Thailand extradicts drug trafficker to US (VOA fwd)
Laura Summers
DATE=1/18/96
TYPE=CORRESPONDENT REPORT
NUMBER=2-191427
TITLE=THAILAND / U-S (L)
BYLINE=DAN ROBINSON
DATELINE=BANGKOK
CONTENT=
VOICED AT:
INTRO: THAILAND HAS EXTRADITED TO THE UNITED STATES A FORMER
POLITICIAN ACCUSED OF INVOLVEMENT IN DRUG TRAFFICKING. FROM
BANGKOK, V-O-A CORRESPONDENT DAN ROBINSON REPORTS IT IS THE FIRST
TIME A THAI CITIZEN HAS BEEN SENT TO THE UNITED STATES UNDER A
BILATERAL EXTRADITION TREATY DATING BACK TO 1929:
TEXT: THANONG SIRIPREECHAPONG WAS INDICTED IN NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA IN 1991 ON CHARGES OF INVOLVEMENT IN THE SMUGGLING OF
TONS OF MARIJUANA TO THE UNITED STATES BETWEEN 1973 AND 1987.
HE WAS CHARGED WITH SMUGGLING, CONSPIRACY AND OPERATING A
CONTINUING CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE. THE INDICTMENT WAS NOT MADE
PUBLIC UNTIL 1994, AFTER U-S AUTHORITIES REVEALED MR. THANONG HAD
BEEN DENIED A U-S VISA.
// OPT // AS PART OF THE U-S INVESTIGATION INTO THE MARIJUANA
SMUGGLING RING, MR. THANONG'S ASSETS IN THE UNITED STATES WERE
SEIZED -- INCLUDING A HOUSE IN BEVERLY HILLS (CALIFORNIA) AND A
MERCEDES BENZ. // END OPT //
MR. THANONG INSISTS HE IS INNOCENT OF THE CHARGES. HE MAINTAINED
-- AS A THAI CITIZEN -- HE COULD NOT BE SENT TO THE UNITED STATES
AGAINST HIS WILL.
THE EXTRADITION IS SIGNIFICANT FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS -- NOT
LEAST OF WHICH IS WASHINGTON'S NEW CAMPAIGN AGAINST INTERNATIONAL
NARCOTICS TRAFFICKING, ANNOUNCED LAST YEAR.
THURSDAY, A U-S EMBASSY STATEMENT WELCOMED THE EXTRADITION AND
SAID WASHINGTON LOOKS FORWARD TO CONTINUED CLOSE COOPERATION WITH
THAILAND IN COUNTERING NARCOTICS TRAFFICKING.
THE QUESTION OF U-S NARCOTICS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THAI
POLITICIANS IS A SENSITIVE ONE -- WITH SOME CRITICS ACCUSING
WASHINGTON OF TAKING A CONDESCENDING ATTITUDE TOWARD THAILAND AND
ITS LAW ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM.
SINCE 1992, THE UNITED STATES HAS CONFIRMED THREE OTHER THAI
POLITICIANS HAVE BEEN DENIED VISAS ON SUSPICION OF HAVING LINKS
WITH THE ILLEGAL DRUGS TRADE.
THEY INCLUDE TWO INFLUENTIAL MEMBERS OF THE "THAI NATION" PARTY
OF PRIME MINISTER BARNHARN SILPA-ARCHA. NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN
CHARGED IN THE UNITED STATES. ALL DENY ANY WRONGDOING.
IN 1994, U-S AND THAI AUTHORITIES ANNOUNCED WHAT THEY CALLED A
MAJOR BLOW AGAINST SOUTHEAST ASIAN HEROIN SMUGGLING -- THE ARREST
OF TEN PEOPLE ALLEGED TO BE FOLLOWERS OF GOLDEN TRIANGLE OPIUM
OPERATOR KHUN SA. ANOTHER SUSPECT WAS ARRESTED LAST YEAR.
AFTER MR. THANONG'S EXTRADITION WAS UPHELD, THAILAND'S ATTORNEY
GENERAL (KHANIT NA NAKORN) SAID THE RULING WAS A PRECEDENT THAT
COULD AFFECT U-S EFFORTS TO BRING THE ALLEGED KHUN SA FOLLOWERS
TO TRIAL.
// REST OPTIONAL //
KHUN SA SURRENDERED TO BURMESE GOVERNMENT TROOPS AND THE RANGOON
MILITARY GOVERNMENT SAYS IT INTENDS TO PUT HIM ON TRIAL.
