6 years ago

19 05 2016

It was six years ago that then Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his deputy Suthep Thaugsuban cooperated with General Anupong Paojinda and General Prayuth Chan-ocha to crush the several months long red shirt protests in Bangkok.

Crackdown 2

That crackdown, extending over some six weeks, was concluded with a bloody crackdown at Rajaprasong that resulted in numerous deaths and injuries, including several murders at Wat Pathum Wanaram, known to have been perpetrated by soldiers.

In the weeks after the crackdown, PPT produced several posts that linked to accounts of witnesses. We called these accounts of the dead (I, II, III, IV, V).

In memory of these bloody events and the lack of justice for those killed and injured, we think that readers may find it useful to revisit some links from that time, some of which are no longer working. These photos are a sad reminder of those events.





Updated: Justice still denied

6 01 2016

As PPT mentioned a couple of days ago, Phayao Akkahad, the long-suffering mother of Kamolkate Akkhad, a nurse killed on 19 May 2010 at Wat Pathum Wanaram Temple in the military clearance of red shirt protesters, reported that she was being harassed by the authorities.

This harassment was because she and others who lost family members in the 2010 crackdowns on red shirt protesters by the military, planned a rally for  6 January:

to call for justice for victims of the April-May 2010 crackdown after the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) last week concluded that Abhisit Vejjajiva, former Democrat Party Prime Minister, Suthep Thaugsuban, his former Deputy, and Gen Anupong Paochinda, the former Army Chief, were not guilty in ordering the 2010 military crackdown.

Despite the threats, the rally went ahead. Prachathai has a short report with some photos, one of which is snipped below.

Justice denied

The report states that “[f]amilies of victims of the military crackdown during the April-May 2010 political violence gathered in central Bangkok to demand justice and condemn the recent ruling from the authorities not to not prosecute those who authorised the crackdown.”

Joining Phayao and her son, were “Pansak Srithep, a pro-democracy activist whose son was killed by the military during the same political violence, and Wannakirati Chusuwan, a pro-democracy activist…”. They “gathered at Pathum Wanaram Temple.” They were watched and escorted by some 30 police officers.

The “four started a march to 14 October Memorial on Ratchadamnoen Rd. where they plan to read our the statement to call for justice for the victims at 6 pm.” Because there were only four of them, the military junta’s “National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO)’s Order No. 3/2015, which prohibits a political gathering of five or more persons,” the authorities were unable to stop them. The police, however, prevented reporters and others from following them.

Update: At Prachatai, the details of the rally for justice are outlined. The families of the dead and injured “have vowed to struggle for justice, calling the recent ruling not prosecute those who authorised [Abhisit and Suthep, along with Anupong] the crackdown ‘shameful’.” They are correct and right. Phayao stated:

We will not accept the shame of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). I tell you, from this day onwards, I will begin a struggle again after a long halt. You (NACC) has caused me to come up to fight again. I will do everything I can to make the society realised what you did to the deaths and those who were injured. You [the authorities] have been slandering us for so long. It is now the time which I will not give in….

Another participant, Phasuk Ngamkam, declared:

“If I am a human who witnessed other human beings dying like pigs and dogs and did nothing, I think I’m lower than dogs. Therefore, I will fight with their families.

According to Wannakiet Chusuwan, a pro-democracy activist,

before stating its conclusion after a 6-year-inquiry into the April-May 2010 political violence, the NACC only called in Abhisit, Suthep, and Gen Anupong, to testify as witness to the incident, but none of the family members of victims were called in.

No justice in Thailand.





Fear and loathing III

5 01 2016

The military dictatorship is fearful that its repression is insufficient to destroy those it loathes.

PPT posted a couple of days ago on the small and quite ludicrous storm over a calendar in Roi-et depicting Yingluck and Thaksin Shinawatra.

Loudmouthed and excitable dictator General Prayuth Chan-ocha could have let the issue pass but, as usual, like a dog with a bone, he has gone off.

