EasyHits4U.com - Your Free Traffic Exchange - 1:1 Exchange Ratio, 5-Tier Referral Program. FREE Advertising!

0 Southern Thailand’s New Activists



The peace process slowly moves forward, while younger activists opt for Facebook over guns.
By James Bean 
Tuwaedaniya leads a protest outside the Malaysian Consulate in Southern Thailand in August
For years, Thailand has been engaged in a little-known war in its Malay-speaking southern provinces (or “Patani,” as the locals call it), the origins of which lie in the country’s sustained policy of assimilation that started with the annexation of the region by Siam in 1909. Both sides in this conflict are dug in. While statistics have not been kept throughout this century-long conflict, since 2004 – when data started being systematically collected – more than 10,000 people have been injured and nearly 6,000 killed.
It has only been this year with the commencement of formal bilateral peace talks in February that the resistance movement has been able to learn just how far the Thai government is willing to go to secure peace along its southernmost borders. There are positive signs that Bangkok is willing to discuss the full scope of the prickly issues that epitomize the resistance movement’s complaints and demands. However, one of the challenges that beset these talks is the degree to which the parties at the table are able to look beyond their own set of concerns and represent the voices and perspectives of civil society in Patani.
What has begun to emerge amidst the peace talks is a resistance movement that is gradually shifting from a purely militant-led strategy to political action led by civil society. Activists I have spoken to in Southern Thailand, who are as fluent in Thai as they are in their native Malay, like to point out that they have over 5,000 friends on Facebook and, “will not remain silent on the issues.” Contrary to the widely held assumptions about resistance indoctrination in Patani, this civilian-led movement is not emerging from unregulated Islamicboarding schools – long accused of being the breeding ground for radicalization – but from Thailand’s own public education system.
The current bilateral dialogue process is the first time that the government has formally acknowledged the armed resistance movement led by the highly secretive National Resistance Front, or BRN. Another first for these talks is the formal participation of the Malaysian government, in this case as a facilitator, which is seen by seasoned Patani-watchers as a crucial development given the historical tendency of resistance groups to use peninsular Malaysia as a safe haven from which to mount attacks and more recently seek refuge. In April, BRN for the first time publicized its preliminary demands, which included an expanded role for the Malay facilitator, the inclusion of external observers, release of political prisoners, and – perhaps most vexing of all for Bangkok – the complex question of Patani-Malay indigenous rights. Barely nine months in, this tentative peace process has already succumbed to hubris, best illustrated by an abortive ceasefire episode that collapsed within days of its announcement.
Young people inclined to political action have started to quietly question the logic of an overwhelmingly militant struggle in Southern Thailand. Pointing out the intrinsic limitations of this approach, one former member of BRN’s political wing, Aziz, recalls the early days of the conflict in 2004; “In areas where the population provided strong support, BRN carried out too many political activities and military operations…The battle intensity exhausted communities and put them at risk of retaliation from the Thai military.” Thus, instead of protecting the population, BRN shot itself in the foot by actually inviting insecurity in those areas it controlled. Aziz, a university graduate from Ramkamhaeng University in Bangkok, claims that he complained internally at the time and urged BRN to adopt a more politically savvy approach. He explained that only when BRN found itself on the ropes during the last ten years did it reluctantly lift its injunction on members operating – or hiding in plain sight as it were – within local government, security services, or joining political parties .
Finally, with the peace talks afoot, it seems that BRN has rediscovered politics and negotiation. In September, at the request of the Thai delegation, the BRN-led delegation transmitted what the media has described as a 38 page report or “clarification.”  This document has elements of “bait and switch” – in this case, baiting members of the Thai delegation with a relatively straightforward set of issues, and, when they show interest, pressuring them to consider a more onerous set of “clarified” demands. Compared to the “roadmap” document prepared by the Thai delegation and widely circulated in March-April this year, BRN’s submission is by far the most detailed and thorough proposal for sequencing the current and future negotiations. A key demand is a proposed joint drawdown of forces, which has agitated the Thai military and no doubt accounted for the delay in the response from Bangkok. In late October, the Thai delegation finally responded, agreeing to further discussion of BRN’s demands, adding two agenda items of their own concerning a reduction in violence and respecting the co-existence of different religious groups in what it refers to as Southern Thailand’s “pluralistic society.”
