2017–2020 Thai temple fraud investigations

In Thailand, Thai temples (, ) do not receive regular financial support from the government, but can make budget requests from the government for restoration or maintenance of temples, educational activities, or other activities for the "dissemination of Buddhism". This is done through the National Office of Buddhism (NOB), a government department. Since 2015, the Counter Corruption Division and the State Audit Office, both governmental departments, had been receiving reports about fraud with temple budget committed by government officials. The Counter Corruption Division, which would normally report this to the police, could find little evidence. Furthermore, the NOB gave little information. == First two investigations (August 2017) ==

The case started in August 2017 when Phrakhru Baitika Anand Khemanando, abbot of a temple in Phetchaburi Province, complained about NOB civil servants. He had requested a budget of eleven million baht, which was granted, but the government officer involved asked the abbot to return ten million baht to him. Khemanando made his complaint to the Counter Corruption Division and the State Audit Office. The Counter Corruption Division investigated the matter further. The commission investigated ten sites throughout Thailand and searched the houses of high-ranking officers of the NOB. The main focus was the use of budgets from 2012 to 2016 that were meant for restoration and repair of temples. The commission stated that 33 temples had requested and received subsidies from the NOB, but ten government officials had asked twelve of these temples to return 75 percent of the obtained funds, illegally. helped to investigate fraud in the NOB.|alt=Tall skyscraper behind elevated highway • the Anti-Money Laundering Office; • the ; • the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACP; another department than the Counter Corruption Division); • the Department of Special Investigation; • the State Audit Office; and • the Royal Thai Police. Inspectors discovered the same pattern in another 23 temples, with one temple losing 31 million baht in this manner. This time, the same ten officers were charged, plus another three officers, all from the NOB. The highest-ranking officers were two former NOB directors: Panom Sornsilp and Nopparat Benjawatthanan. A high-ranking soldier, who had been deployed without contract as a bodyguard at the State Audit Office, was also implicated. Temples in Ayutthaya, Songkhla, Lopburi, and Bangkok were investigated, and it was reported that the officers conspired with four monks and two other civilians. The loss was assessed at 140 to 141 million baht. At least one monk was later released on a bail of 1.5 million baht. Criticism of the NOB grew quickly, as its director Pongporn came under attack. He was seen to vilify Buddhist monks. Under pressure of pro-Buddhist organizations such as the Thailand Buddhists Federation, he was temporarily removed from his position in August 2017, only to be re-appointed one month later. == Third investigation (January 2018) ==

|upright=0.7 After his re-appointment, Pongporn started a third investigation of illegal dealings, and reported that another ten temples had had their budget cut off in the same manner as the temples in the second investigation. Pongporn revealed the names of only three temples, however. He further stated that the officers held responsible were the same suspects as before, who worked together in a network. Apart from problems with returning budget, another problem was found concerning eight monks from three temples: Misappropriated funds to this point were estimated to be 169 million baht. citing that money was found to be transferred to accounts of supporters of their temples. The police issued arrest warrants, (Thai law states that monks cannot be jailed, therefore any monk taken into custody must be defrocked if denied release on bail, even before guilt is determined.) The detention was to last for twelve days. and had encouraged Pongporn's investigations into fraud in the first place. Politician and activist Paiboon Nititawan expressed surprise that this arrest happened at the same time as the arrest of the four monks, but argued that it was unrelated to it. News commentator Chaturong Jong-asa argued that Thai authorities arrested the monks accused of fraud together with Phra Buddha Issara in order to please multiple political interest groups at the same time, without any group feeling left out. which was widely criticized as excessive force. Despite these unannounced raids, Phra Prom Sitthi and Phra Prom Methee were not found. who were volunteers or supporters of Phra Prom Sitthi's temple, One of these was the mother of the soldier accused earlier. On 4 June, the Thai authorities reported that Phra Prom Methee had fled the country and was seeking asylum in Germany. Representatives of the Thai police went to Germany to demand Phra Prom Methee's return, but to no avail: German officials stated the asylum investigations had to be finished first, and only then could extradition be considered. News outlet Matichon argued that the actions of the Thai police had possibly increased Phra Prom Methee's prospects for asylum, because it made the lawsuit look politically motivated. During their detention, the five former monks maintained certain monastic precepts, such as eating only two meals a day. On 31 May, the three monks who were members of the Saṅgha Council were officially removed from their positions. On 17 June, the Buddhist Protection Center, a network that had previously held nationwide protests by monks against the junta, appealed to the Thai Constitutional Court, arguing that the forced defrocking of the monks without trial was unlawful and in violation of the Thai constitution. == Fourth investigation (May 2018–present) ==

