November 2024: Six additional cases – the public prosecutor continues to pursue Emergency Decree indictments despite four years having passed. Meanwhile, Arnon protests in court by removing his shirt after the court refuses to summon requested documents.

Last November saw three new cases, including one Section 112 case in the South. Meanwhile, “Netiwit” was charged for his act of conscientious objection by refusing to participate in military conscription. Additionally, three activists in Chiang Mai were summoned to face charges of insulting the Constitutional Court for activities carried out in 2022.

November saw one more political prisoner, ‘Theerapat,’ who was sentenced to two years in prison without suspension after being accused of hurling a bomb at a police vehicle during the Din Daeng protests at #Mob31Oct21. Meanwhile, ‘Nam Warunee,’ who was imprisoned in a Section 112 case, was released after the Court granted her motion to withdraw her appeal. As a result, there are currently at least 33 political prisoners.

During a Section 112 trial last month, the Court ordered a closed-door hearing in the #MobHarryPotter1 case of Arnon Nampa. Arnon protested by removing his shirt and expressing his dissatisfaction with the judges. The Court had refused to summon crucial documents needed for cross-examining the prosecution’s witnesses, leaving the defense unable to proceed effectively. Arnon also argued with the Court, accusing the proceedings of being unlawful. Following a heated exchange, the Court ordered him removed from the courtroom and detained in a holding cell on the building’s underground floor before the hearing was adjourned.

Last month, at least two verdicts were issued in Section 112 cases, with both defendants found guilty. Additionally, four verdicts were delivered in cases related to violations of the Emergency Decree, convicting all the defendants. However, in another case concerning an offence under the Public Assembly Act, the Court ruled to dismiss the charges.

In addition, the public prosecutor has decided to indict 18 activists and members of the public for violating the Serious Emergency Decree following the #15OctToRatchaprasong demonstrations in 2020. This decision comes despite the fact that nearly all previous cases under the Emergency Decree have been dismissed. According to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, 17 such cases have been dismissed by the Court, and in one instance, the prosecutor decided not to indict.

Between July 18, 2020, and November 30, 2024, at least 1,960 individuals, in 1,310 cases, have faced charges in connection with public assemblies or expressing political opinions. Compared to October, there were three additional cases.

Altogether, there have been at least 4.022 lawsuits against the individuals although some of them are charged for multiple offences.

Prosecution statistics in key offences;

1. Section 112 (lèse-majesté) of the Criminal Code, at least 276 individuals in 308 cases (Of this, at least 162 cases have stemmed from reports to the police made by members of the public.)

2. Section 116 (sedition) of the Criminal Code, at least 154 individuals in 53 cases

3. Violation of the Emergency Decree, at least 1,466 individuals in 673 cases

4. Violation of the Public Assembly Act, at least 182 individuals in 100 cases

5. Violation of the Computer Crimes Act, at least 208 individuals in 230 cases

6. Contempt of court, at least 43 individuals in 25 cases, and insult of the court, at least 37 individuals in 14 cases

Of 1,310 cases, 68 cases have reached their final verdicts (although some cases remain ongoing, since certain defendants decided to appeal the verdicts, while others have not).

Prosecution trend in November 2024 and key events are as follows;

Three new cases: One recently reported Section 112 case in the South, “Netiwit” charged for his act of conscientious objection by refusing military conscription, and three activists summoned to face charges of insulting the Constitutional Court.

Last November, one new Section 112 case was reported in the South. It involved an individual who was reportedly indicted at the Phatthalung Provincial Court, with Songchai Nianhom acting as the accuser. The individual is being assisted by a private attorney.

In another case, Netiwit “Frank” Chotiphatphaisal was charged for refusing to participate in military conscription on 5 April 2024. He was later summoned by the Bang Pu Police Station in Samut Prakan and charged with “avoiding or resisting appearing before the selection committee for active military service according to the summons,” as specified under Section 45 of the Military Service Act B.E. 2497.

In addition, three activists in Chiang Mai have been summoned by the Bhubing Rajanives Police Station to face charges of “insulting the Court” under Section 198 of the Penal Code. The charges stem from their activities criticizing the Constitutional Court following its ruling on the “Eight-year tenure of Prayut” case in September 2022. The three activists are scheduled to report to the police on 9 December 2024, to hear the charges.

Another political prisoner, while ‘Nam Warunee’, prisoner of Section 112, was released. At least 33 political prisoners remain in prison.

