Academics urge suspension of statute of limitations on Tak Bai case
In Tak Bai case, defendant was charged with murder or causing the death of others, but fled abroad
Assistant Professor Pokpong Srisanit, dean of the Faculty of Law at Thammasat University, opened a seminar titled "The Tak Bai Criminal Case Nearing Statute of Limitations: Who Is Responsible? Can the Case Proceed?" held by the faculty on Sunday, October 20.
The Tak Bai case dates back to October 25, 2004, when the southern army used force to disperse a protest by local Muslims in front of the Tak Bai Police Station. Police fired into the air and then into the crowd, killing seven.
The protesters were arrested and piled on top of one another on 25 military trucks to be sent for detention at the Ingkayut Borihan Military Camp in Pattani. By the time the trucks arrived at the camp, 78 of the protesters had died of suffocation.
Pokpong said that in the Tak Bai case, the defendant had been charged with murder or causing the death of others, but fled abroad. The statute of limitations for the case is nearing its expiration on October 25, which could result in the cessation of all legal proceedings.
This issue stems from the defendant exploiting the statute of limitations by fleeing the country, a tactic not exclusive to the Tak Bai case but also used in other cases.
In some countries, for serious crimes, the statute of limitations is not applied. As long as evidence exists, once the fugitive is apprehended, legal proceedings can continue. Alternatively, once prosecutors file charges, the statute of limitations is suspended and restarts.This means the statute resets each time charges are filed.
Pokpong suggested that in the future, to prevent offenders from exploiting the statute of limitations by fleeing and waiting for the period to expire before returning, amendments to the Criminal Code are needed.
He said the statute should be suspended and restarted upon filing charges, following the French legal system, or the statute of limitations should not be counted if the accused flees, similar to the provisions for political officeholders under the Organic Act on Anti-Corruption. In such cases, the statute does not apply if the defendant escapes prosecution.
Assistant Professor Prinya Thaewanarumitkul of the Faculty of Law at Thammasat University suggested that the Cabinet should exercise its authority under Section 172 of the Constitution to issue a royal decree amending the Criminal Code to prevent the statute of limitations from being counted in cases where the defendant has fled.
This measure would be aimed at ensuring the security of the country and public safety in the three southern border provinces, as the legislative process for passing an act can take time.
He emphasised the need to push for further legal amendments to prevent the statute of limitations from applying to offences where state officials cause the death of citizens or commit acts of corruption. This includes suspending the statute of limitations and restarting it when the prosecutor files charges.
Abdulkorhar Awepute, a lawyer in the Tak Bai case, said the case reflects the injustice occurring in the three southern border provinces. He noted that while the proposed legal amendments could be a temporary solution, the core issue lies in the justice system's inability to deliver fairness in the region.
For example, inquests into deaths should lead to the identification of the perpetrators. However, in cases like Tak Bai and others, the responsible parties are often allowed to go unpunished.
