The much-anticipated episode was pulled out at the last minute, causing much puzzlement and uproar on the social network.

The dam itself had already posed as an issue against the current government, as it is concluded in the 350 billion baht ‘Water Management Programme’ and situated in the National Park in Nakhon Sawan and Kampaeng Pet provinces.

Mr. Sasin, who also serves as the secretary-general of Seub Nakhasathien Foundation, argues that the dam would irreversibly damage the lush forest in the area. Other activists accused the government of conducting insufficient research into the project, and attempting to cover up the negative effects to the dam construction.

The opposition to Mae Wong Dam also gained momentum among urban middle class citizens in Bangkok, many of whom harbour deep hostility toward the government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra and her brother, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

To anti-government critics, the cancellation of “Khon Khon Khon” emphasized the belief that the government was trying to interfere with freedom of information.

On 30 September, Mr. Anek Permvongseni, President of MCOT which operated Channel 9, said in a press conference that the ?Kon Khon Kon? documentary "was not banned", but it was merely "delayed".

Speaking alongside Mr. Prasan Inkanant, Deputy Manager of TV Burabha, the producer of ?Kon Khon Kon?, Mr. Anek said the episode regarding Mr. Sasin involves sensitive issues, and may have caused negative effects to the polarised society.

Therefore, MCOT has suggested that the production company should re-edit its content to be "inclusive" for the audience, such as adding different opinions about Mae Wong Dam, before airing the show, Mr. Anek said.

The President also insisted that his company had not been intervened by any group, and confirmed that the show will finally be broadcast on 12 October. He stressed that the relationship between MCOT and TV Burabha is still good.

Meanwhile, Mr. Prasan of TV Burabha said the producers would fix the content as suggested by MCOT, in order to reach a compromise with the station, and expressed his belief that the situation should represent a good example of how to fight something in a peaceful manner.

“It is the best option to release the show”, said Mr. Prasan, “Considering the impact that many people have seen the controversy as a political issue.”

 

 

The act of insulting the Thai monarchy is criminalised under Article 112 of the Criminal Code, and Ms. Daranee was subsequently found guilty of lese majeste by the court, which also sentenced her to 15 years in prison. Ms. Daranee is currently jailed at a Bangkok prison. 

 

Later, Mr. Sondhi Limthongkul, a prominent figure of People′s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), read parts of Ms. Daranee on a rally stage on the night of 20 July 2008, when the Yellowshirts were gathered for a protest against the government at the time.

 

Mr. Sondhi had accused former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his allies of plotting against the monarchy, and he was citing the incident of Ms. Daranee as proof to his allegations about a sinister plot to overthrow the Royal Family. 

 

However, Mr. Sondhi′s was soon charged with lese majeste for repeating Ms. Daranee′s remarks, as the prosecutors argued that propagating the offensive material to a wider audience also amounts to insulting the monarchy. Mr. Sondhi insisted he was simply acting out of his loyalty to the monarchy.

 

After the lower court had acquitted Mr. Sondhi, the prosecutors filed an appeal, and the Appeals Court has today overturned the verdict.

 

The court noted that it had been aware of Mr. Sondhi′s insistence of his good intention to expose the alleged anti-monarchy attitude of Ms. Daranee, but it ruled that "it was not necessary for the defendant to re-broadcast the contents in public places, as some Thais were not aware of what Ms. Daranee had said, and they only learned about the matter from the defendant′s words"

 

It continued, "[the incident] caused much discussion and criticism, eventually affecting the monarchy. The defendant′s action lacks sufficient caution."

 

Therefore, the Appeals Court found Mr. Sondhi guilty of lese majeste and sentenced him to 2 years in jail. Nevertheless, Mr. Sondhi had contested the sentence, saying he intends to take the matter to the Supreme Court, and applied for bail. The court later granted him a release on a bail of 500,000 baht.

 

The case highlights the nature of the Thai lese majeste laws which has been described by critics as silencing any discussion of the monarchy and violating the principles of free speech. 

 

Opponents of the law argue that such stifling measures help discourage the media from reporting about ongoing lese majeste cases, as the news agencies have become fearful of being punished for broadcasting offensive contents.

 

Many Redshirts also criticised the case of Mr. Sondhi, accusing the court of political bias, as Mr. Sondhi was allowed to walk free throughout the years of court procedures, whereas Redshirts-affliated defendants in lese majeste cases have been routinely denied release on bail – including Ms. Daranee herself. 

 

The protesters had been demanding Abhisit dissolve the Parliament and organize a new election, arguing that Abhisit′s ascension to power was undemocratic as his party had not won the general election.

The military operation on 10 April 2010 was called off as night fell and mysterious militants fired at soldiers, leading to an escalation of the violence. More than 20 people, mostly civilians, died in the clashes, including a Japanese journalist working for Reuters. The Redshirts accused the military of killing the mostly unarmed protesters, while the authorities blamed the shadowy militants for the deaths.

In a lengthy reading yesterday morning, judges cited testimony gathered from a number of witnesses, who said that Jaroon and Siam were seen running after soldiers who were retreating from grenade attacks launched in front of Satri Witthaya School, just opposite Democracy Monument.

The judges said the soldiers, who were rallying near Wan Chart Bridge, fired their weapons toward the oncoming protesters. Jaroon and Siam suddenly fell down in front of Satri Witthaya School, the judges said, citing witnesses' accounts.

The pair was taken to the hospital by rescue volunteers, where they were pronounced dead. 

According to autopsy reports presented to the court, residue of lead and other metals found on the bodies of the two victims point to the trace of 5.56 bullets, the type of ammunition used by the military during the clashes.

The autopsy also suggested that the victims were shot from the direction of the soldiers at the time, the judges said in their statement. 

The court added that the accounts of the witnesses, which include a journalist and a volunteer medic, were reliable in their impartiality. 

Therefore, the court concluded that  Jaroon and Siam were killed by the gunfire from the military direction, but said there was not sufficient evidence to determine who committed the manslaughter. 

In previous court inquests, military gunfire was also determined to be the cause of civilian deaths, such as the Italian photojournalist Fabio Polenghi, a 14-year old orphan named Kunagorn Srisuwan, a pair of volunteer medics who were taking shelter in a temple on the final day of the military crackdown, and a military private reportedly killed in friendly fire.

No court inquest has explicitly blamed shadowy 'Blackshirt' militants for casualties of the crackdown, contrary to the claims of the Abhisit administration and the military.

After the inquest was read, Siam's sister Boonnam Taviang told reporters in the courtroom she was "very happy" to receive "justice."

"I was there, I saw the soldiers with guns," Boonnam said. "But the protesters were unarmed. My brother was just holding an empty water bottle."

She said those responsible for the crackdown should be punished by the laws. Even though she had received 7 million baht in  compensation for her brother′s death, she said, it did not satisfy her because "hundreds of millions of baht cannot replace my brother's life."

Speaking in front of the court, Jaroon's wife, Nangnuan Chaiman, also called for holding Thai authorities legally accountable for killing her husband and other protesters. 

"I want [the culprits] to have some humanity. I want them to imagine what it feels like to have lost someone, to endure life without  loved ones," Nangnuang said.

She said it pained her to be accused of enjoying the compensation money issued by the government. "I don't want the money. I want my husband to come back … we went to the protests because we knew the Redshirts were not villains. We simply wanted democracy to be restored in our country". 

 

For comments, or corrections to this article please contact:[email protected]

You can also find Khaosod English on Twitter and Facebook
http://twitter.com/KhaosodEnglish
http://www.facebook.com/KhaosodEnglis