A Secret History of the Bangkok Hilton (16 page)

His analogy is derived from a Buddhist tale, created around 357 by a Singhalese monk, about another monk named Phra Malai who frequented hell so that he could give the tormented souls a temporary reprieve and to preach to them. Clearly Chamlong’s follower was comparing Bang Kwang to hell on earth and prisoners as creatures from hell who are suffering as result of their own karma.

He continued: ‘Prior to the verdict, I had been praying for him and extending my well wishes towards him in the hopes that he would be cleared of the charges. I was distraught to learn that it turned out to be the exact opposite of what I hoped. My daughter doesn’t understand why our abbot is in jail. I don’t believe he has committed the crimes for which he is being punished. He is a victim of a conspiracy. I will continue to abide by his teachings and apply them to my daily life.’

The prison superintendent gives Chamlong’s
followers permission to visit him to avoid a conflict, although the fact that they visit him in a big group does not comply with the usual prison rules.

On November 16, 2005, Chamlong was transferred from Bang Kwang to the Criminal Court on Ratchadapisek Road in Bangkok for a reading of the Appeal Court’s verdict. About 300 followers, 15 monks and a few nuns showed up to give him moral support. The court ruled against him, saying the evidence was indisputable. Chamlong purported to be a noble monk while he overindulged in sexual pleasure and exploited his followers, it said.

Chamlong argued that people who opposed him, who he believed to be Christians and animists, had framed him out of jealousy of his popularity. He also said the girls had not fully reached puberty and, therefore, their vaginas were too small for him to possibly penetrate with his uncircumcised penis. The court dismissed his arguments.

The most shocking admission of all came from defendant number two, who was given 31 years in jail. She admitted having sexual intercourse with Chamlong while he was a monk and afterwards procuring young girls for him. She had chosen to remain silent about his transgression for almost a decade for fear of retaliation and out of gratitude since he was paying for her education until she finished a degree. No doubt this admission sealed their fates.

The Appeal Court upheld the jail terms levied on the former abbot and five former nuns. The court ruled the girls had been violated many times and they had no motive to falsely accuse Chamlong, because they were in his care. The girls also were able to give descriptions of his residence, although it was supposed to be private. As for defendants number two to seven, the court ruled that they became his accomplices to protect their own interests and to maintain their status.

During the two-hour reading of the verdict, his followers meditated, prayed and some covered their ears. Upon hearing the final verdict, some broke into tears. Afterwards, the monks and nuns performed a merit-making ritual for Chamlong in front of the Criminal Court. He blessed his followers, asked them not to worry about him and promised to be their spiritual guide regardless of the court’s decision. Chamlong and another former nun, defendant number three who was given 28 years, decided to continue to fight their case in the Supreme Court. His followers’ faith in him remained intact and they continued to visit him at the prison.

A Spanish woman named Aina not only believes that Chamlong is innocent but also that he was framed for raping the girls in a conspiracy against him that continues. She claimed that a group of people, who were exploiting his incarceration for personal gain, tried to prevent her from helping him. I didn’t become interested in her story until she had a disagreement with a guard in charge of visitors. This introduced another layer of complexity surrounding the former abbot.

This is what Aina told me: ‘A nun confided in me that, upon the abbot’s request, she went to Mae Hong Son to meet the girls who said they had been raped. She went door to door to confront these girls and one of them retorted, “How much money is the monk willing to give me? If he gives me more than I was paid to write the letter (of accusation), then I might consider it.” The nun begged the girls to come clean but to no avail. When I asked why she hadn’t taken this information to the lawyer or someone who could help the abbot, the nun said, “It’s his karma and we cannot do anything to help him.”’

Aina believed one of the abbot’s followers had framed him so as to gain full control of the donations coming into the temple. Aina said that whenever another follower tried to recommend a lawyer to the abbot, that woman would put forward her choice and this resulted in many changes of lawyer, reducing the abbot’s chances of winning the case. Aina said, ‘I believe that the Supreme Court will uphold the verdict of the lower courts and his last hope is a sentence reduction by royal pardon.’

