BANGKOK – A Thai court is holding hearings on a petition seeking to reopen one of the most controversial cases in the country’s modern history – the death of King Ananda Mahidol, who was found shot dead in his bedroom in 1946 at the age of 20.

The former ruler, who was also known as Rama VIII, reigned from 1935 to 1946, and was the uncle of the present Thai monarch Maha Vajiralongkorn and the elder brother of the late King Bhumibol Adulyadej.

King Ananda, who was found lying face up in bed with a gunshot wound to his head on June 9, 1946, was murdered, according to official investigations and three court verdicts that concluded in 1954.

Three palace officials were found guilty of being accessories to the King’s murder and were executed in 1955. The three men pleaded not guilty, and no one else stood trial.

Initial investigations by police blamed a conspiracy plot led by the then Prime Minister Pridi Banomyong.

Mr Pridi went into exile and died in France in 1983, but he was later essentially exonerated by the government, which nominated him in 1997 to the Unesco millennium list of great personalities of the 20th century.

Hearings on the petition to reopen the case were held at the Bangkok Criminal Court on April 4 and 5. It is the first time an attempt is being made to revive the investigation directly through a court order. 

The petition was filed by Mr Kungwal Buddhivanid, 62, a trained chemist and a former business executive who in 2020 published a book challenging the official explanation of regicide for King Ananda’s death. His book, which was published and distributed in Thailand, revived a previously dismissed possibility that the King shot himself. 

Mr Kungwal, who lives near Bangkok, said in court on April 4 that he could prove the King’s gun, found next to his body, was the weapon that killed him.

The original investigators in the 1940s said the gun was fired days before his death and that King Ananda was killed by another gun that was never found.

“The old verdicts dismissed the idea of a suicide and ruled that it was regicide,” Mr Kungwal told the court.

He added that “new evidence I bring will show differently”, referring to new findings that include ballistic tests he conducted in December 2023 with a retired police forensic expert, which he says prove that King Ananda shot himself with his own gun.

Other findings include tests which disputed the original investigation’s conclusion that a bullet, found in a mattress in the King’s bedroom, was planted, as well as new examinations, conducted in 2023 by a forensic doctor, that Mr Kungwal says prove the King shot himself.

Reuters did not view the test results and could not independently verify Mr Kungwal’s claims. 

Mr Wasukit Thanurat, the forensic expert, and Dr Krittin Meewuttisom, the forensic doctor, were not immediately available for comment, though both testified in court on April 5.

The four judges who presided over the hearing have scheduled May 3 for another session to question Mr Kungwal before they send the case to the appeals court, which will decide whether to reopen the case, said presiding lawyer Kongsak Dejkoonmak.

More than two dozen books have been written over the decades about the death of the King, with several scholars challenging the official narrative on the grounds that the investigation was not transparent and was mired by the politics of the day.

Some of the books were published and distributed in Thailand, mostly in the 1970s; others were banned by the authorities. Thailand has a strict lese majeste law that prescribes up to 15 years’ jail for defaming or insulting the monarchy.

Mr Kungwal petitioned the court in October 2023 to revive the case on behalf of the relatives of Mr Chit Singhaseni, one of the palace officials executed.

Ms Watsatarn Kittipinyo, Mr Chit’s granddaughter, was present in court on April 4. She told Reuters that she has no expectations from the case other than a hope that her grandfather’s name could be cleared.

Mr Kungwal also told Reuters that he petitioned the palace for its view on reopening the case but received no response. The palace also did not respond to a Reuters request for comment. REUTERS