Controversial Acquittal over Thaksin's Royal Slurs Stirring Public Discussion
Thai Court Dismisses Lèse-MajestÊ Case Against Thaksin Shinawatra, Ruling Likely to be Appealed
In a surprising turn of events, the Criminal Court in Thailand has dismissed a lèse-majestÊ case against former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra on Aug 22. Thaksin was indicted under Section 112 of the Criminal Code and the Computer Crimes Act.
According to the court's ruling, prosecutors failed to prove Thaksin's remarks directly referred to the King or members of the royal family. Thaksin's lawyer, Winyat Chartmontree, stated that the court dismissed the case due to several reasons, with the central point being that the subject mentioned was not clearly identified as anyone protected under Section 112.
The decision is likely to be appealed, with the Office of the Attorney General having 30 days from the ruling to decide on an appeal, with the option of extending the deadline. Jade Donavanik, a legal scholar and dean of the faculty of law at Dhurakij Pundit University, stated that it may be premature to treat the ruling as a legal precedent because the case is likely to be appealed.
Nipit Intarasombat, a lawyer and former Democrat MP, argued that Thaksin's case should not be treated as a benchmark because each lèse-majestÊ case is fact-specific. However, Nipit supports Mr. Olarn's call for a multi-party committee to vet lèse-majestÊ complaints.
Olarn Thinbangtieo, a political science and law lecturer at Burapha University, commented that the judgment reflected factual reasoning as Thaksin's language did not directly implicate the King, the heir apparent, or core members of the royal family. Mr. Olarn suggested forming a committee to screen all lèse-majestÊ complaints before they proceed to court to prevent abuse.
The committee, according to Mr. Olarn, should include prosecutors, judges, academics, and civil society representatives. Such a committee, according to Nipit, would help filter cases and prevent Section 112 from being exploited, an idea that dates back to the Abhisit Vejjajiva administration.
It's worth noting that Mr. Olarn pointed out a contrast between Thaksin's case and that of young activists, many of whom were denied bail despite the presumption of innocence. Nipit respects the court's discretion but urges the Office of the Attorney General to appeal, warning that failure to do so could erode public trust in the justice system.
In a report within the last 30 days, the Thai Court of Justice concluded that Thaksin did not refer to King Rama IX in his 2015 interview, and acquitted him. Mr. Donavanik suggested that the judiciary should take a more strategic approach by studying and comparing rulings in similar cases to establish consistency and explain the reasoning behind their decisions.
The debate surrounding the lèse-majestÊ law and its application continues, with many calling for reform to ensure fairness and consistency in its implementation. The outcome of the potential appeal in Thaksin's case will undoubtedly have significant implications for the future of this controversial law in Thailand.