WASHINGTON WANTS HIM EXTRADITED, BUT THERE IS NO INDICATION
BURMESE AUTHORITIES INTEND TO DO SO. (SIGNED)
NEB / DR / GKT / WOD
18-Jan-96 7:22 AM EST (1222 UTC)
NNNN
Source: Voice of America
Char Karnchanapee
.......x....details deleted...x
>TEXT: THANONG SIRIPREECHAPONG WAS INDICTED IN NORTHERN
>CALIFORNIA IN 1991 ON CHARGES OF INVOLVEMENT IN THE SMUGGLING OF
>TONS OF MARIJUANA TO THE UNITED STATES BETWEEN 1973 AND 1987.
>HE WAS CHARGED WITH SMUGGLING, CONSPIRACY AND OPERATING A
>CONTINUING CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE. THE INDICTMENT WAS NOT MADE
>PUBLIC UNTIL 1994, AFTER U-S AUTHORITIES REVEALED MR. THANONG HAD
>BEEN DENIED A U-S VISA.
..........X...snipped...x
>THURSDAY, A U-S EMBASSY STATEMENT WELCOMED THE EXTRADITION AND
>SAID WASHINGTON LOOKS FORWARD TO CONTINUED CLOSE COOPERATION WITH
>THAILAND IN COUNTERING NARCOTICS TRAFFICKING.
...........x....snipped...x
>KHUN SA SURRENDERED TO BURMESE GOVERNMENT TROOPS AND THE RANGOON
>MILITARY GOVERNMENT SAYS IT INTENDS TO PUT HIM ON TRIAL.
>WASHINGTON WANTS HIM EXTRADITED, BUT THERE IS NO INDICATION
>BURMESE AUTHORITIES INTEND TO DO SO. (SIGNED)
This is very interesting development of the events...
When the US is applying the same law differently toward two
countries, Burma and Thailand..?
If the Rangoon Government could keep Khun Sa and put
him on her own court...
Why not Thai Government ? She could keep Khun Thanong
up to trial at the Thai court?
Now...what is the differences between Khun Thanong
and Khun Sa..?
If Washington wants Khun Thanong extradited...so
is Khun Sa wanted by the US..?
Regards;
Char Karnchanapee
http://www-rci.rutgers.edu/~karnchan/
Surin Maisrikrod
>On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, G.S. Sean Parlaman wrote:
>
>> ...in this case did the Thai defendant ever -- while in the
>> U.S. -- commit a crime or is he suspected of activities in his home
>> country (Thailand) which broke the law (or somehow led to some illegal
>> acts) in America.
>>
>> If the Thai government had proof of his crimes, why didn't the Thais put
>> him in jail themselves? Thai drug penalities are "supposed" to be more
>> severe than in the U.S.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> C-YA Sean
>>
>Good point. That issue was not clear, at least in the Thai press. He
>was only accused of "trafficking marijuana", whether he just arranged for
>its transfer from Thailand and/or traveled to the US to make further
>arrangements was not brought out in reports.
>
>As for the second question, I think you know the answer to that ;)
>
>Gary Risser
>
>
To Interested persons,
I appreciated Gary Risser's legal clarification about this case. But the
whole thing has little to do with that aspect. it is very political. I
think a person who resides in Bangkok should know better--not from the
press--what went on behind the headlines between the U.S. government and the
Thai officials/government. For one thing, the present government has to
show that it would not intervene AT ALL on behalf of the the accused, who
happened to be a former prominent member of the present ruling party headed
by PM Banharn. Does this make some sense?
Surin
Supang Chantavanich
The two situations differ legally in that Thailand has an extradition
treaty with the United States and Myanmar does not. The US has, since
Khun Sa's surrender to the Burmese Army, requested that he be extradited
to the US to stand trial, but the Burmese government has refused. This
is most likely because a deal had been struck with Khun Sa earlier, which
I am certain included non-extradition to the US. Rangoon has been
extremely resiliant in the face of criticism and does not respond well to
demands for it to do something. America has been one of its most vocal
critics, so it is certain that the Burmese authorities are in no hurry to
do the US any favors.
The Thai did struggle with the issue of extraditing Khun Thanong for some
time. He was provided legal hearings to determine whether he would be
sent to the US and was provided all availalbe opportunities to appeal.
The final judgement was that evidence was substantial and that the
extradition treaty would stand.
This was the first instance that this treaty was applied and sets an
interesting precedent for future cases. By no means should nationals of
one country be allowed to commit crimes in another and then flee home.
There is a movement, especially in the issue of pedophalia, to try
criminals in their home country for offences they have committed abroad.
