Death of King Ananda

9 06 2022

On the anniversary of his death, in addition to the usual books and blogs on the death of King Ananda Mahidol – Marshall, Pavin, etc. – readers may find this old book of interest: Alexander MacDonald, Bangkok Editor. An account of the first major royalist coup, the death of King Ananda and the politics of the period, available at Library Genesis.

The most recent effort is by Pavin Chachavalpongpun in his Love and Death of King Ananda Mahidol of Thailand. It is also available at Library Genesis.

Recalling regicide

9 06 2012

Later today the king will, according to The Nation, “preside over the inauguration of a monument built in honour of his older brother, late King Rama VIII.” The event commemorates the gun shot death of King Ananda Mahidol on 9 June 1946.

It seems from the report that the event is sponsored by the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration as Governor and minor prince Sukhumbhand Paribatra will preside and attend the whole day’s event. Sukhumbhand wouldn’t be minor if, in earlier days, his line had been chosen following the abdication of King Prajadhipok.

For the king, commemorating his brother’s still unexplained death, seems to have been a particularly important. The Nation tells readers only that Ananda “passed away.” Of course, everyone knows that the dead king was shot, so the failure to mention it is another of those “sensitivities” that may not be spoken of. If one does speak, it can land you in jail for a very long time.

More than that, the death remains unexplained but still resulted in the execution of three men who were undoubtedly innocent.This is yet another example of the bias of the judiciary when dealing with the monarchy.

Some details of the death are available here (a PDF), here, here and here.  In 1948, former Prime Minister Luang Thamrong Navasawat confided details to U.S. Ambassador Edwin Stanton (a PDF), and that cable remains well worth a read. Freedom Against Censorship Thailand has posted an audacious post that points to the “censorship surrounding the gunshot death of King Ananda Mahidol in 1946.”

Back to The Nation’s report, where it tells readers that a ‘permanent exhibition [about King Rama VIII’s life] will be set up in the hall under the statue,’ Bangkok Governor Sukhumbhand Paribatra said yesterday.”

This is another of those royalist nonsenses. Yes, he was king for a decade (1935-46), but for almost all of that time he was a minor and away from Thailand, so the exhibition must be a kind of personal homage, although we expect the palace PR machine will try to conjure some achievements. We don’t expect to see any comments about regicide or the books that have seriously examined it (in fact, they are banned).

Almost as a footnote, for today’s big show, the phrai “living in the area have also been encouraged to tidy up their premises for the occasion.”

There’s been a lot of tidying up on this matter for six decades. Things like death and censorship have long been in place in distorting the historical record, but as people get older, they usually cogitate on things like merit and lack of it.

Monarchies in perspective

19 04 2012

We are sure that many readers will have noted the recent reports regarding then honorary president of the Spanish branch of the World Wildlife Fund, King Juan Carlos of Spain fell over and injured himself while on an elephant shoot in Botswana.

At Digital Journal it is stated that WWF is supposedly an international environmental organization that advocates, amongst other things, the protection of the African elephant. That their honorary president was blasting away at elephants on safari, got some attention, and the king quickly resigned his position.

The same report says that this hunting mishap is no surprise as the king “has been hunting all of his life, it is hardly a secret. In fact in 2006, it emerged the Royal had allegedly shot a domestic bear fed honey-laced vodka, to slow its reactions during a hunting trip in Russia.”

But there is much more to this story, with some remarkable links to Thailand, both in terms of similarities and differences. We thanks the regular reader who sent us in search of this material.

On the basic story, while there are now hundreds of articles available, the one at the Christian Science Monitor is a reasonable place to begin.

The story tells us that in “the first public apology by a Spanish monarch in history,” King Juan Carlos apologized for “taking a lavish hunting vacation amid sharp austerity cuts” at home. His apology amounted to 11 words.

Obviously, royals in many places live in the lap of luxury and ideas about austerity seem far removed from their lives, even if they do occasionally speak of the need for others to be more careful (as in Spain) or to make do (as in Thailand). They still enjoy their wealth, supplemented by public funds.

In the case of the safari for Juan Carlos, apparently he was being feted by a wealthy Saudi Arabian businessman. The pictures of the king posing with a dead elephant are everywhere (see below).

In Spain, there have been a series of recent scandals that are said to “have tested popular faith in the monarchy, seen as a unifier in post-Franco Spain.” That too sounds a bit like the “eye-opening” events seen in Thailand in recent years, from political meddling and coup plotting to lavish spending and locking people up for “insulting” the monarchy.

The royal apology only came after “several days of intense public pressure,” something unimaginable in Thailand because of the draconian lese majeste law.

At least Spain doesn’t regularly use such a draconian law to suppress commentary, even though it continues to exist there:

The uproar triggered extremely rare criticism that mushroomed quickly, from discreet comments by political leaders to popular chatter on Twitter and condemnation on talk shows. Several politicians openly called for his the king’s abdication – a demand not made in nearly a century, and one that is rocking the pillars of an already shaky establishment.