Prayuth, who is unable to bring himself to say Thaksin’s name, declared the calendar “inappropriate” because one of the images was of “a person who broke the law,” meaning Thaksin.

In line with Prayuth’s childishness, “[p]olice and soldiers in Khon Kaen also banned distribution of the calendar on Monday, when Ms Yingluck visited the province for a merit-making ceremony and to meet her supporters.” The military thugs also ordered two people “to report for attitude adjustment after finding the two members of the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship handing out the calendar during the former prime minister’s visit to Khon Kaen.”

The military thugs determined that “the distribution of the calendar in public was deemed a politically motivated act, which violated an order of the National Council for Peace and Order that prohibits political activity.”

In line with this kind of fearful thuggery, a report at Prachatai tells of another attempt to ban anything the military finds unacceptable, most especially when it involves those deemed political opponents.

Phayao Akkahad, the long-suffering mother of Kamolkate Akkhad, a nurse killed on 19 May 2010 at Wat Pathum Wanaram Temple in the military clearance of red shirt protesters, reports that she is being harassed by the authorities.

The reason for the attention of thugs is that a rally is planned for  6 January:

to call for justice for victims of the April-May 2010 crackdown after the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) last week concluded that Abhisit Vejjajiva, former Democrat Party Prime Minister, Suthep Thaugsuban, his former Deputy, and Gen Anupong Paochinda, the former Army Chief, were not guilty in ordering the 2010 military crackdown.

Despite the implied threats, the rally will go ahead. The military will be worried and aggressive.

 





On May 2010, part III

20 05 2015

The inquests that have been held on the deaths of protesters in April and May 2014 have been unable to determine perpetrators. However, quite a number have determined that the security forces and Army were responsible, even if an individual could not be identified.

This fact and the hatred that The Dictator has for red shirts and public displays of solidarity is why the military dictatorship does not permit public remembrance of the dead.

The Bangkok Post reports that Phayao Akkahad, “mother of the volunteer nurse Kamolkade who was killed on May 19, 2010 inside Wat Pathumwanaram, held the annual religious rites for her daughter in the presence of plainclothes police and military officers who asked her not to make comments critical of the government.”

She was joined by a “dozen other families who lost loved ones during the demonstration against the Abhisit Vejjajiva government and other red-shirts who were at the 2010 protest joined Ms Payao at the temple…”.

For some reason, “[m]embers of the National Reform Council’s committee on reconciliation* also turned up at Wat Pathumwanaram but some families of the victims felt uneasy with their presence and did not greet them.” One woman who lost her husband in 2010 asked: “Is this a proper place to talk about reconciliation? We’re here to remember our families but they’re here to do a big PR job by joining the commemorations and taking pictures with the photos of our family members…”.

She was clearly not happy with a stunt she considered was “disrespectful of the dead.”

*Phayao is a “member of the reconciliation committee which is chaired by Anek Laothammathat, a member of the Constitutional Drafting Committee.” Anek showed up with others.





Further updated: “Managing” witnesses to military murder

16 03 2015

Under martial law, the military dictatorship can do pretty much what it wants. Of course, when it comes to politics and political murder, the military has long had impunity. No military officer is ever brought to justice for political crimes. While several court inquests have found that soldiers were responsible for the deaths of some of those killed in the crackdowns on red shirt protesters in 2010, no one has yet been convicted for these deaths.

That said, there has been some activity against Abhisit Vejjajiva and Suthep Thaugsuban, who were the civilian leaders of the Democrat Party government that was put in place by the military and its palace allies in late 2008, and which presided over the crackdown. Most recently, the National Anti-Corruption Commission has declared that the two should face “abuse of power” charges for overseeing the crackdown.

Abhisit’s response brought the military back into the picture with statements about and by Generals Prayuth Chan-ocha, Prawit Wongsuwan and Anupong Paojinda and their roles in the murder of red shirts.

