Illegal wildlife trade in Thailand

Presented by Kidngarm K.LIJudge of the Office of the Judiciary Court of Thailand

The overview of the wildlife trade situation in Thailand

Situation-7th Economic and Social development plan (1992-1996): to maintain economic growth and achieve sustainable development

Legal instrument and Government effort in handling with the illegal wildlife trade

type of animal number (piece)

Turtle 8,597

bird 6,128

crocodile 3,543

snake 2,990

ivory 515

tiger 12

elephant 1

others 5,585

carcasses 1,589

Legal instrument

Wild Animals Reservation and Protection Act

26 December 1960 (B.E. 2504)

The Wildlife Reservation and Protection Act 1992 (B.E. 2535)

was adopted on 19 February 1992

Government effort For Wildlife Preservation

Wildlife Preservation Created by Royal Decree 44 Areas account for about 19,880,837 rais

Wildlife Sanctuaries• Created by Royal Decree• 54 Sanctuaries covering 2,671,050 rais

Wildlife Checks points• 49 Stop checks covering all exits from the

countries

Wildlife Breeding Stations• 18 station nationwide• To accommodate abandon wildlife animals

Wildlife Preservation Promotion Unit • 18 units nationwide• To disseminate information to youngsters and

public to create an understanding about preserving wildlife

Wildlife research stations• 3 stations across the country• To study wildlife in their natural habitat

The causes of the decline of wildlife in Thailand

Actions Done Because of Lack of Knowledge

Illegal poaching

Encroachment on Forest Areas

High reward influenced

crime

Use of Chemicals and

Pesticides

To be analyzed?

Legal Enforcement Prevention (1)Low penalties prescribed by law if

compared to rich rewards as it enacted since 1992

(2)Sentences may vary between regions because each region may vary from each other and defendant’s circumstances

(3)Few cases appealed to the Supreme Court so there is not too strong sign to show people of how seriousness the crime is.

(4)The understanding and experience of the prosecution about environmental case handling.

(5)Limitation in Court Procedure : we categorize wildlife offences as criminal cases which plaintiff has a duty to proof guilty.

(7) Gap of law and a limited number of enforcement officer

In order to reduce the opportunity to do the offences

Make it more difficult, more risky and less rewarding

(1) Maximum penalties applicable to wildlife trade in Thailand under The Wildlife Reservation and Protection Act 1992

Charges Imprisonment Max.

Financial Penalty Max

Trade and trafficking offences

40,000 4 years

Possession of species 40,000 4 years

Hunt or attempt to hunt

40,000 4 years

Harms endangered species

10,000 1 year

Move without permission in written

5,000 -

(2)-(3)Judicial Sanction Some sentences might slightly vary from region to region because

each region differentiate from each other and it has to take into account the defendant’s circumstances. Besides, judges are independent in trial and adjudication, they have the discretion to consider relevant factors before sentencing without any interference. However such sentences are within the law prescribed.

It should be noted that the effort of the Supreme Court in developing the sentencing guideline will be a tool for judges to exercise their discretions consistent nationwide. Nevertheless, not many cases were appealed to the SC and almost of them asking to suspend sentences.

The establishment of Green Bench in all levels of court helps to create capacity building of judges in handling environmental cases. The Court of Justice also provide training to judges in environmental knowledge and adjudication.

Statistic of the crime against wildlife appeal to the Supreme Court in the past 6 years

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110

5

10

15

20

25

30Series 1

Series 1

(4)The understanding and experience of the prosecutor in environmental case

Particular mention to the preparation of cases

To ensure the relevant factors in relation to the gravity of the

offence, defendant’s circumstances

Scientific knowledge to legal matters such as DNA,Specimen

Identification and expert witness

(5) The limitation of Court Procedure

Wildlife offence was categorized a criminal case which the plaintiff has a duty to prove the defendant’s guilty. We use criminal procedure law which was not designed for environmental law offences. Fortunately, we are in the process of drafting environmental case procedures which will use inquisitorial system.

(6) Gap of law and lack of

enforcement officer

The Act licensing people to own wildlife and

carcasses in some cases

So the offender will conceal or hide the

prohibited wildlife with a permitted ones

Limited numbers of enforcement officer who know forensic and can identify wildlife types

This limited numbers caused the difficulty in

illegal wildlife trade control

Prevention is better than cure

educate• Through school and out of

school, • Through texts, news,

article

Joining activities

• Ex: exhibitions, movement

• Providing information to official

Reflect the principles of CITES in domestic

law & practice Education and training play an important role

Development of effective sentencing

guildeline

Support awareness raising programme

What we have done !

Recommendations

Effective legal framework

Promote public awareness

Give priority to transnational wildlife crime

Support finance, training &

resources for authorities

Reduce the opportunity to do

the offence by make it more risky and less rewarding

Raise the maximum penalty especially financial

penalty

Thank you for your kind attention !