Not in Thailand…. Lese majeste does have a function in suppressing this kind of criticism.

Like the king in Thailand, “King Juan Carlos is much more than a figurehead monarch. He is credited with being a unifying presence in Spain and is, to most, a guarantor of Spanish national identity.” Very familiar royalist nonsense seen in most places where this political anachronism persists against the tide of history.

Royalists in Spain argue that the criticism has allowed the king to realize that he has made a “big mistake.” Such criticism is unimaginable in Thailand.

Juan Carlos is Spain’s first king since the monarchy was restored in 1978 after the death of Fascist dictator Franco, who had personally selected Juan Carlos for the job.  Spaniards abolished the monarchy in 1931, after voting in a republican government.

Juan Carlos is “credited with saving the country’s fledgling democracy in 1981, when he went on television and condemned an attempted military coup and privately demanded that those involved give up.” While the king in Thailand is often credited with being some kind of democrat, he has never criticized a coup, except when it seemed to be against his selected prime ministers, as in 1977 and 1981.

Even if Spaniards have usually been rather coy in criticizing the monarchy, ” the image of the monarchy has been consistently diminished for years. Spaniards gave the monarchy an unsatisfactory grade in the most recent poll, taken in October 2011…”. Again, that would be unthinkable in Thailand. And, that poll came prior to recent poor publicity.

Those scandals include:

the king’s grandson was injured lightly in his foot in a shooting accident, and his parents could be legally liable for allowing a child to use a firearm. There is also an ongoing trial against the king’s son-in-law, who is accused of embezzling millions of euros in public funds, a particularly egregious thing amid the country’s extreme economic hardship.

On the shooting of the prince earlier in April, the Daily Mail Online reported:

The 13-year-old grandson of Spain’s King Juan Carlos is recovering after accidentally shooting himself in the foot with a shotgun….Felipe Juan Froilan was doing target practice outside the family home north of Madrid, when he misfired into his foot as he walked…. Under Spanish law, it is illegal for children under 14 to possess or discharge firearms…. A palace official declined to comment on the infraction.

Most injuries to Thai royals are carefully kept secrets and even speculating on royal health has led to lese majeste investigations.

But then the report goes on to mention an earlier gun accident when the royal family was in exile in Portugal and that has haunted the Spanish royal family:

In March 1956, Juan Carlos was handling a gun that accidentally went off and killed his 14-year-old younger brother Alfonso…. The king, then 18, was reported to have been completely shocked and devastated and was said to have told family and friends that he ‘felt responsible.’

That event will rings bells for those with an interest in Thailand’s royal history. But first, some background from Wikipedia.

It tells us that on Maundy Thursday in March 1956 the brothers Alfonso and Juan Carlos were at their parents’ home when the former “died in a gun accident.” As Wikipedia explains, the Spanish Embassy in Portugal issued a communiqué, which sounds remarkably similar to the same kind of event at Bangkok’s Grand Palace a decade earlier:

Whilst His Highness the Infante Alfonso was cleaning a revolver last evening with his brother, a shot was fired hitting his forehead and killing him in a few minutes. The accident took place at 20.30 hours, after the Infante’s return from the Maundy Thursday religious service, during which he had received Holy Communion.

The Wikipedia account continues:

Very quickly, however, rumours appeared in newspapers that the gun had actually been held by Alfonso’s brother Juan Carlos at the moment the shot was fired. Josefina Carolo, dressmaker to Alfonso’s mother, said that Juan Carlos playfully pointed the pistol at Alfonso and pulled the trigger, unaware that the pistol was loaded. Bernardo Arnoso, a Portuguese friend of Juan Carlos, also said that Juan Carlos fired the pistol not knowing that it was loaded, and adding that the bullet ricocheted off a wall hitting Alfonso in the face. Helena Matheopoulos, a Greek author who spoke with Alfonso’s sister Pilar, said that Alfonso had been out of the room and when he returned and pushed the door open, the door knocked Juan Carlos in the arm causing him to fire the pistol.

Unlike, Thailand where royal secrecy and decades of cover up has led to speculation and rumor, Wikipedia states:

Most historians agree nowadays that the pistol was fired by Juan Carlos by accident. After the accident, the father, Don Juan de Borbón, sent Juan Carlos back to Spain immediately after the funeral and, because of pain and anger against Juan Carlos, did not talk to him for a while.

There have been various stories about the origins of the pistol. The most frequently repeated is that it was a gift to Alfonso from General Franco.

Such statements are, like so much else associated with a monarchy that thrives on a lack of transparency and scrutiny, unthinkable for Thailand. For Thailand, the most recent account of the shooting in 1946, which includes some interesting new documents, can be found at Zenjournalist (and our pics are mostly from that site).

