A 2-year-old sedition charge

Thai Examiner reports that Progressive Movement secretary-general Piyabutr Saengkanokkul has been “charged this week with additional sedition charges two years after the complaint was filed.”

The complaint was lodged by Nathaporn Toprayoon, a former adviser to the Ombudsman, who has also filed a petition to dissolve the Move Forward Party for seeking to amend the lese-majeste law and for supporting the youth-led pro-democracy movement.

Nathaporn might be dismissed as another ultra-royalist nutter, but he’s had previous success with complaints, most notably having the Constitutional Court agree that monarchy reform movement was trying to overthrow the state.

Nathaporn (clipped from The Nation)

Piyabutr observed:

“I do not want to believe that this summoning order…is politically motivated and it was probably a coincidence that it came while I was helping the Move Forward Party with their canvassing campaign,” he said sarcastically.

“The investigators took over two years to consider the case before issuing the summoning order and I want to see which of my previous statements were considered as sedition,” he said.

The complaint relates to a discussion where Piyabutr commented on the lese majeste law. He denied all wrongdoing.

Just another example of the state seeking to tilt the election to the conservatives.

Updated: 2023 election coverage

Here are some international attempts at understanding the upcoming election:

Council on Foreign Relations, Thailand’s Parliament Has Been Dissolved: Elections Loom, But Will They Be Free?

In a free and fair election, it would be difficult for military-aligned parties to put together a winning coalition. But this could well not be a free and fair election. (2019 was not, after all.) The election commission is in the hands of Prayuth and his allies, and they can disqualify MPs who have won. The top court can even go so far as to disqualify entire parties.

Clipped from Nikkei Asia

DW, Will Thailand’s upcoming elections see a political shift?

… in recent years, Thailand has faced political unrest and economic woes, while the kingdom’s monarchy has been challenged. The prime minister’s popularity has faded.

Reuters, Thai PM Prayuth to run for re-election in May*

The military veteran has lagged rivals in opinion polls, but hopes to win over supporters with promises of looking after the wellbeing of the people and the country’s stability, and protecting the monarchy…. “The most important thing is to defend the country and protect the nation’s main institution. Please trust me as you’ve always done,” Prayuth said.

VICE, Thailand’s Election Is Filled With These Controversial Characters. Here’s What You Need to Know

Faced with pro-democracy protests, half-baked cannabis laws, and the comeback of the Shinawatra family, millions will cast their votes on the country’s leaders in May.

The Diplomat, Thai PM Dissolves Parliament, Paving Way For May Election

Thailand’s parliament has been dissolved by a government decree, setting the stage for a general election in May that will once again pit the country’s conservative establishment against an opposition led by the representatives of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

The Times of India, Explainer: What you need to know about Thailand’s elections

Youth-led protests that began in 2020 broke a longstanding taboo around questioning the role of the monarchy in Thailand, where the constitution states the king is “enthroned in a position of revered worship”.

The Move Forward party has campaigned on reforming a law that punishes royal insults with up to 15 years in jail. Activists have urged opposition parties to scrap it, but the topic remains sensitive among many Thais and most parties oppose or want to avoid talk of reform.

The Washington Post, How Military Has a Thumb on Scales in Thai Election

Paywalled in some places.

La Prensa Latina Media, Thai leader Prayut confirms re-election bid

Prayut recently joined the United Thai Nation Party having previously led a government run by the pro-military Palang Pracharath Party.

He was army chief when the military seized power in a bloodless coup in May 2014 after months of anti-government demonstrations.

Of an authoritarian and ultra-monarchical nature, the military leader silenced any dissenting voice at the head of the military junta and delayed elections several times.

In 2019 he was appointed leader of the civilian government after elections that international observers described as lacking transparency.

Between 2020 and 2021, his government used police force to stop student-led demonstrations demanding reforms in the country and the monarchy, a highly taboo subject in Thailand.

Since then, more than 200 people, including minors, have been charged with lèse majesté and sedition for their peaceful activism. Both can carry long prison terms.

South China Morning Post, As Thaksin’s daughter Paetongtarn readies for May 14 vote, army and youth pose major challenges

“We are ready to rescue the country,” Paetongtarn told reporters on March 21 outside the City Pillar shrine where Bangkok residents seek blessings…. “We are very ready to go on campaigning and to explain our policies in greater detail, but in the end it’s about the people; whether they choose us or not, the power is in their hands.”

