"Pholpeer" discusses summary of examination results of four bodies at Bang Khla Jewish Cemetery in Chachoengsao Province. Three are Israelis reported deceased in Chonburi, while the remaining one is British. Two were found to have overstayed their visas. An investigation has been ordered into the relationship between the Thai reporters of the deaths and the deceased.
On 13 Sep 2026 GMT+7, Mr. Pholpeer Suwanchavee, Deputy Minister of the Interior, held an online meeting to follow up on progress after inspecting the Jewish cemetery in Bang Khla District, Chachoengsao Province, on 11 Sep 2026 GMT+7. Representatives from Chachoengsao Province attended, including the Governor, Provincial Clerk, Land Officer, Local Administration Officer, Provincial Resources Officer, Bang Khla District Chief, as well as representatives from the Department of Provincial Administration such as Mr. Wirun Sitthiwong, Deputy Director-General, and Police Lieutenant Singkham Kamyod, Director of the Investigation and Legal Bureau.
The reporter stated that initially, Mr. Pholpeer was informed that three of the deceased were Israelis reported dead in Chonburi Province, and one was British. It was found that two of the four (one British and one Israeli) had overstayed their visas in Thailand.
Of the two, the Israeli and British nationals entered Thailand on 60-day tourist visas. One Israeli entered with a 30-day tourist visa, and another Israeli had a non-1 year visa.
Relatives of all four deceased have contacted authorities to request moving the bodies. Subsequently, the Gan Shabad company expressed their intention to handle the transfer themselves. The relatives requested a seven-day extension to prepare a new location for the remains.
Mr. Pholpeer ordered further investigation into the relationship between two of the three Thai individuals who reported the deaths and the deceased, to determine whether they are connected or are officials from Gan Shabad company.
Regarding the cemetery’s establishment permit, today's meeting and provincial information suggest that the 2021 permit application was not in accordance with regulations from the start. Thus, the refusal to renew the permit in 2023 was appropriate. There is strong likelihood, based on historical geographical data, that issuing the permit in 2021 was irregular from the beginning.