Germany and Sweden are examples.
To reiterate, the US has not applied the law differently in the two cases
- they have requested extradition in both. The difference rests in the
two governments' responses. Khun Sa can be tried in Myanmar because he
is also wanted their for numerous issues. Khun Thanong was not indicted
in Thailand, so there would be no reason to hold a trial there.
Gary Risser
Asian Research Center for Migration,
Institute of Asian Studies,
Chulalongkorn University
Supang Chantavanich
Supang Chantavanich
>
> To Interested persons,
>
> I appreciated Gary Risser's legal clarification about this case. But the
> whole thing has little to do with that aspect. it is very political. I
> think a person who resides in Bangkok should know better--not from the
> press--what went on behind the headlines between the U.S. government and the
> Thai officials/government. For one thing, the present government has to
> show that it would not intervene AT ALL on behalf of the the accused, who
> happened to be a former prominent member of the present ruling party headed
> by PM Banharn. Does this make some sense?
>
> Surin
>
I agree with Surin that the issue was more political than legal, but I was
responding to some questions of legal process and more so, the contrast
between the Thanong and Khun Sa cases.
Gary Risser
Sunil Pednekar
> I agree with Surin that the issue was more political than legal, but I was
> responding to some questions of legal process and more so, the contrast
> between the Thanong and Khun Sa cases.
>
> Gary Risser
>
So, is the legal process serving political interests here or the
political process serving legal interests? Why didn't the US bring out
the issue when it found out back in 1991? I think the issue has now come to
head
because Thanat Khoman did a good job of airing it strongly. Unfortunately
his efforts were little appreciated here in Thailand.
Sunil Pednekar
Tannarong Viboonsunti
> On Wed, 31 Jan 1996, Surin Maisrikrod wrote:
>
> >
> > To Interested persons,
> >
> > I appreciated Gary Risser's legal clarification about this case. But the
> > whole thing has little to do with that aspect. it is very political. I
> > think a person who resides in Bangkok should know better--not from the
> > press--what went on behind the headlines between the U.S. government and the
> > Thai officials/government. For one thing, the present government has to
> > show that it would not intervene AT ALL on behalf of the the accused, who
> > happened to be a former prominent member of the present ruling party headed
> > by PM Banharn. Does this make some sense?
> >
> > Surin
> >
>
> I agree with Surin that the issue was more political than legal, but I was
> responding to some questions of legal process and more so, the contrast
> between the Thanong and Khun Sa cases.
>
> Gary Risser
>
Gary,
I still don't agree with you. The issue is legal than political. Thai
legal system is to a large extent free of political influence.
Tanarong
Chiangmai University
TIM BLAKE
>> I agree with Surin that the issue was more political than legal, but I was
>> responding to some questions of legal process and more so, the contrast
>> between the Thanong and Khun Sa cases.
>political process serving legal interests? Why didn't the US bring out
I'd suggest the distinct possibility that the legal process is not
tainted by the executive branch's wishes in this matter. I think that
some do not understand the separation of powers that *usually* obtains
in the American system. Prosecutorial discretion exists but is normally
based more on the liklihood of conviction than upon some foreign policy
perogative of the executive branch. There really is not a conspiracy
behind every bush.
--
tbl...@aztec.asu.edu
Phoenix, AZ U.S.A.
"I like people, but I don't like the disgrace they've fallen into."
- Saroyan, *Love's Old Sweet Song*
Serge Thion, CNRS Paris
but can anyone imagine an American citizen accused of
>crimes against Thailand (or any other country) commited in the U.S. being
>packed off by the U.S. government elsewhere. I can only recall suspected
>WWII war criminals being sent to Israel, but I think those were part of
>some international (UN?) convention.
Mr Parlaman is quite mistaken. There is not UN convention. It is highly
unusual and quite contrary to international law to extradite your own
citizen towards a foreign country where they would be tried, and possibly
condemned and even excuted.
The US did that. For instance they sent back to Yugoslavia a war criminal
named Artukovitch, an old and sick man, who was executed (in the 1980') in
Yugoslavia.
There is a special US governmental agency for this purpose, with the
revealing name of OSI, Office of Special Investigations. These people have
conspired with Soviet authorities on many files, the most notorious being
the case of Demjanjuk, who spent seven years in jail to satisfy the
monstruous appetites of OSI, a shame on US legal history. I believe OSI
still exists.
st
Johpa
<Pine.SOL.3.91.960201224601.28999C-100000@cmu>
>......The issue is legal than political. Thai
>legal system is to a large extent free of political influence.
ROTFL
Johpa