iLaw HOME
  • Important case
  • Cases, Computer Crime Act, Defamation

Tung Kham company sued youth journalist and Thai PBS

Latest Update: 16/08/2019

Defendant

Wanpen or Ploy

Case Status

Other

Case Started

2015

Complainant / Plaintiff

Tungkum Co., Ltd., an affiliated company of Tongkah Harbour PCL., had earned the right to explore and develop a gold mine as well as obtained the mine concession from the Ministry of Industry. The designated area was in Wang Saphung District, Loei Province. They had another branch office in Phuket Province. Tungkum Ltd. had six committeemen; Mr. Chana Wongsupa, Mr. Pramote Bunsit, Mr. Bundit Saengseridham, Mr. Wijit Jiamwijitkul, Mr. Wichai Cherdcheewasart, and Mr. Thanapoom Dettewandamrong.

Table of Content

ThaiPBS broadcasted a citizen journalist progaram on 1 September 2015 reporting about impact of gold mining on environment in Wangsapung District, Loei Province.

Tung Kham company who own the mine in the area file a complaint to Meenburi Police station and file a case before Juvenile Court in Loei against Wanpen or Ploy, a 10th grade student, whose voice narrated the program under the defamation by publication charge. Tung Kham company also filed another case against ThaiPBS station, reporter and station executives before Criminal Court under defanation by publication and Conputer Crime charge.

The court of the first instance did not accept the case after preliminary hearing but later the Court of Appeal ordered to accept the case. Tung Kham company and ThaiPBS negotiated with court for six times and has agreed. ThaiPBS produced a scoop with the fact from the plaintiff and broadcast messages on midday news. The plaintiff satisfied and withdrew the case.

 

 

Defendant Background

At the time of the incident, Wanpen, aka Ploy, a tenth grade student, was 15 years old. She lived in Wang Saphung District, Loei Province. This area had been affected by the mining operation. 

Tung Kham Co., Ltd. filed the case before Criminal Court against 5 individuals;

  1. Wirada Saelim, Citizen Thai PBS Program Presenter
  2. Thai Public Broadcasting Service (TPBS)
  3. Somchai Suwanban, former Director General of TPBS
  4. Kohket Chanthaloetlak, Director of News Department
  5. Yothin Sitthibodikun, Director of Television and Radio Department 

Offense

Article 14 (1) Computer Related Crime Act, Article 326 / 328 Criminal Code

Allegation

The case against Wanpen or Ploy, Thungkum company stated that Ploy gave an interview to ThaiPBS reporter during the youth camp on 28-30 August 2015 that

'Huai creek got affected from gold mine industry in the area and contaminated. The water is not drinkable.'

The program with Ploy' voice aired all over the country on 1 September 2015 and also posted on internet cause a damage to Thunhkam company. The information was claimed to be false because the company has proven that there is no contamination and the Huai creek does not pass the mine.

The case against ThaiPBS, reporters and station administrators, the complaint stated that ThaiPBS broadcasted enviromental news on the youth camp during 28-30 Audust 2016. The program said that Huai creek affcted from the gold mine industry. 

The plaintiff claimed that the information was false and an impute to the plaintiff in a manner to impair the reputation and cause the damage to the plaintiff's business. The plaintiff demand a compensation for 50 million baht and demand ThaiPBS to stop broadcasting for 5 years.

 

Circumstance of Arrest

No information

Trial Observation

No information

Black Case

อ.3756/2558

Court

Criminal Court

Additional Info

No information

Reference

No information
1 September 2015
 
Citizen Thai PBS Program, episode; Camp Yaowachon Hak Banchaokhong (Youth Loves Homeland Camp) was aired on the evening news program, Thai PBS. The content of the program was about a youth camp, which aimed for the local youth to learn about their environment. They also talked about the effects of mining in Wang Saphung District, Loei Province.   
 
6 September 2015
 
Prachatai, online newspaper, reported that at 11.00 am, Ploy and her family members met the Village Headman, three representatives form Tungkum Co., Ltd., and the Deputy Chief Executive of Kowlaung Subdistrict Administrative Organization. The representatives informed that the Company would file for defamation, illegal dissemination of information and Computer-Related Crime Act (CCA) against those involved organising this camp. They included the news presenter, Thai PBS, and Ploy. They claimed that the news had damaged the Company’s reputation. They said that there were no harmful substances, and that Huai creek did not run through the mine.  
 
The representatives advised Ploy to report to the police. Ploy should inform that the news staff forced her to report that news, so that she would not be charged against.        
 
19 November 2015
The website, Citizen Thai PBS, reported that Thai PBS staff received an order for the preliminary hearing for the case of Tungkum Co., Ltd., the plaintiff, against Wirada Saelim, Citizen Thai PBS Program Presenter, and five other individuals, which were Thai Public Broadcasting Service (TPBS), Somchai Suwanban, Kohket Chanthaloetlak, and Yothin Sitthibodikun for defamation, illegal dissemination of information. The hearing was scheduled on 21 March 2016.       
 
15 December 2015
Thai PBS made a statement regarding the lawsuit, Tungkum Co., Ltd., against the young reporter for defamation. Thai PBS mentioned that if the Company had no other intention other than protecting their right, then filing against Thai PBS should be a sufficient ground. It was to prevent the public being misled for the Company’s wrong intention. Thai PBS urged the Company to review the lawsuit against the youth.  
 
