Thanakorn : Clicked like on lèse majesté facebook page and satirized royal dog
Latest Update: 07/01/2022
Defendant
Thanakorn
Case Status
On trial in Court of First Instance
Case Started
2015
Complainant / Plaintiff
No information
Table of Content
Thanakorn copied and shared a diagram of Ratchapakdi Park scandal on facebook which later lead to his arrest. After his arrest, he had been incommunicado detained for 7 days. Apart from charged with sedtion for sharing Ratchapak diagram, Thanakorn was also charged with lèse majesté for posting message on facebook satirizing the king's dog and for clicking "like" on picture that deem to be lese majeste offense.
The authorities brought him to the military court where his pre-trial detention order was issued and the bail was denied for months.
On 8 March 2016, Thanakorn got bail with 500,000 baht and the case is under trial.
Defendant Background
Thanakorn was a worker in a factory.
Offense
Article 14 (3) Computer Related Crime Act, Article 112 Criminal Code, Article 116 Criminal Code
Allegation
The military prosecutor stated in a statement of accusation that Thanakorn committed offenses against Article 112 and 116 of the Criminal Code and under section 14(3) of the Computer-related Crime Act, 3 different offense are including
1. The defendant clicked “Like” on facebook page titled “Yeunyad Pratya” which had photos and content deemed to be offense under Lese majeste law and under the Computer-related Crime Act section 14 (3)
2. The defendant posted message refering to the King's dog in a sarcastic manner which deemed to be offense under Lese majeste law and under the Computer-related Crime Act section 14 (3)
3. The defendant used his facebook posted photo of persons who involved with the construction of Ratchapakdi Park where caption of the photo can made the reader understand that the persons who are in the photo involved with corruption which was false information and could provoke public disorder. This act fall under section 116 of the Criminal Code and the Computer-related Crime Act section 14 (3)
The accused’s circumstances were deemed defaming, insulting or threatening the King, Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent. The accused also made an appearance to the public by words, writings or any other means which was not an act within the purpose of the Constitution or for expressing an honest opinion or criticism in order to raise unrest and disaffection amongst the people in a manner likely to cause disturbance in the country. This involved import to a computer system of false computer data in a manner that is likely to damage the country's security or cause a public panic.
Mentioned above was a crime according to Thailand Penal Code, Section 112, Section 116(2), and Computer Crime Act, Section 14(2)
Circumstance of Arrest
A lawyer from Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) informed that on 8 December 2015, at 16.00 hrs., 2 plain-clothed police personnel “invited” Thanakorn to visit Bang Poo Police Station from his workplace. In the evening he was taken to another police station in Samut Prakan Province. After that army personnel in uniform took Thanakorn to an army camp.
Thanakorn was detained for “questioning” for 7 days at the army camp. He was then brought to the Crime Suspension Division to be charged and to be detained at the military court on 14 December 2015.
Trial Observation
No information
Black Case
อ.1541/62
Court
Bangkok Military Court, Samut Prakarn Provincial Court
Additional Info
No information
Reference
No information
8 December 2015
From his workplace in Bang Poo District, Thanakorn was “invited” to visit and to be “questioned” at a police station in Samut Prakan Province. Then he was detained by the army at a military camp for 7 days.
9 December 2015
Komchadluek reported that Maj Gen Wijarn Jodtaeng and Colonel Burin Thongprapai, filed charges against Thanakorn to the inquiry official of the Crime Suspension Division for violating Section 112 and Section 116 of the Criminal Code and Computer Crime Act.
14 December 2015
Komchadluek reported after Thanakorn was detained for 7 days at a military camp, Colonel Burin Thongprapai, a judge advocate, brought him to be detained at the military court who granted the first 12-day detention.
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights’ website mentioned that after the court granted the detention order, Thanakorn submitted a 300,000 Baht case for bail. The money came from a donation of Resistant Citizen group. But the bail was denied, with the reason from the court that the severity of the case was too great and the inquiry official objected the bail. They considered that according to the circumstances the accused could have absconded, so the request for bail was lifted.