Both despite and because of the talks, violence on the ground has intensified and BRN has shifted its focus from targeting local collaborators to assassinating security officials and representatives of the state. There are, however, signs of hope. Central among them is the emergence of civil society groups and activists who have started asking just how responsive peace talks are to local perspectives and expectations. New BOOKS with titles like Patani Merdeka (i.e. “Independent Patani”) are being published by young activists, local media is blossoming, and the boundaries for political expression in Southern Thailand are being routinely tested and expanded. Some observers claim that this rise of political activism is nothing more than the rejuvenation of BRN’s political wing. But in fact, these mostly young civil society activists are exercising freedoms that the broader Thai polity has been exploring since the most recent coup d’état in 2006.
In 2004, the war in Southern Thailand made international headlines when several thousand Patani-Malays confronted the Thai army in the seaside town of Tak Bai seeking the release of six men detained by authorities on accusations of providing weapons to insurgents. On that day protesters assembled in what the government claimed was a political action orchestrated by BRN. Kandar (not his real name), a teacher who was among the approximately 1,300 men arrested that day in Tak Bai, recalls, “On the way to the site we heard shots, but everyone thought, ‘whatever, let’s keep pushing on!’ Initially soldiers had started using tear-gas and water cannons to disperse the crowd, but when I retreated to the river’s edge, a live round hit a steel railing just near me. At this point I realized that the army had switched to live ammunition.”
Not long after being shot at, Kandar and many other men were arrested and loaded onto a truck. Kandar was forced to lie down in the third row of men stacked four rows high. He estimated that the entire trip lasted over ten hours before they arrived at a military camp in the province of Pattani. During this time he described how he had to move around and allow for the men in lower rows to breathe and get the circulation going in their limbs. Upon arrival, three unconscious men were removed from the truck bed, one of them found to have severe swelling in his legs and testicles. Out of the estimated 1,300 men arrested that day, some 80 men died from asphyxiation and organ failure. But this, according to an implausible and widely derided Supreme Court reviewconcluded in August, was not due to any wrongdoing on the part of the Thai security personnel.
Tak Bai should have marked the beginning of stepped-up political action by the resistance movement, but the heavy-handed response by the Thai military was devastating. Hasan (not his real name), a field coordinator working with a community-based organization providing outreach assistance to a prominent legal aid provider, explained to me that it took nearly three years for civil society activism to muster up the courage to challenge the government after the tragic events at Tak Bai in 2004. In June 2007, a four-day strike and sit-in at the Pattani Central Mosque brought 10,000 people together to raise awareness of human rights abuses in southern Thailand. Older activists claim that this protest and the silent protests preceding it (i.e. short demonstrations by performers wearing tape over their mouths) were the result of lessons learned at Tak Bai
Tuwaedaniya, a prominent activist, decries the paucity of reliable information in southern Thailand “especially at the start of the peace talks, when we really wanted to know what was going on!”  Tuwaedaniya shot to prominence this year by spearheading a series of rallies designed to publicly confront both the government andBRN with the costs of war and the need for a “representative peace”.
Sadly, Tuwaedaniya’s notoriety also stems from a smear campaign on Facebook and through the Thai media, accusing him and others of being BRN sympathizers. This campaign started when a primary school teacher was arrested in April, accused of aiding insurgents, and detained at a camp in the province of Yala. Two grassroots organizations – a teacher’s union and Tuwaedaniya’s own activist group – organized a demonstration outside the camp that gathered around 500 protesters, mostly primary school teachers. The demonstration lasted five hours, and after protracted negotiations, the military camp authorities relented and allowed the teacher to leave the camp to address the 500-strong crowd. Along with the protest organizers she warned the camp administrators that unless she was released in seven days (the time limit for detention without charge under the martial law in force across Thailand’s southernmost provinces) a bigger demonstration would follow.
Tuwaedaniya played a significant role in this protest. After it was over, he and his colleagues became the targets of “trolls” on a Facebook page entitled “South Dark” whom some believe to hail from the same security agency as the camp authorities they confronted in Yala. The choice of means for attacking activists, in this case Facebook, was particularly significant because activists like Tuwaedaniya have been using exactly this medium, along with town-hall style meetings, to engage civil society in exploring what peace in Patani means for people who have been living with guerrilla war all their lives.
