A new dimension of justice process in the deep South?

The Pattani provincial court ordered the release of eight Thai Muslims detained under emergency decree on Friday April 29 after the court rejected the requests of  the security authorities to have their detention extended.

The court ruled that the authorities could not present evidences to prove that the eight detainees were involved in insurgency apart from incriminating information against them from sources whose credibility was in doubt.

The court’s landmark decision marked what was seen as a "new chapter in justice process" for people in the restive deep South.

Of the eight detainees, five of them were taken into custody on April 17 in Thepa and Sabayoi districts of Songkhla province which has not been placed under emergency decree or martial law. They were identified as Manasae Sama-ae, Suriya Waenawae, Abrik Sahamankood, Roheem Lamso and Doloh Den-ayad. The identities of the three other detainees were not available.

Since the arrest of the five men on April 17, they had been detained at the Pitak Santi (Peace Protection) centre in the compound of the Police Academy Region 9 in Yala’s Muang district.

Local human rights groups earlier voiced protest against what they considered as illegal detention of the five Thai Muslims under the emergency decree on the ground that the locations where they were arrested were not placed under the emergency rule.

The Pattani provincial court’s decision coincided with the announcement in the Royal Gazette of a new set of recommendations from the president of the Supreme Court, Mr Sobchoke Sukharom, regarding the procedures for the arrest and detention of individuals under emergency rule.

As for the request for an arrest warrant or a detention warrant sought by authorities, it is recommended that such requests must be submitted to the Criminal Court or the provincial court which has jurisdiction over the areas placed under emergency rule or to the provincial court where the suspects have their residence or where the crime was committed or believed to be committed.  Also, the security authorities must prove to the court that the arrest or detention warrants are necessary to prevent the crime from happening.

For the court to prove a request for arrest warrant or for a detention warrant for an individual, it was recommended that the court should ask the officials who make the request whether a similar warrant was issued before for the same individual and for the same offence. This recommendation was intended to prevent a suspect from being detained over the limit permissible by law (each detention period last seven days and altogether the detention period must not exceed 30 days the maximum).

When the court decided to issue an arrest or a detention warrant for an individual or more, the officials are obliged to carry out the following duties:

-    to report to the court every three months about the progress of the efforts to arrest the suspect in question until he or she was arrested;
-    if the suspect was arrested, a report must be filed to the court within 48 hours of the arrest.  The report must be accompanied by a photo of the suspect and must also specify the location where the suspect was held in custody;
-    the court must also be notified if there is a change of the place of detention;
-    the relatives of the suspect must be informed in advance if the suspect is to be released.

The court is empowered to revoke the arrest or detention warrant if the officials concerned do not comply with the set recommendations by the Supreme Court president.  And if a wanted suspect is not arrested within one year since an arrest warrant was issued, the court may summons the officials concerned to question about why the suspect was not arrested or may revoke the warrant.

If an arrest was done illegally, the court can revoke the arrest warrant and order the suspect to be freed immediately.  If the detention period of a suspect is to be extended, the court may ask for the detained suspect to be questioned and if it is discovered that the detention is illegal, the court will reject the request for the extension of detention and order the detainee to be released.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks : Photo from web http://news.mcot.net/politic/inside.php?value=bmlkPTYxNzAmbnR5cGU9dGV4dA==