Aina was born into a Christian household to a faith-healer father and a secular mother. Her parents’ different outlook on life drove them apart. Her mother didn’t want to make their house a hospital and her father travelled extensively to heal people. They separated when Aina was seven. However, her father’s success in healing people contributed to her decision to become a psychologist and embark on a lifelong quest to be master of her own mind.

She married and had a daughter but divorced her husband after she found out that he had cheated on her. While she was practising as a clinical psychologist and pursuing a master’s degree in family psychology, a friend introduced raja yoga to her. She decided to embark on a spiritual journey in India with her daughter so she could learn from the real masters. Her pilgrimage was inspired by the trip to India her favourite thinker Carl Jung had taken.

While in India, she went to mosques, ashrams and temples to learn from the masters of all faiths. In Madras, she met Santi, a Thai monk and disciple of Bhavana Buddho, who was there studying a master’s degree in philosophy. Santi asked for permission from his master to resign from the monkhood so he could become Aina’s husband. They went back to Spain before travelling to Thailand in early 2004 to meet Bhavana Buddho. She stayed at Sam Phran Temple where she taught the girls about Buddhism in English while Santi helped out at the temple. She has two sons with him.

After Bhavana Buddho was jailed, Santi and Aina came to Bang Kwang to visit him along with the other followers. That was fine—until she started to visit other foreign inmates she met inside. She used to bring her two young sons to prison with her while visiting inmates as well. Before she was banned from the prison, according to the visitors’ records, she had seen a Thai, a Singaporean, an Indian and intended to visit a Pakistani.

One could argue that she was just being charitable extending her help to them but, given the fact that they were drug offenders, the officials grew concerned. Two of them were serving life sentences and were considered high-risk inmates. Plus, she was not related to any of them, nor was she a member of a lawfully recognised religious organisation, nor was she a representative of an embassy. To make matters worse, Aina declared her love for an Asian named Chen whom she met when he was inside and claimed that they were spiritually married. Chen was a drug offender and sentenced to life in prison. Previously, he had been held in another Thai jail for a different crime.

Chen’s father met Aina while he was registering to visit his son for the first time at Bang Kwang. Aina helped him with the protocol of registration. Afterwards he asked her to visit Chen on his behalf as it cost him a lot to travel to Thailand to visit his son. The family also sent a letter to their embassy in Bangkok to declare Aina as their representative and state that they recognised her as Chen’s future wife.

Recalling the day that she was banned from the prison, Aina said, ‘The officer who is in charge of visiting rudely said to me, “You no wife. Your country’s… very dangerous. Drugs. You no come!” Although my country is known for its cocaine trade, he has no grounds to assume that I’m involved in the drug trade.’

The officials always look at the visitors’ log for signs of suspicious activity. They want to reduce the chances of illegal dealings being conducted through the bars. Aina’s habits came into question when she visited drug offenders whom she had no business with in the first place. She lodged complaints against the official who banned her with various government agencies, saying she was a target of prejudice. Around the same time, however, a Thai woman who represented the group of Chamlong’s followers sent a letter to the authorities saying they disowned Aina because of her suspicious visits with these inmates. Aina had to move out of Sam Phran Temple into an apartment near Bang Kwang paid for by Santi, who now works in a Buddhist temple in America. She presented the authorities with a divorce paper which declared her union with Santi was no more and she asked for permission to marry Chen inside the prison—but to no avail. She even drew up a marriage licence herself between her and Chen. Once she sat in my office after she was denied a visit with Chen. It was raining and, without a hint of irony, she said, ‘The sky is crying with me.’

Aina wasn’t winning over Thai officials and represented a threat to some of them, though I considered her harmless. Her circumstances were more complicated than others and we had grounds to be concerned. How could we ban her for violating the regulations regarding inmate visits, however, when there were plenty of others who did not conform, such as Chamlong’s big groups of followers or the backpackers who stopped by for thrills?

Eventually a compromise was reached and Aina was allowed to visit Chen on condition that she follow the prison rules and not take along her two young sons. She said she was very grateful for the permission.