Update: *A reader rightly points out that the Reuters headline is buffalo manure because Gen Prayuth was never elected, except to the unelected senators he appointed.

Convicted of 112 a second time

Clipped from Bangkok Post

Via Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, Prachatai provides details on the latest conviction of Pornchai Wimolsupawong.

On 13 March 2023, Pornchai was found guilty of four counts of lese majeste, sedition, and violation of the Computer Crimes Act. The Chiang Mai Provincial Court found him guilty and sentenced him to 12 years in prison.

Acting on a “complaint against him was filed by Jessada Thunkeaw, a former protest guard for the People’s Democratic Reform Committee,” the court found that the Facebook posts attributed to Pornchai “refer to King Vajiralongkorn using inappropriate language and contain false information, and also invited people to join illegal gatherings.” The Facebook posts made between 18 October and 19 November 2020.

Pornchai had been arrested on 10 March 2021 at his home in Nonthaburi on a warrant issued by the Chiang Mai Provincial Court. He was “denied bail and held in pre-trial detention at Chiang Mai Remand Prison for 44 days before being released on 22 April 2021.”

In his trial, Phonchai had claimed “that he did not make the posts, as his Facebook account was stolen at the time.” The court dismissed this, ruling that Pornchai “did not present evidence that this was true, and he would have pressed charges or tried to find the culprit if his account was stolen. Since he said the account was his, and there is a video clip of Phonchai introducing himself on the account, the Court believe[d] that he made the posts.”

Following his sentencing, his lawyer requested bail, but this was denied and he was removed to the Chiang Mai Remand Prison.

Pornchai was previously granted bail by the Yala Provincial Court, after he was found guilty of lese majeste and sentenced to three years in prison, reduced to 2 because he gave useful testimony. That court “also only found him guilty of a Facebook video he posted of himself talking about the pro-democracy protests in October 2020, and not for 2 other Facebook posts he said were made after his account was stolen, because evidence presented by the prosecution did not contain the posts’ URLs, and the inquiry officer testified that they were not sure if the images of the posts are accurate.”

We may be misunderstanding and misremembering but we think this is the first time we have seen a person face two cases on what seem to be the same charges.

Pornchai is also facing other charges from joining protests in Bangkok.

Hunger strikers resolute but health deteriorates

Activists Tantawan Tuatulanon and Orawan Phuphong, who are undergoing a hunger strike to demand the release of political prisoners and judicial reform are in danger (see below).

Prachatai reports that on Saturday, the two vowed to continue their fast. In that report, Krisadang Nutcharus, a lawyer from Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), said that:

he and the two activists’ parents met Tantawan and Orawan on Friday (3 February), and reported that they were alert and were able to hold a conversation. Krisadang said he informed Tantawan and Orawan that the National Human Rights Commission and the Ministry of Justice have issued a joint statement promising reform of the judicial system, while several political parties have agreed to discuss issues related to the royal defamation law [Article 112] and sedition law in parliament. He also told them that the Court of Justice held a press conference on bail on that Friday (3 February), and read them the press release, which Tantawan and Orawan said did nothing and said nothing.

Krisadang said that he also told them that many activists have been allowed to take off their monitoring bracelets, and that the court is considering bail requests for many political prisoners. Nevertheless, the two activists said they will continue with their hunger strike until every political prisoner is released and asked TLHR to post bail for everyone still detained again on Monday (6 February).

“[Tantawan and Orawan] believe that, the Ministry of Justice, the National Human Rights Commission or political parties tend to listen to the people,” Krisadang said, “… but the court has never listened. They have asked me to tell you that they will continue their hunger strike, but they are not trying to pressure the court. They wanted to prove whether what the court spokesperson said, that the court uses human rights principles when ruling on cases was true.”

The report also notes that Orawan’s father Suchart Phuphong said:

the medical team told him to wait until Monday to be told what can be done, but he said that Orawan’s condition is considered critical to her parents although her doctors say they need to keep monitoring her, and that they are concerned that she may not make it to Monday.

Suchart called on the powers that be to have sympathy when someone is using a method the two activists are using to demand the rights Thai people should already have, and to keep someone who is the nation’s future healthy and strong.