BRN’s apparent shift in strategy from revolution to negotiation has taken civil society groups by surprise. “We wanted to pressure BRN to disclose their strategy, the direction of their thinking…we had almost no information in the beginning,” explains Tuwaedaniya. “At the time BRN was putting up banners around Patani, reproducing their demands at the village-level. The Thai media were accusing us of being a division of BRN! So, we came up with ‘Talking Patani’ as a way of putting peace squarely in the public domain.”
Although under-reported, ‘Talking Patani’ has become a popular development in southern Thailand, precisely because it pre-empts the common mistake made in many peace processes that leave the “middle” out by focusing on the leaders of the opposing sides. Nearly 40 town hall events have been held in towns and trading centers across the region, with attendance ranging from 300 to 10,000 people per event. Eschewing the conventional discussion forums and protections offered by nearby university-based think tank Deep South Watch, the format of “Talking Patani” engages people living with the conflict at the community-level in exploring indigenous rights and the dynamics of the ongoing peace talks in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
According to activists working on the ground, local authorities arbitrarily charge and arrest Patani-Malay civilians thought to be giving aid and comfort to the insurgents. Tuwaedaniya feels that the “violence committed against soft targets has increased as a result of the peace talks” – he believes that the vast majority of this violence is perpetrated by Thai security forces. During the writing of this article, I was informed of the assassination of two young civil society activists in August and September.
Each of the two warring parties tends to assume that civil society groups are actually collaborating with the other side and this justifies targeting civilians. During the course of my fieldwork in October, I spoke to the families of two ex-combatants, who were part of a large group of 93 alleged “insurgents” that surrendered to the Royal Thai Army in September last year. Under this program, known as “Bring People Home,” individuals with outstanding arrest warrants or bounties for security-related crimes are induced to resume “normal” lives providing that they report to the authorities and renounce rebellion. Despite the safety assurances provided by local security actors to participants of the scheme, two of the 93 that surrendered in September 2012 were shot dead during the last two months. Family members of the victims believe that these killings were carried out by death squads supported by the Thai military, despite allegations by local Thai security forces that BRN in fact carried out the killings because the victims were “snitches.” Commenting on the killings, one of the remaining 91 returnees under the same program said, “The military is not sincere…they refuse to trust us and leave us alone.”
Ustaz Duloh (not his real name), a senior member of BRN’s religious wing, depicts the people of Patani as easily manipulated and anxious to throw their lot in with the strongest side. Senior resistance fighters like Duloh, who typically represent a less compromising stance, view the political action led by activists like Tuwaedaniya through the prism of their own participation in protest movements back in the1970s. “My friends and colleagues were killed,” he says, “I was so angry…The Thai government is cruel, they provide us no freedom to think, to express our culture… They should have caught who did it, but the government failed.”
The way old grievances calcify in people like Ustaz Duloh should be instructive for the Thai government as it considers how to deal with this new crop of bright, passionate activists who, for now at any rate, have chosen to build political strongholds for nonviolent resistance rather than pursuing armed resistance. These groups are working together to form a critical mass of support across a broad cross-section of young Patani-Malays, and calling for people to learn from regional attempts at achieving peace in places like Indonesia and the Philippines. Unlike previous generations of activists, this new generation of civil society advocates is focused on sustaining longer-term efforts to educate and mobilize communities in order to give meaning and longevity to an eventual peace process. The rise of civilian-led political action in Southern Thailand is a milestone and signal from the Facebook generation that people living in southern Thailand are determined to become stakeholders instead of distant spectators to any eventual peace process. It is yet to be seen whether the parties now at the table are prepared to listen to them and see their efforts to invigorate civil society as a constructive part of the broader process of dialogue.
James Bean is a PhD candidate with The Australian National University’s School of International, Political, and Strategic Studies. Email: beanjamesp@gmail.com
Thanks: http://thediplomat.com/2013/11/southern-thailands-new-activists/?allpages=yes
[Read More...]


