Solving the murder of Phra Supoj: back to the drawing board?
This is the third of a four-part series on the murder of Phra Supoj Suwajo, of Suan Metta Dharm forest monastery in Chiang Mai's Fang district in June 2005.
Central Institute of Forensic Science officials mark where evidence was found on the murder scene during an investigation co-organised by the Metta Dharmaraksa Foundation and the Department of Special Investigation on December 7, 2006.
1.
On the night of June 17, 2005, Phra Supoj Suwajo is thought to have been hacked to death by a group of people.
His mutilated body was found on a small path not far from the Suan Metta Dharm forest monastery in Chiang Mai's Fang district on June 18, 2005. The initial post mortem found the monk was hit by an unidentified sharp object. However, police have not been able to find any weapon or any material evidence at the crime scene, or any witness to identify the murderer.
Phra Supoj's brutal death remains a mystery.
Local police in Fang district first pointed to the conflict between the monk and villagers over the cutting of trees in the monastery grounds. Investigator Pol Lt Col Somchai Inthawong of Fang District Police said police found two bamboo poles that has been cut some 10 metres from the corpse. Police said the monk's death might have resulted from a dispute with villagers over the cut bamboo. Another police theory was a dispute over payments to villagers that the monastery hired to cut the trees.
But Phra Kittisak Kittisophano, a close friend of Phra Supoj and leader of the Sekkiyadharm group rejected local police's theories. The monastery allows villagers to cut bamboo and collect forest products. Besides, Phra Supoj's determination in following the Lord Buddha's path and his strict observance of Buddhist teaching had won him high respect from villagers living around the monastery. Phra Kittisak believed that Phra Supoj was deceived into leaving his kuti in a rush because he did not turn off his computer and it seemed he was in the middle of washing work. Phra Kittisak also said the wounds on Phra Supoj's body showed the murderer's intention to kill the monk. Phra Supoj's pet dog was also hit.
Phra Kittisak suspected Phra Supoj's death was linked to local influential people and politicians at the national level. Before his death, a local influential person known to be a younger brother of a Thai Rak Thai Party MP and some government officials had threatened monks at the monastery that the land on which their monastery was built had no proper title deeds.
However, Phra Kittisak said that the monastery has proper documents. The lands were donated to the monastery by a well-to-do villager for the purpose of building a place to teach and practice dharma. After the threat, the Metta Dharmaraksa Foundation with Phra Supoj as key witness had filed a lawsuit with local police. However, the police refused to record the case until forced to do so by the complainants who brought the case to the government. Phra Kittisak said the prosecutor informed him the case would be brought before the court on June 30, 2005.
|
The death of Phra Supoj and the loss of hope in Thai society By Phra Kikkisak Kittisophano, Prachatai online newspaper, August 9, 2005
Phra Supoj Suwajo was found dead on June 18, 2005 at around 9.30 on a small path in the Suan Metta Dharm forest monastery. His body lay on the ground, his head pointed northeast. The crime scene was close to a bamboo grove not far from the village road. It was some 300 metres from Phra Supoj's kuti and separated from it by small streams, big ponds and a bamboo plot.
The small path was choked with grass, from knee to waist deep, fed by seasonal rain. It was almost abandoned by commuters.
Kham Laowan walked along the path that fatal day. The Shan woman is in her 30s and a member of one of two families living in the grounds of Suan Metta Dharm. Kham had a bunch of longan from another orchard that she intended to give to Phra Supoj. He was alone at the monastery because two other monks had left for other activities in Bangkok.
Kham was the first to find Phra Supoj's body. The first thing she saw was his pale feet and calves. When she saw wounds on his face and blood all over his robe, she fell to the ground. The body could not be anyone but Ajarn Supoj, as the monk with the glasses was known to her and for whom she had brought the fruit.
When she regained consciousness, Kham walked from the crime scene and met Tor, her former husband who used to work at the monastery. He took her to see Pong, another worker who lived some 400 metres away.
The death of the monk was terrifying enough. However, for these Shan workerd to be involved with the police is even more frightening as they have often been threatened in many ways by officers who claimed authority, laws and regulations the Shan workers knew nothing about. Therefore, it took them over one hour to report the crime to an officer at the house of a former high-ranking policeman near the monastery.
Kham's nightmare turned into terrible reality. Indeed, death did not just take Phra Supoj from his family, friends and fellow monks, it also changes the lives of Kham and other Shan workers.
2. These workers said that after the police performed an autopsy, they were taken for interrogation at the police station. They were interrogated many times by several police who asked same few questions. It seemed the police were only interested in the bamboo that had been cut, what the monks were doing at the monastery and why the workers were absent on the day of the murder. They were asked as if they colluded with the perpetrators in the killing of Phra Supoj.
