Received by email:
Joint Appeal co-authored by Asian Forum on Human Rights and Development, Clean Clothes Campaign, Front Line Defenders, International Federation for Human Rights, Lawyers’ Rights Watch – Canada, Protection International, Southeast Asia Press Alliance, and World Organisation against Torture)
15 November 2011
Re: Thailand – Human rights defender and magazine editor Somyot Prueksakasemsuk faces lèse majesté charge
We write to you to raise our concerns about the situation of human rights defender and magazine editor Mr Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, who will stand trial on charges of lèse majesté from 21 November 2011 until 4 May 2012. Somyot Prueksakasemsuk is a longtime labour rights activist and is affiliated with the Democratic Alliance of Trade Unions. He is facing a maximum of 30 years’ imprisonment if found guilty.
Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, who is also editor of Voice of the Oppressed (Voice of Taksin), was arrested on 30 April 2011 at Aranyaprathet district, Sa Kaeo Province, and charged with contravening the lèse majesté law or Section 112 of the Thai Criminal Code which states that “whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years”. He was detained in Bangkok Special Prison and was reportedly transferred to Sa Kaeo Provincial Court on 12 November 2011. He has been in pre-trial detention for six and a half months since his arrest by Department of Special Investigation officials in April 2011. His fourth bail request was denied on 1 November 2011.
Somyot is known for his active support for the empowerment of the workers’ movement and the right to freedom of association both in Thailand and internationally. Somyot’s arrest on 30 April came only five days after he held a press conference in Bangkok launching a campaign to collect 10,000 signatures to petition for a parliamentary review of Section 112 of the Criminal Code, which Somyot claims contradicts democratic and human rights principles. According to a document produced by the Public Prosecutor, Somyot is alleged to have allowed two articles that made negative references to the monarchy to be published in his magazine.
The hearings involving the Prosecution witnesses will take place on 21 November 2011, 19 December 2011, 16 January 2012, and 13 February 2012 in the provinces of Sa Kaeo, Petchabun, Nakorn Sawan, and Songkla, respectively, while the Defence witnesses will be called to appear before Bangkok Criminal Court on 18-20 April 2012, 24-26 April 2012, and 1-4 May 2012.
We are concerned that the venues of the hearings for the Prosecution witnesses are all held outside Bangkok in different provinces across the northern, northeastern, and southern provinces of Thailand, which will place an undue burden on Somyot and his family and undermine his fair trial rights. This may also prevent the full presence and participation of trial observers, diplomatic corps, and journalists.
We are further disturbed that if Somyot’s application for bail continues to be denied until the conclusion of the trial, he will have been in prison for over a year before a verdict is reached, since the trial is expected to last until at least 4 May 2012. This is in violation of the constitutional guarantee for a right to bail under Section 40 (7) of the 2007 Thai Constitution, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which Thailand has ratified, and Principles 36-39 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (1988).
The Truth for Reconciliation Commission of Thailand (TRCT), in its second report, also emphasised that “a temporary release…is a fundamental right of accused persons and defendants in order to enable accused persons and defendants to defend their cases, to prove innocence and to reduce effects from the restriction of freedoms on themselves and families.” Under national and international law, the right to bail can only be restricted on limited and precisely defined grounds. The authorities have yet to provide an adequate justification for his continued detention or an explanation as to why less restrictive and non-custodial measures are not sufficient to ensure his appearance at trial and non-tampering with evidence.
Our organisations are alarmed by the escalating cases of using lèse majesté law against human rights defenders and dissidents in the years following the military coup d’etat in 2006. Concerns have already been raised, in particular regarding the ongoing case of Ms Chiranuch Premchaiporn, Executive Director of Prachatai and a media rights advocate, who is also charged under the lèse majesté law and the 2007 Computer Crimes Act.
