Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding a brutal rape of two migrant workers in Thailand by a powerful businessman who is the son of a former member of parliament, with the assistance of a ranking police officer. Although the police have arrested and held the alleged perpetrator and a trial is pending, there are strong fears that the case could be prejudiced due to the power of the defendants, and especially that witnesses may be intimidated. Already one witness is reported to have been killed, and the accused had tried to close the case by paying the victims. Therefore, a speedy and effective trial and good witness protection measures are needed, as well as proper analysis and use of the gathered forensic evidence. The victims must also be given full compensation and rehabilitation.
This appeal contains a number of sections: procurement by a police officer and rape; police investigation and further events; violent criminal background of the accused, and additional comments.
PROCUREMENT BY A POLICE OFFICER & RAPE
The two victims, Ms. Ya (19 years old) and Ms. A Rae (18 years old) were registered migrant workers from Burma who had been working at a seafood factory located in central district, Suratthani Province of southern Thailand. When the factory was temporarily closed in January 2006, both began to look for new jobs.
On 29 January 2006, a woman nicknamed Pu and a Burmese go-between named Mrs. Meethe offered Ya and A. Rae jobs as maids in a house nearby the Suratthani hospital. Pu was actually Police Sergeant Major Uraiwan Kraidej of the Suratthani Distict Police Station.
After they agreed, a man came to pick up the two girls and then dropped them at a house located on Kanchanadit Road. Both women waited for their employer at the house.
After some time, Mr. Saengroj Kanjana came down from the upper floor. Saengroj is the son of Mr. Chumpon Kanjana, a former member of parliament for Suratthani Province. Saengroj is also himself a former local government official who is a wealthy and powerful businessman with interests in mines in the south of Thailand.
Saengroj asked Ya and A Rae to clean the house and gave each girl 1000 baht (USD 25). After the women had completed their task, Saengroj asked Ya to go to the upper floor while A Rae waited downstairs. By the time that Ya came back downstairs, she allegedly saw that A Rae was handcuffed to the banister of the stairs. Ya became distressed and tried to run away, but she was allegedly caught by Saengroj who then tied a piece of cloth around her neck, as if to strangle her, and pointed a gun to her head. He handcuffed her next to A Rae and tied her legs together with a plastic cord or hose. Saengroj then began to stamp on Yas stomach until she fainted.
When Ya regained consciousness she allegedly found her shirt was torn and her skirt was removed, as was A Raes next to her. Saengroj then raped them both. After this, they were left handcuffed to the banister.
The next day at around 5pm, Saengroj allegedly took the victims upstairs to clean them and he then took them into a room where he handcuffed Ya to the door and A Rae to a cabinet. He then played a pornographic video in front of the victims and then began to rape A Rae a total of three times. This torture against the two victims allegedly continued until January 31.
On January 31, Saengroj ordered a driver to take the victims away and kill them. However, the driver instead released them in Wiangsa district. Some persons there called their relatives who then took them to a clinic nearby Bansong. They were then transferred to Suratthani Provincial Hospital.
A Rae was hospitalised for two days, and Ya was treated for a broken intestine due to being allegedly jumped on by Saengroj.
While in hospital, both victims were allegedly approached by Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan Kraidej and Mrs Meethe, who offered 10,000 Thai baht (USD 250) to A Rae and 40,000 Thai baht (USD 1000) to Ya to end the matter, and allegedly threatened the victims that if they lodged complaints then they would be killed along with their relatives. Out of fear, both victims accepted the money and Ya retreated to a shelter because she feared reprisals from Saengroj.
POLICE INVESTIGATION & FURTHER EVENTS
On February 18 the director of the shelter where Ya was staying lodged a complaint against Saengroj at the Suratthani District Police Station.
The day after, on February 19, a witness in the case, motorcycle taxi driver Mr. Pan Muangnoi, was reportedly killed in Suratthani town. The investigators now believe that his death was connected to the case. However, further details are not yet available.
On February 21 the police searched Saengrojs property where they found traces of blood, hair and skin samples in his bedroom and toilet, plastic restraints as described by the two girls, and 36 VCDs containing pornographic material.
On February 22 the police charged Saengroj with rape, bodily harm, deprivation of liberty, and possession of weapons without permission, among other offences. However, Saengroj absconded.
In the meantime, the public prosecutor lodged another case against Saengroj from 2005, relating to a rape of a college student (see below).
Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan was also charged with procurement on February 22. She surrendered herself on February 24 and was released from custody but reportedly suspended from her duties.
The public prosecutor filed a motion asking the court to grant the testimony of Ya, her parents and two other witnesses before the case against Saengroj is opened in the court, and these testimonies were allowed by the court. On March 16 Ya was repatriated to Burma with her family after completing giving evidence.