Last month, there was one new political prisoner, Theerapat (last name withheld), who is serving time in the Samut Prakan Central Prison pending his appeal. He was accused of hurling a bomb at a police vehicle during the demonstrations in Din Daeng, #Mob31Oct21. On 25 November, the Criminal Court convicted and sentenced him to two years without suspension. Theerapat had already been detained without bail following his indictment for 68 days. He was subsequently imprisoned for his personal case.

Meanwhile, “Nam” Warunee (last name withheld), a detainee in a Section 112 case, was released from the Department of Corrections Hospital after serving most of her time.

Since 11 April 2024. Warunee decided to withdraw her appeal, However, it took the Court seven months to schedule a hearing on 21 November 2024 to grant the withdrawal of her appeal motion and to dispose of case against her. As a result, she has been freed after serving up in total one year and five months (518 days), almost all of the sentence she had received from the Court.

On 11 April 2024, Warunee decided to withdraw her appeal. After seven months, the Court finally scheduled a hearing on 21 November 2024, to grant her request for withdrawal and close the case in the Appeals Court. As a result, she was released after serving a total of one year and five months (518 days), nearly completing the sentence imposed by the Court.

The Criminal Court ordered a closed trial in the Section 112 case of #MobHarryPotter1 against ‘Arnon,’ who removed his shirt in protest and expressed his dissatisfaction with the Court for failing to summon crucial documentary evidence.

On 27-28 November 2024, the Criminal Court conducted prosecution witness examination in a case involving Sections 112 and 116 of the Criminal Code and the Emergency Decree against Arnon Nampa. His case stemmed from a speech that he allegedly made at the demonstration #CastingSpellToProtectDemocracyDefenders, aka Harry Potter Mob, at the Democracy Monument on 3 August 2020.

On the first day (27 November), Arnon removed his shirt in protest against the Court, as the Court insisted on not summoning crucial documentary evidence needed for cross-examining the prosecution’s witnesses. The Court also ordered the hearing to be conducted in secret and instructed everyone not relevant to the case to leave the courtroom. In response, Arnon filed a motion to challenge the judges and request their replacement. However, the Chief Justice of the Criminal Court dismissed his motion, stating that there were insufficient grounds to justify challenging the judges.

Meanwhile, the defendant’s attorneys insisted on not conducting the cross-examination since the Court had failed to summon the crucial documentary evidence. Consequently, the Court assumed that the defendant did not wish to pursue cross-examination, and thus concluded the witness examination. The Court then instructed the defendant’s attorneys to bring in their witnesses for the hearing the next day (28 November).

On the next day (28 November), Arnon pleaded with the Court that this judicial proceeding is unlawful due to three reasons including the Court’s refusal to summon crucial documentary evidence, the Court’s order for secret trial without legal basis, and the defendant’s challenge and request to replace the judges since the judges have demonstrated their prejudice which may prevent the defendant from receiving justice.

On the following day (28 November), Arnon argued before the Court that the judicial proceeding was unlawful for three reasons:

(1) the Court’s refusal to summon crucial documentary evidence;

(2) the Court’s order for a secret trial without legal basis; and

(3), the defendant’s challenge and request for the replacement of the judges, claiming that their bias could prevent the defendant from receiving justice.

As the Court deemed that the defendant was not willing to bring their witnesses for examination, it decided to suspend the witness examination. The Court also announced that no press conference would be held regarding this hearing, as the case involved matters of national security. Arnon then protested the order for a secret trial and the unreasonable grounds for prohibiting the dissemination of information. The Court ordered Arnon to stop his statement, then instructed the court marshal and correctional officers to remove him from the courtroom and hold him in custody at a holding cell on the underground floor of the court building, even though the hearing had not yet been adjourned. The Court then announced that it would deliver its ruling on 19 December 2024, at 9:00 AM.

Throughout November 2024, at least two verdicts were rendered in two Section 112 cases, both convictions.

Throughout last month, at least two verdicts were rendered in Section 112 cases by the Court of First Instance, both in the Nonthaburi Provincial Court. These include the cases against “Phu Khao” (pseudonym) and “Sing To” (pseudonym), both of whom were found guilty by the Court. In one case, the sentence was suspended, while in the other, the sentence was not.

First was the case against “Phu Khao”, a 45-year-old member of the public charged for posting six Facebook messages in 2019, when there was activity from the Organization for a Thai Federation. The Nonthaburi Provincial Court found him guilty under Section 112 and sentenced him to three years per count, totaling 18 years for all six counts. Given his guilty plea, the sentence was reduced by half, resulting in a total of six years (36 months). The Court also suspended the sentence for five years.

