In August 2026 one more political case was added: the Section 112 case against “Kaseni”, prosecuted over the publication of clips criticizing politics and the monarchy, in which the complainant was found to have had a personal conflict with her beforehand. That brings the number of people charged under this provision to at least 293, in 322 cases. Meanwhile, the number of people prosecuted in political cases, counted from 18 July 2020 onward, now stands at at least 2,000.
As to the position in the courts, over the past month the courts delivered judgment in at least five cases—four Section 112 cases and one other case connected to assembly and political expression. The courts convicted in all of them. “Dong” Prasong and “Peera” must now serve prison terms in Section 112 cases of two years and 12 months and of two years respectively, their cases having concluded with the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Over the past month the court ordered that “Areef” Weerapap Wongsamarn be allowed to withdraw his appeal in a Section 112 case, more than 10 months after he filed the motion. He is accordingly due for release on 27 September 2026, having been detained for the full three years of the sentence imposed by the Court of First Instance.
In addition, the Act on Promoting a Peaceful Society came into force on 24 August 2026. In cases pending before the courts, the courts have to date begun to order at least six cases struck out. As to the applications asking the Criminal Court and the Bangkok South Criminal Court to order the release, and the modification of the sentences, of nine political detainees in all who meet the criteria for an amnesty, the courts have so far followed differing practices and made differing orders—some ordering the applications sent to the Committee to determine, and some ordering the detainees produced for a fact-finding hearing at the court in late September. As a result, no political detainee assisted by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights has yet been released under the Act.
.
According to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights’ monitoring, from the start of the “Free Youth” assembly on 18 July 2020 until 31 August 2026, at least 2,000 people have been prosecuted for exercising assembly and political expression, in 1,348 cases.
Compared to July 2026, the number of people charged and/or prosecuted has increased by one, in one more case. (This figure counts only cases arising from public assembly and political expression in which the individuals have already been notified of the charges, and does not count defamation suits brought by politicians against members of the public in various provinces.)
Counting each criminal case separately, without deducting people prosecuted in more than one case, the total comes to at least 4,079 instances of criminal proceedings.
Statistics by principal charge are as follows:
1. Section 112 (lèse-majesté) of the Criminal Code—at least 293 people in 322 cases, of which at least 172 were brought following complaints lodged by members of the public. (One more accused, in one more case, than the previous month.)
2. Section 116 (sedition) of the Criminal Code—at least 158 people accused in 58 cases.
3. Violation of the Emergency Decree—at least 1,466 people in 678 cases.
4. Violation of the Public Assembly Act—at least 202 people in 111 cases.
5. Violation of the Computer Crimes Act—at least 224 people in 244 cases. (Two more accused, in one more case, than the previous month.)
6. Contempt of court—at least 45 people in 27 cases; and insulting the court—at least 37 people in 11 cases.
Of those 1,348 cases, 842 have concluded. (Some cases have not concluded in their entirety—for example, where an appeal has been brought on behalf of only some defendants while the cases against others have concluded—and cases struck out by the court are not counted.) That is to say, at least 575 cases remain ongoing and are at various stages of proceedings.
.
Korat housewife charged under Section 112 over the publication of clips criticizing politics and the monarchy; complainant found to have had a personal conflict with her beforehand
“Kaseni” (pseudonym), a 44-year-old resident of Nakhon Ratchasima, went to be notified of the charges under a summons at Cho Ho Police Station, Mueang District, Nakhon Ratchasima, on charges of lèse-majesté under Section 112 of the Criminal Code and of an offense under Section 14 of the Computer Crimes Act, over an allegation that she had published four video clips criticizing politics and the monarchy on a Facebook page.
The complainant in this case is Chanwit Wongchanrueang. Kaseni states that she and the complainant had had a personal conflict beforehand, having previously brought defamation-by-publication proceedings against one another, but that on this occasion he brought a Section 112 charge instead.