 
22 December 201
The website, Citizen Thai PBS, reported that the youth’s relatives received the summons, which was issued on 14 December. It was for the accused to report to Minburee police station on 30 December 2015 at 10.00 am., to acknowledge the charge of defamation by publication for reporting Citizen Thai PBS Program, episode; Camp Yaowachon Hak Banchaokhong (Youth Loves Homeland Camp). The program was broadcasted by Thai PBS on 1 September 2015. The report contained the effect of gold mining on quality of live and the environment in Wang Saphung District, Loei Province.      
 
28 December 2015
The website, Citizen Thai PBS, reported that on 29 December 2015, 10.00 am., Jirasak Chaichanasap, Ploy’s School headmaster, announced that a legal advisor of Tungkum Co., Ltd., paid him a visit and asked the School to send Ploy to the Juvenile Observation and Protection Centre of Loei Province. If Ploy apologized, they would drop charges against her.  
 
21 March 2016
Preliminary hearing for the lawsuit against Thai PBS, at the Criminal Court
 
The website, Citizen Thai PBS, reported that a lawyer and representatives of Tungkum Co., Ltd., the plaintiff, asked to postpone the hearing. They reasoned that they were still waiting for mine concession and Huai creek-related document from the Department of Primary Industries and Mines, Loei Province. The defendant’s lawyer did not argue if they were important documents. The judge postponed the hearing to 30 May 2016, 09.00 am onwards.    
 
Nonetheless, the judge urged the plaintiff to gather evidence promptly for the next hearing, or the judge would determine accordingly.   
 
2 June 2016
The website, Citizen Thai PBS, reported that the Juvenile Observation and Protection Centre of Loei Province had sent a letter to Ploy. The Centre agreed and did not allow the company to file the lawsuit to the Juvenile and Family Court.
 
According to the Juvenile and Family Court and Its Procedure Act, B.E. 2553 (2010), Section 99, states that it forbids any injured person to file criminal charges against children and youth before the Juvenile and Family Court, unless the permission is granted by the Director of the Juvenile Observation and Protection Centre in the area.     
 
16 November 2016
At 9.00 am, the Court Room number 812, the Criminal Court dismissed the case. The judge informed that many state agencies agreed and concluded that cyanide was found in the creek. The villagers could not use the water. The judge mentioned that the defendant’s report was a faithful criticism and was not defamation.  
 
 

Verdict

The Verdict of Criminal Court
 
On 16 November 2016 around 9 am at the courtroom 812, the Criminal Court scheduled to read an order of the case between Tungkum Ltd and Thai Public Broadcasting Service (TPBS) executives and broadcaster on the ground of airing a report claming the mine operator caused an environmental damage in Huai creek.
 
The defendants in this case are five individuals; Wirada Sae-Lim, moderator for Citizen Journalist Program; Thai Public Braodacaster Service (ThaiPBS); Somchai Suwanban, former Thai PBS director; Kohket Chanthaloetlak, Thai PBS dews director; and Yothin Sitthibodikun, director for Thai PBS’s Television and Radio units.
 
The court adjudicated that the case started from a youth camp in Wang Saphung district of Loei Province. During the camp, Thai PBS’s citizen journalist program held an interview with some of the participants and villagers who alleged that there are chemical contaminants in the Huai creek. The plaintiff stated that it is not true since the mining area and the river are distant, hence it filed a complaint that the accused imported false data on television and Youtube which brought cause a damage to the gold mine and violated Section 328 in the Criminal Code and Section 14(1) in the Computer Crimes Act.
 
To examine whether the content was false and harmed the company’s reputation, after the mine tailing reservoir collapsed, the residents appealed to a governmental agency that the water was polluted. Thus a related office investigated and found that over 20 locals received high level of cyanide in their body, which is the substance used in mining operation and Tungkum Ltd is the only industry in the creek area.
 
Furthermore, water quality testing in Huai and nearby creeks was conducted and high residue levels of toxins were discovered.  The Provincial Public Health Office once disallowed the townspeople from using water from the resources for consumption and agriculture. The Pollution Control Department examined and directed the plaintiff to fix the problem along with explaining to public, and ordered to temporarily suspend the operation.
 
The voice of the local people in the village, stating contamination in the water resource from answering questions from the reporter that are by no means misleading, and of juvenile members who participated in the river youth camp, which all spoke in the same way about the water pollution, tally with the water test results and the government’s warnings.
 
The mentioned television program reported about environmental and natural resources caught the social’s attention because it is a matter of everyone’s qulity life. Since the five defendants, as media, presented the issue to the public by carrying out an investigation without made-up evidences and reported per the residential villagers’ opinions. It is, therefore, an honest criticism by way of fair comment on any person or thing subjected to public criticism and is not guilty of criminal defamation by advertising. As a result, the court dismissed the case.

Other Cases

  • Important Case

Teepakorn: Sharing YouTube video and criticizing the monarchy on Facebook

  • Cases, Computer Crime Act, Section 112
  • Important Case

Nut: Wore crop top at Siam Paragon

  • Cases, Section 112
  • Important Case

Tepha: Defying public assembly act(2nd case)

  • Cases, Public Assembly Act