DEALING WITH ADDICTS TAKES SPECIAL CARE

The reported torture and murder of a number of Akha highlanders by soldiers
and police, some while undergoing a supposedly voluntary detoxification
programme run by the army, has raised serious questions about both the drug
suppression effort and the way the authorities treat minority groups. How
is it highlanders, even suspected drug traffickers, can be taken from their
homes in the middle of the night, thrown into a hole in the ground and
beaten into making some sort of confession?

The latest incidents took place last month when five Akha tribesmen were
allegedly taken from their villages in Chiang Rai to a military camp where
they were kept in a hole filled with water, coal and ashes. The villagers
were periodically taken out for interrogation when they were allegedly
electrocuted, kicked, punched and hit with the butt of a gun in an effort
to make them confess to drug trafficking. One, Ajuuh Cheh Muuh Gooh, died
at the camp. Relatives of other villagers say two other men died earlier
last year in similar circumstances, but at the hands of police.

Both the army and police have promised to investigate these allegations.
Gen Surayud Chulanont, the army chief, has admitted some soldiers had made
"mistakes" by using violence against local people. The officer who ran the
detox programme has insisted that Ajuuh, a known user of opium, died from
withdrawal symptoms even though death as a result of withdrawal from opium
addiction is unheard of. The real cause of death should be noted in the
autopsy report but this has not been made public.

Gen Surayud must make sure there is no whitewash of the case. If Ajuuh died
as a result of a beating he received at the hands of soldiers, those
involved must be tried for his murder to send the clear message that the
army will not tolerate the use of such dungeon measures. The police also
cannot protect officers guilty of such wrongdoings.

The mistreatment of the highlanders begs a review of our drug suppression
and rehabilitation methods. The authorities have to make sure they are in
keeping with judicial and moral principles. People cannot simply be taken
from their homes. Forced participation in drug rehabilitation programmes,
particularly when not ordered by the courts, needs to be re-examined and
rigorously debated. It can be counter-productive, especially when detox
centres are no better than concentration camps. Drug users and addicts are
not necessarily the same thing, and the authorities must learn the
difference. If they pose no clear threat to the public, those who use drugs
should be left to seek rehabilitation of their own free will.

The wisdom of soldiers running rehabilitation programmes must also be
rethought. Soldiers are not social workers and their training does not
afford them the time and patience to deal with the complexities of drug
addiction. Military boot camps may pull teenagers flirting with drug use
into line but strongarm tactics with real addicts will most probably
misfire. Dealing with these people should be left to professionals.

But most importantly, all officials involved in drug activities must learn
not to take the law into their own hands. They must realise they cannot
make simple moral judgments about who deserves to be "sent to a fourth
country", a saying among soldiers for sending drug traffickers to hell, or
who is a burden on society. Otherwise those in charge could turn drug
suppression into general oppression. Nothing will be gained from this since
the innocent will become victims. More rather than less social problems
will be the result.