ARTICLE 19 stands in solidarity with the victims of police brutality during a peaceful protest in 2004, and with their families, as they seek justice 20 years on for the deaths of seven people. No compensation will remove the pain of the tragedy, but Thailand’s courts must seize the opportunity to bring justice to this community, even under authoritarian rule. From 24 – 25 June, the Narathiwat Provincial Court conducted a preliminary hearing to assess the merits of a criminal case arising from the Tak Bai incident. The hearing seeks to determine whether the charges against nine state officials involved in the incident are substantiated. The court adjourned the hearing to 19 July and 26 July 2024. This postponement was due to the Chief Justice and Deputy Chief Justice of the Court of Justice, Region IX, noting that some state officials accused were unaware of the new hearing date on 25 June 2024.
On 25 October 2004, military and police forces fired on ethnic Malay Muslim protesters in the Tak Bai district of Narathiwat province, killing seven individuals. The protesters were demonstrating against the detention of six men accused of supplying weapons to insurgents. The Tak Bai incident resulted in the torture and inhuman treatment of 1,300 victims, leaving thousands of households in the deep South suffering from this painful history to this day. Without justice for the victims, the incident has significantly fueled conflicts in the southern border provinces for over two decades. The Tak Bai lawsuit represents an effort by the victims of torture and inhuman treatment, along with their families, to seek justice and end this long-standing impunity.
Complexity of the South in the spotlight
A survivor recounted his ordeal in court: “It seems like the occurrence happened quite recently. If there is a violent incident anywhere, I do not want officials to arrest anyone without evidence. I do not want officials to make assumptions like in the Tak Bai case. I was at the Tak Bai incident. Shot from behind, through to the front. My body is covered in huge scars.” His statement highlights the enduring pain and hardship the victims and their families face.
On 25 April 2024, the same day the Tak Bai lawsuit was filed to the Attorney General,he Provincial Police Region 9 appeared to have made a summary of the case file indicting officials involved in the Tak Bai incident for extra-judicial killing and murder under the criminal code section 228 and section 83, stating that the officials’ operation was reasonable, and the damage was beyond officials’ capability. After 20 years of inaction, the police suddenly submitted an opinion recommending that the Office of the Attorney General did not prosecute.Among the 48 plaintiffs who brought this case to light, plaintiffs numbers 1-34 are made of victims of the deaths and injuries caused during the Tak Bai incident and family members who represent the affected people. The group of plaintiffs includes two individuals who were fatally shot in front of the Tak Bai police station, one who died at the hospital, and 31 who died during transportation. The injured persons are identified as plaintiffs numbered 35-48. The lawsuit was filed against 9 State officials on 25 April 2024.
The delay in court proceedings for the victims and their families is due to constant pressure and harassment following the incident. Over the last year, beginning on 25 October 2023, survivors and families of the deceased from the Tak Bai incident, along with youth, community members, and the Muslim Attorney Center, worked together to build trust and confidence in the community, ultimately leading to the filing of this lawsuit before the statute of limitations expired.
The charges against the nine state officials include murder by torture or cruelty, coercion, and unlawful detention under Articles 288, 289(5), 309, and 310 of the Penal Code.
The defendants are:
- Former 4th Army Region Commander
- Former Deputy Commander of the 4th Army Region
- Former Commander of the 5th Infantry Regiment
- Former Director of the Front Office of the National Police Agency
- Former Commander of the 9th Region Police
- Former Chief of Tak Bai Police Station
- Former Deputy Chief of Tak Bai Police Station
- Former Deputy Director of the Southern Border Provinces Administrative Centre and Deputy Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Interior
- Former Governor of Narathiwat
Delaying closure with postponement
A man who lost his brother in the Tak Bai incident, stated, “We oppose the postponement of the trial. People arrive at the court every time with difficulty, and it costs so much. I kept thinking about the cause of my brother’s death. The officials used excessive force. During the crackdown, people were treated as if they were not human, 4 – 5 people were forced to lie on top of each as they overcrowded the trucks for 6 hours. What struck me the most was that the death was caused by suffocation. The compensation from the state was insufficient to compensate for my brother’s loss of life. Tak Bai is the state’s most painful lesson. It is the worst in history. I want the criminals brought to justice.”
The postponement of the preliminary hearing is concerning, as Section 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows the court to conduct the preliminary examination in the absence of the accused when the charge is brought by a private prosecutor. According to Section 95 of the Criminal Code, the prosecution shall be precluded by prescription if the offender is not prosecuted and brought to court within 20 years for offences punishable with death, life imprisonment, or 20 years of imprisonment.
Since 2007, Thailand has been a state party to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), committing to prevent and suppress all forms of torture and inhuman treatment. This lawsuit is the victims’ most significant effort to achieve justice. The outcome of this case will indicate Thailand’s success or failure in fulfilling its obligations under CAT to prevent and suppress acts of torture. Failure to address this historical lesson of torture and inhuman treatment may indicatet that Thailand is not fit to be a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council.
ARTICLE 19 considers that non-violent direct action, and civil disobedience, should be considered legitimate forms of protest and, where they involve more than one person, should fall within the protective scope of Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). ARTICLE 19 calls upon the international community to closely monitor the progress of this significant and historical lawsuit. The pursuit of justice for the victims of the Tak Bai Massacre is essential to upholding human rights and ensuring accountability for state actions.
Furthermore, the relentless postponement of the preliminary hearing exacerbates the already significant delay in delivering justice. ARTICLE 19 emphasises that this delay, coupled with the recent submission by the police recommending non-prosecution, reflects a systemic reluctance to hold state officials accountable. In this case, the international community must remain vigilant and demand transparency and adherence to due process. The victims and their families have waited too long for justice, and any further delay only deepens their suffering and erodes trust in the judicial system.