Probably not coincidentally, it is now reported that an important witness to the events at Wat Pathum Wanaram has been taken away, allegedly by military officers. Khaosod reports that volunteer nurse Nattathida Meewangpla, “who witnessed the killing of two fellow medics by soldiers in a Bangkok temple during the 2010 crackdown on Redshirt protesters has been abducted from her home by security officers…” on 11 March.

Family members report that “Nattathida received a phone call from men who said they wanted to visit her home and discuss a possible land purchase. However, the potential buyers turned out to be two soldiers and three plain-clothed security officers, who arrived at Nattathida’s house and ordered her to come with them for interrogation.” These men declared “they didn’t need a warrant to detain Nattathida because they were acting under martial law…”.

Her family states:

“They simply told her to bring some clothes. They didn’t say on what charges they arrested her…. They didn’t say where they were taking her, and they wouldn’t let us photograph them. We have been too afraid to tell the police.”

Col. Winthai Suwaree, the spokesperson for the military dictatorship, “denied that soldiers detained Nattathida, and suggested that ‘individuals with ill-intention’ might have falsely claimed to act in the junta’s name in order to ‘mislead society’.” Given the military’s dark and bloody record, few might have believed him. Fewer still when he made the ludicrous claim that “every action and mission of the security officers is in accordance with boundary of the laws…”.

Update 1: In the last paragraph above, we have the words of junta mouthpiece Col. Winthai Suwaree. Reports of this case now demonstrate that the junta spokesman is a liar who should never be believed. Khaosod reports that Nattathida has now “emerged from six days of military detention today, a day after the junta denied any involvement in her arrest.” Never believe a bunch of liars in green uniforms who think the public is dense and stupid, and not just those who vote for Thaksin Shinawatra parties; they think everyone is as dense as the military bosses. She was taken on Tuesday to police headquarters “in a van belonging to the 11th Army District.” It is not clear that she has been charged with any crimes.

Update 2: The Bangkok Post now reports that Nattathida is alleged to have “colluded with suspects in the March 7 Criminal Court bombing.” Police claim she was in a “money trail” linking the bombers. So far, we see no reason to believe anything in this, not least because the people telling the story are demonstrated liars.





Nasty and stupid

12 12 2014

Military dictatorships are always nasty outfits. The nastiness is usually meant to make up for their general (and generals) lack of mental capacity. Socialized in hierarchical and authoritarian organizations, it is often only the dull posterior polishers who get to the top. This is certainly true of the current lot who took control of Thailand in May. They want to wind Thai society back to some “golden” age that never existed but which they think was better because people followed military orders. Repression will often get compliance, as it does at present.

They are certainly stupid men. Not necessarily lacking in IQ, but just as thick as short planks on the real world and real politics. This is demonstrated time and again in the daft things they do.

For example, at Khaosod it is reported that soldiers have dismantled a stall in Pai in northern Thailand that sold strawberry products “with a logo resembling the face of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.”

Jam

Five uniformed soldiers dismantled a roadside stall and “refused to identify their ranks, units, or the reasons behind their action.” They “confiscated all of the products with the [alleged] Thaksin logo, which included twenty jars of strawberry jam, eight bottles of strawberry wine, and six bottles of orange juice.” They also stole his stall.

The owner of the stall, a “local coordinator of the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD)” is said to be “confused by the soldiers’ operation because his stall and products are properly registered, and the [alleged] Thaksin logo is merely a cartoon that bears no political statement.”

The owner said he would “file formal theft charges against the soldiers at Pai Police Station for ‘robbing’ him.” It probably won’t do him any good for under a military dictatorship, the military can do as it pleases, no matter how base or stupid the act. In this case, The Dictator is trying to erase Thaksin from Thailand.

Reports are of nastier interventions at Prachatai.Two family members of Kamolkade Akkahad, a nurse murdered by military at Pathum Wanaram Temple in the 2010 attacks on red shirts, “were arrested on Wednesday morning after they held a symbolic activity in response to the junta leader’s distortion of the facts about the 2010 killings in saying that the military did not kill anyone during the crackdown.”

The Dictator has repeatedly lied about these events.