0 Thailand loses bid to join UN rights body



Nearly 5 months since its military declared martial rule, Thailand fails to win a seat at the UN Human Rights Council
Prayuth Jan-ocha, Junta leader and now the Prime Minister of Thailand
UNITED NATIONS – Junta-ruled Thailand lost its controversial bid to join the top United Nations body in charge of promoting and protecting human rights.
Thailand was among 5 Asian countries that vied for seats on the UN Human Rights Council but got the least number of votes compared to India, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Qatar.
The UN General Assembly elected 15 new members of the 47-member Council on Tuesday, October 21, at the UN Headquarters here in New York. The new members will serve a 3-year term starting on January 1, 2015.
With only 4 Asian seats available, Qatar edged out Thailand with 142 votes compared to Bangkok’s 136. India got the most votes with 162, Indonesia with 152, and Bangladesh with 149.
A majority of 97 votes was the minimum requirement. The UN has 193 member states.
Ahead of the elections, human rights groups pressed Thailand to improve its human rights record by lifting martial law, ending censorship, and ceasing arbitrary and secret detention.
The New York-based Human Rights Watch, the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights, and the Bangkok-based Union for Civil Liberty all called on the Thai government to end martial rule to be a “credible and influential member” of the Council.
Martial law has been in place in Thailand for nearly 5 months since the military grabbed power from the government in a May 22 coup.
At the UN General Debate in September, Foreign Minister General Tanasak Patimapragorn justified the coup as necessary because the opposing political parties were “unwilling to compromise for the sake of the country” and caused a political impasse.
In a letter to Thai Prime Minister General Prayuth Chan-ocha on October 18, Human Rights Watch said Thailand’s pledges to promote human rights cannot be taken seriously so long as the country is under “abusive military rule.”
“Thailand’s declarations supporting rights without action to revoke military law and end the repression of speech, association, and peaceful protest will be easily ignored,” said Human Rights Watch Asia director Brad Adams.
Human rights groups pointed out that the junta ordered the media not to criticize the military, censored critical stories, and banned public gatherings of more than 5 people.
Rights activists also noted that the junta even arrested protesters who peacefully expressed dissent by showing a 3-finger Hunger Games-inspired salute, and read George Orwell’s 1984 novel in public, or played the French national anthem “La Marseillaise.”
Based in Geneva, Switzerland, the UN Human Rights Council addresses human rights violations and makes recommendations on them. It discusses thematic human rights issues, reviews countries’ rights records, and acts on complaints.
Members are elected to a 3-year term, and are not eligible for re-election after two consecutive terms.
India, Indonesia re-elected
India and Indonesia won their bids for re-election. The Philippines got one vote, even if it did not campaign for re-election. Manila is already a member of the Council and will end its term this year.
In its campaign, Indonesia pledged to promote religious freedom and tolerance as the world’s third largest democracy, and the biggest Muslim-majority nation. Jakarta is also a key player in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
“Indonesia is living proof that democracy and Islam can coexist peacefully, harmoniously and productively. Indonesia also continues to actively promote genuine dialogue to advance human rights causes,” Indonesia said in a note verbale to the UN General Assembly.
Indonesia cited its initiatives in the region including the Bali Democracy Forum, the Asia-Pacific Regional Interfaith Dialogues, the International Conference of Islamic Scholars and the New Asian-African Strategic Partnership Ministerial Conference on Capacity-Building for Palestine.
Yet human rights groups have also expressed concern about Indonesia’s rights record, drawing attention to growing violence and discrimination against religious minorities, local decrees that violate women’s rights, corruption, and mistreatment of refugees and migrants.
Qatar has also not escaped criticism.
UN Watch, an observer NGO at the Council, said Qatar poorly treated migrant workers, denies basic rights to women like being elected to the Shura legislative council, and allegedly finances terrorist groups like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and Hamas.
This is not the first time countries with questionable human rights records were elected to the Council. In the past, nations like Cuba, Saudi Arabia, China and Russia won seats to the body.
Costa Rica also loses polls
Besides Thailand, Costa Rica was the other candidate that lost a seat but for the Latin America and Caribbean States group.
The other regional groups agreed on their candidates, presenting a so-called “clean state.”
The 15 new members of the Council are:

