This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BANGKOK 001117 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR G/TIP, EAP/MLS, DRL/IL, DRL/PHD 
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FOR ILAB - MITTELHAUSER AND SASSER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KWMN KCRM ELAB PHUM KJUS TH
SUBJECT: BURMESE MIGRANT LABORER MURDER TRIAL IN THAILAND CONTINUES 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  The next trial hearing in the death of Ma Suu, a 
17-year-old Burmese migrant worker who was allegedly murdered by her 
employer, will be on March 8-9, 2006.  Ma Suu left Burma to seek 
work in Thailand, and found a job as a domestic servant for a 
wealthy Thai military officer in 2001.  While it remains unclear 
whether Ma Suu was originally trafficked across the border, her 
ensuing employment situation clearly amounts to a trafficking case. 
Held against her will in an abusive employment situation, she 
escaped and notified police, only to be returned to her employer and 
eventually killed.  She died on July 16, 2002 from extensive 
beatings and acid burns.  The public prosecutor, with help from the 
Thai Law Society, is seeking cooperation from key witnesses, but 
fear of retribution -- and the defendant's high ranking military 
status -- has caused some to hesitate in cooperating.  End Summary. 
 
¶2. (U) Representatives from the Thai Law Society updated Emboffs on 
February 10 about Ma Suu's murder trial.  On March 8, 2006, the 
trial will resume with the testimony of five witnesses and four 
police officers.  The defendants, Mr. Suchat Akapibul and his wife 
Yawadee, are accused of murdering the 17-year-old Burmese domestic 
employee who died of extensive acid burns and beatings on July 16, 
¶2002.  Suchat is a military officer, whose rank is equivalent to Air 
Force colonel.  Yuwadee was arrested and jailed from July 7-13, 
2002, and released on the same day that Suchat presented himself to 
the authorities.  He was subsequently released on bail, and has not 
yet entered a plea. 
 
--------------- 
CASE BACKGROUND 
--------------- 
 
¶3. (U) A Burmese citizen of Mon ethnicity, the then 17-year-old Ma 
Suu lived in Burma with her grandmother and two younger siblings, 
her parents being deceased.  She crossed into Thailand in 2001 at 
the Mae Sot border town searching for income, and found work, 
through an employment agent, as a domestic worker for the Akapibul 
family, who own a furniture manufacturing business in Suratthani, 
Lopburi province. 
 
¶4. (U) According to the Thai Law Society, Ma Suu's employers accused 
her of stealing a gun, necklace, mobile phone, watch, ring, and more 
than 30,000 baht (USD 750) at the end of June 2002.  Ma Suu denied 
the accusation and was then allegedly locked in a room and beaten 
for the next five days by Suchat, his son, and some soldiers working 
for Suchat.  Another employee stated that a PVC pipe broke into two 
pieces because of the beatings. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Ma Suu escaped on the fifth day and fled to a nearby field, 
where a woman found her, gave her refuge, and brought her to the 
local police station two days later.  The police contacted Suchat's 
father to inform him of Ma Suu's whereabouts, and he then brought Ma 
Suu back to Suchat's house.  The police accompanied them to inspect 
the home, and, after hearing more accusations of the theft, jailed 
Ma Suu for one night.  Suchat requested that Ma Suu return to the 
house the following morning, on the assurance that he would deport 
Ma Suu back to Mae Sot.  The police agreed.  (Note: The Law Society 
blames Thai deference to authority for this decision, as the police 
presumably felt obliged to return Ma Suu to her employer given his 
military rank -- despite indications that he was responsible for her 
beatings.  End note.) 
 
¶6. (U) Instead of returning Ma Suu to Mae Sot, Suchat allegedly 
proceeded to beat her again.  Suchat and his wife then, according to 
court papers, hired a self-professed "medium", or soothsayer, to 
interview Ma Suu and divine the truth about the alleged thefts. 
When the medium proclaimed Ma Suu guilty, Suchat allegedly set her 
on fire and poured acid over her.  Ma Suu was later found near a 
road and taken to Uthai Thani hospital with burns covering more than 
50 percent of her body.  She died on July 16, 2002 after five days 
in a coma.  Prior to her death, she gave a taped statement to a 
journalist recounting her ordeal, and her injuries were 
photographed. 
 
¶7. (U) Jurisdiction for the case spans three provinces: Lopburi, 
where Maa Suu worked; Uthai Thani, where Maa Suu was found 
unconscious in the woods and where she eventually died; and Nakhon 
Sawan, where Maa Suu spent part of her hospitalization. 
 
-------------- 
WHO WILL HELP? 
-------------- 
 
¶8. (U) Ma Suu's case was reported in The Nation, a Thai 
English-languagee newspaper, on July 8, 2002, prompting a number of 
NGO representatives to visit her in the hospital.  A public attorney 
is prosecuting the case, with help from The Thai Law Society, The 
Asian Human Rights Commission based in Hong Kong, Amnesty 
International, Human Rights Watch, and the American Center for 
International Labor Solidarity (ACILS).  The Law Society noted that 
the public prosecutor in this case is being extremely proactive, 
perhaps due to the international attention this case has attracted. 
 
