The origin of the land conflicts between the state authority and the indigenous / ethnic group of Karen can be dated to 1981. During this year the Kaeng Krachan forest was designated as the country's 28th national park. The forest has been the ancestral home and livelihood of the indigenous group of Karen. The first conflict arose in 1996 when under a royal initiative project of the Upper La-Ou forest and Khao Panern Thung Conservation 57 families with 391 Karen people were relocated out of the core zone and were given farming land outside the forest. Some Karen returned to the core zone to continue their traditional shifting cultivation as a response to the not suitable conditions of the given place outside the forest. In May 2011 during an operation called Tenasserim, the destruction of 98 shelters of the Karen by setting fire to them was undertaken by the park chief and his staffs. [6] [8] In September 2011 the local activist and former Pheu Thai candidate Thatkamon Ob-om who supported the evicted Karen people was shot dead [35]. In the same year the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation proposed the Kaeng Krachan Western Forest Complex to join the list of World Heritage sites due to its fertile land and the fact that it is a significant hub for elephants and other wildlife. Concerns were raised by the Karen Network for Culture and Environment in Western Region that the department might not provide clearly for the Karen's living zone and respect their traditional farming method of shifting cultivation. [8] |
Land conflict between the state and Karen group in Kaeng Krachan National Park, Thailand
The decades-long conflict on state control over national parks resulted in murder and enforced disappearance of activists who fought to return to their homeland, Jai Pan Din, where the heart of this Karen Community lies for a hundred years.
| Name of conflict: | Land conflict between the state and Karen group in Kaeng Krachan National Park, Thailand |
| Country: | Thailand |
| State or province: | Petchaburi province |
| Location of conflict: | Pong Luk - Bang Kloy village, Huai Mae Phriang Sub-district, Kaeng Krachan District |
| Accuracy of location | HIGH (Local level) |
| Type of conflict. 1st level: | Biodiversity conservation conflicts |
| Type of conflict. 2nd level: | Land acquisition conflicts Establishment of reserves/national parks |
| Specific commodities: | Biological resources Ecosystem Services Tourism services |
| Project details | Kaeng Krachan National Park lies close to the Tenesserim Range near the border between Thailand and Myanmar, on the Western side of the country [32]. It is considered a part of Kaeng Krachan Forest Complex, a tentative list for Natural World Heritage site, with other two protected areas which are Pachi Wildlife Sanctuary and Kuiburi National Park [32]. Kaeng Krachan National Park was first protected by National Park Act 1961 [2] and later reenforced by National Park Act 2019 [1]. It is the largest national park in Thailand, covering the area of 2,914.70 km2 [33]. The park is located in the Indo-Malayan ecoregion and very rich in biodiversity because of four zoogeographical subregions and four floristic provinces (Indo-Burmese or Himalayan, Indo-Malaysian, Annamatic, and Andamanese); it features high habitat diversity per unit area [32]. There are also presence of endemic species or globally endangered species such as Siamese crocodile, tiger, Asian elephant, Asian giant tortoise, etc. There are 91 species of mammals and 461 bird species already inventoried in the forest complex [32]. Its forest is a mixture of semi-evergreen forest, moist evergreen forest, mixed deciduous forest, montane forest, and deciduous dipterocarp forest [32]. The park is important headwaters of nearby wetland and many agricultural areas [32], with its water reservoir and watershed [33]. The threats found in the park are poaching, agricultural encroachment, and growing human population, according to the report submitted to UNESCO [32]. The park welcomes tourists [41] but it is closed to public during 1 August - 31 October of every year due to the heavy rainfall and wild livelihood [33]. It is managed by Kaeng Krachan National Park Headquarter which is part of National Park office in Department of National Parks, Wildlife, and Plant Conservation in Ministry on Natural Resources and Environment [33]. |
| Type of population | Semi-urban |
| Affected Population: | 60 families, 400 people (approximately) |
| Start of the conflict: | 12/06/1981 |
| Relevant government actors: | Department of National Parks, Wildlife, and Plant Conservation (http://www.dnp.go.th/index_eng.asp) Kaeng Krachan National Park ([email protected]) |