  1. Albania
  2. Bangladesh
  3. Bolivia
  4. Botswana
  5. Congo
  6. El Salvador
  7. Ghana
  8. India
  9. Indonesia
  10. Latvia
  11. Netherlands
  12. Nigeria
  13. Paraguay
  14. Portugal
  15. Qatar                     Thabks to  Rapler   ...Rappler multimedia reporter Ayee Macaraig is a 2014 fellow of the Dag Hammarskjöld Fund for Journalists. She is in New York to cover the UN General Assembly, foreign policy, diplomacy, and world events
[Read More...]


0 Thailand's war-weary southerners fear coup will erode new freedoms



Article from Reuters
BY ANDREW R.C. MARSHALL
They talked about corruption and politics, about healthcare and women's rights, about the anxiety of bringing up children in a corner of Thailand where war has killed 6,000 people in the last decade.
Then they fell silent.
For years, Media Selatan was one of the most popular community radio stations in Thailand's three southernmost provinces, where Muslim separatists have fought government troops since 2004. But when the Thai military seized power in a May 22 coup, it ordered the closure of thousands of independent stations nationwide - Media Selatan among them.
The Malay-language station - its name means "Southern Media" - was more than a public forum for a war-weary people. It had also come to symbolize a flowering of political expression among the south's Malay-speaking Muslims, who live in a country dominated by Thai-speaking Buddhists, since abortive peace talks last year.
Many southerners now fear the military will use the coup to roll back hard-won freedoms. "It's like closing the eyes and ears of the people," said Wanahmad Wankuejik, director of Media Selatan, of his station's closure.
Civil society groups also voiced concerns that a recent purge of senior officials and the arrival of a hardline military commander could exacerbate what is already one of Southeast Asia's deadliest unresolved conflicts.
On May 24, a rare series of bombings in Pattani's provincial capital, also called Pattani, killed three people, wounded dozens and triggered fears that post-coup violence might soar.
BANGKOK PREOCCUPIED
Annexed by Thailand a century ago, the south has long simmered under the neglectful rule of distant Bangkok. The latest and most serious violence erupted in the early 2000s, with a thousands-strong network of elusive militants battling at least 60,000 soldiers, police and paramilitary forces.
Reports of gunfights, drive-by shootings, beheadings and bombings are near-daily events. Martial law, declared last month in the rest of Thailand, has been in place in Pattani and neighboring Narathiwat and Yala provinces for almost a decade.
Most governments - and most Thais - have been too preoccupied by political unrest elsewhere in their country to pay much attention to the so-called Deep South.
The military staged its May coup after six months of sometimes deadly street protests, the latest flare-up in a 10-year conflict between the Bangkok-based royalist establishment and mostly rural "red-shirt" supporters of ousted premier Yingluck Shinawatra and her brother Thaksin.
Before the crisis erupted, Yingluck's government had last year began peace talks with the insurgent group Barisan Revolusi Nasional (National Revolutionary Front, or BRN) in the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur.
The talks soon foundered, but not before fostering an increasingly assertive civil society of activists, journalists, students and lawyers. They have spoken out against human rights abuses and pushed for greater recognition for the Malay language, culture and religion.
REVIVAL OF PEACE TALKS "UNLIKELY"
    Since taking power, the military has carried out what one senior police officer described to Reuters as a "systematic purge" of officials considered loyal to Thaksin or Yingluck.