On the day and night after they reported the murder and for several days afterwards, Kham and Pong were interrogated again and again for more than ten hours.
Kham's ex-husband, Tor faced an even worse situation. He was suspected as a perpetrator until it was later proved that he was innocent as no blood stains were found on his shirt or axe.
3. Phra Supoj was hacked to death with an unidentified sharp object and police failed to find any evidence or weapon at the crime scene so as to identify the perpetrator.
However, police were not totally at a loss, since the several severe wounds and deep cuts on the mutilated body of Phra Supoj should provide some clue at least.
There were more than ten deep cuts on his body; three on the back of his head, four on the left and front side of the neck, and others on his face, arms and right hand. One of the cuts on the back of his head was 15 centimetres long and five centimetres deep. Another 15 centimetre long cut on the neck had cut the artery and almost cut the vein. This cut also slashed the larynx, trachea, and neck bone. These cuts, according to a forensic expert, were so severe that they would have killed the victim almost instantly. Phra Supoj's right hand was almost cut off. From all these wounds, it is most doubtful, and almost illogical for police to conclude that 39-year-old Phra Supoj, a former sports player over 170 centimetres tall was killed by a villager who got angry because the monk told him to stop cutting one bamboo pole.
The observation of other monks that Phra Supoj's death might be linked to earlier threats by the local influential people who wanted the monastery lands, fell on deaf ears. The police refused to listen.
Later when it became too hard even for the police to believe their own theory, some officers raised a new one, suggesting that Phra Supoj was killed because he scolded villager who came to steal a wooden plank from an old barn near the crime scene, and who hit the monk's pet dog when it barked in alarm. The monk's relatives rejected this theory, based on their knowledge of Phra Supoj's nature. They also observed the irregularity in the monk leaving his kuti without closing the door or turning off his computer, and also, as it seemed, amid the unfinished washing of his robes.
In short, it was hard to believe the police's contention that Phra Supoj was killed because of a dispute over some bamboo or a wooden plank.
4. Amidst the grief of relatives and friends over the death of the young monk, Thai society became duplicitous. On the one hand, many respected figures and rights advocates attended the funeral rites to provide moral support to relatives and friends when they most needed it. On the negative side, government officials at all levels, particularly those involved with ensuring security, and the judicial system refused to take any responsibility for failing to ensure justice. Worse still, some morally deficient officials had even accused the victim of being the wrongdoer, so as not to feel any responsibility toward his death. From the viewpoint of symbolic violence, this is no less cruel than the actual killing of Phra Supoj. The ignorance on the part of the Sangha council and administrators only added insult into injury. Effectively, they had left relatives and acquaintances to fight alone in the dark with no hope.
5. Until today, Kham, Pong, Tor and other disadvantaged people continue to be suspects from times to time. Similarly, Phra Supoj, brutally murdered by the deadly hand of fate, a victim of the greed of local influential people, government officials and investors, was unable to demand justice. On the contrary, the perpetrators and those who must be responsible directly and indirectly for his death remain unscathed, maintain their high position in the society, beyond the reach of people like Kham, Pong or the relatives of Phra Supoj to ask for justice.
Unless Thais rise up and demand change for a better society in which to live, the death of Phra Supoj won't be the last.
|
2.
The failure of the police to arrest the perpetrator led environmentalists and a network of activist monks to issue a statement demanding that the investigation be speeded up. The National Human Rights Commission meanwhile sent its commissioners to follow up the case. The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) later took over the case from local police. However, not much was done until the change of government and a new DSI team was sent to the crime scene to follow up on the case. Like other cases where human rights activists had been murdered, the transfer of the case won't lead to any progress unless the civil groups exert more pressure on the relevant parties.
A new development took place with the change of the DSI head. Former chief Pol Gen Sombat Amornwiwat was transferred to take up the Justice Ministry's Deputy Permanent Secretary post formerly held by Mr Kraisorn Baramee-auaychai, who became acting DSI Director-General. Appeals Court Chief Judge Sunai Manomai-udom was nominated as the new DSI chief. Sombat later became Deputy Police Chief for Security, a new position.
After the change of DSI head, major cases were re-opened, including the disappearance of the Muslim lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit, other extra-judicial killings, and the murder of Phra Supoj.
In December 6-7, 2006, a team of investigators from the Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) and the DSI under the leadership of Pol Lt Col Krisda Ribruamsap visited the Suan Metta Dharm in Sansai Subdistrict, to collect more evidence about Phra Supoj's death.
3.
