work being performed. I do not see anything more in this photo than two guys in forestry ( or Park) uniforms sawing up a tree.

I am talking about this photo and this tree and my questions are clear:

1) Was this photo taken in a national Park?

2) Do forestry personnel cut down trees as part of their daily work?

3) Does anyone else see that the bark is removed from the tree and there is not bark laying below it which there would be if the bark was peeled after it was felled.

If you see details in this photo I am missing then please point them out. I am well aware of the history of illegal logging.

Thanks

Deary me, please read more than the first two lines of my previous post. The bark has NOT been removed.

Lord have mercy, I can't say for sure with my old eyes and that is why I asked.

Can you answer any of the rest of my questions? The funny thing about a photo is it captures one moment in time.

I still see no proof that a crime is being committed here.

There is no proof its on Park property.

There is no proof they don't have a perfect right to be cutting it.

If you see these things then please provide evidence.

Thanks again

If you read the OP it says photos, that's right plural meaning there are more than one.

From the one provided it is obvious they are cutting the log into board sections.

That would indicate they are going to remove said boards.

It would be impossible to remove a log that size from the forest without specialized heavy machinery which would be extremely obvious.

There is every chance these photos would have been taken in the national park.The fact that they have been brought forward as evidence of wrongdoing by park employees would uphold that.

Therefor it would be illegal to cut up any tree and remove the timber whether it was felled of dropped on its own.

The rider on that would be the cutting of a tree that had dropped over and was blocking a road or important track, even then removing the timber would be illegal.

I would add:

I see no proof that it is not on park property

I see no proof that a crime is not being committed.

I see no proof that they had any right to be cutting the log

You are funny. You still simply offer opinion based on your anger over illegal logging.

So you support Napoleonic Law of assumed guilt until proven innocent? You think you should simply be allowed to make a baseless (without supporting evidence) accusation and the accused should be assumed guilty?

Additionally, your statement that "the photos were brought forward by park employees as evidence of wrongdoing" is also not supported by the article, which clearly indicates the images were found on the poor young activists hard drive by his widow. Perhaps you read that elsewhere or its more of the creative imagination of yours?

Listen Lad, I do not condone illegal logging practices, but I have felled and milled a fair share of timber over the years and I know enough to not fall for a single photo and fill in all the missing details from a biased imagination.

Please do respond once you actually find some proof. Good luck in your search for the truth--the deceased deserves the truth be told and justice be done. Justice relies on verifiable facts.

Edited June 20, 2014 by ClutchClark

[ClutchClark]

I remember being here when Thailand's forestry industry was shut down officially in 1988, if I remember correctly during the administration of Prime Minister Chatchai Choonavan. Almost all sawmills died overnight except for people milling imported logs from Cambodia by sea.

This was done so that Thailand's forests that had been decimated for the past 50 odd years could grow back some what.

There is no forestry done except for trees that have been planted for harvesting. Small farmed trees and Teak and Eucalyptus plantations.

It is illegal to have a chainsaw with a longer than 12 inch blade.

If you do, it must be licensed in a similar manner to a gun is licensed and only used for a specific purpose under Department of Forestry supervision.

Badbanker, now thats the kind of information that is useful. Thanks.

Would a State Forestry Dept have a license to use chainsaws with longer bars?

Would a State Forestry Dept have a right to remove diseased and/or insect-infected trees?

I don't know the answers to these questions and cooked can't seem to answer.

Thanks again, your details help to add context to a photo.

[NeverSure]

The tree isn't old and dead. It still has its live color.

It has been bucked to length and the man is rip sawing it for boards. That would also make it transportable by people.

I don't know about Thailand, but in a forest preserve, a fallen tree must be left in place to mimic nature. Over the years as it rots it provides habitat for numerous species, and its compost fertilizes the soil. Man can't outsmart nature by doing things with a chainsaw.

[Robby nz]

Lord have mercy, I can't say for sure with my old eyes and that is why I asked.

Can you answer any of the rest of my questions? The funny thing about a photo is it captures one moment in time.

I still see no proof that a crime is being committed here.

There is no proof its on Park property.

There is no proof they don't have a perfect right to be cutting it.

If you see these things then please provide evidence.

Thanks again

If you read the OP it says photos, that's right plural meaning there are more than one.

From the one provided it is obvious they are cutting the log into board sections.

That would indicate they are going to remove said boards.

It would be impossible to remove a log that size from the forest without specialized heavy machinery which would be extremely obvious.

There is every chance these photos would have been taken in the national park.The fact that they have been brought forward as evidence of wrongdoing by park employees would uphold that.

Therefor it would be illegal to cut up any tree and remove the timber whether it was felled of dropped on its own.

The rider on that would be the cutting of a tree that had dropped over and was blocking a road or important track, even then removing the timber would be illegal.

I would add:

I see no proof that it is not on park property

I see no proof that a crime is not being committed.

I see no proof that they had any right to be cutting the log

You are funny. You still simply offer opinion based on your anger over illegal logging.

So you support Napoleonic Law of assumed guilt until proven innocent? You think you should simply be allowed to make a baseless (without supporting evidence) accusation and the accused should be assumed guilty?

Additionally, your statement that "the photos were brought forward by park employees as evidence of wrongdoing" is also not supported by the article, which clearly indicates the images were found on the poor young activists hard drive by his widow. Perhaps you read that elsewhere or its more of the creative imagination of yours?

Listen Lad, I do not condone illegal logging practices, but I have felled and milled a fair share of timber over the years and I know enough to not fall for a single photo and fill in all the missing details from a biased imagination.

Please do respond once you actually find some proof. Good luck in your search for the truth--the deceased deserves the truth be told and justice be done. Justice relies on verifiable facts.

Wow what a lot of twisting and turning in defense of your own post .

I suspect you are going to have to learn to read a little better among other things.

If you had read the OP you would have understood the photos were not as you state "Brought forward by park employees" but by Billy's wife and I never said or intimated they were not.

The bias sir is all yours.

These photos were brought forward in an attempt to show that park employees may have had even more reason to fear testimony that the missing man could have given.

That he is missing is fact.

It has been reported that the park boss has been implicated in shady dealings and even another disappearance in the past so it is reasonable for authority to be looking in his direction in attempting to solve the disappearance.

I hope these photos among other evidence can contribute to the truth emerging.

I also hope that this whole thing can help to get a better deal for these people who have lived in and with this and other forests for generations.

Rather than being vilified they should be incorporated into the forest service and their knowledge of the forest and its conservation used for the good of the forest, the country and very obviously themselves.

Instead of having authority come in and lord it over them treating them as enemies they would be much better seen as friends and colleagues in forest conservation.