Phayao Akkahad and Nattapat Akkahad, the mother and brother of Kamolkade,”were arrested by the police on Wednesday at 10.30 am and were detained at Pathumwan Police Station.”

They were arrested for having “distributed and read out the court’s ruling on the deaths of red-shirt protesters which concluded that they died from gunshots from the military. They then washed a soldier’s shirt as a symbolic gesture that the military’s uniforms were tainted with blood, let off firecrackers and said ‘People died here’.”

This was too much for The Dictator’s underlings and they sprang into action arresting the two.

As reported, when meeting media editors last week, military dictator and self-appointed prime minister, General Prayuth Chan-ocha continued his lies and fabrication when he stated that “photo evidence used in court of a military sniper aiming a gun in the direction of the temple was actually intentionally posed for photographs.” This is a very large pile of horse manure. When he adds that “I know very well who was behind this, which group is behind it and who paid the media to attack me,” he is making himself look not only absolutely callous but hopelessly stupid.





Updated: Intolerance

22 06 2014

Thailand’s military dictatorship tolerates not a word or action that is considered dissident. The weekend has demonstrated that this is a regime that expects obedience and operates to instil fear through repression.

Prachatai continues to report the junta’s activities. On Friday it reported that minister in the Yingluck Shinawatra government Chaturon Chaisaeng could now face up to 14 years in jail on a series of charges related to his initial refusal to comply with the dictatorship’s illegal orders. No dissent is to be tolerated when the Dictator makes demands, especially when the refusal comes from people considered capable of intelligent dissent. Chaturon’s new charge relates to the Computer Crimes Act for Facebook posts of his statements opposing the coup and the junta. In demonstrating that it brooks no opposition, the junta indicates its fear of Chaturon.

Another opponent feared by the military is red shirt activist Kritsuda Khunasen. She has been missing for many days. She was presumed to be in military custody, prompting Human Right Watch to issue a special call for her to be located. As Prachatai now reports, the military junta has failed to produce her, but has made a statement that “the army is detaining an anti-establishment red-shirt activist at an undisclosed location so she can meditate without any distractions from the outside world.” This raises the specter that the junta is running an Abu Graib-style detention camp. Because “Kritsuda ha[d] a prominent role in providing legal and humanitarian assistance to red-shirt supporters who were affected by political violence” in the murderous 2010 Army-led crackdown on red shirts, she is despised by the Dictator. The junta should be required to produce Kritsuda immediately and release her or lay charges.

In its refusal to accept even silent dissent, the military dictatorship expended huge resources on the weekend capturing anyone considered to be showing such dissent. In one police action, police made it apparent that a red shirt/United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship Buddhist ceremony to remember the people murdered by the military at Wat Pathum Wanaram in 2010 could  barely be tolerated. This meant that only 30 people arrived. One of those, was Usanee Sedsuntree who wore a Respect My Vote t-shirt. For that apparently dastardly act, she was taken off by the police for a “talk.” It is not known how many were prevented from attending the ceremony.

A further large police action was conducted at shopping malls to prevent any displays of anti-coup sentiment. Police reportedly detained eight activists “from the Thai Student Center for Democracy group, just half an hour before their planned activity to hand out sandwiches as symbolic protest against the coup at Siam Paragon Mall.” No free sandwiches as this violates the junta’s demands and edicts. Subway is apparently not suspect as it charges for its sandwiches. It is unclear where the students have been detained and for how long they will be detained. Not long after, a lone and well-dressed student, sitting alone, eating a sandwich and reading “1984” was literally jumped on by police and dragged off.

Silent dissent

Update: Adding to this picture of total intolerance is the report that the “Bangkok Military Court on Monday approved a police request to detain Sombat Boonngamanong, leader of the Red Sunday group and founder of the Mirror Foundation, for another 12 days for further questioning.” Sombat is perceived by the military dictatorship as more of a threat to them than Chaturon. This is because Sombat is a canny organizer who has been critical in mobilizing opposition to military fascism in the past, and has a huge following. The excuse for locking him away is that he has violated the Computer Crimes Act, a quasi-lese majeste charge.