On April 8 Saengroj surrendered himself to a senior police officer in Bangkok. He was taken into custody and the police and public prosecutor have refused bail.
Both Saengroj and Uraiwan could be sentenced to life imprisonment if found guilty. Both have claimed that they are innocent.
On April 11, a lawyer connected to Saengroj, Mr. Wanrat Naksuwan, was reportedly charged also with concealing or destroying evidence, for which he could be sentenced to five years in jail.
The police investigators have said that they will bring the case to the court within April.
VIOLENT CRIMINAL BACKGROUND OF THE ACCUSED
Saengroj is known as a violent criminal who is facing other serious charges, but he has so far escaped punishment because of the power enjoyed by members of the elite in Thailand. His history includes the following:
1. On 22 January 2005 Saengroj allegedly raped a 19-year-old student, again causing serious injuries. The police charged him, but the case was never opened in court. The public prosecutor has now laid charges in this case, since the allegations of rape by the two migrant workers.
2. On 13 July 2001 Saengroj was found in possession of illegal drugs and concealed firearms.
3. On 28 December 2000, Saengroj allegedly shot dead Mr Kitti Wisetsombat, a government driver, at an apartment in Suratthani. The Suratthani Provincial Court found him guilty and sentenced him to 16 years imprisonment. The Appeal Court upheld the decision but allowed the accused free on bail while the case is in the Supreme Court.
4. On 5 December 1999 Saengroj shot two police officers in front of a pub and was charged with attempted murder but again the case did not go to court.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
This case is a very strong example of the sort of impunity that so-called “influential people” continue to enjoy in Thailand, and the protection that they are given by police and government officials. Any one of the above alleged crimes would be sufficient for an ordinary person in Thailand to be denied bail and sent to prison for years, if not be extrajudicially killed on some pretext, or forced by the police to participate in a sting operation that may be life-threatening. However, Saengroj’s position, like other members of the elite, ordinarily puts him beyond reach of the law.
The sister organisation of the AHRC, the Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC), has in a special report described how Thailand is still governed by the “rule of lords”, not the rule of law, despite modern developments and external appearances that suggest otherwise (article 2, vol. 4, no. 2). There are many cases of violence against–and murders of–ordinary persons and human rights defenders in Thailand that are believed linked to powerful members of the elite in Thailand like Saengroj Kanjana (see for instance the unsolved case of Phra Supoj Suwagano, UA-112-2005). There has also been a history of the sons of senior politicians in the country literally getting away with murder. Therefore it is important that the impunity enjoyed by these persons–and the police officers and other government officials who protect them–is brought to an end.
A special concern in this case is not only that the accused are found guilty, but are also given maximum sentences. As the key perpetrator is an influential person and the abettor a police officer, there is a strong fear that even if found guilty due to the overwhelming evidence, they may not be given adequate sentences. For instance, the one perpetrator found guilty of abducting human rights lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit was given only three years in jail (AHRC-PL-002-2006). By contrast, ordinary persons found guilty of lesser criminal offences are given long jail terms: the defendants in a torture case in Ayutthaya Province were sentenced to over 17 years in jail for allegedly committing armed robbery of a necklace (see UP-004-2005 for general details); and a young man in Singhburi Province was given 10 years in jail for allegedly assaulting someone to steal some amulets (UA-040-2005).
Another special concern is the use of forensic science in the case. The police reportedly gathered sufficient forensic evidence from the house of the accused to convict him. While forensic science is used effectively in more developed jurisdictions, in Thailand the courts are still dominated by witness testimonies and forensic science is not given sufficient weight. The work of police forensic scientists is also a particular concern that the AHRC has raised in the past. It has noted that in the Somchai Neelaphaijit case the police failed to properly use and present available forensic evidence. The ALRC has also raised general concerns about the situation of forensic science in Thailand in a recent submission to the United Nations (E/CN.4/2006/NGO/64).
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write to the Caretaker Minister of Justice, who is also the interim Prime Minister, asking him to ensure that this case is properly and carefully conducted from start to finish and the perpetrators held fully responsible. The areas for his attention include investigation and prosecution of all accused to the full extent available under the law, keeping the perpetrators in detention, protection of witnesses, and full redress for the victims.
