VZCZCXRO1109
RR RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHBK #2286/01 2520424
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 090424Z SEP 09
FM AMEMBASSY BANGKOK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 8183
INFO RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 7430
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 9937
RUEHUL/AMEMBASSY SEOUL 5756
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 1885
RUEHWL/AMEMBASSY WELLINGTON 0087
RUEHCHI/AMCONSUL CHIANG MAI 6950
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC
RHEFDHS/DIA DHS WASHINGTON DC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BANGKOK 002286 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 9/9/2019 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM DRL TH
SUBJECT: EXECUTIONS RESUME IN THAILAND AFTER SIX YEAR 
BREAK: TWO METHAMPHETAMINE DEALERS DIE BY LETHAL INJECTION 
 
BANGKOK 00002286  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
Classified By: POL Counselor George Kent, reason 1.4 (b,d) 
 
 ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  On August 24, the Royal Thai Government 
(RTG) executed two Thai drug traffickers by lethal injection 
after their request for a King's pardon was rejected; these 
were the first executions in Thailand since 2003.  The 
overall Thai reaction was a shrug; there remains high 
societal support for the death penalty in Thailand, 
particularly for large-scale drug traffickers.  In contrast, 
human rights groups and the European Union immediately 
registered their disappointment with the news, having clearly 
perceived the intervening six years since Thailand's last 
executions -- of four drug traffickers -- as a moratorium 
building towards possible abolishment of the death penalty. 
Neither the prisoners themselves nor other interested parties 
were given much notice prior to their execution, a result of 
the applicable Thai death penalty provisions.  END SUMMARY 
 
DEAD MEN WALKING 
---------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) Convicted drug traffickers Bundit Charoenwanich and 
Jirawat Phumpruek were executed by lethal injection in 
Bangkok's Bang Kwang prison on August 24th.  These executions 
were the first judicially-sanctioned killings in Thailand 
since 2003, and only the fifth and sixth lethal injections in 
the country since Thailand switched from execution by firing 
squad earlier that year.  The two men were first arrested for 
large-scale trafficking of methamphetamines in 2001; given 
the lengthy mandatory appeals process associated with death 
penalty cases, the Supreme Court did not uphold their 
conviction until June 28, 2007.  Following the Supreme 
Court's decision, the prisoners exercised their right to 
submit a petition for royal pardon. 
 
¶3. (SBU) The Thai Constitution gives the King the discretion 
to grant a pardon, and in practice the King can also decide 
whether to release the prisoner, commute the sentence, or 
reduce the punishment.  In this instance, the King rejected 
the petition for pardon of the two male defendants on August 
10, 2009, but commuted the death sentence of their female 
co-defendant, who remains in a women's prison.  (Note: There 
was no mention of the female defendant's pardon, let alone 
her identity, in local or international media coverage.  End 
Note.) 
 
LOCAL APPROBATION; NGO, EURO CONDEMNATION 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) Aside from the criticism from the usual suspects, 
the overall reaction to the executions in Thailand was 
relatively muted.  Longtime Thailand observers and human 
rights lawyers believe that not only is there overwhelming 
support for the death penalty in Thailand, but the execution 
of drug traffickers in particular is perceived as especially 
justified. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Local NGOs and Amnesty International quickly joined 
the EU in condemning the resumption of executions in 
Thailand.  Citing UN conventions, they not only took issue 
with use of the death penalty writ large, but also questioned 
its application in conjunction with drug crimes.  The NGOs 
also condemned the fact that the prisoners were reportedly 
given as little as one to two hours notice before their 
executions. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Most Thai believe that while a murder only has an 
impact on the victim's family, drug trafficking has a 
detrimental effect on Thai society and the nation as a whole, 
according to longtime Thailand observer Bill Klausner.  That 
said, the resumption of executions was not intended to send a 
particular message to drug traffickers, Director General of 
the Department of Corrections (DOC) Nathee Chitsawang 
suggested to us, but rather a function of statistics. 
According to the DOC, 92 of the 128 prisoners on death row 
who have exhausted the appeals process were convicted of 
drug-related crimes (including 12 of the 13 women). 
 
