VZCZCXYZ0042
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHBK #1757/01 0810905
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 220905Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY BANGKOK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7366
INFO RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEABND/DEA HQS WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE

UNCLAS BANGKOK 001757 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV CJAN KCRM KJUS TH
SUBJECT: EXTRADITION: THAILAND: SUWIT A.K.A. CHENG PRASOPRAT 
 
REF: SECSTATE 43624 
 
¶1. (U) This cable is intended to address the questions posed 
to Post in Reftel regarding the proposed extradition of Suwit 
a.k.a Cheng Prasoprat from the US to Thailand. 
 
¶2. (U) The Embassy believes that there is no merit to Mr. 
Suwit's assertion in his submission to the Department that he 
would be tortured if extradited to Thailand.  While some NGOs 
and legal organizations report that some members of the 
police occasionally torture suspects to obtain confessions, 
we have no reason to believe that Suwit would be subjected to 
torture.  As an American citizen, Post's American Citizens 
Services section would closely monitor Suwit's well-being 
through regular prison visits.  Those visits, combined with 
the relative high-profile nature of this extradition case, 
lead Post to conclude that Suwit would not be mistreated 
during his incarceration in Thailand.  As such, and in 
accordance with standard procedures in extradition cases in 
which Convention Against Torture (CAT) claims are made, 
Ambassador Boyce certifies that it is NOT "more likely than 
not" that Prasoprat would be tortured if extradited from the 
US to Thailand. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Below are answers to questions posed in Reftel, 
paragraph 6. 
 
Q: Is the death penalty routinely imposed in Thailand for 
non-violent drug offenses?  Please include statistics on: (1) 
the number of narcotics offenses charged per year; (2) the 
number of narcotics convictions; (3) the number of death 
sentences handed down for narcotics convictions; (4) the 
number of death sentences carried out for narcotics 
convictions; (5) the number of total death sentence 
convictions; (6) the number of total death sentences carried 
out. 
 
A: The death penalty is mandatory for many serious 
drug-related offense in Thailand including certain serious 
non-violent drug offenses.  However, mandatory death 
sentences are frequently reduced by judges to lesser 
sentences ranging from 25 years to life in prison. 
Additionally, death sentences are often commuted by royal 
pardon from the King or Queen.  Statistics: 
 
-- Number of narcotics cases in 2005: 40,849 (source: 
Thailand's Office of Narcotics Control Board) 
 
-- Number of narcotics convictions in 2005: Post is unable to 
locate this specific statistic.  However, according to 
Thailand's Department of Corrections, as of May 31, 2002, 
there were 106,256 persons incarcerated on narcotics 
convictions. 
 
-- Number of death sentences handed down for narcotics 
convictions:  Post has been unable to obtain this statistic. 
 
-- Number of death sentences carried out for narcotics 
convictions: 14 between years 1998 and present. Breakdown by 
year:  1998 - 0; 1999 - 1; 2000 - 1; 2001 - 7; 2002 - 2; 2003 
- 3; 2004 - 0; 2005 - 0; 2006 (to date) - 0. (Source: Amnesty 
International). 
 
-- Number of total death sentences carried out: According to 
the Thai Department of Corrections, from 1997 to present, 56 
executions have been carried out.  Breakdown by year 
(1997-present): 1997 - 2; 1998 - 16; 1999 - 2; 2000 -2; 2001 
- 8; 2002 - 11; 2003 - 11; 2004 - 4; 2005 - 0; 2006 (to date) 
- 0. (source: Thailand Department of Corrections) 
 
-- Number of total death sentence convictions: statistic not 
available. 
 
Q: To the extent that the death penalty is imposed, is it 
usually carried out? 
 
A: Actual executions are becoming more rare in Thailand. 
According to the Department of Corrections none have been 
carried out since 2004.  In fact, death sentences (including 
those issued to defendants in narcotics cases) are very often 
commuted under collective royal pardons which are issued 
periodically on certain Thai holidays.  In addition, every 
convicted prisoner has the right to petition the King for an 
individual pardon. Following are statistics from the 
Department of Corrections on the impact of petitions for an 
individual royal pardon on death penalty cases from 2001-2005. 
 