Later, Prachatai has tweeted:

Parents of hunger striking activists Tantawan Tuatulanon and Orawan Phuphong have been contacted by their doctors, who said that they have gotten worse and asked that the families and lawyers visit them tomorrow morning {Monday].#ตะวันแบม

Courts caught (in a bind)

A couple of days ago we had a post that raised a question regarding judicial double standards on actress Savika “Pinky” Chaiyadej who won approval from the Criminal Court to remove an electronic monitoring (EM) device.

In that post we mentioned that there had been no such leniency for lese majeste and other political prisoners.

That has suddenly changed.

Bailed on lese majeste and sedition charges, several activists seized on Pinky’s case.  Thai PBS reports that the Ratchadapisek Criminal Court “agreed to the request of five anti-establishment protesters yesterday (Wednesday), to have electronic monitoring (EM) tags removed.”

The report says the “five protesters are Chonthicha Jaengrew, Panupong Jadnok, Jatupat Boonpattararaksa, Weha Saenchonchanasuek and Nawapon Ton-ngam.”

As well as the Pinky precedent, it may be that the sustained criticism of the judiciary from the hunger strikes has had an impact.

Updated: Smash 112, free all political prisoners

Brave advocates for the end of Article 112 began protesting “in front of the Criminal Court on Ratchadapisek Road in conjunction with a hunger strike by two detained female activists who are neither eating nor drinking water with tonight (Jan. 21) being the third night but they have been taken to the Correctional Department’s hospital…”.

Calling themselves the Independent People’s Group, the protesters had these demands:

• Reform the judicial process taking into account human rights principles and freedom of expression and not interfere with litigation;
• Stop prosecuting people for exercising their freedom of expression, assembling and  voicing their political views:
• All political parties propose a policy to guarantee rights, liberties and political participation by cancelling Section 112, also known as the lese majeste law, and Section 116 of the Criminal Code.

Yesterday, members of Thalufah “peacefully stood in a row on a sidewalk outside the Bangkok Art & Culture Centre at Pathumwan intersection in protest of the sustained detainment of the 21 political detainees, nine of whom have been faced with the draconian lese majeste charges, better known as Section 112 of the Criminal Code, and others on sedition charges.” They planned a 112 hour protest calling for “Free Political Prisoners” and “Stop Violation of Human Rights”, among other demands.

These protesters are also calling “for the unconditional and immediate release of the 21 political detainees,” and supporting “Tantawan Tuatulanond and Orawan Pupong, currently held at the Central Women Correctional Institution.”

Now, “Tantawan and Orawan who have not only denied meals but drinking water provided at the prison have resolutely insisted that all the political detainees be freed, the country’s judicial systems be amended and the lese majeste law be abolished.”

Update: Prachatai updates on the protests, which have expanded beyond Bangkok, including Khon Kaen and Chiang Mai (scroll down the story about halfway for the update on protests).

Updated: Opening eyes

Thai Newsroom and Thai PBS show that it takes considerable effort to get reporting of critically important news when it has anything to do with Kibosh and his family of Munsters.

It took self-bail revocation, a (limited) hunger strike, and student pressure to get them to take notice.

The Bangkok Post seems to still be avoiding the obvious:

The two stories mentioned above relate to large banners that were hung at Chulalongkorn University and Thammasat University’s Tha Prachan campus. The banners pushed:

“students to pay attention to politics, to not bow to unjust rules and to support the persistent call for freedom for the 21 political detainees, nine of whom have been prosecuted under the draconic lese majeste law, better known as Section 112 of the Criminal Code, whilst the others have been slapped with sedition charges.

The call was supported by the United Front of Thammasat & Demonstration and Thai Lawyers For Human Rights.

Update: Better late than never – the Bangkok Post has reported this story.

Silencing MPs on 112

Prachatai reports that yet another ultra-royalist vigilante group is seeking to silence critics of the lese majeste law. This time, they are targeting an elected member of parliament for a speech made in parliament, later posted online.

Move Forward party MP Amarat Chokepamitkul recently “posted a video clip on Twitter of herself speaking about court neutrality issues in royal defamation [Article 112] cases.”

Amarat. Clipped from Prachatai

The “King Protection Group posted on its Facebook page on Thursday (3 November) that its President Songchai Niamhom went to Phatthalung Provincial Police Station to file a royal defamation [lese majeste] and sedition complaint against Amarat, claiming that she defamed the monarchy in a Twitter video of herself speaking during Wednesday’s parliamentary session.”

