THE MAY 1992 EVENT AND THE PROBLEM
OF INVOLUNTARY DISAPPEARANCES IN THAILAND
 

By: Atty. Nakhon Chomphuchat

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.

I speak in behalf of the Relatives Committee of the May 1992 Heroes, though I just received the invitation for this affair. I wanted to speak in Thai but I do not know if you will understand me. I will focus on the May 1992 Event and the things that unfolded eight years after.

The May 1992 event was one of the bloodiest uprisings by Thai democracy advocates. Its cause can be traced back to a coup committed by a group of top army men in 1991, which has overthrown the then civilian and elected government, and subsequently led to the appointment of an interim regime. Later that year, a general election was called as promised by the coup leaders, and the people were expecting the restoration of a democratic administration. Nevertheless, one of the coup leaders who formed the National Peace Keeping Council (NPKC) as an overshadow government, General Suchinda Kraprayoon, took over the premiership. This happened against the wish of the people, and against the promise made by the General himself prior to the forming of the government, that he would not accept the post.

The angry crowd began to accumulate and culminated during 17-20 May 1992. Demonstrations spread everywhere in Bangkok, in which the masses joined to demand the peaceful resignation of General Suchinda. These peaceful mobilizations were, however, met with brutal and violent suppression by the Army. During those nights, hundreds of demonstrators who crowded the Ratchademneon Avenue were either shot dead or seriously wounded. In one incident, a busload of people was fired upon by rows of military men. The vehicle got burned down and apparently, none of the brave democracy lovers inside managed to escape. Testimonies pointed out that the corpses were taken away on army trucks to unknown and remote places.

In the initial aftermath of the event, the figure of missing filed by the public has reached more than 1,000. After investigation has been made and after a grace period of waiting time, the government has officially announced 42 cases. At present, some of the missing had already returned and the number is now standing at 34.

Most of the missing had intentionally and actively participated in one of the largest democratic uprisings seen in the last two decades in Thailand. According to their surviving relatives, most of them were politically concerned and were closely exposed to the events. There were some of them, however, who had gone to the demonstration sites mainly out of curiosity. Due to heavy censorship of the media, which waslargely owned and controlled by the Army, the public have been kept out of authentic reporting. Some of the missing worked near the protest sites as small food vendors and went missing after the first shots broke after midnight of 17 May 1992.

At this point, allow me to point out the results of the actions that we have taken for the several years.

Aside from demonstrations and other direct actions to mete out justice for those who died during the May Event, the Relatives Committee, with help from the Law Society, has lodged a lawsuit against the five leaders of the NPKC, demanding punishment for the sending of troops and shooting at the demonstrators and compensation for those who lost their family members.

On 5 April 1995, the five defendants pleaded against the charge. They claimed that what they did was in accordance to laws and due to the situation then. They have all b een exempted from any penalties as the Pardon Provision was passed by the Cabinet right after the event. However, 39 relatives who lodged the suit claimed that the Provision was not passed by normal procedure, is not justifiable, and does not exempt the defendants from their crimes. Their claim can be explained as follows:

1. The approval of the Provision was unconstitutional as there was no meeting of the Cabinet to officially endorse it. All cabinet members were simply informed about the Provision via fax with the condition that any veto has to be made before noon of the following day.

2. The Provision was passed against the rule of law. A clemency law can be issued only by the superior authorities, which want to exempt those inferior to them from certain penalty.

3. The Provision cannot be stipulated to protect the defendants as it is destined to forgive the violators of law, but the defendants claimed that they have been undertaking action.

4. The Provision was later brought to the consideration of the House of Parliament and was annulled. According to the Constitution, this gives retrospective effects to the time it was endorsed by the Cabinet.

The cases have been fought all the way to the Supreme Court, and all of the courts maintained the innocence of the defendants. It should be noted that none of the above arguments by the plaintiffs were taken into account by the judges. The plaintiffs further claimed that the endorsement of the Pardon Provision was unjustified under a democracy for it merely reflected the interference of the administrative power over the affairs of the judicial power. Similarly, the claim made by the defendants that they passed the Provision to ensure peace within the nation is not justified, for on the day of its endorsement, all havoc had already ceased. All these facts were not at all mentioned in the ruling of the Supreme Court.

Despite all the hurdles, especially with regard to the lack of court fees, the Relatives Committee has been struggling to push the cases through the courts. A number of fund-raising activities have been organized to raise enough money for all the costly legal procedures; and support has also been extended to the relatives who lost their family members, many of whom were their breadwinners. But the struggle has to continue if justice is to be done. Our ultimate hope is simply to retrieve the remains of our loved ones. We hope that this Conference will be the chance to raise our legal point. I will also try to further explain the situation in Thailand in more detail in the coming days.

Thank you.