    One was Thawee Sodsong, the ex-director of the Southern Border Provinces Administration Centre (SBPAC), which oversees civilian administration in the region. Thawee was popular among Malay Muslims for handing out cash to conflict victims and investigating suspected abuses by Thai security forces.
   Just two days after the coup, he was transferred to an inactive post and replaced with Panu Uthairat, a former SBPAC chief with close ties to Thailand's royalist and military establishment.
    Of more concern to civil society groups is Lieutenant General Walit Rojanaphakdee, the new commander of the Fourth Army, which controls southern Thailand. Walit was appointed in a military reshuffle almost two months before the coup.
Like junta chief General Prayuth Chan-ocha, he belongs to the military's "Eastern Tigers" or Queens Guard faction, which was instrumental in both last month's coup and the one in 2006 that removed Thaksin.
In 2010, Walit was wounded - and his aide killed - in an April 10 clash with red-shirt protesters in Bangkok. He then commanded the Second Infantry Division, which played a central role in a military crackdown in which more than 90 people were killed.
Walit was likely to "reinforce the military's current playbook" by boosting intelligence-gathering and launching more frequent raids on insurgent hideouts, said Anthony Davis, a Thailand-based analyst at security consulting firm IHS-Jane's.
Or he could resurrect "more aggressive counter-insurgency methods" last deployed in 2007 and 2008, said Davis. Back then, hundreds of Malay Muslim suspects were detained in large-scale military operations that fueled local grievances but had little long-term impact on the violence.
"Either way, it will not be business as usual," said Davis. The junta was highly unlikely to revive peace talks with BRN insurgents in the coming months, he added.
WINNING HEARTS AND MINDS
Aggressive methods could escalate the conflict beyond the southern region to tourist areas. Hat Yai, the closest major city to the three southernmost provinces at the heart of the conflict, has already endured many deadly bomb attacks. Police on the resort island of Phuket found and disarmed a car-bomb in December.
"Peace talks are still on our agenda," said deputy army spokesman Colonel Weerachon Sukondhapatipak, adding the military government was devising a plan to "bring all stakeholders together".
"We still believe that to solve the problem of the Deep South we must win hearts and minds," he said.
Even so, many journalists and activists are braced for the worst.
A week after the coup, General Walit summoned journalists to his army base and warned them that publishing "negative" stories about the military carried a two-year jail sentence.
Many actions taken by the coupmakers to suppress political dissent in Thailand are grimly familiar to southern Muslims.
In the past month, hundreds of politicians and activists have been detained without charge at army camps, with some undergoing what the authorities call "attitude adjustment".
In the past decade, thousands of Malay Muslims have been detained and sometimes tortured by the military for suspected insurgent links, or forced to attend "re-education" programs.
The army's post-coup campaign to "bring back happiness to the Thai people" by staging festivals elicits groans of recognition in the south, where a bid to win hearts and minds has been undermined by human rights abuses by security forces.

"The military is now using the Pattani model against all Thais," said a Malay-Muslim reporter who, fearing military harassment, requested anonymity. "My friends in Bangkok tell me, 'Now we know what it's like to live there."
(Editing by Alex Richardson)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/17/us-thailand-pattani-insight-idUSKBN0ES2TQ20140617
[Read More...]