 
¶9. (SBU) The Law Society reports that neither the police, nor the 
hospitals, nor the Burmese Embassy have been cooperative or 
proactive in the investigation.  Hospitals refuse to release any 
records to anyone but family members, and lawyers have been unable 
to reach Ma Suu's family.  The police state that they have found no 
evidence related to the murder, and that Suchat and Yuwadee deny 
having employed Ma Suu.  It is unclear whether Suchat has been 
suspended by the military, or if he is still working.  (The Thai Law 
Society claims he is still employed and stationed at Don Muang 
International Airport, but post has not been able to verify this.) 
 
--------------------------------------- 
COOCOO FOR KO KO -- AND OTHER WITNESSES 
--------------------------------------- 
 
¶10. (SBU) The Law Society has been hoping for the testimony of a 
Burmese radio journalist, Thin Ko Ko, who visited Ma Suu in the 
hospital and recorded her statement the day before she died.  Ko Ko, 
who has worked as a stringer for the Voice of America (VOA), 
recorded statements from Ma Suu that match the testimony of five 
Burmese witnesses.  Ko Ko recently returned to the US, but his 
testimony has been requested by prosecutors to certify the 
authenticity of the tape.  According to the Law Society, Ko Ko had 
been reluctant to testify out of concerns for his safety, despite 
letters from the Uthai Thani Police offering security.  In a 
February 24 e-mail to Econoff, Ko Ko stated that he would not be 
returning to Thailand for the March 8 trial hearing given the "short 
notice" of the request. (Note: The Law Society told Emboffs that 
they had been requesting his testimony since Summer 2004.  End 
Note.)  Ko Ko has, however, agreed to a second option -- less 
desirable to prosecutors -- to send a notarized statement to Post, 
which would then deliver it to the prosecution. 
 
¶11. (U) Prosecutors are counting on the testimony of a second 
important witness, Kamron Parnikorn, who is believed to be the only 
witness to Ma Suu's burning.  He has admitted to participating in 
the beating of Ma Suu, but claimed that it was on orders from 
Suchat.  He has cooperated with prosecutors in the case against 
Suchat and has not been charged.  The Law Society believes that he 
will appear at the March 8-9 hearing.  Other prominent witnesses 
include the five Burmese witnesses whose testimony, given during a 
pre-trial period in the summer of 2004, matches that of Ko Ko's 
recording.  They stated that they were employed in the defendants' 
household at the same time as Ma Suu.  These witnesses were under 
the care of the police until they gave their statements, and are now 
under the care of new employers. 
 
---------------------------------------- 
EXTREME EXAMPLE OF A MUCH LARGER PROBLEM 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶12. (U)  Ma Suu's death is an extreme example of the helplessless 
often faced by illegal Burmese migrant workers who are unable to 
turn to authorities for assistance.  Female domestic workers are 
particularly vulnerable to abuse because they are isolated in 
individual homes, and Thai labor regulations do not provide coverage 
for domestic workers, regardless of nationality. 
 
¶13. (U) The Institute for Population and Social Research (IPSR) 
conducted a survey in 2002-3 of 528 Burmese domestic workers in 
northern Thailand, nearly all of them women, most young and 
unmarried.  Most of the workers found their employment through an 
agent, with none of them knowing what the work conditions would be 
until arriving at their employers' house.  Thirty-two percent 
received 1000 baht (USD 25) or less per month, and only 15 percent 
received more than 3000 baht (75 USD) per month.  Eighty percent 
worked more than 12 hours per day, many of whom worked seven days a 
week.  Two-thirds cared for a child or elderly person, and were 
expected to be available at all hours. 
 
¶14. (U) As most workers were not registered with the government, 
they were vulnerable to threats from the Thai police.  Of the 43 
percent who reported encountering the police, 49 percent said they 
had been asked for money and 29 percent said they had been 
threatened with deportation.  Half of the workers reported being 
threatened by their employer, and 1 in 10 physically abused.  Eight 
percent reported being subjected to sexual advances, with 1.3 
percent being victims of rape.  Only 43 percent were allowed to 
leave the house, making access to health care (which 79 percent had 
to pay for on their own) difficult. 
 
¶15. (U) Comment:  Ma Suu's death is an extreme and rare example, but 
highlights the continuing vulnerability of migrant domestic workers 
in Thailand.  Her confinement, severe abuse at the hands of her 
employer, and subsequent forced return to her employer after her 
escape, qualifies her as a trafficking victim.  There is so far no 
indication that the police officers who returned Ma Suu to her 
employer will face any charges or disciplinary action, but NGOs have 
lauded the public prosecutors' office for their commitment to this 
case.  Post continues to follow this case closely and will send an 
observer to the March 8-9 hearing.  End Comment. 
BOYCE