In the same period that the arrests of the four prominent monks took place, the Counter Corruption Division and the National Office of Buddhism started a fourth investigation. This one involved the use of government funds by temples in the period 2011–2016 in 60 places, spread over 13 provinces in every part of Thailand. The Counter Corruption Division and the NOB stated they found evidence of another 26 temples involved in illegal dealings, resulting in the loss of 102 to 106 million baht. Most budgets were meant to be used for repair and restoration. Investigators said that the same network of civil servants, monks, and assistant laypersons was involved in the alleged scams. four of the suspects had been fired, and on 4 June, the high-ranking soldier implicated earlier had been imprisoned, though not fired. Bank records showed that the soldier and his mother had received millions of baht from Thai temples. criticized the online response to the 2018 arrests.| alt=Smiling Thai man in suit|upright=0.7|left Pongporn expected to complete his investigations by September 2018. Meanwhile, a number of news reporters doing field research in Thai temples found that some Thai temples were unaware of any financial dealings, because they were not informed about the amount of money involved in transfers, or presumed that the NOB, as an advisory organization, knew what was best. A representative of the NOB responded that they were just trying to gather information, to which the federation responded by suing the NOB for negligence in official duties. He added that "security measures" might be required. On 20 June, Pongporn held a press conference defending the provincial investigations, stating that he was acting in accordance with the law but did not have the "authority to manage the temples". He further added that in the first two investigations, the main fault was the NOB itself, but in the third the fault was with the monks arrested, due to evidence indicating "money laundering". He concluded by insisting that any temple aware of any government officials involved in temple scams should report this to the NOB, and they would investigate. The federation and several other networks, however, recommended that any temples that had from the NOB should report this to the local police immediately, and report to the police that they would completely cooperate with any legal action against the NOB and be a witness in such cases. == Responses and analysis ==

The arrests have been widely regarded by journalists and news analysts as unprecedented and a critical blow to the faith of Thai Buddhist devotees. The Guardian stated that the timing of the investigations and subsequent raids were a clear indication that they were politically motivated, as the junta tried to assert greater control over the Thai Sangha before the next election. Paul Chambers, a lecturer at Naresuan University, claimed the arrests were done to take control of any monks who were not loyal to the National Council for Peace and Order. Anthropologist Jim Taylor wrote that the arrests were likely politically motivated, arguing that the investigations and subsequent arrests represented the "ruling palace regime" trying to consolidate traditional, central royalist power by eliminating several non-royalist high-ranking monks and members of the Sangha Supreme Council. Taylor argued that this was done in order to take control of several wealthy temples and ensure that the next leader of the Thai Saṅgha is a royalist, pro-junta monk, pointing to the junta's previous interference with the position in 2017. Taylor also pointed out that the suspects of the investigations were innocent until proven guilty, yet were defrocked before trial and stripped of decades of monastic seniority solely on the basis of unproven accusations. if the monks were guilty at all. Chao Khun Kasem stated that officials often grant large sums to decrease paperwork, and sometimes use the same budget for several temples. The investigations and subsequent arrests have been described as politically motivated. Specifically, Korn has speculated that the arrest of the three Sangha Council members was a form of political revenge. According to Korn, the three council members had been instrumental in removing Pongporn from his position in August 2017. Moreover, they were understood to have connections with the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship that opposed the junta, and were therefore seen as a threat. Critics of the junta have argued that the high-profile arrests were an attempt to cover up the military government's own failings. This eventually led to the temporary suspension of Pongporn's position as director in August 2017. On 1 June 2018, Jaroon, in the name of several pro-Buddhist networks, charged Pongporn with fraud and negligence in official duties, Pongporn defended his actions in 2017 and again in June 2018, stating that most of the suspects were government officials, but if monks were involved, he had to follow procedures. There were also people who supported the investigations and arrests, arguing that it helped improve the monastic community. Somdet Phra Ariyavongsagatanana, the Supreme Patriarch of the Thai monastic community, said he was "concerned with the current state of Buddhism", but that he understood that the authorities needed to take action. He further requested that "all organizations properly explain to the public" what was going on. == Subsequent political reform ==

The fraud investigations have led to some ideas for political reform. Back in 2017, Pongporn stated that the structure of the NOB had been greatly improved on and subsequent fraud was less likely. In particular, more oversight had been built into the budget request procedures. Pongporn also proposed more government control over the finances of Thai temples. and Buddhist scholar Vichak Panich Korn Meedee complained that too little time was given for the Saṅgha to oppose or give their opinion on the amendment and even if they submitted their response in time, the National Legislative Assembly did not respond. After the amendment had been finalized, Korn stated that Buddhist organizations could no longer protest against the new act due to risk of violating the strict law on lèse majesté in Thailand. He did add, however, that pro-Buddhist networks did not object to the role of the Thai king, but felt it was possible the junta would choose the members instead, citing the king's authority. == References ==