From: kamol@munnari.oz.AU (Kamol Hengkietisak)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.thai
Subject: Sept 26: Govts May masacre report revealed.
Date: 29 Sep 1992 00:04:11 +1000
Organization: Mail/News gateway


Govt May report makes public
 
DEPLOYMENT of upcou7:9^H].kMQ=EU11Q!AI=QMQ%9	9-=-%95e9)the execution of Pairee Pinas (Enemy Destruction) plan without proper 
control of the use of force were blamed for the bloodshed, according to a 
government enquiry report into the May event which was released on Friday.
 
The report also blamed the distortion of facts by state-owned media for 
encouraging people who were denied of access to factual information about 
the event to go to the protest site to "see with their own eyes".
 
However, the report did not put the blame on any particular individual 
involved in the crackdown of the protest, but noted that Gen Suchinda 
Kraprayoon, then prime minister and defence minister, had acknowledged and 
approved the execution of Pairee Pinas plan at every step.
 
The report said even though there were instructions to avoid the use of 
weapons to quell the protest and to take measures from lenient to tough, 
the troops deployed could open fire without having to seek approval from 
WWkKM%Q!e!	Q=MQ=AQ!Q!IQ	A=M	eQ!)demonstrators.
 
While recognising the legitimate right of the people to hold rallies, the 
report said that the movement of a large number of protesters from one 
place to another as was the movement of demonstrators from Sanam Luang to 
Rajdamnoen Avenue during the May event was provocative as it could lead to 
confusion, riot and violence.
 
The enquiry report concluded that the May protests stemmed from public 
dissent against the Constitution which appeared to perpetuate the power of 
the now defunct National Peace-keeping Council and Gen Suchinda's failure 
to honour his pledge that he would not accept the premiership.
 
Gen Suchinda's uncompromising stand in the face of the protests against him 
and his refusal to negotiate with the protesters caused the public to feel 
that he was not responsive to the aspiration of the people, said the 
rY\KQ9) 
The approval of the use of Pairee Pinas plan by ACM Kaset Rojananil, then 
the supreme commander, to cope with the protesters was a major factor 
contributing to increased public resistance, the report said.
 
The arson of Phu Khao Thong police station of the Fire Brigade, the Nang 
Lerng police station and the Youth and Juvenile Welfare Sub-division led to 
the use of the force by the military to quell the protest, according to the 
findings.
 
The report also noted the confusion in the line of the command of the 
police force during the protests.  It said even though Pol Lt-Gen Chalerm 
Rojanapradit, commissioner of the police force, was responsible to deal 
with the protests in accordance with the Pairee Pinas plan, a senior police 
officer which the report only identified as Vor still issued orders to the 
police force despite the fact that Vor was no longer chief of the police 
task force.
 
Even Police Director-General Sawat Amornvivat was powerless and could not 
issue orders to his men, said the report.
 
The report attributed the seriousness of the crackdown to the deployment of 
upcountry troops who were not fully informed about the protests.  These 
soldiers were aggressive and were tough with the protesters at the 
beginning, but when they became acquainted with the protesters, they became 
less aggressive, said the report, quoting a witness.
 
The report also quoted a statement by another witness, New Aspiration Party 
leader Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who maintained that there were sufficient 
troops who were trained in riot control to deal with the demonstrators 
without having to resort to armed crackdown.
 
"The protests originated from a political struggle.  The use of police and 
troops to solve the problem was not appropriate.
 
"The execution of Pairee Pinas plan which was hatched on May 7 was 
inappropriate for the situation.  Even though it could be claimed that (the 
troops and police) simply performed their duties, the use of force was not 
properly controlled.
 
"Troops had no experience in mob control and police did not have the 
capability to control the situation.  Although provoked, challenged or 
assaulted and government buildings destroyed, the shooting of demonstrators 
was not intended to stop the rampage.
 
"The shooting, intentional or unintentional, was a mistake....," concluded 
the report.
 
The 219-page report chronicled events leading up to the protests between 
May 17-20.  It contained accounts given by numerous witnesses who included 
the protesters as well as officials involved in the crackdown.
 
Details about damage, casualties and recommendations to prevent recurrence 
of the tragedy were also shown in the report.
 
The report said the May event had inflicted extensive damage estimated at 
about 33,350 million baht.  These included 1,967 million baht of state 
properties, 266 million baht in loss of revenue of private and government 
sectors and 32,890 million baht in decreased productivity, lost investment 
and tourism, exports and services.

Kamol notes: Vor in the report refers to Pol Gen Viroj Pao-in, a Class 5 and is Suchinda's friend. He resigned from the police to take up deputy interior
minister in Suchinda govt. He was said to be behind the brutal police crackdown
of the demonstrators and issue commands not to protect the police station a
against the arsonists (rumoured to be instigated by Army's provocatours).