To support this case, please click here: SEND APPEAL LETTER
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear Pol. Gen. Chidchai Wanasatidya,
THAILAND: Rape case against Mr Saengroj Kanjana and alleged procurement by Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan Kraidej, Suratthani District Police Station Cases 149-150/2549
Names of victims:
1. Ms. Ya, aged 19; and
2. Ms. A Rae, aged 18
Registered migrant workers from Burma working in Suratthani District, Suratthani Province
3. Mr. Pan Muangnoi, motorcycle taxi driver in Suratthani town; witness in the case reportedly killed on 19 February 2006
Names and details of accused:
1. Mr. Saengroj Kanjana, former headman of village 2, Bansong Subdistrict, Wiangsa District; son of Mr. Chumpon Kanjana, former Democrat Party MP, Suratthani Province; charged under Penal Code sections 276, 297, 310, 392, and 371, and the Weapons Act; arrest warrant no. 149/2549 issued 22 February 2006 at Suratthani District Police Station
2. Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan Kraidej, officer of Suratthani District Police Station; charged under Penal Code section 283; arrest warrant no. 150/2549 issued 22 February 2006 at Suratthani District Police Station
3. Mr. Wanrat Naksuwan, lawyer; reportedly charged under Penal Code section 184 at Suratthani District Police Station
4. Mrs. "Meethe", who allegedly assisted Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan
Details of investigators:
1. Pol. Lt. Col. Noppadol Tirapravat, received complaint
2. Pol. Col. Thesa Siriwatoe headed first investigation team under order no. 91/2549 of 21 February 2006 from Pol. Maj. Gen. Santan Chayanont, Deputy Commissioner, Police Region 8
3. Pol. Maj. Jaru Pechparn, investigating officer, Suratthani District Police Station
Date of incident: 29-31 January 2006
Place of incident: House on Kanchanadit Road, Suratthani Province
I am writing to you to express concern about the alleged brutal rape of two migrant workers by Mr. Saengroj Kanjana with the assistance of Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan Kraidej and others. Although I am aware that the police investigators are working on the case, I am concerned that the positions of the authority and influence held by the accused may help them to pervert the case.
The details of the case may already be known to you. In brief, on 29 January 2006 Ms. Ya and Ms. A Rae were allegedly organised by Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan and Mrs Meethe to go to the house of Mr Saengroj, who repeatedly and extremely brutally raped them until January 31.
It is alleged that on January 31, Mr. Saengroj ordered a driver to take the victims away and kill them; however, the driver released them and both were subsequently hospitalised. The medical report from Suratthani Provincial Hospital reportedly indicates that Ms. Ya's intestine was ruptured, allegedly due to Mr. Saengroj jumping on her.
While in hospital, both victims were allegedly approached by Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan Kraidej and Mrs Meethe, who offered 10,000 Thai baht to A Rae and 40,000 Thai baht to Ya to end the matter, and allegedly threatened the victims that if they lodged complaints then they would be killed along with their relatives.
On February 18 the case was lodged at Suratthani District Police Station. The day after, a witness in the case, motorcycle taxi driver Mr. Pan Muangnoi, was reportedly killed in Suratthani town. I am told that investigators now believe that he may have been killed because of this case.
On February 22 the police charged Mr. Saengroj under the sections noted above, and he absconded. The public prosecutor has since reportedly lodged another charge against him over an alleged rape of a college student on 22 January 2005. Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan was charged with procurement. On April 8 Mr. Saengroj surrendered himself, and the police and public prosecutor have refused bail. On April 11, a lawyer connected to Mr. Saengroj, Mr. Wanrat Naksuwan, was also reportedly charged with concealing or destroying evidence.
I am pleased to hear that police investigators have said that they will bring the case to the court within April, and look forward to news of this. A speedy trial is of great importance in this case, in order to deny the accused time to pervert the course of justice. However, I have a number of special concerns regarding which I am also requesting your special attention:
1. Neither of the key accused should be freed on bail.
Mr. Saengroj has a criminal record and a history of violence. He is facing grievous charges. It is reassuring to me to hear that both the police and public prosecutor have opposed his bail.
However, Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan should also be denied bail. I understand that after she presented herself to investigators, she was suspended from duty but not taken into custody. She is charged with a very serious offence under the Penal Code and I fail to understand how she was released from detention. I can only presume that some consideration was given to her position as a police officer. In fact, this is all the more reason to deny her bail. As a police officer and a key defendant, if she is free on bail she may have many opportunities to pervert the case. She should be denied bail and held in custody until the trial is concluded. The police and public prosecutor should take the necessary steps to ensure this.
2. The public prosecutor must ensure that all charges are laid and fully pursued.
I am concerned that as the prime accused is an influential person and the second is a police officer there may be attempts to reduce the charges against them, or lighten their sentences if found guilty. I urge you to closely monitor the case to ensure that this does not happen. Specifically, I am interested to know if Pol. Sgt. Maj. Uraiwan has or will be charged in connection with the alleged threats against the victims after they were in hospital. I am also interested to know if charges will be laid in connection with the alleged killing of a witness in the case, Mr. Pan Muangnoi.
