Home Opinion ​Time to Review Not Just the Royal Defamation Law

​Time to Review Not Just the Royal Defamation Law

FILE - A vehicle with members of the Thai royal family onboard passes through a road where anti-government protesters gathered outside the Government House in Bangkok, Thailand on Oct. 14, 2020. (AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit, File)

As a witness in the court case of “obstructing the royal motorcade” of activist and former lese-majeste detainee Ekachai Hongkangwan and four others, I am appalled and deeply disturbed by the Court of Appeal’s overturning of the lower court’s not-guilty verdict.

​The defendants, including Ekachai and Francis Boonkuenun Paothong (a 26-year-old Mahidol University graduate with a promising future, fluent in English and not parochial), were found guilty yesterday. Ekachai was sentenced to 21 years and the others, including Francis, to 16 years each. (They are currently being remanded while awaiting the results of their bail application to the Supreme Court.)

​As a witness of the 14 October 2020 incident, I wonder how this could have happened, especially since the prosecutors in the initial criminal court trial could not present a strong case. Here are my five key observations:

​On the day of the incident, a group of monarchy-reform demonstrators, including the five, had arrived in front of Government House, and there was no prior warning—via megaphone or any other method—that the royal motorcade would shortly be passing through.

​There were no special police units present, which you normally see during a royal motorcade. Normally, special police tasked with coordinating a royal motorcade route are deployed 10 minutes in advance, if not longer. There were none on that day.

​Given that the police were aware of the protest, why did they choose this route for the motorcade when there were other alternatives?

​Based on what I saw, none of the defendants obstructed the royal motorcade. They simply found themselves in the “wrong place at the wrong time.”

​The minimum penalty of 16 years under Section 110 of the Thai Criminal Code is excessive. This severe penalty is anachronistic and draconian, unfit for the modern age where our political system is no longer that of an absolute monarchy.

​I am willing to testify anew at the Supreme Court level if needed and hope that the defendants will be granted bail while they appeal their case.

__________