| Environmental justice organizations (and other supporters) and their websites, if available: | Cross Cultural Foundation (https://voicefromthais.wordpress.com, [email protected]) National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRC)(http://www.nhrc.or.th/Home.aspx?lang=en-US) Karen Network for Culture and Environment (https://www.facebook.com/เครือข่ายกะเหรี่ยงเพื่อวัฒนธรรมและสิ่งแวดล้อม-เขตงานตะนาวศรี-776509242360679/) Karen Studies and Development Centre Chulalongkorn University Social Research Institute (CUSRI) (http://www.cusri.chula.ac.th) Amnesty International Thailand (https://www.amnesty.or.th/en/) Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact (https://aippnet.org) |
| Intensity | LOW (some local organising) |
| Reaction stage | In REACTION to the implementation (during construction or operation) |
| Groups mobilizing: | Indigenous groups or traditional communities International ejos Local ejos Local government/political parties Neighbours/citizens/communities Social movements Ethnically/racially discriminated groups Local scientists/professionals |
| Forms of mobilization: | Artistic and creative actions (eg guerilla theatre, murals) Community-based participative research (popular epidemiology studies, etc..) Development of a network/collective action Development of alternative proposals Involvement of national and international NGOs Lawsuits, court cases, judicial activism Media based activism/alternative media Official complaint letters and petitions Occupation of buildings/public spaces |
| Environmental Impacts | Visible: Food insecurity (crop damage) |
| Health Impacts | Visible: Mental problems including stress, depression and suicide, Deaths |
| Socio-economical Impacts | Visible: Displacement, Loss of livelihood, Loss of traditional knowledge/practices/cultures, Violations of human rights, Land dispossession, Loss of landscape/sense of place |
| Project Status | Under construction |
| Conflict outcome / response: | Compensation Criminalization of activists Deaths, Assassinations, Murders Court decision (failure for environmental justice) Court decision (undecided) Migration/displacement Violent targeting of activists |
| Proposal and development of alternatives: | The Cross Cultural foundation with other 22 NGOs has been pushing for legislation against the enforced disappearance known as Bill on Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance (citizens edition), in order to be strict and to fully comply with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) and the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (CED), and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED) to ensure protection and prevent the recurrence of grave violations like the case of Porlajee [34]. Nonetheless, this bill was not approved by the legislative assembly yet (as of February 2020) [34] . |
| Do you consider this an environmental justice success? Was environmental justice served?: | No |
| Briefly explain: | Even though there is a push from the local and international NGOs and civil society, the authority seemed to have not addressing concerns over the issues, both about the land rights and the enforced disappearance of activists. The National Legislative Assembly under the National Council for Peace and Order passed the National Park Act B.E. 2562 (2019) in May 2019 [1]. This act lacks the description of community and strengthens the punishment, even though it highlights on community's participatory process [18]. It also enforces the forest reclamation policy to evict people out of forest conservation area [18]. Overall, the rights of community which have lived there before the legislation are not recognized. In April 2020, the Karen community in Kaeng Krachan national park still have to live in the area that they were forced evicted to (Bang Kloy Lang village) without fields that they can cultivate in [17]. Mana Permpoon, the new park chief, stated that he is surveying the area and looking for the potential fields to allocate for villagers [18]. Surely, the community rights to get back to their homeland, Jai Paen Din, were not served. Nevertheless, in case of Porlajee's death, even his wife has been fighting all along and been continuously neglected by the court, the DSI officers said that they have not abandoned the case and is preparing the dissenting statement to the court which will be sent in the end of April [18]. |
| Juridical relevant texts related to the conflict (laws, legislations, EIAs, etc) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| References to published books, academic articles, movies or published documentaries |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Related media links to videos, campaigns, social network |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other documents |
|
| Contributor: | Julia Rheinheimer ([email protected]), Kunlanat Jirawong-aram ([email protected]), Political Ecology: Environmental Justice and Degrowth Master, UAB |
| Last update | 17/04/2020 |
| Conflict ID: | 5028 |