Barkar Nash (Page 958)

Many children taken in by foundation were beaten and forced to work, say police

Police have completed their investigation into alleged child assault at a children’s foundation in Samut Songkhram and recommended charges against a prominent child rights advocate, his wife and the foundation.

Pol Gen Surachate Hakparn, the deputy national police chief, held a briefing on Wednesday to outline the case against Montree “Khru Yun” Sinthawichai and the Child Protection Foundation in Amphawa district.

Mr Montree, a former senator, made the headlines when activists from the Zendai Foundation took children who had been under his care to file a complaint against him at the Amphawa police station on Oct 29 last year.

The children had accused Mr Montree, 61, of assaulting them. They brought a video showing Mr Montree using a wooden baton to beat some children under his care at the foundation, of which he was the secretary-general.

After receiving the complaint, local police began investigating the foundation. They were joined by officers from the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Division, officials from the Samut Songkhram provincial social development and human security office and activists from the Zendai Foundation.

When they visited the foundation, which also serves as Mr Montree’s residence, they found 56 children and youths, aged between one and 18 years old. There were signs that eight had been physically abused and they were taken into the care of child welfare officials.

An extended investigation found that a total of 33 children had been physically assaulted by Mr Montree on many occasions. They also had allegedly been forced to work at a resort run by his wife Phimol Sinthawichai, 61. They were tasked with cleaning and changing bedsheets and were paid wages of 40-60 baht per day.

Police questioned more than 100 witnesses, investigated those who had links with Mr Montree and also examined his finances and those of the foundation, said Pol Gen Surachate.

Mr Montree is facing charges of physically assaulting children under his care and colluding in forced child labour, hiring children aged under 15 to work, paying wages below the minimum wage rate and exploiting children for his own benefit.

Ms Phimol was charged with colluding in forced child labour, hiring children aged under 15 to work, paying wages below the minimum wage rate and exploiting children for his own benefit.

Officials also learned on March 28 that the foundation had put up donation boxes at more than 300 locations to raise funds without seeking permission.

A police complaint was filed against the foundation and six committee members at the Chokchai police station for soliciting donations without permission. Police have summoned the accused to acknowledge the charge on Wednesday, said Pol Gen Surachate.

Deputy national police chief Pol Gen Surachate Hakparn briefs reporters on the charges against child rights advocate Montree Sinthawichai at the Royal Thai Police Sports Club on Vibhavadi Rangsit Road in Bangkok on Wednesday. (Photo: Police TV)

Move Forward should be happy with premiership, says Adisorn

The Pheu Thai Party should get the House speakership because it has more people suitable for the position than the Move Forward Party, according to Adisorn Piangket, Pheu Thai list MP-elect.

Mr Adisorn, a veteran politician, was responding to a Facebook post by Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, a member of the Progressive Movement, who said the speaker’s position should go to an MP nominated by the Move Forward Party.

Mr Piyabutr and other executives of the former Future Forward party were banned from politics for 10 years after the party was dissolved by the Constitutional Court in 2020. He is, however, is regarded by many as the brains behind the Move Forward Party.

Mr Adisorn said Mr Piyabutr might take it for granted that Move Forward would command a majority in the House of Representatives. In fact, the 152 House seats won by Move Forward was still far short of 250, or half of the 500 House seats.

He said if Move Forward wanted every key position, it must first do what had been done by the former Thai Rak Thai party, which clinched 377 House seats in an election.

Pheu Thai was glad to support Move Forward leader Pita Limjaroenrat for the post of prime minister, leader of the executive branch, he said.

The House speaker, leader of the legislative branch, should be from another party in the coalition, Mr Adisorn said.

For example, Mr Adisorn said, Chuan Leekpai was appointed House speaker even though the Democrat Party did not have the most MPs in the House. Uthai Pimchaichon was once House speaker although his party had only three MPs. It all depended on suitability and timing, he added.

“By comparison, I think the Pheu Thai Party has more people suited for the post of House speaker in terms of personality,” he said.

Mr Adisorn said in order to be democratic, the post of House Speaker should be decided by a vote in the House of Representatives.

“The person holding the post of House speaker should have an outstanding personality. Since Move Forward already has a young man to lead the executive branch, the party should not want to take everything for itself.

“If Move Forward remains unyielding and Pheu Thai chooses to walk away from the planned coalition, Move Forward would not be able go any further. I don’t want to see this happen,” Mr Adisorn warned.

On Mr Piyabutr’s dissatisfaction over the amendment of Section 112 of the Criminal Code (the lese majeste law) not being included in the memorandum of understanding signed by the eight parties forming a coalition, Mr Adisorn said Mr Piyabutr should talk this matter over within the Move Forward Party.

He said Mr Piyabutr cared only about the image of Move Forward, which had emphasized this issue in its campaign, all the way to victory, and therefore did not want the party to be branded a liar.

Pheu Thai leader Cholnan Srikaew also reacted to Mr Piyabutr’s Facebook post. He said all the parties involved had not, in fact, discussed the allocation of any positions, apart from prime minister.

He said the parties were concentrating on how to reach the targets that lay ahead. The first target was to get a nominee for the post of prime minister endorsed by a joint sitting of parliament. Mr Piyabutr’s remark was far from being positive, and more like applying pressure, he said.

As for the post of House speaker, a decision should be reached, amicably and reasonably, in talks involving all parties concerned, Dr Cholnan said.

Not responsible ‘due to caretaker role’

The caretaker government does not have to take responsibility after the Constitutional Court invalidated the executive decree suspending four provisions of the anti-torture law, according to Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam.

Mr Wissanu, who is the government’s top legal expert, explained that the term of the government that issued the decree ended in March when the House of Representatives was dissolved. Had the government’s term not ended, it would have had to step down or dissolve the House to show responsibility following the court ruling, he said.

While any individual minister in charge of initiating the provisions may step down from the post, the caretaker government itself cannot resign as it must carry on its duty as constitutionally required to avoid leaving the country in a power vacuum, he said.

Mr Wissanu’s comments were in response to civil rights groups’ calls for the government to account for the provisions being invalidated.

The Constitutional Court ruled last week that the move to postpone the enforcement of Sections 22–25 of the Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act until Oct 1 this year violated Section 172 of the constitution.

He insisted that even before the Constitutional Court passed its ruling, the Royal Thai Police (RTP) had anticipated the anti-torture law coming into effect and had been making preparations, such as acquiring the tools needed to enforce the law.

The Office of the Court of Justice, meanwhile, has issued an urgent letter instructing courts of first instance to operate outside normal working hours to facilitate the enforcement of the anti-torture law. The letter cites Sections 24 and 26 of the law in which relevant individuals can submit a petition to a court seeking disclosure of information about those detained by authorities if they suspect or witness torture or enforced disappearance.

Also, Chaowalit Wichayasuth, a member of the Thai Sang Thai Party, on Tuesday urged Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to step down following the court ruling.

“When the Constitutional Court rules [the decree is against the charter], Gen Prayut, as head of the cabinet, should take political responsibility without waiting for a petition seeking his ouster,” he said.

Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, a former EC member turned chief strategist of the Seri Ruam Thai Party, suggested that a petition should be lodged with the National Anti-Corruption Commission against the Prayut administration over the decree.

Angkhana Neelaphaijit, a human rights activist, on Tuesday urged people who are affected by the incomplete enforcement of the decree to seek compensation.

Pornpen Khongkachonkiet, Cross Cultural Foundation director and rights activist, said equipping police with body cameras would improve transparency.