Under any circumstances, the charges before the two key accused carry life sentences, and it will be very disappointing if they escape with comparatively light penalties due to poor work done by the public prosecutor, as has been seen in other cases of importance involving influential persons. Please be sure to monitor the work of the prosecutor so that this does not happen in this case.
3. Forensic evidence must be used effectively.
According to information I have received, the police collected ample forensic evidence from the house of the prime accused, including bloodstains, hair and skin remains, footprints and fingerprints, restraining devices and pornographic videos. This should be sufficient upon which to secure a conviction. However, I am aware that in other cases, such as the celebrated case of abducted lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit, forensic evidence has not been used effectively to secure a conviction. So I urge you to pay special attention to the use of forensic evidence in this case, and ensure that the work of the forensic experts in the police be monitored by those under the Central Institute of Forensic Science, Ministry of Justice, to ensure the same.
4. Witness protection must be given to all persons who need it.
It is obvious that there are very grave dangers to the witnesses in this case. I urge you to instruct the Witness Protection Office under the Ministry of Justice to see to it that full protection is being given to all concerned parties. In particular, I am informed that another motorcycle taxi driver, Mr. Pichet Saekwoe, is in special need of protection. In order to ensure the success of this case, please take every effort to guarantee his and other persons' security, including the one victim who is still in Thailand.
5. Compensation and other redress must be given to the victims.
I also urge you to take the necessary steps for full redress to be given to the victims through the Office of Public Compensation in Criminal Cases under the Ministry of Justice once the outcome of the case is known. As one of the victims, Ms. Ya, returned to Burma on March 16, this will no doubt complicate the process, but notwithstanding arrangements must be made to ensure that this is done. In addition, I urge you to consider and make arrangements for other aspects of redress for the victims, including for their psychological wellbeing. As at present the work of the office is limited to providing monetary compensation, it is important that the government of Thailand considers how the full meaning of redress is applied in cases such as this, and include all aspects of rehabilitation and compensation, not merely payment of money.
I would remind you that in its 2005 review of the situation of human rights in Thailand, the UN Human Rights Committee noted that there was in general "a lack of effective remedies available to victims of human rights violations, which is incompatible with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant [on Civil and Political Rights]" (CCPR/CO/84/THA, 8 July 2005, para. 10). One area where this is very much evident is in cases involving influential persons in Thailand such as Mr. Saengroj, popularly known as "mafia figures". These persons cannot enjoy impunity without the support and assistance of police and other government officials. I therefore urge you to ensure that a strong signal is sent in this case that heinous crimes in Thailand will not be tolerated, no matter who commits or abets them.
I look forward to your swift and effective action.
Yours sincerely,
----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTER TO:
Pol. Gen. Chidchai Wanasatidya
Caretaker Minister of Justice & Interim Prime Minister
Government House
Pitsanulok Road, Dusit District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Tel: +662 280 1404/ 3000
Fax: +662 282 8631/ 280 1589/ 629 8213
E-mail: govspkman@mozart.inet.co.th
(or)
Office of the Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Justice Building
22nd Floor Software Park Building,
Chaeng Wattana Road
Pakkred, Nonthaburi
Bangkok 11120
THAILAND
Tel: +662 502 6776/ 8223
Fax: +662 502 6699/ 6734 / 6884
Email: ommoj@moj.go.th; chidchai@moj.go.th
PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:
1. ACM Kongsak Wantana
Caretaker Minister of Interior
Office of the Ministry of Interior
Atsadang Road
Bangkok 10200
THAILAND
Tel: +662 224-6320/ 6341
Fax: +662 226 4371/ 222 8866
Email: ommoi@moi.go.th
2. Pol. Gen. Kovit Wattana
Commissioner-General
Royal Thai Police
1st Bldg, 7th Floor
Rama I, Patumwan
Bkk 10330
THAILAND
Fax: +66 2 251 5956/ 205 3738/ 255 1975-8
Email: kovit@police.go.th
3. Mr Pachara Yutidhammadamrong
Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Lukmuang Building
Nahuppei Road
Prabraromrachawang, Pranakorn
Bangkok 10200
THAILAND
Tel: +662 224 1563/ 222 8121-30
Fax: +662 224 0162/ 1448/ 221 0858
E-mail: ag@ago.go.th, oag@ago.go.th
4. Prof. Saneh Chamarik
Chairperson
The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand
422 Phya Thai Road
Pathum Wan District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Tel: +662 2219 2980
Fax: +66 2 219 2940
E-mail: commission@nhrc.or.th, saneh@nhrc.or.th
5. Ms. Yakin Erturk
Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women
c/o Ms Lucinda O'Hanlon
Room 3-042
OHCHR-UNOG
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Tel: +41 22 917 9615
Fax: +41 22 917 9006 (ATTN: SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN)
E-mail: lohanlon@ohchr.org
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)
