1.3 Organizational Structure of Criminal Groups Operating in Thailand

1.3

Organizational Structure of Criminal Groups Operating in Thailand

The stakeholders interviewed generally stated that Thai traffickers prefer a networking approach rather than the hierarchical structure traditionally found in more organized criminal groups. This means that TOC in Thailand carried out by Thai nationals is mostly conducted by small-scale, informal, loose and flexible networks of brokers and middlemen coordinating along a supply chain in which each group or individual takes care of one or a few specific steps. This type of organization is operating in a way that could be called the ‘social network theory’ of organized crime,4 which focuses on the relations between criminal actors. These actors often engage in reciprocal, preferential, mutually supportive actions. In this social network type of organized crime, the actors are engaging in transactions with each other through discrete exchanges rather than acting at the direction of a person or people above them in the organizational chain. This makes TOC networks in Thailand, which ‘somehow find one another for a few sporadic transnational operations,’5 more elusive and flexible than the hierarchies observed in traditional modes of organized crime. Criminal transactions in Thailand may be conducted by networks that have endured over the long term, or by criminal groups which are simply cooperating on a case-by-case basis. For example, most ivory trafficking cases appear to be carried out by two or three well-organized networks of African and Asian traffickers who consistently use the same transfer route. Trafficking in persons and migrant smuggling operations, in turn, are generally managed by small, separate networks of local agents of different nationalities who connect with one another on a case-by-case basis.6

Hence, the degree of professionalism of traffickers varies greatly depending on the type of crime committed and the extent of smuggling operations. Child trafficking from the Mekong countries into Thailand was frequently described by interviewees as a local-level ‘family-friends business’ in which friends, neighbours and even family members recruit victims on behalf of local brokers, who then deliver victims to persons who exploit them in labour or in sex work. Nonetheless, the smuggling of migrants appears to be much more sophisticated, involving the procurement of fraudulent passports and visas, interregional transfers of victims, and a professional and well-organized chain of smugglers who can manage complex logistics. Environmental crimes, in turn, appear to implicate a very different set of actors, from local farmers and loggers using rudimentary trafficking methods, to white-collar offenders with extensive expertise in the waste management market.

4 Mackenzie, S., & Davis, T. (2014). Temple Looting in Cambodia: Anatomy of a Statue Trafficking Network. British Journal of Criminology, 54, 724. Retrieved from http://traffickingculture.org/app/uploads/2014/12/2014-BJC-Temple-Looting-in-Cambodia-print.pdf 5 Ibid. 6 Zhang, S., & Chin, K. L. (2003). The Declining Significance of Triads Societies in Transnational Illegal Activities. British Journal of Criminology, 43, 469-488.