Enforcement of Legal Measures in Cases Where Bhikkhus are Found Committed a Criminal Offense Based on the Vinaya Act

Abstract

          The objectives of this study are 1) to examine the context of the enforcement of legal measures and judgements in cases in which Buddhist monks are accused of having committed incriminating acts based on the Vinaya Canon; 2) to examine problems and obstacles in the enforcement of legal measures and judgements of cases in which Buddhist monks are accused of having committed incriminating acts based on the Vinaya Canon. 3) to present solutions to problems and obstacles in enforcing legal measures and judgements in cases in which Buddhist monks are accused of having committed incriminating acts based on the Vinaya Canon. This research applies a qualitative research methodology. Data collection is conducted based on the in-depth interviews. 26 key informants and 8 focus group discussants are selected through purposive sampling in order to verify as to whether or not the findings corroborate with the research questions.

The research findings are as follows: 1)The term "renouncing the monkhood" is a legal term without a specific definition, leading to a lack of clarity in Thailand’s legal provision with respect to its lexical meaning, as well as guidelines for officers' practice; 2)The term "renouncing the monkhood" does not exist in the Tripitaka’s Vinaya sections. There are three kinds of the termination of monkhood: (1) pārājika, (2) resigning from the study of Dhamma as a monk (ลาสิกขา), and (3) entering the Dīraṭhi retreat. A Buddhist monk is not to be deprived of his monkhood in an instance in which he complies to the law of the monarch with magnanimity by disrobing into another form of attire as per the rules of the penitentiary institution yet still holding true to his monkhood conscience (สมณสัญญา). Therefore, the lexically inexact term "renouncing the monkhood" in the country’s legal provisions does not apply to account for the termination of a monk’s monkhood as per the Dhamma and the Vinaya; and 3) Buddhist monks should comply with the law of the monarch, and other righteous deeds. However, they should not conform to other unrighteous karma, such as a misjudgment in The Sangha Supreme Council of Thailand as mentioned in the following Pali prose: “tasmā aññasmi ca dhammike kamme anuvattitabbam adhammike pana na kassaji anuvattitabbam”. Recurring forms of problems include the following: instances in which The Sangha Supreme Council of Thailand have been presented by its secretary with misled and unlawful information which is in contradiction to Dhamma, Vinaya, the Council’s resolutions, and facts, and is also inconsistent with the Council’s past conventions. This constitutes one of the reasons for some of the Council’s misjudged resolutions. In accordance with the Council’s convention, the Council does not normally deliberate upon any accounts or make any resolution thereof in relation to matters whereby lawsuits are pending the judgement of Secular Courts of Law, or judgments thereof are yet to be made final. In such an instance, the Sangha will normally suspend its deliberation accordingly. Any course of action in contradiction to this convention unmistakably leads to a misjudgment on the part of the Council.

Suggested solutions to these problems are as follows: 1) strictly refraining from using the term "renouncing the monkhood"; 2) alternatively, clearly defining the term "renouncing the monkhood" in order to achieve lexical clarity, to provide a practical guideline for competent officials in the administering of a monk’s renouncing his monkhood as per the Sangha Act, B.E. 2505; as well as specifically providing that disrobing into any other form of attire as prescribed by law does not translate to the termination of a monk’s monkhood as per the Dhamma and the Vinaya; 3) during the inquiry or the trial of the case, if inquiry officer, prosecutor or court does not authorize a provisional release, a place of detention shall be provided as per Criminal Procedural Code, Section 89/1; 4) enacting legal provisions, and prescribing appropriates clauses in the Sangha Supreme Council’s Rules so as to provide remedies to monks affected accordingly; and 5) effectively annulling all past erroneous resolutions on the basis of misjudgment made by The Sangha Supreme Council