Updated: NHRC humiliated

12 08 2013

PPT has posted quite a lot that has been critical of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). In our last post on it, we noted that, under Yingluck Shinawatra, the NHRC has become irrelevant as it is recognised as a failed agency. We observed that the process of de-fanging the NHRC has been a post-2006 coup phenomenon. This is because the military junta and the Abhisit Vejjajiva regime that gave the NHRC extra powers, used it as a political tool and stacked it with political flunkies, including current head, Amara Pongsapich.

This political tool of the previous regime has taken more than three years to report on the events of April and May 2010. It is no surprise that the report is dead on arrival. “Biased” is the word most used in describing it. That appears to be an overly generous description. The response has been a humiliation for Amara and the NHRC.

At Khaosod: it is reported that the NHRC report “has been blasted by a number of activists and academics … which, the critics say, shifts most of the blames on the side of the protesters rather than the authorities.” The NHRC report was meant to draw lessons that could be guidelines for future governments. Khaosod summarizes the 90-page report:

that the security forces did commit several inappropriate actions – such as dropping teargas from the helicopters onto the crowd below and censoring a number of websites – but the bigger issue is that it was the Redshirts who “violated human rights” by engaging in unlawful protests and provoking the authorities.

The report concludes that the red shirts violated the law and provoked the violence. This made the Abhisit Vejjajiva government’s violent crackdown “entirely lawful,” as was the use of the  Centre for the Resolution of Emergency Situations and the emergency law. Further, the censorship  – closing down – of opposition media was “justified” by the need to eliminate  “inflammatory” speeches by red shirts.

Any casualties are claimed to have resulted from “clashes between the security forces and shadowy armed militants allegedly allied to the protesters…”. This includes the murders at Wat Pathum Wanaram! This clearly contradicts a recent court finding where the military was held responsible for the deaths.

Amara with CRES at an army base during the red shirt uprising in 2010

Amara with CRES at an army base during the red shirt uprising in 2010

Clearly, the NHRC report is a political document that simply ignores evidence (only 184 of the 1,036 witnesses called bothered to turn up for the NHRC) in seeking to protect the military and Abhisit government allies of the NHRC. This is no idle claim, as Amara spent time with CRES, the military and Abhisit and his lot at a military base during the events,

As red shirt Sombat Boonngamanong points out, looking through this travesty is like “reading a report written by CRES itself”, with former Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thuegsuban the author of many of the bizarre claims made. He calls it Abhisit’s report.

Other critics are cited in this report from Khaosod.

Amara defense of the report has been staggeringly bad. She:

… told Khaosod that she did state very clearly in her report that the Abhisit administration did violate human rights too by announcing the emergency laws which granted the government a sweeping power in 2010…. However, she insisted that the invocation of such powers were “acceptable” because the former government was observing the situation closely and only used the laws when it was clear that the protests were about to turn violent.

Yet she recently criticized Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra′s invocation of Internal Security Act to handle the anti-government protests. She has been unable to criticize previous governments she supported.

In a televised debate, Amara was even worse, and according to Khaosod:

appeared incoherent and even distracted throughout the interview, especially when pressed to explain about contentious issues such as the armed militants and deaths in Wat Pathumwanararm. Many of her replies were simply “I have not looked into that”, or “I am not sure about that”.

In another Khaosod report, Sunai Phasuk of Human Rights Watch, no enemy of the Abhisit government, accused the NHRC of “bias against the Redshirts and downplaying the heavy-handed tactics of the authorities in its report on 2010 political unrests.”

Of course, the incorrigible Democrat Party leadership wants to translate the NHRC report and use it with an international audience to “prove” its position. We assume Abhisit and Suthep will use it to defend themselves on murder charges associated with the events of 2010.