2001: 21 Petition submitted - 12 Pardons granted (reduced 
sentence) 
2002: 32 Petions submitted - 32 Pardons granted (reduced 
sentence)2003: 70 Petitions submitted - 63 Pardons granted (reduced 
sentence) 
2004: 82 Petitions submitted - 76 Pardons granted (reduced 
sentence) 
2005: 110 Petitions submitted - 98 Pardons granted (reduced 
sentence) 
 
Q: How is the death penalty carried out? 
 
A: Death sentences are carried out by lethal injection. 
 
Q: In death penalty cases, are there adequate procedural due 
process protections, such as a right of the defendant to be 
tried in his/her presence, the right against 
self-incrimination (or not to confess guilt), the exclusion 
of evidence extracted through torture, the right to produce 
witnesses and to cross-examine witnesses, right to appeal, 
etc.? 
 
A:  Defendants in Thailand have adequate procedural due 
process protections, including a right to be present during 
the trial; a right against self-incrimination; a right 
against the use of threats or 'inducements' in obtaining 
statements from a witness/defendant; the right to produce 
witnesses and cross-examine witnesses, and the right to 
appeal the verdict.  These rights are implemented in practice. 
 
Q: Are adequate lawyers available for death penalty 
defendants? 
 
A: Yes. 
 
Q: To what extent does corruption in the judiciary prejudice 
criminal cases, in particular narcotics and death penalty 
cases? 
 
A: Over the past several years, corruption has lessened in 
the judiciary overall.  Post is not aware of any specific 
case of corruption in the judiciary that has prejudiced death 
penalty cases or narcotics cases. 
 
Q: Are there other factors related to the administration of 
the death penalty that we should be taking into account in 
deciding whether to seek assurances (i.e., that the Thai 
prosecutors would not seek the death penalty or would 
recommend clemency)? 
 
A: In Thailand, sentencing is Qthe discretion of the judge 
hearing the case.  The prosecutors must bring charges for 
which there is specific evidence.  They can recommend that a 
judge issue a lesser penalty, but their recommendations are 
not binding, and the judge can sentence a defendant to death 
even when the prosecutor does note pursue that sentence. 
Under Thai law, the ONLY authorized sentence for the 
production, importation or exportation of a Category I 
controlled substance (including heroin, amphetamines, 
methamphetamine, ecstasy, and LSD) is death.  As such, the 
prosecutor cannot give a death penalty assurance. 
Nevertheless, Thailand has not executed anyone since 2004. 
The judge has the option to impose the death sentence, then 
immediately reduce the sentence.  An admission of guilt often 
results in the judge reducing the sentence to life, or 25-50 
years. (Note: Section 72 of the Penal Code states that a 
death sentence can be reduced to between 25 years and life. 
End note.)  If the judge imposes and does not reduce a death 
sentence, the prisoner (or someone acting on his behalf) can 
petition the monarchy to have the sentence reduced. 
 
Q: Do we know whether the Thai prosecutors are actually going 
to seek the death penalty in this case? 
 
A: Post's contacts close to this case believe that the 
prosecutors will not actively seek the death penalty in this 
case.  Nevertheless, under Thai law the ONLY authorized 
sentence for the production, importation or exportation of a 
Category I controlled substance (including heroin, 
amphetamines, methamphetamine, ecstasy, and LSD) is death. 
 
Q: Do we know whether Prasoprat is considered a big fish by 
the Thai authorities? 
 
A: Suwit's case is considered significant in Thailand because 
of the nature of his alleged crimes (large-scale heroin 
trafficking), and because Suwit's case represents the very 
first case in which Thailand requested that a suspect be 
extradited from the US.  Thailand is very cooperative in 
accommodating US extradition requests.  The Thai are among 
our best Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) and 
extradition treaty partners in the world.  Since the 
US-Thailand Extradition Treaty entered into force in 1991, 
the US has extradited one individual to Thailand while the 
Thai have responded favorably to over 40 requests to 
extradite suspects (including Thai nationals) to the United 
States.  DOJ and DEA view this cooperation as vital to USG 
efforts to combat drug trafficking in this part of the world. 
 Suwit's case is viewed as a barometer of whether this 
cooperation is mutual.  Given the fact that the penalty for 
serious narcotics crimes in Thailand is often a mandatory 
death sentence, the decision to deny Suwit's extradition 
based on those grounds would seriously damage the utility of 
the US-Thai Extradition Treaty from the perspective of the 
Thai.  Further, DOJ is concerned that a refusal to extradite 
Suwit may negatively impact the broader US-Thai MLAT 
relationship. 
 