The story of the tribulations of the Spanish monarchy, re-created by military Fascists and claimed to be democratic and enjoying the fruits of monarchy, seems to fit Thailand’s circumstances  in ways that are  uncanny.

Regicide request

16 03 2012

A few days ago PPT noted  that Freedom Against Censorship Thailand has posted what can only be described as an audacious post that points to the “censorship surrounding the gunshot death of King Ananda Mahidol in 1946.”

FACT observes: “The death of young King Ananda is a seminal event in Thai history yet it is not even taught to post-graduate students of history. Ananda’s death is the one event which must not be mentioned.”

That death eventually led to three seemingly innocent royal servants being put to death and the blame for the murder was placed on Lt. Vacharachai Chaisitthiwet, an aide-de-camp to Pridi Phanomyong. Pridi was hated by the old princes and the royal family for his leadership of the People’s Party that chucked out the absolute monarchy.

To cut a very long story short, FACT makes this call:

There has been remarkable progress in modern investigation and jurisprudence and forensic science since 1946. We think it is time to put this revision of history and miscarriage of justice to rest. The deaths of Chit, Bhut and Chaleo, as well as the deaths under suspicion of Pridi and Vacharachai, are no less important than the death of King Ananda. We owe a debt of history to their descendants, regardless of the outcome.

Freedom Against Censorship Thailand (FACT) calls for Thai govt to re-open a full public inquiry into the death of King Ananda….

We are in process of opening consultation with the Law Faculty of Thammasat University and Thailand’s National Human Rights Commission to initiate this inquiry.

That is a big, big call and bound to create waves as this death remains hugely politically charged 66 years on.

For readers who want to know more, Andrew Macgregor Marshall at Zenjournalist has been doing a fantastic job posting contemporaneous documents, and lots of them. Most have never been seen, and PPT is left to wonder what all those trained historians have been doing in the archives. We have posted one of the most significant, from U.S. Ambassador Edwin F. Stanton in 1948 regarding a conversation with former Prime Minister Luang Thamrong Navasawat. Read it here (as a large PDF).

The sad thing is that FACT, Zenjournalist and PPT are all blocked in Thailand….

The mysterious death of Rama 8

29 09 2011

PPT is sure readers will be interested in the blog post by Gilbert King at It is a longish account of English-language material on the regicide or Ananda Mahidol in June 1946. PPT won’t summarize as readers can access the story and photos.

Updated: Devil’s Discus download

19 02 2011

Freedom Against Censorship Thailand has made a free download of The Devil’s Discus available. As most readers will know, this is the best-known analysis of the death of King Ananda Mahidol by gunshot in 1946. The case remains mysterious, of great interest and (privately) is widely discussed.

The book was first published in 1964.

The book has long been out of print, and when copies are available, they are very expensive.

This is apparently a limited-time free download, so get it soon.

Update: A reader reminds us that the book is available from Abe Books.

FACT on The Devil’s Discus

21 01 2011

Regular readers of the Freedom Against Censorship Thailand blog would be aware of C.J. Hinke’s passion for the Rayne Kruger book on the death of King Ananda Mahidol, The Devil’s Discus. Much discussed and apparently still banned in Thailand, it is a classic account of regicide (also an account by a British pathologist). FACT now has an exclusive interview with Prudence Leith, Kruger’s widow, including an extract from her forthcoming book. Worth a read.

Ananda Mahidol’s death

3 10 2010

There have long been quiet discussions on the death of the current king’s elder brother, Ananda Mahidol, back in 1946, by gun shot. As part of PPT’s Historical Commentary, we have added a chapter by Keith Simpson, “The Violent Death of King Ananda of Siam,” from Forty Years of Murder: An Autobiography, London: Harrop, 1978). There are some other versions about on the web, but this is a scan of the chapter. Simpson was a British pathologist who investigated the Ananda Mahidol death. We had a brief post on the death once before, where the embedded link mentioned Simpson.

Piling on the royalist nonsense

9 07 2010

They keep saying it. AFP states that Thailand’s “82-year-old king has been a stabilising force…”. The agency refers to 1992. The evidence is, however, that the monarchy and this king has also been a force that has encouraged partisanship and instability. Just a few examples: 1946 regicide, 1947 coup, 1957 coup, destabilization of governments in 1973-76, 1976 massacre and coup, 2006 coup. Why do they keep saying this?

This error is made in an article citing Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva on the political role of the monarchy. He says that his government’s position “had always been that the monarchy should remain above partisan politics…”. As PPT has pointed out several times, and will do again below, this is a misrepresentation. In fact, the Abhisit regime has and continues to use the monarchy for political gain.