Although Chamlong’s followers did not want to be associated with her, some of them shared her view that he was the victim of an ongoing conspiracy by an insider.

One of Chamlong’s Thai female devotees, who preferred to be anonymous, said: ‘It’s feasible that someone framed him for their own benefit. Millions of baht were donated to him by us visitors. I wonder who is taking care of it now… I’ve been visiting him at the prison for a long time and what I’ve seen is too many changes of lawyers working on his case. The lawyers seemed to vie to represent him as there are hefty fees involved but it turns out their only real interest is in getting paid without putting in real work in defending Chamlong. To me, the lawyers are like vultures picking on a dying animal for the best pieces of meat. The followers who try to help him come into conflict with each other as they want the abbot to use their nominated lawyer.’

That follower has a theory as to who wanted to harm the abbot, but no proof, she says. ‘I have an insider in mind… All I can speculate is that this person wants total control over the donation money.

‘Mind you, the abbot has never been one who uses money for himself. He buys instant noodles and gives them away to his cellmates. He reminds us to count our blessings. Small things we usually take for granted, like noodle sprinkled with chilli, are delicacies to the inmates. Fed up with infighting between us, the abbot told us to let him be. This was bad news for those who wanted to make money from his ordeal. During most of our visits, instead of being bitter about his fate, the abbot told us how he has persuaded inmates to follow the rightful path of Buddhism by ordaining them. Wherever he is, he can make it holy. The fact that he has taken it upon himself to clean the prison reinforces my faith in him all the more. We followers believe he is innocent and perhaps his ordeal has been brought on him by transgressions he committed in his previous life.’

While the rest of Thailand sees Chamlong as a sexual predator, his followers describe him as an innocent victim who accepts his ordeal as a test he has to pass in order to advance up a spiritual ladder. The stark contrast between the two sides of the same story is fascinating to me.

Almost 14 years after the rape allegation came to light, the judge read the verdict of the Supreme Court at Ratchada Criminal Court on May 7, 2009. In court, Chamlong pointed out he was renowned for meditation as a monk. His foundation was recruiting the hill tribe girls for Buddhism from Christianity or animism, however, and this had upset other faith-based organisations, which plotted to destroy him. Another argument the former abbot made was that his penis was abnormal, so he could not perform sexually. The court found his claims inadequate and upheld the 50-year sentence. Chamlong looked solemn while being escorted back to Bang Kwang as his followers knelt down and put their hands together in prayer.

At the time of writing, dozens of white-clad followers still visit him to listen to his teaching for about an hour every Tuesday and Thursday, as if the Bangkok Hilton were a temple. Before they go into the prison to meet him, they usually line up to donate money into his prison account. Each gives either 108 baht or 227 baht as the two numbers are auspicious in Buddhism: 108 refers to 108 omens and 227 refers to the number of precepts laid down by Buddha for the monks to follow. Ironically, Chamlong was found guilty of breaking the very first precept.

One news report ran a rough calculation of Chamlong’s wealth. Provided that no fewer than 60 visitors meet him at a time on average, the total amount of money that is put into his account per visit easily comes to 7,000 baht. The report claims he has accumulated 14 million baht in his account, making him the richest prisoner in Bang Kwang.

I don’t have a problem with people coming to the prison to listen to teachings but what concerns me is that allowing Chamlong to receive lots of visitors and to be charitable towards his fellow inmates has already made him very influential. The guards have enough influential inmates to deal with already.

In life, there are questions that forever remain unanswered and, to some, the question of Chamlong’s innocence is one of them. What is definite is that, over the 30 years of working in Bang Kwang, I have never met an inmate who came to his power the way he did. I’m also amazed by how Chamlong manages to maintain his followers without a temple and, if karma does exist, the good deeds he must have done that warrant him better living conditions in Bang Kwang. Perhaps, the best way to be constructive is to blind oneself, as do his followers, to the crimes the former abbot was found guilty of and choose to listen only to the good teaching he delivers.