Suporn Vanichkul, President of the foundation, which operates the Big Buddha viewpoint area, told The Phuket News that the site “will definitely reopen”, though he could not yet give a specific date.
“Please wait a bit. It won’t be long,” Mr Suporn said confidently.
Mr Suporn downplayed the site as a tourist attraction, instead choosing to emphasise the site’s spiritual importance.
“Every day, more than 1,000 people come to pay their respects, and most of them Myanmar visitors,” he said. “Visitors come to meditate and find spiritual refuge. They are moved by the foundation’s efforts to share the teachings of the Buddha.”
He also downplayed the donations that the foundation receives from visitors to the Big Buddha site, estimated to be millions each year.
Despite the legal requirement for all registered foundations to publicly disclose their financial operations, Mr Suporn said, “I don’t know about the donated money. We’re not opening Big Buddha for profit. People give from the heart, out of faith. Money is not the main factor, it’s all voluntary.”
Mr Suporn repeatedly declined to provide any financial reports, and The Phuket News has yet to confirm any records publicly released detailing how much money Big Buddha has received, how it has been used or where it has been distributed.
CLEARED
However, Mr Suporn was happy to repeat to The Phuket News that the illegal encroachment case against the foundation for building more structures without permission on protected forest land at the Big Buddha site had been “resolved”.
“The case with the Phuket office of the Royal Forest Department is now complete. It’s over,” he said.
The case stems from the deadly landslide on Aug 23 last year that killed 13 people, injured 19 and damaged over 50 homes in Kata, at the base of the hill below the Big Buddha site. Heavy rains triggered a landslide, burying homes along Soi Patak 2.
Investigators from the Royal Forestry Department found the landslide originated at the back of the Big Buddha site, where illegal deforestation ‒ and illegal construction of structures on protected forest land ‒ was linked to the disaster.
Following a formal complaint from the RFD Phuket office, Karon Police charged Mr Suporn with illegal forest encroachment.
As a result, authorities seized more than five rai of land deemed unlawfully expanded.
Mr Suporn told The Phuket News that in the months since the disaster, the case had advanced and a settlement with RFD Phuket had been reached.
“The case has now finished,” Mr Suporn said.
‘NOT FINISHED’
However, Sorasak Rananan, Director of the Phuket Forestry Center, which operates under the RFD Phuket office, told The Phuket News that the case was unequivocally, “Not finished”.
“I don’t know how he can say that… Since we [RFD Phuket] seized the five rai [on which the foundation illegally built structures], Mr Suporn became a suspect. At that point the operation of the Big Buddha site was handed over to the Phuket branch of the National Office of Buddhism…
“So right now the foundation does not even operate the Big Buddha site,” Mr Suporn said.
However, Wasan Sankasin, Chief of the Phuket office of the National Office of Buddhism, declined to answer any questions from The Phuket News about the operation of the Big Buddha viewpoint as a religious site.
He also had no information to share on the financial operations of the Big Buddha viewpoint.
‘NOT OUR FAULT’
Despite the ongoing legal and public scrutiny, Mr Suporn defended the foundation’s role and denied allegations of negligence related to the landslide that killed 13 people.
“It was a natural disaster. We didn’t cause the rain. Everything was investigated according to procedure. It is not our fault,” he said.
With the RFD complaint now withdrawn, Karon Police have also dropped the criminal investigation against Mr Suporn and his foundation, saying there was not enough evidence to proceed with criminal negligence causing death and destruction of property.
Last month, Pol Lt Col Ekkasak Kwanwan, Senior Inspector at Karon Police Station, told The Phuket News that illegal construction at the Big Buddha viewpoint was no longer seen as the primary cause of the deadly landslide in Kata.
He said that the situation did not meet the criteria for a criminal negligence charge.
Pol Lt Col Ekkasak said that geotechnical experts from the Department of Mineral Resources determined the landslide was a natural disaster, occurring in a high-risk “red zone” prone to such events due to steep, unstable terrain and heavy rain.
Because multiple natural factors contributed to the cause of the disaster, the police no longer viewed the case as straightforward negligence, and there was no clear liable party, Pol Lt Col Ekkasak said.
FIGHT GOES ON
Meanwhile, the case is far from over in the eyes of locals and legal activists. The Phuket Bar Association is preparing a civil lawsuit on behalf of the victims, frustrated by lack of action by police.
Phuket Bar Association President Rungnapa Phutkaew, a legal representative working with affected residents, said both civil and criminal cases against the foundation remain active.
“The local residents’ case is not over. The Lawyers Council has already submitted a letter to the civil court for an investigation,” she said.
“We also filed a complaint to the Phuket office of the Ombudsman two months ago, requesting an audit of the foundation’s financial records and its income ‒ but we’ve received no response so far,” she added.
Ms Rungnapa expressed concern that some authorities may be showing leniency toward the foundation.
“The police and some government agencies may lean on that foundation, but the criminal case is still active. We’ve moved things to court and encouraged victims to wait for more expert input,” she said.
She added that an expert has now joined the case and will help assess the situation and provide a professional opinion on the cause of the landslide and any related legal responsibilities.
While acknowledging the locals’ dwindling resources and morale, she vowed to continue the legal fight.
“The victims are tired. They’re afraid that they’ll get nothing in return, and court fees are a burden. But we haven’t given up. The law isn’t closed. We can still take it to court. We will do our best until the end,” she stated.
Despite the push to reopen the site, Ms Rungnapa warned that government agencies should proceed with caution. “If they open it, let them. But the case isn’t over, and officials should be aware that legal risks remain.”