Update: PPT was surprised to see disgraced NHRC chief Amara in the media again today. She has criticized and warned police “to be cautious about its reported plan to examine the chat-application conversation histories of some suspects.” PPT would generally agree and we have said so, in stronger terms than Amara’s. However, her position is damned by the fact of her hopeless bias. It is all very well to criticize censorship and excessive legal snooping, but she seems to apply her “human rights” measure in an exceptionally partisan manner. It seems that cyber-snooping is a problem, but not censorship and murderous repression when this is conducted by her buddies in the (anti-)Democrat Party. To be a leader on human rights, one needs to understand rights, law and impartiality, none of which seem to be in Amara’s back of tricks.





Prayuth and Suthep dissemble (again)

11 08 2013

Many readers will know that, last week, a Criminal Court declared that six persons killed on Wat Pathum Wanaram on 19 May 2010 were shot by the soldiers. The court states that five were shot by the soldiers situated on the BTS sky train track above the temple, with the sixth shot by soldiers stationed on Rama I Road.

That seemed pretty clear, but not for Army boss General Prayuth Chan-ocha. The outspoken general is reported at Khaosod as insisting “that the military was not involved in the deaths of 6 civilians shot dead as they sought shelter inside a temple during the 2010 military crackdown.”Prayuth locked and loaded

In one sense this should not be surprising as the military has repeatedly “denied any involvement, despite stacks of evidences and witness′ accounts.”

Prayuth “insisted that he never gave order to kill civilians. None of his commanding officers ever admitted they had shot any civilian…”.

Adding to the the mood of rejection of courts, evidence and reality, Prayuth is joined by former Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban. Also reported at Khaosod, The newspaper points this out:

… the more mind-boggling denial of what happened in 2010 appears to rest with the Democrats, who have repeatedly argued that the military operating under Mr. Abhisit [Vejjajiva]′s government have not killed any civilian or protester throughout the crackdown….

Continuing this mind-boggling denial, with Suthep speaking in parliament, again “denied that the military ever used excessive violence against the protesters.” His explanation was appropriately royalist:

Suthep Thaugsuban (Bangkok Post photo)

“The soldiers were loyal to His Majesty the King. They knew they were the nation′s troops. They acted according to my orders within the lawful power.” Mr. Suthep announced to the Parliament. He said a group of unknown individuals was responsible for any death.

Remarkably, despite considerable evidence to the contrary, Suthep claimed (again) that there were no snipers at work shooting down red shirts.

Puea Thai Party MP Khattiyar Sawasdipol, whose father, Seh Daeng or Khattiya Sawasdipol, was cut down by a sniper’s bullet, declared: “Mr. Suthep is lying right inside the Parliament…”.army-snipers

Even more remarkable and showing not a shred of normal human emotion or sense, Suthep reportedly responded: “Maybe your father was shot by one of your own people?”

Such responses derive not just from reprehensible elite arrogance but from the history of impunity for state officials who murder citizens.





With a major update: Soldiers responsible at Wat Pathum

7 08 2013
The South Bangkok Criminal Court has issued its ruling. It has stated that six persons who were killed on Wat Pathum Wanaram on 19 May 2010 were shot by the soldiers. The court states that five were shot by the soldiers situated on the BTS sky train track above the temple, with the sixth shot by soldiers stationed on Rama I Road. In addition, it states that examinations by the Central Institute of Forensic Science found no gunpowder residue on the hands of any of the six victims,meaning they were not using any weapons. Interestingly, the court found no evidence that men in black were operating in this area, contradicting earlier claims trumpeted by the Democrat Party and former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his then deputy Suthep Thaugsuban.
Prachatai provides an unofficial translation of the Criminal Court’s decision, which we reproduce in full:

The Court’s Order

The post mortem inquest of six deaths inside Wat Pathum Wanaram Ratcha Worawiharn

Black Case No. C5/2555

At 09.00, the South Bangkok Criminal Court read an order after completing the post mortem inquest of six deaths that occurred inside Wat Pathum Wanaram Ratcha Worawiharn as a result of the demonstrations on the Rama I Road.