After she was notified of the charges, the inquiry official took her to file an application with the court for pre-trial detention during the investigation. Later the same day, the Nakhon Ratchasima Provincial Court granted bail, on security of 150,000 baht, provided with assistance from the Ratsadonprasong Fund.
The other case counted as an additional Computer Crimes Act case this month is the case against Pavin Chachavalpongpun, arising from a post in the Facebook group “Royalist Marketplace–Talad Luang,” which was counted as an addition in July 2026.
As to the position of cases in the courts, throughout August 2026 the courts delivered judgment in at least five cases arising from public assembly and political expression—four Section 112 cases and one other case connected to assembly and political expression. The courts convicted in all of them, with “Dong” Prasong and “Peera” having to enter prison because their cases concluded with the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Courts convict in four Section 112 cases in a row, sending “Dong” Prasong and “Peera” to prison as their cases conclude
The case against “Nut” Theeramet (surname withheld), a 23-year-old with special needs, who was prosecuted on a Section 112 charge over an allegation that he had published a clip on TikTok showing him sitting astride a royal portrait, on 12 February 2023.
On 25 August 2026 the Phatthalung Provincial Court sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment. As the defendant had pleaded guilty, which was of benefit to the court’s consideration of the case, the sentence was reduced to one year and six months. Having considered the pre-sentence investigation report, which found the defendant to be a person with a type 5 disability, namely an intellectual disability, the court took the view that he should be given the opportunity to reform himself into a good citizen and to be placed in a suitable setting. The custodial sentence was therefore suspended for two years.
.
The case against “Dong” Prasong Kotsongkhram, a 30-year-old resident of Lopburi province, who was prosecuted on a Section 112 charge over two counts of posting and sharing on Facebook. On 26 August 2026 the Supreme Court upheld a sentence of two years and 12 months’ imprisonment, without suspension, taking the view that the conduct constituting the offense was a serious matter, notwithstanding that he had never previously served a custodial sentence and had dependants in his family to support. His case thereby concluded, and he was sent to be detained at Thonburi Remand Prison.
.
The case against “Tawan” Tantawan Tuatulanon, a 25-year-old student and activist, on a principal charge under Section 112, over a livestream on the clearing of a farmers’ protest from the footpath on Ratchadamnoen Nok Road shortly before a royal motorcade passed, on 5 March 2022.
On 31 August 2026 the Criminal Court gave judgment, holding that the content of the livestream was questioning that concealed defamation and the expression of malice; that if the defendant had wished to criticize the police she could have done so without implicating or defaming the King; and that this was not a good-faith exercise of rights. It convicted her under Section 112 and sentenced her to two years’ imprisonment, without suspension, and imposed a fine of 600 baht for disobeying an official’s order. On the same day the Criminal Court granted her bail pending appeal, subject to a condition prohibiting her from leaving the Kingdom.
.
The case against “Peera” (pseudonym), a member of the public: on 18 August 2026 the Supreme Court sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment in a Section 112 case over a posted message. His case thereby concluded and he is detained at Samut Prakan Central Prison.
Since Section 112 of the Criminal Code was brought back into use from late November 2020 onward, the courts have to date given judgment in at least 224 Section 112 cases, of which 25 were cases in which the defendant contested the charge and was acquitted.
Read more > Statistics on Section 112 cases in which the courts have given judgment
No political detainee released—the courts continue to deny bail, even as “Fah” Promsorn goes on hunger strike for the right to bail
In August 2026, bail applications were filed for seven political detainees in all. The courts denied every one of them, so again no detainee was released over the past month.
Of these, four were in Section 112 cases: Attapon Buapat, Nawat Liangwattana, and Jatupat Boonpattararaksa. The courts denied every one of these applications, even though they were applications for bail in cases in which the applicants had themselves applied to withdraw bail while detained in their principal case, and even though in the principal case in which they were held they have now either been granted bail or served the sentence in full.