Q: What is the Embassy's sense of the Thai reaction to a 
possible request for assurances from the Thai government that 
Thai prosecutors will recommend to Thailand's pardoning 
authority that the death penalty be commuted if it is imposed 
in this case? 
 
A: As stated above, under Thai law, sentencing is at the 
discretion of the judge hearing the case.  As such, the 
prosecutor cannot give any such assurance.  Post believes 
that it would be inappropriate to request such an assurance 
from the prosecutors when such an assurance, even if given, 
would be meaningless in practice.  Requesting an assurance 
such as this would put the prosecutor's office (with whom 
Post has a very positive relationship) in an unnecessarily 
difficult position which would produce absolutely no benefit 
to the defendant in this case. 
 
Q: What is the status of the legal proceedings against 
Boonsong a.k.a. Song Mekphongsathorn a.k.a. Thanat Yuwawanit? 
 Note: Boonsong's extradition was requested concurrently with 
Prasoprat's, and Boonsong was wanted for the same narcotics 
offense.  Boonsong served a sentence in the United States and 
was subsequently deported to Thailand.  End note. 
 
A: Boonsong's case concluded in late November 2005.  He was 
convicted and the judge issued the mandatory death sentence. 
 
Q: What services would Embassy provide Prasoprat, as a U.S. 
citizen, should he be extradited? 
 
A: The Consular Section's American Citizens Services Unit 
(ACS) would visit Prasoprat on a regular basis (once per 
month during the trial phase, and once every three months 
after sentencing).  ACS would provide a list of private 
attorneys who operate in Thailand and offer to contact an 
attorney of Prasoprat's choosing.  During regular ACS visits, 
a Consular Officer will inquire as to Prasoprat's well-being, 
listen to his concerns or requests and make the appropriate 
follow up with prison officials.  Prasoprat will have the 
option of applying for an Emergency Medical and Dietary 
Assistance (EMDA) loan from the USG.  If approved, the loan 
would provide Prasopat with a small amount of money each 
quarter for purchase of supplemental food, toiletries, etc. 
from the prison canteen.  The Consular officer will also 
provide leisure reading material for Prasoprat. 
 
Q: Are individuals - both those awaiting trial and those 
serving a sentence - tortured or extra-judicially executed in 
Thai prisons?  If so, are they more likely to be tortured or 
extra-judicially executed in narcotics cases? 
 
A: While some NGOs and legal organizations report that some 
members of the police occasionally torture suspects to obtain 
confessions prior to incarceration, Post is not aware of 
reports of torture in prisons - both for those awaiting trial 
or those serving sentences. (Note: These allegations of 
police torture occur while suspects are in police custody, 
not when prisoners are incarcerated in Department of 
Corrections run prisons. End note.)  Prisons have been known 
to use leg irons to control prisoners who were deemed escape 
risks, or sometimes prisoners on death row.  However, this 
does not constitute torture under the Department's 
interpretation of the Convention Against Torture (CAT).  Post 
is unaware of any reports of extrajudicial killings taking 
place inside Thai prisons. 
 
Q: If torture or extra-judicial execution occurs in Thai 
prisons, do public officials commit the act?  Or is the 
violence imposed by private actors? 
 
A: Not applicable, see above. 
 
Q: If public officials, are they acting in an official or 
unofficial capacity? 
 
A: Not applicable, see above. 
Q: If other inmates or other private actors are responsible, 
are Thai officials aware prior to the activities that 
violence will occur?  Are Thai officials aware of the 
specific instances in advance or is it a more general 
awareness of the climate of violence in the prison and the 
failure by Thai authorities to take reasonable action to 
prevent the violence by private actors? 
 
A: Not applicable, see above. 
 
Q: If violence against alleged or convicted drug traffickers 
occurs, is it intentional?  Is the purpose of such actions to 
punish the victims for drug trafficking activity or is it due 
to generalized violence in detention? 
 
A: Not applicable, see above. 
 
Q: Would a U.S. citizen - particularly one who is extradited 
- be treated better than other narcotics defendants? 
 
A: Suwit would likely be treated about the same as all other 
prisoners in the Thai prison system.  As a US citizen 
receiving regular visits from ACS, he might benefit slightly 
in terms of access to medical care, or access to EMDA loan 
funds to purchase supplemental food from the prison canteen. 
 
BOYCE