September 13, 2022
image source, Archyde.com
The Southern Bangkok Criminal Court sentenced Ms Jatuporn Sae-Ung, aka New, to three years in prison for lèse majesté. According to Article 112 of the Criminal Code of Thailand for allegedly dressing up to imitate the Queen in 2020.
The verdict of the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court gave Ms. Jatuporn Sae-Ung, aka New, to three years in prison for lèse majesté. According to Article 112 of the Criminal Code for allegedly dressing up to imitate the Queen Create social controversies and concerns. especially concerning the right to freedom of expression including comparisons with similar cases abroad
One of them is Amnesty International. has issued a statement expressing concern that The verdict marks a grim prelude to the direction of law enforcement for the foreseeable future.
According to the Center for Lawyers for Human Rights, between November 2020, at least 210 people have been charged with defamation of the King, and from 2021-2022, 10 cases have been convicted by courts.
The case of Ms. Jatuporn was a result of the incident that she dressed in Thai costumes to participate in a fashion show on Silom Road on October 29, 2020. According to the data from the data collection of witness investigations by the Lawyers for Human Rights Center. stated that the protesters (on that day) showed a crouching gesture to Ms. Jatuphon, bent down to shake hands with the protesters. An unidentified protester shouted the words “Queen” and “Long live the king”.
image source, WASAWAT LUKHARANG/BBC THAI
Ms. Jatuporn Sae-Ung blows cakes that supporters bring as encouragement The cake is decorated with a picture of her wearing a pink Thai dress walking the red carpet at the People’s Party art fair on October 29, 2020.
Such images resulted in Ms. Warisanan Sriboonthanakit or “Admin Jane”, one of the admins of the page supporting the government of Gen. Prayut Chan-ocha, who used the page’s name as ” Cheer Lung” has been a reporter since 2020.
In the indictment stated that “This behavior is interpreted as It is an expression or conveys meaning to the protesters. or the general public which a third party understands that This defendant was the queen in the reign of King Rama 10, mocking, harassing, harassing, insulting, defamation, or slandering the king and queen. which is in a position that no one can violate.”
Call for an end to the prosecution of Section 112
However, in Amnesty’s latest statement International by Mr Clyde Ward, deputy secretary general, said the fashion show was a satirical interpretation of the political situation in the country. It is a public event that is held peacefully. It’s no different from a typical street festival with music performances. Food stalls and dancing. Participants in such events should not be punished. Just because of participating in such a peaceful gathering
image source, WASAWAT LUKHARANG/BBC THAI
“We urge government officials to immediately cease all prosecutions against individuals for exercising the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Ready to release people who have been detained unjustly,” Mr Ward said.
However, Amnesty declined to comment on the content of the various speech types. That would be construed as a violation of Article 112, but urges government officials to comply with their obligations under international law to respect, protect and promote the peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression, such as the fact that Thailand is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil Rights. and political rights (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: ICCPR), etc.
lawyer Thammasat University skeptical
This issue has been raised and criticized in many aspects of social media by Asst. Prof. Dr. Ronakorn Boonmee, Lecturer at the Criminal Law Center. criminologist Faculty of Law, Thammasat University, has expressed his views on his personal Facebook page. “Ronnakorn Bunmee” Which has more than 9,600 followers on Sept. 12 after the court has sentenced the case.
The main point is to question the interpretation of the said law in line with the constitution certifying the right to honest expression of the people and certifying that Thailand is a democratic country with the King as Head of State.
image source, Getty Images
A Briton wears a mask with the portrait of Queen Elizabeth II to attend a community event in south London. to join the celebration On the occasion of the Queen’s 70th anniversary of the throne
“It is very questionable how simply dressing in Thai clothes can be ‘mocking’, and why ‘mocking’ (if it is) an insult to mean contempt? because when considering the logic If the dress or expression is similar to the real thing. It cannot be insulting to the person who modeled that dress.” Here are some of the messages he posted on social media. which has been shared more than 1000 times
In addition, Asst. Prof. Dr. Ronakorn also stated that the question people have now is not a question of the appropriateness of the existence of this section. Rather, it is the suitability and correctness of the judge’s performance of duties. Therefore, if there is no specific reason or having any other act by the defendant that makes it an offense under section 112 other than dress The court should disclose details of the case. and the reason why the court used the similarity as an insult. To make the public see that the court’s decision remains clear, credible, reasonable and deserves further respect.
How is the comparison in foreign countries?
in the UK There is a law on human rights. Human Rights Act 1998 stating Freedom of Expression in Article 10 that “everyone has the right to free expression. This right includes expressing opinions. Receiving and providing information and ideas without interference from state powers and regardless of boundaries…”
However, the provision states that the exercise of these rights comes with “Duties and responsibilities” and may be limited by law to protect national security. or for the safety of society, public health or morality, or to prevent disturbances. or crime including to protect the reputation and rights of others, etc.
image source, Channel 4
At the end of 2020, British broadcaster Channel 4 was criticized for using “deepfake” editing technology to broadcast a video of the Queen’s Christmas blessings.
The UK is no longer using lese majesty laws. Scotland repealed its criminal law for inciting and insulting a head of state in 2010, but it has not been used to punish citizens since 1715, more than 300 years ago.
In minutes of a meeting to consider the repeal of the law, Scotland’s Community Security Minister Fergus Iowing said it was time for Scotland to abolish the UK’s crimes of sedition and insults.
Mr Iwing said the provisions were just strange things for law students to contemplate for fun. and more importantly The existence of these laws in the UK has allowed the ruling body of oppressive nations to use it as an easy excuse to apply similar laws.
“In those countries, besides[กฎหมายนั้น]It will have a worrisome effect – people are too afraid to criticize the authorities and the elite – but people are also routinely prosecuted for their expressions,” Iowing said.
He said the repeal of the defamation law against the king. or using the word “leasing-making” in Scottish law will help the UK have More “moral power” when negotiating with oppressive states.
For this reason, the UK press is able to present critical news. Or you can do a drama that tells the story of the royal family, such as the Netflix series The Crown, or even the royal comedy series The Windsors, as well as Spitting Image, a comedy show that uses satirical puppets to mock people. in the royal family, etc.
in Europe Even though many countries have laws that make it a crime to insult the king and members of the royal family. But nowadays hardly anyone is severely punished.
Take Denmark, for example, where Article 268 of the Penal Code states that anyone who insults another person without proof could face up to two years in prison. The penalty is doubled, equating to a maximum of four years. If it is an offense against the Queen and the heir, the penalty is increased by half, which is no more than three years.
Back in 2011, Danish news site Politicken reported that Two environmental activists will be charged with offenses under Section 115 after storming into a protest during a reception during the 2009 COP15 convention in Copenhagen. which Her Majesty Queen Margrethe II of Denmark is the president.
However, in August 2011, the Guardian news website reported that 11 activists involved in the raid Sentenced to two weeks in prison with only parole.
In addition, the imitation Or a show with satirical content that mocks the monarchy is not a crime at all. This is evident in the case of Ulf Pilgard, a Danish actor who earned his living by playing parodies of Queen Margrethe II and her husband Prince Henrikh. many years And on his last day to play the role at a theater in Copenhagen on Oct. 3, 2021, something unexpected happened when the Queen suddenly went on stage without notice. surprise the whole audience in the theater and Mr. Pilgard, who was dressed like him. Before the Queen gave him a souvenir gift Video clips of the incident have been published by the Danish Royal Household.social media And there are many people who share and admire the Queen’s sense of humor.