Skip to content

May 11, 2012

2

Abhisit’s Final Insult to Ah Kong

Opposition leader Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva has responded to the tragic death of lese majeste victim Mr. Amphol Tangnoppakul (“Ah Kong”) with one of his trademark Orwellian statements. Before warning mourners not to “exploit” Mr. Amphon’s death by “turning it into a political issue,” Mark Abhisit asked that the government, in the interest of “justice,” provide a full explanation of what led to Mr. Amphol’s sudden passing. We do not speak for the government, but the facts that might allow Mark Abhisit to reconstruct Mr. Amphol’s death are in the public domain.

“Ah Kong,” a sixty-one-year old cancer-stricken man, was arrested in the summer of 2010 as part of the lese majeste witch-hunt initiated by Mark Abhisit’s government. According to experts, the year 2010 saw a three-fold increase in the number of lese majeste cases reaching the lower courts from the previous year, which had itself shattered earlier records. The criminal complaint against Ah Kong was initiated by none other than Mark Abhisit’s personal secretary, who reported the content of four SMS messages he received on his mobile phone. Naturally, Mark Abhisit claims to have known nothing about it, but his history of lies and distortions calls his credibility into serious question.

Following his arrest, Mr. Amphol was subjected to a horrifying array of violations to his basic human rights: two months in detention without charge, repeated rejections of bail requests while awaiting trial, denial of proper medical treatment, and finally a grotesque twenty-year prison sentence handed down in late 2011, at the conclusion of a process that required the defendant to prove his innocence, instead of placing the burden on the prosecutor to establish his guilt. Even the presiding judge admitted the evidence was not conclusive, but that did not stop him from sentencing Ah Kong to die in prison.

Given the appalling prison conditions for which Thailand is infamous, it is no surprise that Mr. Amphol’s cancer was allowed to spread without proper monitoring or treatment. Detainees generally, and political prisoners in particular, are frequently denied the medical care they need while in custody. As recently as February 2012, the Appeals Court reasoned that Mr. Amphol’s health condition was not serious enough to warrant bail.

The death of Mr. Amphol is a continuation of the policy of terror against the Thai people enacted by Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva’s previous Democrat Party regime that began with 1000s of troops on the street of Bangkok in 2009, the use of army snipers against unarmed civilians in 2010 and the abuse of Article 112 for political gain. The use of 112 was systematically ramped up by the Democrat’s and Mark Abhisit and this has included demagoguing the issue to prevent the law from being reformed in any way. If Mark Abhisit wants to find out who is responsible for Mr. Amphol’s death, he ought to start with himself and his patrons in the military.

Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva may not appreciate it, but confronting the Thai public with evidence of the barbarity of his own actions is not an “exploitation” of Mr. Amphol’s death. It is rather the only way to make sure that Ah Kong did not die for nothing, and to help save the lives of others who have been victimized by Article 112. Ah Kong’s tragic death does not need to be “turned into a political issue.” Ah Kong’s death is a political issue—a symbol of everything that is rotten and backward and inhuman about the political establishment to which Mark Abhisit Vejjajiva has sold his soul.


2 Comments
  1. Lalida
    May 11 2012

    I don’t see anyone can disagree that this Oxford pig Abby is born from the backside of his mother. I really wonder how his parents feels having a son as such that lies and farts all day long. He is a true disgrace to his family and the Oxford he went into……

  2. Guido F. Gebauer
    May 13 2012

    The responsibility of Abhisit Vejjajiva for this tragic injustice is clearly established. His prosecution had originally been motivated by the regime of Abhisit Vejjajiva. Thai courts subsequentely violated his human rights with a charade of justice. The prison authorities did not ensure adequate treatment but let his cancer, spread until death. But in addition, it must be said that Yingluck Sinawatra has been prime minister at the time of his death and we should not deny that generally speaking Amphon finally died under her care. Whatever obstacles and pressures there may have been, she was the prime minister at the time of his death. A cancer stricken grandfather should not have been left rotten in prison until death. Furthermore, Amnesty International and their Thailand researcher Benjamin Zawacki also bear responsibility for the death of Amphon. AI had condemned the cruel prison sentence of Amphon, but they refused to campaign for the freedom and life of this critically ill political prisoner. He was left alone without a single visit by Amnesty International. He was neglected by Amnesty International because he was a Thai lese majeste prisoner. An international campaign of Amnesty International on the behalf of Amphon would have made it easier for the Yingluck administration to do something about this case. An AI campaign might ultimately have saved his life. It is too late. Amphon is dead. How many more Amphons will there be in the future?

Comments are closed.