No presumption of innocence

Those who have read the case involving Atthasit (last name withheld), a 29-year-old satirical artist, sentenced to 6 years in prison on an Article 112 charge, will know that he was not allowed bail during the trial and that he was “encouraged” to plead guilty, and that when he did, his sentence was halved.

For those like us who have followed 112 cases over many years, this judicial tactic is well  known. But it isn’t often that an accused person writes about the experience. In a recent article at Prachatai, Yukti Mukdavichit has. Yukti is an associate professor of anthropology at Thammasat University, and on 20 February, was indicted on Article 112 and computer crimes.

Clipped from Prachatai

His brief note is about his initial arraignment, where he was taken to a room at the court and prevented from having either lawyers or family present.

This long process, at least for Yukti, led to an Orwellian process that led to “temporary release”:

… you must pass through the step of “rights protection.” The word “temporary release” is a terrible one and should be changed. Does this mean I am already guilty, if I am temporarily released?

In principle, the provision of “rights protection” is intended for the court to inform the defendant of your rights, such as, if you do not have a lawyer, one will be appointed for you.

But. But. What everyone must comprehend is that at this stage, the defendant will immediately feel that “I am held to be guilty already” according to the prosecutor’s indictment file. Even though that file does not yet hold any testimony of the defendant. The defendant has not yet been able to refute the accusation in any way, at all. But the judge adopts an attitude as if he is trying to persuade you to confess. How can he do that?

At this stage, the defendant must hold the unwavering confidence that I am innocent. We must robustly protect our rights ourselves, by ourselves, in a process that is called “rights protection.” Otherwise, we will immediately lose the chance to maintain our innocence. This all takes place while you are without a lawyer.

He refers to this process as ” gravely dangerous” because this process means no “actual protection of the rights of defendants and … the swift removal of the presumption of innocence before the defendant ever enters a courtroom.”

The legal system, so full of corruption, and so dependent on hierarchy, is a travesty for Thailand’s people.