0 The Situation of Saiburi Royal Family Escape to take Refuge in Kelantan



Translated from เหตุการณ์กลุ่มราขินิกุลเมืองสายบุรีหนีราขภัยไปเมืองกลันตัน
By  รัศมินทร์ นิติธรรม
มูลนิธิลเล็ก-ประไพ วิริยะพัน (http://lek-prapai.org/index.php)
Tengku Abd.Kadir Kamaruddin Raja of Patani
 After  the dead of Phraya Saiburi Tengku Abdulkadir(Ni-Lamai) King Chulalongkorn or Rama V of Siam (1868 -1910) appointed Ni-Pae son  of Phraya Saiburi((Ni-Lamai) as Phraya-suriya-sunthorn-baworn-phakdee Sri-maharaja Matta-abdulwibul-kobkate-prated-malayu  the governor of Saiburi, appointed Ni-pi younger brother of Phraya Saiburi((Ni-Lamai) as Phra-Ratana-Montri-the assistant governor and Ni-Hitam younger brother of Phra-Ratana-Montri (Ni-pi) as Phra-wiset- wangsa-assistant governor of Saiburi.
When Phraya Saiburi (Ni-Pae) was appointed  the governor of Saiburi, he moved out from Nyiringa(Nyigno)  palace to construct a new palace at Salingdongbayu now situated in  Taluban Su-District , Saiburi district, Pattani province.
After Phraya Saiburi (Ni-Pae) moving out from Nyiringa(Nyigno)  palace and resided at Taluban Salingdongbayu palace, left a huge  Nyirigna people and community  behind with out any leader, the Siamese government then appointed Ni-kuechi(Ni-Kari) from Bumae village(now in village No.1 ,Nyigno district, Narathiwat province) as  Mae-Kong- titled Muen-sawek -Amat or people called Tok Mae-Kong.
Ni-kuechi(Ni-Kari) or Tok Mae-Kong  Muen-sawek-Amat  married to Ni-Putih, a  relative of Ni-Bongsu- the royal guard of Phraya Saiburi(Ni-Pae), governor of Saiburi. Originally, Ni-Bongsu is resided in Nyiringa(Nyigno)but came  to live with the governor in Saiburi because of duty. Tok Mae-Kong Muen-sawek -Amat born one son to Ni-Putih, name Ni- Wae Ni-kuechi( later received royal title as Khun-Lahan Pracha-Chet)
Mean while Bangkok government had sent down Khunluang-Sukhumwinit as commissioner of Patani and had adopted a new collection of  opium and liquor tax by divided  percentage  of 50-50  between Patani and Bangkok, later he had collected land tax from people with out given any receipt, this in turn had given him an opportunity to collect land tax many times a year.
In 1900 the Siamese government had imposed the new collection system of  import and export tax in Patani by given  12.5 percent  of revenue received from the collection to Patani while another 77.5 percent was sent to Bangkok. The Patani Rajas opposed the new tax system of Siamese government by saying that the authority of tax collection was belong to them not Siamese government, the Patani Rajas feel uneasy with the situation and started to oppose the Siamese government, this led to an arrested of  Tengku Abd. Kadir Kamarudin, Patani Raja in the morning of Friday,  21 February 1902 by Phraya Sri Sahathep, deputy interior minister. After the arrest, Tengku Kamarudin Abd. Kadir was deported  to Songkhla and Pitsanulok respectively, he was charged with treason(disobeyed an order of Siamese King)  and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment in Pitsanulok.
Tengku Abd. Muttalib Raja of Saiburi
In March 18,1902  Khunluang-Sukhumwinit, the commissioner of Nakornsrithammarat arrested Tebgku Ngoh Shamsuddin, Raja of Legeh with 8 of his men and at the same time Tengku Abd. Muttalib, Raja of Saiburi was also arrested. The situation at the time was insecure for the royal family of Saiburi then they decided to send their family to take refuge in Kelantan.
Ni-Bongsu was one of the royal guard with 5 or 6 others had the order to protect  10  Saiburi royal family during travelling to take  refuge in Kelantan .
In this adventure, Ni-Bongsu had arrested Ni- Wae Ni-kuechi  son of Muen-Sawek-Amat as   the hostage because his father,  Muen-Sawek-Amat was a Siamese official and better known about the rout to Kelantan, Muen-Sawek-Amat had a lot of relative all  the way long  to Kelantan , starting from Legeh, Boango, Joh-Irong until Sungai Padi because he was originated from Baenu(Yaning ) village,  Joh-Irong. The Saiburi royal guards better known that with out his son in the company as hostage  there will be a negative threat to the security of Saiburi royal family.
Tengku Ngoh Shamsuddin Raja of Legeh
During the travelling  of Saiburi royal family to seek refuge in  Kelantan , they faced a lot of difficulties, they ate very simple food, slept in simple places,  sometimes people were  given food  to eat but people along the way pay much attention and respect when  they   knew that the company  belong to the royal family. At last the company reached  Tok Ra-Weng village situated  between Legeh and Kelantan and probably out Siamese government influence.
When reached Tok Ra-Weng village, Ni-Bongsu the chief of Royal guard had a serious sickness and had to stay at Tok Ra-Weng house for treatment,  Tok Ra-Weng was a man who migrated from Raweng village,(Jerang(Yarang), Patani) and establishing himself there.
Tok Ra-Weng village was a pier,  transporting merchandise to Tok Mo’  village(gold mine) thus had a bit of development. Ni-Bongsu was treated at Tok Ra-Weng house for many days but not yet better, the royal family then had decided to left him for further treatment at Tok Ra-Weng house and  they went further crossing the river to seek refuge in Kelantan.
After recover from sickness, Ni- Bongsu did  not travel to Kelantan to join the royal family there but established himself at this village by married  the woman in this village and born one son, Ni-Hae bin Ni-Bongsu.
Ni- Wae Ni-kuechi, the hostage of Saiburi royal family feel insecure  with out his close relative(Ni-Bongsu) joining the company of Saiburi royal family, in the night he escaped himself from the royal company,  until morning the Saiburi royal family knew the story of Ni- Wae Ni-kuechi but did not pay any interest to get him back because they were too tired and now they feel safe in Kelantan dominion. The royal company traveled further to Pasir Puteh village, Kelantan and established their family until this day and they never  come back again to Saiburi.
Patani Soldiers

