Dear friends,
The Administrative Court in Thailand has turned down a petition challenging the decision of the Royal Thai Police and its commissioner general to reappoint the five policemen who are allegedly involved in the disappearance of lawyer Somchai Neelaphaijit (UP-044-2007). The petition was filed by Somchai’s wife, Angkhana Neelaphaijit, who was also a joint-plaintiff in the criminal case regarding her husbands disappearance. However, the court decided that Angkhana does not have the right to sue the police and dismiss the case.
Angkhana filed the petition against the national police chief’s decision to reappoint the five policemen allegedly involved in her husband’s disappearance (AS-046-2007). The five policemen were charged with forcing Somchai into a car on12 March 2004, and the case was concluded in the Criminal Court in January 2006. Only one of them was convicted and was sentenced to three years of imprisonment. Angkhana has appealed, and the case is now pending in the Appeal Court (please refer to AS-013-2007). The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) is also conducting an investigation into Somchai’s disappearance. If DSI collects sufficient evidence, the alleged policemen might be charged with murder, although it has so far not made any known progress.
Despite the pending case against them and the ongoing DSI investigation, the national police chief decided to reappoint the five policemen, including Police Major General Ngern Tongsuk, who was the one convicted; he is now free on bail. One of the acquitted policemen, Pol. Lt. Col. Chadchai Leiamsa-ngoun, has been transferred to Provincial Police Region 4.
The preliminary inquiry into the petition was carried out on 4 April 2007 in the Central Administrative Court (Black Case No. 475/2500, Red Case No. 533/2550). The court decided that the reappointment of the five policemen is within the national police chief’s power as the head of police. The court also decided that Angkhana has not been aggrieved or injured due to his decision, and therefore does not have the right to sue [under section 42(1) of the Establishment of Administrative Court Procedure Act].
Angkhana disagrees with the decision and filed an appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court on 3 May 2007. She argues the court overlooked her interest in the case. The reappointment of the five policemen might hinder the ongoing investigation, and thus infringe her due process rights. Therefore, she should be entitled to seek redress from the Administrative Court.
The AHRC has pointed out that the reappointment is inappropriate because the criminal case against the five policemen is still pending. It is not only a violation of the police regulations, but also gives opportunities for them to interfere with the evidence and witnesses regarding Somchai’s case, and the ongoing investigation and prosecution process might be jeopardized (please refer to UP-050-2006).
For all links and further information on the case of Somchai Neelaphaijit, please visit the Somchai Neelaphaijit webpage established by the AHRC.
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ahrchk@ahrchk.org)