¶7. (SBU) As to the issue of the short notice provided to 
prisoners, DG Nathee and other DOC officials did not perceive 
that as a deprivation of human rights, but rather as a 
humanitarian gesture.  According to DOC representatives, 
 
BANGKOK 00002286  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
shortening the timeframe prevents suffering associated with 
waiting, which can lead to escape attempts, suicide, or 
mental distress.  In this instance, the condemned prisoners 
spent their final two hours praying with Buddhist monks, 
calling family members, and putting their final affairs in 
order.  Legally speaking, the DOC views its mandate as 
relatively straightforward: the law requires the execution 
immediately after the rejection of the petition for pardon by 
the King.  In this case, after the petition was rejected on 
August 10th, it took approximately two weeks for it to pass 
from the King through government channels to the DOC.  As 
soon as the DOC received the petition on August 24th, the 
executions were swiftly carried out. 
 
PARDON ME... 
------------ 
 
¶8. (C) The mechanics of the royal pardon are just as opaque 
as most other aspects of Palace affairs.  Human rights 
attorney Thongbai Thongpao recalled that the King in the past 
has issued pardons even in controversial cases.  In the 1960s 
for example, the King pardoned a Communist Party member who 
killed a police officer during fighting in the jungle after 
the Communist had already served 13 years in prison. 
 
¶9. (C) But the Thai system has always treated drug cases 
differently.  Director General Nathee and others within DOC 
did not speculate why this particular pardon petition  -- as 
opposed to the other 33 dealth penalty petitions currently 
before the King -- was addressed first.  As far as the 
two-year deliberation process was concerned, the DOC would 
only say that each case required different levels of 
investigation by the King's private office, and that the 
King's fragile health slowed down the process even more. 
Also contributing to the six-year gap between executions was 
the King's royal amnesty collectively pardoning approximately 
28,500 prisoners on the occasion of his 80th birthday in 
December 2007. 
 
¶10. (C) Many government and civil society members speculate 
the King will use the occasion of his 84th birthday (December 
5, 2011) to issue another collective Royal Pardon, if he 
lives that long (Note: An 84th birthday would be an 
especially auspicious occasion for Buddhists, marking the end 
of his seventh 12-year life cycle.  End Note.)  Citing rumors 
of his declining health, Chulalongkorn University professor 
Suthachai Yimprasert speculated that the King might issue a 
collective pardon on his birthday this December in order to 
"make merit." 
 
...ACCEPTING ONE'S KARMA 
------------------------ 
 
¶11. (SBU) Anti-death penalty activists like Thongbai argue 
that the death penalty contravenes Buddhist teaching, which 
requires that its adherents refrain from taking life. 
However, as Bill Klausner related to us, Thai society has 
long reconciled itself to these contradictions.  Klausner 
noted that in 1918, as a Thai contingent headed to Western 
Europe to join the World War I fight on the side of the 
Allies, a patriarch gave a famous sermon in which he 
explained why Thai soldiers could kill and still adhere to 
Buddhist principles.  This also reflected an acknowledgment, 
even in this overwhelmingly Buddhist populace, that state 
security is paramount in the secular world. 
 
¶12. (SBU) The Union for Civil Liberty in Thailand completed a 
campaign for death penalty abolition in Buddhist learning 
centers in 2009.  While some Buddhist monk participants 
agreed that the death penalty was inconsistent with Buddhist 
prohibitions of killing and the idea of making restitution, 
another participant articulated the more dominant view of 
Thai Theravada Buddhism and karma as practiced: "All 
creatures on the earth are subject to Fate and are ruled by 
its outcome and circumstances.  Those who do what is right 
will achieve good, those who do what is evil will suffer 
evil." 
JOHN