[Read More...]


0 Statistic Summary of Conflict Incidences in southern Thailand(Patani) From 1-31 March 2014



From  Deep South Watch
(Translated from Thai Language)

Statistic of Death and Injured Persons classified according religion
Dead 35 Persons
Injured 38 persons
Not Specify
Buddhists
Muslims
Not Specify
Buddhists
Muslims

2

16

17

0

20

18



Statistic classified according to Type of Incidences
Type of Incidences
Number of Incidences
Grenade throwing
2
Spreading nails
1
Tyr  burning
1
Shooting
37
Shooting and Burn
2
Bombing
16
Bombing and Shooting
1
Total
60

Statistic classified according to Background(Occupation)
Occupation
Dead
Injured
Total
citizen
16
20
36
Police
3
7
10
Army
2
7
9
Para Military
1
1
2
Teacher/Education Personnel
2
0
2
Politician
1
0
1
Head Village/Headman /assist. Head village/man
3
1
4
Private employee
2
1
3
Islamic Religious Leaders
1
0
1
Foreigners
2
0
2
Youth age 15 down
0
1
1
Movement fighters
2
0
2
Total
35
38
73

Statistic classified according to Provinces in March 2014
Provinces
Incidences
Dead
Injured
Numbers
Percentage
Numbers
Percentage
Numbers
Percentage
Narathiwat
20
33.33
9
25.71
15
39.47
Pattani
23
38.33
17
48.57
17
44.74
Yala
15
25.00
9
25.71
6
15.79
Songkhla
2
3.33
0
0.00
0
0.00
Total
50
100.00
35
100.00
38
100.00
[Read More...]


Share |
 
Creative Commons License
.

VISITORS

SAY NO TO RACISM

Return to top of page Copyright © 2010 | Platinum Theme Converted into Blogger Template by HackTutors