Abhisit also had to deny “speculation that the palace had sought to influence his administration during the recent crisis.” The reason he is forced to state this is because the assumption of palace involvement is widespread in the country. Abhisit states: “I can definitely say, categorically, that all the decisions during the protests were taken by the government. The palace does not interfere in the matter…”.

Even if one accepts this assertion, the proximity of Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda to the civilian-military junta – called the Centre for the Resolution of the Emergency Situation – during the red shirt demonstrations would raise questions. Abhisit’s private audience with the king raises questions and so does the king’s speeches to judges.

When Abhisit says: “The institution plays the same role as in other constitutional monarchies” he’s just parroting royalist nonsense. His statement on lese majeste, where he claims “We have to make a distinction between people who make comments on the monarchy, maybe academic discussions, from people who clearly show intent in terms of undermining the institution, which would be a threat to national security…” simply and clearly confirms his adherence to the status quo.

In any case, the actions of the government are far louder than the premier’s bleating. The ever more Gestapo-like Department of Special Investigation is reported to have “begun its operations dealing with the anti-monarchy movement, setting up nine teams comprising nearly 300 agents from various agencies to do the task.” That’s three hundred!

The DSI doesn’t seem too bothered about issues like the presumption of innocence, but has decided to identify “people whose behaviours are considered ‘detrimental or ill-minded’ to the monarchy…”. How will it determine who these people are? It will rely on the so-called “Mind Map composed by the government’s Centre for Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), which indicted 27 key figures released during the run-up to the red shirt protests in Bangkok.” This is a wholly discredited document, but the DSI is interested in destroying the government’s political opponents. It’s a witch hunt or worse.

The DSI’s director-general Tharit Phengdit makes things worse when he makes the government’s conspiracy even bigger by considering the “blacklisted 83 people whose assets had been frozen by the CRES were taking part in the [red shirt] movement.” Ahem. They are accused. But the political Tharit – he’ll get piles of royal honors and awards for sure – is going to try to make connections. Tharit also targets those who joined the UDD are in the Puea Thai Party and those who “took part in arranging the red-shirt protests in May…”. This is the flunky officer really wanting to show he can protect the monarchy better than anyone else. Such slithering individuals are the most dangerous. He says there is no deadline for the “completion of all lese-majeste and anti-monarchy cases.” This is because the cases involve “a large number of people through complicated networks of operations. The overall DSI investigation will be lengthy…”.

The ever-vigilant DSI has “identified two types of wrongdoing: online publication of lese-majeste content; and public statements in various forms, including public interviews, speeches during rallies and distribution of hard copies. The wrongdoers involved are divided into three levels: the leadership and commanders, who allegedly funded the anti-monarchy operations, gave directions and tactics and issued ideological themes. The second level are the ‘operatives’, who delivered lese-majeste content or speeches as directed by the leadership – individually, as groups, or systematically as a whole. The third level are ‘the masses’, who used public activities or gatherings to support the people in the second level.” They are going to be filling the jails!

International human rights groups need to look far more critically at the DSI as a politicized agency, operating with government mandate, Abhisit’s support, and regularly infringing on human rights. The potential is for it to get far worse and the rabid royalists and drooling yellow shirts urge them on.

Pridi website

31 05 2009

A new website has been launched to celebrate the life of Pridi Phanomyong and his wife Phoonsuk Phanomyong.

Pridi was one of the leaders of the People’s Party (khana ratsadon) that overthrew the absolute monarchy on 24 June 1932. He was repeatedly accused by his opponents, most of them royalists, of being a republican and communist. Pridi founded Thammasat University as an open university a people’s alternative to the royalist Chulalongkorn University, he held posts as Minister of the Interior, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Finance. Pridi was largely responsible for negotiating the treaties revoking foreign extraterritorial rights in Thailand.

During WW2, Pridi led the in-country arm of the Free Thai movement. After the war a number of pro-Pridi governments were formed, including one where Pridi took the premiership, but these were bitterly opposed by royalists including those in the newly formed Democrat Party.

Pridi was eventually ousted and sent into exile following the 9 June 1946 regicide of King Anand Mahidol. He returned twice, but each time was sent back to exile, first to China and then to France. He died in Paris in 1983.

Launching the website, Professor Charnvit Kasetsiri is reported (Bangkok Post, 31 May 2009: “Pridi’s life brought into the 21st century”) claims that the site is recognizing Pridi’s exceptional life. Charnvit is quoted as saying that “Thai history had left out the lives of some respected commoners.”

The new website not only celebrated Pridi and Phoonsuk and “unearth, recover and restore” their places in history, but would also provide a database of other prominent Thais.

At the launch, Thanapol Eawsakul one of the sites developers, said that the the site would include a repository of documents. One of these is a confession regarding the framing of Pridi in King Ananda regicide case.

PPT also notes that the site makes available the excellent book Pridi by Pridi, put together by Chris Baker and Pasuk Phongpaichit. This is a most useful resource.

%d bloggers like this: