Buriram: Chanin exposed the behind-the-scenes political maneuvering using court rulings as a "rubber stamp" to settle scores, sharply criticizing those who boast of their knowledge and manipulate the media to act as vigilantes, aiming to undermine political ethics, even though the Khao Kradong case is not yet concluded, contradicting the facts in the Buriram court.
According to Thai News Agency, Chanin Kaenhirun, the lawyer handling the Khao Kradong case, posted on his personal Facebook account that some people are repeatedly discussing the Khao Kradong issue, as if trying to make society believe that "the Supreme Court has ruled that everyone in the 5,083 rai area is a trespasser, and the Land Department must immediately revoke all land title documents." He argued that anyone who truly understands the law, or has the sense to read the law thoroughly, would realize this is a fragmented account that leads to serious misunderstanding in society.
A court ruling does not silence the entire community, especially those who were never parties to the case. The law still grants outsiders the right to prove they have a superior right or that they possess different facts and evidence than the original case. A ruling concerning property ownership may be applicable against outsiders in some cases, but it does not mean that outsiders are deprived of the right to explain, dispute, or defend their own case.
If all the cases are "closed," as some are trying to manipulate the situation, the simple question is: why does the court of justice still accept the lawsuits that the State Railway of Thailand (SRT) is filing against individual land plots in the Buriram Provincial Court? Why does the court allow the parties to continue presenting evidence? And why hasn't the Administrative Court ordered the Department of Land to immediately revoke all land titles, but instead instructed them to proceed according to Section 61 of the Land Code, which means examining, investigating, hearing from stakeholders, and considering the facts according to legal procedures?
The phrase "The Land Department has the power to revoke" is not the same as "The Land Department must revoke immediately without listening to anyone." Because if government officials revoke land title documents without verifying the boundaries, without proving each plot individually, without listening to stakeholders, and without following Section 61, that is an abuse of power and will cause damage to the public, the officials, and the legal system.
What is regrettable is that a number of people don't even know what "better rights" for outsiders are, what evidence differs in the new case from the original, what the history of land title deeds is, or how the true boundaries are determined. Yet, they boast about their knowledge, make definitive judgments, and accuse everyone in the area of being trespassers, disrespectful of court judgments, or corrupt officials, even though they are neither plaintiffs nor defendants, haven't seen the case files, and are unaffected by their own words.
Demanding justice is not about inciting hatred, and respecting court rulings is not about using the court's name to silence citizens who are legally entitled to fight their cases. If anyone is confident that a particular plot of land belongs to the State Railway of Thailand (SRT), they should present evidence in court. If they believe that any land title document was issued illegally, they should prove it under Section 61, not resort to loud public rhetoric in place of evidence, thereby damaging the reputation and lives of others.
The Khao Kradong case must conclude with facts, evidence, and verdicts for each case, not with the schadenfreude of those who are unaware of the latest case details but speak as if they know everything, except for their own conscience. "Don't use the phrase 'respect for the final verdict' as an excuse to disrespect the rights of those who are still allowed by law to fight their cases.