Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
Bangkok Post
Bangkok Post
National
ONLINE REPORTERS

Court grants 1.9m damages to mother of beaten corporal

The Bangkok Civil Court has ordered the army to pay 1.87 million baht in damages to the mother of a corporal who died two years ago after being beaten in an army jail.

Boonruang Suthiraphan, 63, sought 18 million baht under the civil liabilities law after her son died of the injuries.

Cpl Kittikorn Suthiraphan, 25, was beaten by a volunteer private appointed as a special warder and three privates who were detained at the time at the army jail in Surin district under the 25th Military Circle in February 2016. He later died on Feb 21.

The army’s defence was the plaintiff could not file the suit because the statute of limitations on the case had run out and the offence was a personal dispute because the victim had been decommissioned before the crime took place.

The court said an autopsy showed Cpl Kittikorn had died of severe head injuries and a ruptured stomach.

It ruled Pvt Chukiat Nantaphan was appointed a warder so he was considered a competent army official while the other three privates were not.

“The fact that Pvt Chukiat ordered the three privates to beat the victim means he had acted in violation.”

Since the civil liabilities law does not set the statute of limitations, the period prescribed under Section 193/3 of the Civil Code applied, the court said.

“Although the plaintiff sought damages of almost 10 million baht from violation of human rights, the court had decided Section 25 of the 2017 Constitution allows a victim of such violations to seek remedy or aids from the state. The court, therefore, did not set the damages for this part.”

The court approved 1.87 million baht, plus 7.5% interest a year from Feb 21, 2016 and another 30,000 baht in solicitor fees. The defendant was to pay within 30 days.

Preeda Nakphiew, the plaintiff’s solicitor, said the case was not final since his client was considering appealing over the liabilities of the jail’s commander.

“We still have doubts over the court’s view that the commanders of the jail and the army were not negligent and that they had done their best. Our goal is to prevent a recurrence of such incident,” he said.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.