25 December 2015
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights’ website reported that the military court allowed Thanakorn to be detained for a second period of 12 days. Thanakorn’s lawyers filed another 900,000 Baht cash for bail, which came from Facebook fundraising. The bail was again refused. The judge stated that it was previously stated clearly. The order was not to be changed. And the inquiry official also objected the bail.
15 January 2016
Thanakorn was brought to the military court to be detained for the fourth time. Either Thanakorn, his relatives nor the lawyers knew the schedule iin advance. This was because the period was concluded on 18 January 2016, which was the Royal Thai Armed Forces Day and the court was closed. So Thanakorn was brought in before the 18th. Thanakorn’s lawyer who was at the court for another case met him unexpectedly.
Around 10.40 hrs., the inquiry official filed the fourth detention request. They reasoned that there were six other witnesses to be questioned, and they were still waiting for the fingerprints analysis. Thanakorn’s lawyer who did not have document with her, objected and verbally stated that the accused could not interfere the 6 witnesses. The computer was now with the police. The accused could not interfere the investigation process at all. And there was no sufficient reason to detain him during the investigation process.
The judge asked the inquiry official whether there was a sufficient reason for the detention. The inquiry official insisted that the investigation was still in process. When the judge asked whether the witnesses had anything to do with the accused, the inquiry official did not answer. In the end the permission was granted for the accused to be detained for the fourth round. The order mentioned that the inquiry official had been questioned, and there was a necessity to further detain the accused. But it also mentioned that the inquiry official had to speed up the investigation.
Then the judge read the Central Military Court's (Military Court of Appeal) order. It was when the accused filed the bail request on 25 December 2015, and the military court denied. The accused therefore appeal such order.
The Central Military Court stated that the accused appealed the court’s order dated 25 December 2015, titled bail refusal while being detained for the first period on 6 January 2016. But as of now, the court had already granted the third detention. So it was not lawful when the military court accepted the appeal for consideration. This was because the period of the first detention, which was the ground of the appeal, was now ended. The Central Military Court could not consider the bail application. The appeal was lifted.
4 March 2016
Thai Lawyer for Human Rights reported that the military prosecutor had filed charges against Thanakorn before the Bangkok Military Court. Thanakorn was charged in three different count, 2 counts under Ariticle 112 of the Criminal Code and under the Computer-related Crime Act Section 14 (3), 1 count under section 116 of the Criminal Code and under the Computer-related Crime Act Section 14 (3)
8 March 2016
Thai Lawyer for Human Rights reported that the defense lawyer had submitted a petition for bail before the Bangkok Military Court for the third time along with 900,000.Baht bail deposit (worth rougthly 25,714 USD). In the petition, the lawyer gave 3 reasons to support Thanakorn bid;
1. The Lese Majeste accusations against the defendant were immoderate. Moreover, the expansion of section 116 which was offense against national security to cover individual libel will damage the rule of law and Thai Judicial system in the long term.
2. The military prosecutor claimed in a statement of acusation that clicking like can be lese majeste offense. The claim was however not correct. In fact, the act of "clicking like" wasn't considered as an act to disseminate or taking part in the commission of offense, and wasn't considered as a supporter of an offense. The criminal law must be interpreted strictly in a manner to benefit the defendant not harmful. As for the accusation under section 116, it was interpreted broader than what the defendant has committed.
3. In his family, the defendant is a major and sole source of income. He is responsible to support his parents and his sister who is studing. If the defendant is in detain his family will suffer for the lack of income.
After the lawyer filed a petition to the court along with 900,000 Baht deposit the court later approved Thanakorn's temporary release. Cash that used to guarantee his bail was reduced by the court to 500,000 Baht (worth roughtly 14285 USD). The court also suspend Thanakorn from traveling aboard. After the court ordered to release Thanakorn on bail he was release from the Bangkok Remand Prison in the same night.
Overall Thanakorn was held in prison for 86 days from 14 December 2015 which was the first day of his pre-trial detention until 8 March 2016 when the court release him on bail. Prior to his detention under the Military Court's jurisdiction, Thanakorn was also held for 7 days in a military camp under order of the head of NCPO.
Verdict
No information