Investigators searched Phra Supoj's kuti for more evidence on December 7. Reporters and relatives were not allowed into the kuti during the search. In the afternoon, officers used metal detectors to collect more evidence at the murder scene. The spot where the monk's body was found was now choked with tall grasses surrounded by bamboo groves. A spirit house had been erected at the murder spot as well as in the compound of the tangerine orchard opposite.
During the two-hour search at the crime scene and surrounding areas, the metal detectors gave regular alarms. Investigators collected a glass bottle, shoes, and a spectacle frame and lenses which relatives thought belonged to Phra Supoj. Reporters following up on this case observed that the gathering of evidence by the CIFS investigators was more thorough and used more sophisticated equipments than the previous teams of local police or the DSI. However, the investigators refused to give any interview to reporters.
4.
Phra Supoj's father and mother, Mr Kittipat and Mrs Daoruang Duangprasert were also present at the Suan Metta Dharm forest monastery during the gathering of more evidence, travelling from their hometown in Nonthaburi province.
Speaking to Prachatai after the search, Kittipat said his hopes had been revived after the change of the government, and with the collection of more evidence. However, he said it remains to be seen what the revival of the case will lead to. He felt that at least the new investigation team had been very determined in its work; however, this was a bit too late, and all the major evidence might have been lost.
Indeed, all the evidence collected during the search could have been found earlier by the previous teams right after the death of Phra Supoj. This reflects ignorance on the part of the police for not carefully collecting all evidence, said Kittipat.
He kept his hopes up, though. "It's kind of late. It has been almost two years. However, I still have hope that they will not abandon my son's case. At least it seems to be a big team this time, from all relevant agencies."
Meanwhile, Phra Kittisak Kittisophano, abbot of Suan Metta Dharm forest monastery and chair of the Sekkiyadharm group, said that he had been informed by the DSI that this case is now considered as premeditated murder, and not the result of a dispute or angry outburst.
"This confirms the thesis we pointed out right after the death of Phra Supoj but which had been turned down or ignored. Investigators wasted one year trying to prove their own theory to deny that this case is linked to politics," said Phra Kittisak.
"It's like we have been pointing to the East for you so that you can find the village but you refused to listen, going instead in all other directions. Eventually when after all the wandering you still can't find the village, now you say; well it might be the East" he said.
This can't be called "progress" because what investigators did in collecting more evidence on December 7, 2006, could have been done 18 months ago, he added.
"Why did they refuse to listen to us? The reasons I can think is that perhaps they want to protect someone, or that they are inefficient, or that they are too proud to follow our instruction. But who will take responsibility for the damage done (for following the wrong thesis)?," asked Phra Kittisak.
Meanwhile, Dr Khunying Pornthip Rojanasunan, acting CIFS Director, told Krungthep Thurakij newspaper on Dec 7, 2006 that her office sent officers as had been requested. She said she will also hear progress on the case from investigators, while admitting that it is difficult to get more evidence given that the case happened long time ago.
"Taking up the case seriously now might be viewed as attempting to placate the appeals of society," she said, adding that in the past the DSI and her office did not cooperate in their work.
"Phra Supoj's death is like the case of lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit, where our office was called in when the responsible agency felt like it. But the result is that when we were called on late, there was almost no evidence left," she said.
5.
Another development is the change of high-ranking officials in the DSI which has seen a change in the head of the agency that is directly responsible for major cases involving human rights violations. On April 27, 2007, Justice Ministry Permanent Secretary Charan Pakdeethanakul signed an order appointing new officials to major agencies.
Of particular interest is the transfer of Pol Col Suchart Wong-anandchai, head of the Special Criminal Investigation Bureau which was responsible for the cases of Phra Supoj and Muslim lawyer Somchai to be the head of the Bureau for Foreign Affairs and International Crime. Replacing him is Col Piyawat Kingkade, an expert in special cases and former DSI spokesman.
"Col Piyawat has proven himself to be capable of taking up this new post from his past works in the investigation of major cases," said DSI Director-General Sunai.
He also said that the transfer was meant to rotate officials to different work within the department so as not to concentrate power in one particular section.
Col Piyawat was recently assigned as the chief investigator in the Somchai Neelapaijit case, the extrajudicial killings during the war on drugs, and the physical assaults on suspects in the case of the raid to steal guns from the army camp in Narathiwat on Jan 4, 2004.
It remains to be seen if the change in the DSI will lead to any progress in the investigation into the cases of Somchai, Phra Supoj, and the murder of other human rights defenders.
Or will it take the investigation back to the drawing board?
Related news:
Phra Supoj's mysterious death: a Buddhist monk falls victim to capitalist greed (4)
Phra Supoj's mysterious death: a Buddhist monk falls victim to capitalist greed (2)
Phra Supoj's mysterious death: a Buddhist monk falls victim to capitalist greed
Translated by Mukdawan Sakboon