At the request of the public prosecutors of the Office of Attorney General for an inquest on the death of six persons inside Wat Pathum Wanaram Ratcha Worawiharn as it was possible that the deaths have been caused by the act of competent officials who claimed to have performed their official duties. The Court was asked to investigate and rule on who the deceased were, where they died, when they died, causes and circumstances around their deaths as per Section 150 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

After reviewing evidence submitted by the petitioners and relatives of the six deceased including eye-witnesses and other experts, the Court was convinced that the first and the third to the sixth deceased were shot dead by high velocity .223 or 5.56 mm bullets which had been fired by competent officials who were military officials under the charge of Ranger Battalion, Special Force Group 2, Erawan Military Camp while the officials were stationed on the BTS rail tracks. The second deceased was shot dead by high velocity .223 or 5.56 mm bullets which had been fired by competent officials who were military officials under the charge of the 2nd Infantry Battalion, 31st Infantry Division the King’s Guard while the officials were stationed on the BTS rail tracks.

The first deceased, Mr. Suwan Sriraksa, the second deceased, Atthachai Chumchan, the third deceased, Mr. Mongkhol Khemthong, the fourth deceased, Mr. Rop Sooksathit, the fifth deceased, Miss Kamonket Akkhahad and the sixth deceased, Mr. Akkharadet Khankaew, died inside Wat Pathum Wanaram Ratcha Worawiharn, Pathumwan Sub-district, Pathumwan District, Bangok on 19 May 2013 during daytime. The deaths were caused by being shot with .223 or 5.56 mm bullets and the direction of fire was from where the competent officials were stationed to perform their duties to maintain order on the BTS’s rail tracks in front of Wat Pathum Wanaram Ratcha Worawiharn and around Rama I Road. At the instructions of the Center for Resolution of Emergency Situation (CRES), the officials took control over the area of the Ratchaprasong Intersection. And as a result of that, the first deceased died of gunshot wounds on his lungs and heart causing hemorrhage, the second deceased died of gunshot wound that destroyed his lungs, the third deceased died of gunshot wounds that destroyed his lungs, heart and liver, the fourth deceased died of gunshot wounds that destroyed his lungs and liver, the fifth deceased died of gunshot wounds that destroyed her brain and the sixth deceased died of gunshot wounds that went through his oral cavity, whilst no particular perpetrators can be identified.

Update: PPT just read the Khaosod report of the courts findings, and considers that some of its points deserve repeating:

The inquest helps debunk claims made by critics of the Redshirts who have claimed that the the military had not played any role in the deaths of over 90 people, mostly civilians, that perished during the 2010 crackdown….

The notion that these civilians were shot at as they were helplessly penned inside a Buddhist temple has made the incident at Wat Pathum particularly shocking in its level of brutality, even compared with other bloodsheds that have characterised the closing weeks of Redshirts protests….

In an unprecedented move, the court went further than stating that the 6 civilians were killed by the soldier; its inquest also disputed the soldiers′ explanation of their action as a necessary “self-defence” against the shadowy armed militants who, according to the soldiers, were blending in with the crowd around the temple and shooting at the military personnel….

… [T]he Democrat Party has always insisted that the heavy-handed tactics of the military operation authorised by then-Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, which included uses of live ammunition, was necessary to combat Blackshirts militants around the protest site.

Critics of the Redshirts therefore placed the blame of Wat Pathum deaths on the Blackshirts, saying that the military opened fire only after the Blackshirts shot at them from inside the temple….

Former Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban once insisted that individuals on Skytrain track shooting at civilians inside Wat Pathum were actually “thugs” wearing army uniforms to create misunderstanding….

The court inquest read out today stated that there was no evidence that the so-called Blackshirts were present inside or around the temple. The entire area has been secured by the military, the court insists, and it is impossible that so many journalists – some of them foreigners – failed to spot the mysterious gunmen…. [T]he gunfire was most likely one-directional.

As for the weapons allegedly found inside the temple and shown to the press later, the court noted that there was no evidence the firearms were found inside the temple immediately after the compound has been secured by members of security forces. Consequently, the court said, the weapons had no connection with the incident on 19 May 2010.