In her speech, Amarat “discussed the court’s neutrality when dealing with royal defamation cases and how courts refused to summon documents to be used as evidence in these cases, such as records of King Vajiralongkorn’s travel to and from Germany and records of the transfer of shares in Siam Commercial Bank.”

In the meeting, conservative House Speaker Chuan Leekpai “told her to keep her discussion to what benefits the public and not to talk about the monarchy. He eventually cut off her microphone.”

As is usual, the “the police accepted Songchai’s complaint and said that they will investigate the matter and submit the case to their superiors.” That usually leads to a charge.

Net censorship

Rankings are always problematic, yet the Freedom House rank for Thailand’s “Freedom on the Net” seems reasonable. Thailand is assessed as “not free,” with a score of 39/100.

Clipped from Freedom House

Freedom House’s overview is as follows:

The internet is severely restricted in Thailand. A wide-ranging crackdown on online expression was carried out by the military-led regime in response to prodemocracy protests that started in July 2020 and continued throughout the coverage period. Authorities significantly increased the use of lèse-majesté law and sedition, charging and imprisoning individuals for online expression. Prodemocracy activists face heavy prison sentences. State-sponsored attacks, intimidation, and harassment targeting individuals for their online activities also continued. The government repeatedly extended the enforcement of a repressive emergency declaration issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, imposing further constraints on fundamental freedoms, though the courts found some measures unconstitutional.

Following five years of military dictatorship, Thailand transitioned to a military-dominated, semielected government in 2019. The combination of democratic deterioration and frustrations over the role of the monarchy in Thailand’s governance has since triggered massive demonstrations. In response, the regime continues to employ authoritarian tactics, including arbitrary arrests, intimidation, lèse-majesté charges, and harassment of activists. Press freedom is constrained, due process is not guaranteed, and there is impunity for crimes committed against activists.

The whole report – which runs to about 50 pages – is depressing reading.

The monarchy and “sedition”

Readers will recall the “good news” from late last month, when a court in Khon Kaen rejected a lese majeste case against Tiwagorn Withiton. The bad news is that Prachatai has reported that on 4 October, the Lampang Provincial Court found Tiwagorn “guilty of sedition [Article 116] for inviting netizens to cast votes in a campaign asking whether the Thai people wanted to have a referendum about having a monarch as head of the state.”

The Court found Tiwagorn guilty “for his campaign message on 28 June 2021 on Change.org, a website known as an online space for starting social advocacy campaigns” where he asked “people if they agreed to a referendum on whether Thailand should have a monarch as head of state.” His call added: “We dream of a republican/federal state system that needs no monarch.”

The complaint by ultra-royalist Thawi Intha from the Network to Guard, Defend and Protect the Monarchy in Lampang. Tiwagorn lives in Khon Kaen and was forced to travel to Lampang for the trial.

Tiwagorn admitted that he posted the campaign message but claimed a constitutional right. Indeed, one of his witnesses argued “that questioning the form of government is a regular activity and that bringing this issue to the Court can be deemed as manoeuvring the monarchy down into a political debate. He also referred to a Facebook post of royalist MC Chulcherm Yugala which asked whether Thailand should be a “democracy” or “monarchy”. He saw this question as more radical than Tiwagorn’s.”

To no avail, and Tiwagorn “was sentenced to 3 years in jail, but was later paroled. Tiwagorn told TLHR, that he wanted to appeal as he finds that the ruling contradicts the Constitutional right to freedom of expression when it comes to monarchy issues. He believes that the ruling will be harmful to a democratic regime.”

The court’s ruling was reported this way:

The Court declared that Sections 1, 2, and 3 of the 2017 Constitution state that Thailand is a unified and inseparable Kingdom, governed under a democratic regime with the King as head of state. Despite freedom of expression being a constitutional right and freedom, it would have to be limited for the sake of the security of the state and the form of government.

Besides security restrictions, the Court mentioned that rights and freedoms can also be limited in order to protect the freedoms and rights of others and public morality. Moreover, it is a constitutional duty for Thais to protect the nation, religions, and monarchy.

Thus, Tiwagorn’s action went against the will of the Constitution and he was found guilty, but as multiple charges were filed over one offence, the Court found him guilty only of the charge with the heaviest punishment, and sentenced him to 3 years’ imprisonment for sedition.