A bail application was also filed for “Fah” Promsorn, who has been on hunger strike since 1 July 2026 in demand of the right to bail in a Section 112 case, after the Court of Appeal sentenced him to two years and 10 months’ imprisonment over an assembly in front of Khlong Luang Police Station in 2021. He then began refusing water as well, after the court denied his bail application. Fah has now been transferred for treatment at the Corrections Hospital.
In addition, bail applications were filed for two detainees in Section 110 cases—Aekachai Hongkangwan and Suranat Paenprasert—before the Supreme Court denied them, at a point when they had been detained for a full year.
And in the case of “Bank” Nattaphon (surname withheld), a bail application was filed in the case concerning the burning of a police vehicle from Din Daeng Police Station during the #Mob11June22 assembly. The Supreme Court denied that application too, while he is at present also detained in a personal case.
Court of Appeal upholds prison sentences on four Thalu Gas protesters over the burning of a police vehicle at #Mob11June22; three granted bail, but Bank–Nattaphon remains detained
In the case against four participants in the Thalu Gas assembly—Watcharaphon, Ponlaphon, Jatuphon, and Nattaphon—who were prosecuted on a principal charge of jointly committing arson under Section 217, together with other charges, five in all, following the #RatsadonMarchToOustTu or #Mob11June22 assembly.
On 10 August 2026 the Court of Appeal upheld sentences of three years’ imprisonment each on Watcharaphon, Jatuphon, and Nattaphon, and of one year and four months on Ponlaphon, without suspension. On the same day, the Criminal Court granted bail to three of the defendants (Watcharaphon, Jatuphon, and Ponlaphon) pending appeal to the Supreme Court, subject to their wearing an electronic monitoring (EM) device. As for Nattaphon, the court did not grant bail, and he remains detained in a Section 112 case as well as in a personal case of his own.
.
Progress on the amnesty under the Peaceful Society Act: the courts have not yet ordered detainees released, while pending cases are beginning to be struck out
Following the announcement that the Act on Promoting a Peaceful Society B.E. 2569 (2026) had come into force on 24 August 2026, granting an amnesty in political cases for assembly or political expression arising from political conflict or political motivation committed between 1 January 2005 and 16 July 2025, but excluding cases of corruption, Section 112, and cases of grievous bodily harm—
those who fall within its scope will not receive an amnesty automatically. At present the Committee for Promoting a Peaceful Society is in the process of being established, with a framework requiring it to hold its first meeting by 22 September 2026, in order to issue the relevant criteria and to set up a channel through which applications for an amnesty may be filed.
As to cases pending before the courts under Section 8, which provides that “if the case is pending before any court, that court shall terminate the proceedings and strike the case from the docket,” to date (8 September 2026), so far as is known, the courts have begun to order at least six cases struck out:
- The #Mob16AugToToppleTyrants case of 2021, against three defendants on principal charges of violating the Emergency Decree and of Sections 215 and 216 of the Criminal Code.
- The #19SeptToReclaimPowerOfRatsadon assembly case of 19–20 September 2020, against 15 defendants prosecuted on a principal charge under Section 116, leaving seven defendants contesting the case on the Section 112 charge alone.
- The “Sadoed Convoy” car mob case of 2021, against three young people on charges of violating the Emergency Decree.
- The case over the assembly in front of Government House to follow the Cabinet meeting on the resolution of forest and land problems in 2025, against seven defendants on charges under the Public Assembly Act. (Case handled by the Community Resource Centre Foundation.)
- The case over the #PmoveReclaimingRights assembly beside Government House in 2024, against five defendants on charges under the Public Assembly Act. (Case handled by the Community Resource Centre Foundation.)
- The #Mob6Oct21 assembly case, against seven defendants on charges under Sections 138, 140, 215 and 216 and the Emergency Decree.
