The Supreme Military Court ruled yesterday (22 July) to uphold suspended prison sentences against two senior cadets charged over the death of a first-year cadet in 2017.

Pakapong Tanyakan, a first-year cadet at the Armed Forces Academies Preparatory School, died on 17 October 2017 after he was ‘disciplined’ by two senior cadets, identified as Phumiphat and Phiphot, and a drill sergeant named Piyaphong.

It was reported that Pakapong recorded in a diary abuses and physical violence in the school and that he was assaulted and faced extreme disciplinary actions, including being forced to run against a doctor’s advice and to exercise in a sauna.

The school told his family that Pakapong died from sudden heart failure. However, his family found bruises on his body and requested another autopsy at the Central Forensic Institute of the Public Health Ministry, where it was found that some of Pakapong’s internal organs, including his heart and brain, were missing.

Pakapong’s death led to criticism of the military and questions about how the case was handled. In November 2017, the Chief of Defence Forces issued a statement admitting that Pakapong was punished by the senior cadets and drill sergeant. Meanwhile, his family filed a complaint with the Department of Special Investigation.

In March 2019, the two cadets and the drill sergeant were indicted for manslaughter. They were tried in the Military Court, which gave the two cadets suspended prison sentences.

ThaiPBS reported yesterday (22 July) that the Supreme Military Court ruled to uphold the Appeal Court’s verdict finding Phumiphat and Phiphot guilty. They were sentenced to 4 months and 15 days in prison and a fine of 15,000 baht. Their sentence was suspended for 2 years because the Court said that, given their age and the fact they have never been sentenced to prison before, it would not be useful to jail them. The Court also said that they should be given the chance to improve themselves and continue serving the country.

Pakapong’s family also filed a civil lawsuit against the Army and the Ministry of Defence for compensation. The Appeal Court ordered that the family be compensated. However, Pakapong’s mother Sukanya Tanyakan told Matichon Online ahead of today’s Supreme Military Court ruling that the family was paid 100,000 baht for funeral costs, but never received any other compensation.

Sukanya also posted on her Facebook page last night (22 July) that she hopes to launch an inquest in a civilian court into Pakapong’s death to resolve remaining questions about his cause of death.

The sentence given to the two senior cadets sparked widespread criticism of the Military Court and calls for reform as the sentence was seen as too light. People's Party MP Chayapon Satondee, spokesperson for the House Standing Committee on the Armed Forces, said in a press conference today (22 July) that the Supreme Military Court's ruling led to questions about the Military Court's standard and whether military court should exist when justice has not been delivered in cases where civilians file a complaint against military personnel.

Chayaphon, himself a former cadet at the Armed Forces Academies Preparatory School, noted that there several suspicions about the case, such as gaps in witness accounts of the events. He noted that the school has regulations about what punishment command students are allowed to give junior students, but Pakapong's punishment was not in line with said regulations. He also questioned why the students' commanding officers said they were not aware of what had taken place when they are responsible for the students.

It is time for the Army to implement its regulations, Chayaphon said. The Army would make excuses every time a Private or a Cadet is killed during disciplinary action, saying that it already has regulations prohibiting excessive actions, but Chayaphon said these regulations are not strictly implemented. He also questioned whether it is appropriate the two senior cadets were not only given such a light sentence for Pakapong's death and were not discharged from service. The preparatory school should be a safe zone for students to learn how to appropriately and safely use their power in the chain of command so that they would become good officers, he said, but the cadets involved in this case show that they had not exercise enough discretion to stay within the bounds of regulation and causing a loss of life. It is time for the Army to reform its internal system and how it trains future officers.

People's Party MP Ekkarach Udomumnouy, secretary of the House Standing Committee on the Armed Forces, noted during the same press conference the Military Court Act does not allow civilians to directly file charges with a military court but must do so through a military prosecutor.

The People's Party has filed a bill proposing amendments to the Military Court Act so that civilians can become plaintiffs in cases being handled by a Military Court, he said. The proposed amendments would also make military court independent, transparents, and give plaintiffs the same rights as civilian courts. It had also proposed amending the Constitution to abolish military courts during peacetime.

Under the new anti-torture and enforced disappearance act, cases of disciplinary actions resulting in death are seen as torture and tried in the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases. Ekkarach said, however, that there has been attempts by the Army to have these cases tried in a military court. One example is a case involving the death of a conscript at Fort Mengraimaharaj in Chiang Rai, where defendants attempted to argue that the anti-torture and enforced disappearance act is unconstitutional and the case should be tried in a military court instead of the civilian Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases in Chiang Mai. 

Ekkarach said that sentences given in a criminal case must be proportional to the offense. He is concerned that such a light sentence given in a military court would perpetuate a culture of impunity in the military, as soldiers might think that they will be given a light sentence as long as they are tried in a military court. He asked that the government support the proposed amendments to make a start on reforming the military.