On 10 October 2011, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, urged Thailand to urgently amend lèse majesté laws (Section 112 of the Penal Code and the 2007 Computer Crimes Act)*. As emphasized by the Special Rapporteur, “[t]he threat of a long prison sentence and vagueness of what kinds of expression constitute defamation, insult, or threat to the monarchy, encourage self-censorship and stifle important debates on matters of public interest, thus putting in jeopardy the right to freedom of opinion and expression”.
Concerns regarding lèse majesté laws were also raised during the consideration of the situation of human rights in Thailand through the UN Universal Periodic Review in Geneva on 7 October 2011.
We call on the authorities in Thailand to:
- Immediately drop all charges against Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, or else, grant him the right to bail in accordance with fair trial standards under domestic and international law;
- Review the lèse majesté law to ensure its conformity with Thailand’s international human rights obligations, as recommended by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and immediately drop all charges against human rights defenders based on these laws;
- Guarantee in all circumstances that all human rights defenders in Thailand, especially those working on freedom of expression, are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities without fear of reprisals and free of all restrictions, including judicial harassment.

I think they should’t concentrated on just Somyod but everyone that face lese majeste accusation and the law as a whole.
Quality comment or not?
8
0
Lese Majeste law is here to stay. Take your freedom to other places that you can gain benefit from it !
Quality comment or not?
1
32
I wonder why it is that the self-appointed or appointed (and paid) protectors of the monarchy and defenders of repression get shitty and tell those with whom they cannot agree to go elsewhere. It is such a stupid response (not limited to Thailand, of course) that says a lot about the apparently limited capacity of the correspondent to empathize with others or to think beyond an extremely narrow and seemingly comfortable political boundary. Thank goodness there are much livelier minds at work on Thailand’s politics.
Quality comment or not?
30
1
“Lese Majeste law is here to stay” says Jesse.
But the actual answer is Lese Majeste as it exists today is going to disappear after the present King dies and the Crown Prince takes on the role.
Even diehard Thai Royalists are full of bad words when it comes to the Crown Prince. Spoken loudly, often, and in public places.
Quality comment or not?
23
1
If the law has to be this strong to protect a Monarch who ‘universally loved’ how much stronger will it have to be in the future?
If he can get back in Thaksin will be the one to enforce the law.
Have you seen the Red Shirts in their ‘I love the Prince’ tee shirts.
Many of the outspoken amaart will be in danger. That’s why Thaksin must be kept out at all costs.
Quality comment or not?
1
2
Vorajet Pakirat, one of the active founders Nitirasadorn, is campaigning to reenbact/abolish the Section 112 of the Criminal Code. However, the Section 112 cannot be reenacted/abolished unless the Section 8: “The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated,” in Chapter 2 of the present constitution is abolished.
Quality comment or not?
7
0
Strange that the Yingluck government with its avowed interest in democracy is not lifting a finger to help those oppressed by Section 112 or, more to the point, moving on reform of the law. Priorities seem to be more towards bringing Thaksin home, curbing freedom of expression in the media and legal amendments to allow them a free hand in military reshuffles with nary a peep about Section 112.
Quality comment or not?
11
5
The news that Somyot has been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment is in all the world’s newspapers, spreading world-wide disgust for Thai royalism.
Quality comment or not?
11
2
How disgust you have? We are the independent country, not the same as Singapore the Englnad-Slave country.
Quality comment or not?
0
12
Yes we are independent country but then again, are people in the country independent?
Quality comment or not?
4
0
After what happened in Parliament last year I believe even more than I did before that the present government is just “giving them more rope”, by allowing them to accumulate more and more international, and local criticism of their actions. each statement such as this is an additional “nail in the coffin”, and it takes a whole lot of nails to overcome what is going on at the present.
Those people showed what they are all about last year with the riot in parliament, especially with the childish hiding of the Speakers chair, and throwing stacks of paper at him.
Quality comment or not?
3
0
Somyos with “Karaoke” in Thai-Jail is uncomparable with Veera “Nothing to read, nothing to write, jail alone, no human right” in Khmare-Jail.
Quality comment or not?
0
1