As to the applications asking the Criminal Court and the Bangkok South Criminal Court to order the release, and the modification of the sentences, of nine political detainees in all—“Wichit” (pseudonym), “Khunphaen” Chen Chiwa-abancha, Ngoenta “Manee” Khamsaen, “Bas” Prawit (surname withheld), Jiratchaya “Jinny” Sakulthong, Khajonsak (surname withheld), Kachen (surname withheld), Phichai (surname withheld), and “Peerapong” (pseudonym)—on the footing that they meet the criteria for an amnesty under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act on Promoting a Peaceful Society:
At present the courts are found to be exercising their discretion, and following practices, that differ markedly. In all the cases before the Bangkok South Criminal Court—“Khunphaen” Chen, “Manee” Ngoenta, “Jinny” Jiratchaya, Phichai, and “Peerapong”—the court made orders to the same effect: that the applications be sent to the Committee for Promoting a Peaceful Society to determine conclusively.
The Criminal Court, for its part, revoked its earlier order dismissing the applications, and instead ordered that “Bas” Prawit, Khajonsak, and Kachen be produced at court for a pre-trial hearing and questioning on the facts. As for the case of “Wichit,” monitoring indicates that the Court of Appeal has not yet made any order.
The result is that no political detainee assisted by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights has yet been released under the Act. Meanwhile, in a case before the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases, the court has ordered the release of one detainee under Sections 7 and 8—Nawakarn Khonsri, in the case over the closing of polling stations in the Din Daeng district in 2013. He was released on 2 September 2026.
Tracking the political amnesty under the Peaceful Society Act, which excludes Section 112
.
Court reads order allowing “Areef” to withdraw his Section 112 appeal after a 10-month wait; due to complete his sentence at the end of September
On 13 August 2026 the Criminal Court read out an order permitting “Areef” Weerapap Wongsamarn to withdraw his appeal in a Section 112 case, with the result that his case is treated as final from 14 October 2025, the date on which he filed the application from inside the prison. The decision to withdraw the appeal was taken because he had been detained for a long period while his case remained unconcluded, which cost him the right to sentence reduction and to parole—yet he then had to wait more than 10 months for the order on the withdrawal.
Weerapap was prosecuted over an allegation that he had spray-painted messages calling for reform of the monarchy in the area of Din Daeng Intersection during an assembly on 13 September 2021. Following the court’s order on the withdrawal of the appeal, his case has concluded, and he is due to complete his sentence on 27 September 2026, having been detained for the full three years of the sentence imposed by the Court of First Instance.
ข่าวหรือบทความที่เกี่ยวข้อง
Agencies in the justice system should apply the Act on Promoting a Peaceful Society to a consistent standard
Following the promulgation of the Act on Promoting a Peaceful Society, B.E. 2569 (2026), in force since 24 August 2026, which grants an amnesty in cases arising from assembly or expression motivated by political conflict or political motivation, committed between 1 January 2005 and 16 July 2025. Although the Act still excludes from the amnesty […]
Advocacy Team
08/09/2569
Silent Harassment: Monitoring and Intimidation of Citizens during the Coronation Month
Although the coronation ceremony of King Rama X from 4 to 6 May 2019 and the royal celebration from 22 to 28 May 2019 took place “peacefully”, violations of personal freedom through constant monitoring and intimidation by state authorities occurred in secret throughout the course of the events. They gained little media coverage. In the […]
TLHR
12/06/2562
As if the NCPO Never Left: Six Years After the Coup and the Persistence of Human Rights Violations
As the new Cabinet was sworn in before His Majesty the King on 16 July 2019, the junta-led National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) stepped down from power after having ruled the country for five years, one month, and 23 days. Nevertheless, the network of powerful political actors established under the NCPO regime has […]
admin62
22/05/2563
The Court of Appeal denied a request to release 4 protest leaders, citing their speeches have tarnished the reputation of the monarchy, despite the lack of final verdict
On 15 February 2021 at 16.30 approximate, The Criminal Court read the order of the Court of Appeal to deny bail requests of 4 protest leaders of the “Ratsadon Group”, which is in accordance to the Court of First Instance. After 11 February 2021, the lawyer filed an appeal against the Court’s order denying bail […]