In far South, military impunity has a familiar sound 

This past Thursday Thai security forces swooped on Pattani’s Pakaharang neighbourhood at 2am and detained two residents, Paoyee Tasamoh, 45, and Abdullah Cheama, 70, before taking them for questioning at the Ingkayut military camp in the province.
The two were accused of providing shelter for suspected militant Suding Mamat, who was killed in a gunfight with military personnel the day before.
Suding was said to have run into Paoyee’s house while being pursued by the security forces.
The following day, on July 14, a group of soldiers escorted Paoyee back to his village, where, according to officials, he was supposed to point out where the militant cell had hidden their weapons.
Officials claim the plan misfired when Paoyee grabbed the hidden weapons and fled the scene, firing at them as he went. Soldiers were forced to shoot back. It was a legitimate killing, said one officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity. No security forces were injured.
As expected, insurgents retaliated with a shooting spree, turning their automatic weapons on three Buddhist residents of Tambon Bothong near Ingkayut Army Camp. Eight people, including a four-year-old child, 
were injured in the attack.
For the Muslim residents of this restive region, where nearly 7,000 people have been killed in insurgency-related violence, the official explanation of Paoyee’s extra-judicial killing sounded like a broken record.
The suspect went to snatch a hidden weapon and so the authorities had the right to shoot back.
Needless to say, this is not the first time a suspect has been killed in questionable circumstance, and it almost certainly won’t be the last. In none of these cases has an independent investigation taken place, while security agencies have consistently come under criticism from rights organisations, as well as local residents, for not doing enough to curb the culture of impunity in their midst.
Like previous similar incidents, this one prompts questions about Thai soldiers’ standard operating procedures in the deep South – and whether indeed they have any.
Why wasn’t the suspect handcuffed when he was led to the scene where the weapons were supposedly hidden? To avoid misunderstandings and reassure local residents there would be no foul play by the authorities, why wasn’t the local village chief asked to accompany the military men as they escorted Paoyee to the arms cache?
The sound of the shooting alerted everybody in the village, including Paoyee’s wife, who only moments earlier had stood motionless at the back of her house watching a group of soldiers escorting her husband into the wooded area.
For the local residents, most of whom identify as Malay Muslims, the killing of Paoyee is yet another reminder of the injustice they face daily.
Caught in the crossfire of a 13-year-old conflict between Patani Malay separatists and Thai security forces, many understandably play it safe by keeping to themselves. Most are said to share the same resentment towards the Thai state as the insurgents, and are sympathetic to their cause if not their methods.
But outside the region, most Thais see this quietness as taking sides. Thai people care little about the Patani Malay feeling of mistrust and resentment towards the state and demonstrate little interest in understanding the historical root causes of that mistrust. This explains why there has been no uproar in wider Thai society over extrajudicial killings of Patani Malay Muslims and the culture of 
impunity that exists within the 
security apparatus.