There was also a case against “Sing To”, a 27-year-old member of the public charged for making a comment on a Facebook post by another person, which featured photos of King Rama X and Prince Dipangkorn. The Nonthaburi Provincial Court found him guilty under Section 112 and sentenced him to three years in prison. Given his guilty plea, the sentence was reduced by half, resulting in a prison term of one year and six months, with no suspension. However, he was granted bail pending his appeal.

The issue of judges using their discretion to decide whether or not to suspend sentences has raised questions about the consistency of their rulings.

Last month, verdicts were delivered in four additional cases related to protests and violations of the Emergency Decree, with all defendants convicted. In a separate case involving the Public Assembly Act, the Court acquitted the defendant.

Piyarat “Toto” Chongthep, who wore traditional Thai attire to show solidarity with those facing Section 112 charges in front of the Yannawa Police Station, was charged with violating the Emergency Decree and the Public Assembly Act. The Court of Appeals upheld the lower Court’s verdict, fining him 2,000 THB, reasoning that by posting an invitation for others to join, the defendant demonstrated he was an organizer, and as such, he was required to notify the authorities of the protest in advance.

In the case against Sirawith Seritiwat, aka “Ja New”and two others, who were charged for violating the Emergency Decree after participating in the #Mob1November protest at the Udom Suk Intersection in 2020, the Court of Appeals upheld the previous verdict, finding them guilty as charged. This was similar to another case against Chukiat and Sirawith for their participation in the #Mob29October protest in front of The Nation’s office in 2020, where the Court of Appeals also upheld the verdict of the Lower Court and fined them.

Another case involved the four participants of the #Mob20March21 protest, who were charged with violating the Emergency Decree and resisting and physically assaulting officials following the REDEM protest at Sanam Luang. The Court them found guilty as charged. ‘Amphai’, Somkiat, and Ketsirin were each sentenced to two years in prison for complicity in resisting and obstructing officials, while Boonlom was sentenced to four years for physically abusing officials during their duties. All four were granted bail pending appeals.

However, in the case involving “Bai Por” and Sophon “Get” Surariddhidhamrong, the Court acquitted both of the charges under the Public Assembly Act and for using an amplifier without permission during the “WHAT HAPPENED IN THAILAND” march from Asoke Intersection to the Queen Sirikit National Convention Centre and the APEC2022 meeting in 2022, citing that they were not the organizers.

Public prosecutors are continuing to press charges for serious violations of the Emergency Decree in two cases related to the #15OctToRatchaprason demonstrations, despite most previous cases being dismissed by the Court.

Since October, the public prosecutor of the Pathumwan Municipal Court has indicted eight activists in connection with the #16OctToPathumwanIntersection demonstrations in 2020. In the following month (November 2024), 18 more activists and members of the public were indicted under serious violations of the Emergency Decree related to the #15OctToRatchaprason demonstrations in 2020. They were charged in two separate cases, one involving the activists who made speeches and the other concerning the driver and sound system team.

Previously, in the same demonstrations, three youths were indicted by the Central Juvenile and Family Court. After nearly three years of fighting their cases in court, they have all been acquitted.

Previously, almost all of the cases under serious violations of the Emergency Decree have been dismissed. According to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights’ data, 17 such cases have already been dismissed. There was also another case where the prosecutor decided against indictment. The only case where the Court found the defendants guilty was the case involving the #Mob19Oct2020 demonstrations at the Kasetsat Intersection.

There are at least 673 cases under the Emergency Decree stemming from demonstrations in 2020-2022. A deeper dive into the statistics show that the in most of the cases where defendants pleaded not guilty, the Courts either dismissed the case or the public prosecutor decided against prosecuting the case further. In total, at least 102 of such cases were dismissed by the Court, while the public prosecutor decided not to prosecute at least 70 such cases.

Thai Lawyers for Human Rights previously submitted a petition to the public prosecutor of the Pathumwan Municipal Court asking them to consider suspending the decision to prosecute or to use their discretion not to prosecute such cases, given that the House of Representatives is deliberating on an amnesty bill for political cases. One of the recommendations from the Lower House Committee suggested that the public prosecutor not pursue cases found not to serve the public interest while the amnesty law is still pending.

On 27 September 2024, another petition was submitted to the Attorney General asking them to review the prosecution of cases related to public assemblies. However, it seems that the public prosecutor persists in prosecuting such cases.

ข่าวหรือบทความที่เกี่ยวข้อง

Thai Lawyers for Human Rights

admin

TLHR

TLHR