Bangkok is celebrating its 236th anniversary this week -- with a sad irony. Just as the government kicked off celebratory activities with a fanfare on Saturday, the city is losing its old Mahakan Fort community -- one of its oldest communities known for its wooden houses that represent the architecture of the early Rattanakosin era in the late 18th century.
Community members, with support from academics, civic and rights groups, in their long fight against an eviction order that stretched over 26 years, finally threw in the towel. All were to leave the area where they have lived together for generations yesterday in accordance with the BMA order while massive bulldozing work got under way.
Ploenpote Atthakor is editorial pages editor, Bangkok Post.
It's unfortunate that the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) which fails to see the value of the community -- that lies not only with the wooden houses, but also the community's conservation spirit -- vehemently refused to listen to calls that it be preserved, not demolished. Demolition work began in late 2016 as the BMA used tactics, some quite dirty, to break up the strong community.
The eviction order, originally issued in 1992 as instructed by the Committee for the Conservation of Rattanakosin and Old Towns, wanted to vacate the residents and turn the 5.1-rai land plot into a park. The order was disputed by academics and civic groups. In 2006, the BMA under then governor Apirak Kosayodhin which was more open to civic opinion, commissioned Prof Chatri Prakitnonthakan of Silpakorn University's Architecture Faculty to study the potential of the old community as a museum. The study results were positive and gained public support. But BMA officials adamantly resisted and, while claiming legal restrictions that proved to be unfounded, eventually decided to tear it down.
In a bid to justify the eviction, the BMA acted as if it was going to adopt the museum idea as the park was too controversial. But the museum plan appeared to focus on the physical structures, not the life of the community. The BMA said it would selectively keep only "original houses".
It's unfortunate that under the military regime, the BMA has had a free hand to handle -- or mishandle -- this notorious eviction case. Its massive felling of trees in the area last year drew fierce public criticism. Yet, a military presence with soldiers deployed last year left the community fearful and disheartened embattled residents.
I talked to Rungsima Kullapat, a US-based urban culture expert, who insisted the BMA, which has no idea about conservation principles, is all wrong in pursuing the eviction order. It's a shame the agency was tasked with dealing with this valuable community in the first place.
The academic disputed the BMA's claims that fort residents are not "original" and that deprived them of their right to stay. In this day and age, such originality, as demanded by the BMA, no longer exists. In other words. There is no such thing as an original community.
It's useless to try to prove the community's "DNA", she said, adding that all communities have gone through changes.
In fact, the academic said, the fort community has evolved with time. "It's all right for the community to accommodate new people as long as they follow the code of conduct regarding conservation," she said. Those who live in the area are "residents" and should be allowed to stay, and accommodating new people into the community is an internationally acceptable practice under the so-called Valetta Principles of conservation which recognise changes and new demands.
"There are several layers of conservation signifying different groups of residents who settled down in different period of time. It's necessary that every layer is kept, as suggested by Prof Chatri in his research work, the academic said.
The world has changed but the BMA is still stuck with its outdated, bureaucratic top-down administrative style which has now wrought conservation havoc.
Moreover, the way the BMA has acted in the Mahakan case raises questions about its failure to respect the people's participation principle as imbued in the constitution. It's evident the promise that it would allow public participation in the Mahakan community's development and conservation is a hollow one.
Ms Rungsima also said it's a pity that while the community has gained recognition in academic and civic circles, the BMA fails to see its value. The once lively community has become a dead zone, with all the houses razed. The museum project appears to have gone astray.
Despite its defeat, the community is determined to keep the Mahakan legacy alive and maintain its existence in virtual form. A Facebook page has been opened so people can share their stories and the public can learn from the Mahakan lesson. That is a noteworthy effort.
What is worrying is what the BMA plans to do with the historical site.
Now that the BMA is fully confident of victory in the eviction war, it has indiscriminately flattened the site, without regard for its architectural value as highlighted by the Chatri study. This all-out demolition has triggered fears that the BMA may revert to its original plan of building a park. If that happens, it will be a shame and civic groups will have to fight on. They must maintain the stance the a meaningless park is not welcome, while budget spending on the historical site must be subject to public scrutiny.
It's a pity that at a time when Bangkok is celebrating its past, the 236th anniversary of its founding, the city must suffer an irreplaceable loss and the Mahakan Fort community has been turned into a thing of the past.