- Important case
- Cases, Computer Crime Act, Section 112
Saravut: Post a Portrait of HM
Latest Update: 20/08/2019
Defendant
Saravut
Case Status
On trial in Court of First Instance
Case Started
2016
Complainant / Plaintiff
Intelligence agent from military unit in Chiang Rai is an accusor and the military prosecutor is a plaintiff in this case
Table of Content
Saravut, owner of a local glasses shop in Chiang Rai province, was charged with defaming the monarchy under Penal Code Section 112, After posting a portrait of HM. He reported to the police on 11 Octocer 2016 then he was detained in prison for 38 days before allowed on bail.
On 8 August 2019, Chiang Rai Military Court strike the case out of the court. Then ordered to transfer the case to be try in Chiang Rai Provincial Court by using the same bail bond. Sarawuth stand trial in the military court for 2 years and 10 months from October 2016 – August 2019. The Chiang Rai Military Court had examined total 7 witnesses and there were at least 3 times that the court had to reschedule a hearing because withnesses for the prosecution did not came to the court
Defendant Background
Prior to the arrest, Sarawut was 32 years old. He had two children; a 5-year-old and a 3-month-old. He owned an optic shop in Chiang Rai. In 2010, Sarawut joined the Red Shirt Protest and that he had been a politic enthusiast afterward, however, he had not joined political activities under a specific group. He generally expresses his political view on his private Facebook page by making a satire video clip which resulted in number of followers.
After the coup, Sarawut was abducted on 25 May 2014 by the military and detained at Mengrai Maharaj military camp for 7 days, before he was charged of defying the NPCO annoucement No.7/2014 on Prohibition of gathering up to 5 persons as he and his friends were protesting and calling for the release of the group of activists who protested the coup by joining Eating McDonald’s campaign. On 14 August 2014, Chiang Rai Military Court sentenced him to 6 months in prison and fined in the sum of THB 10,000. The court, however, mitigated his penalties by half on the ground that he pleaded guilty. He was then sentenced to 3 months in prison and fined in the sum of THB 5,000. The court finally suspended the sentence in the period of 1 year on the ground that the defendant may reform himself.
During the period of military dictatorship, Sarawut had been summoned and visited at home by the military more than 10 times. Mainly as a result of his political expression on his personal Facebook account. The “visit” was claimed to be on duty by the military.
Offense
Article 14 (3) Computer Related Crime Act, Article 112 Criminal Code
Allegation
The complaint of the military prosecutor establishes that on 21 July 2016, the defendant defamed, insulted or threatened Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn, the Crown Prince and the heir apparent of King Bhumibol Adulyadej—the ninth monarch of the Chakri dynasty—to the Thai throne. The defendant imported data into a computer system, by posting two images of the Crown Prince in manner of comparing between his private posture with unknown woman and his official posture. The post was embedded with the comment that read “so very cool” on his personal Facebook page.
The complaint further describes that the post was set to be accessible by the public, and therefore, was liked by number of his followers. The complaint suggests that such act was inappropriate to the Crown Prince who shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated, and it was considered an imputation before a third person in a manner likely to impair the Crown Prince’s reputation, to be hated or scorned which are the offense relating to the security of the kingdom and publishing or forwarding computer data.
Circumstance of Arrest
On 26 August 2016, at 6.30 am, a group of plainclothes officers including the military force, the police, and the officers from the Technology Crime Suppression Division were presented at Sarawut’s house. They briefly claimed that Sarawut was accused of posting on Facebook a content that could be considered defaming the royal family. However, without specific detail of the post was given, the officers then requested an inspection of his house, and seized one computer, one mobile phone and one flashdrive. Sarawut was taken to Chiang Rai Police Station. It was uncertain that this abduction was deemed to be an arrest.
Further, the officers brought Sarawut to his other houses for inspection. These house are his old house and his mother’s house. No further seizure proceeded. The officers obtained a search warrant from Chiang Rai Military Court. However, the first house was searched by asserting the power from Section 44 of the Interim Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2557 (2014) and the Martial Law Act.
The Technology Crime Suppression Division’s officer made a copy of the computer seized from Sarawut’s house at Chiang Rai Police Station. Sarawut then knew that the abduction on 26 August 2016 was not an arrest. There were also no charges pronounced. The case was still under investigation and the process of accumulating evidence to be proposed to the commander. The officer released him in that evening. Nonetheless, he had not been sufficiently informed that his action would then be considered a violation of Section 112 of the Criminal Code (lèse-majesté) until 11 October 2016. About a month after the search, the police then called Sarawut in to acknowledge the charges.
Trial Observation
No information
Black Case
No information
Court
Chiang Rai Military Court
Additional Info
No information
Reference
No information
26 August 2016
A group of more than 10 plainclothes officers including the military force, the police, and the officers from the Technology Crime Suppression Division were presented at Sarawut’s house. They requested an inspection of his house and seized one computer, one mobile phone and one flashdrive. On that day, there were no charges pronounced to him and Sarawut was later released.
11 October 2016
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that at 9.00 am, Sarawut promptly met the inquiry official at Chiang Rai Police Station to acknowledge the charges in order to show that he was being fully cooperative and had no intention to escape since the beginning of the investigation on 26 August 2016.
At Chiang Rai Police Station, the inquiry official informed him the detail of the charges that: on 21 July 2016, the intelligence officials reported that there was a Facebook page which used the same username as Sarawut’s posted images of the Crown Prince with certain narrative, however, couple minutes later the post was deleted; after that Facebook user named Sarawut posted a picture of Zlatan Ibrahimović, Swedish footballer with his body tattoo visible with certain narrative.
The charges record declared that an officer had been closely monitoring Sarawut according to Sarawut’s public posting behaviour on political issues. The military prosecutor and the chief officer reviewed the case and concluded the prosecution be proceeded under Section 112 of the Criminal Code and Sections 14 (3) and (5) of the Computer-related Crimes Act B.E. 2550 (2007).
Sarawut primarily denied all the charges. Following the verbal investigation session, the police brought Sarawut to Chiang Rai Military Court and filed a petition for pre-trial detention. The court granted the petition that Sarawut be detained at Chiang Rai Central Prison for a period of 12 days from 11 to 22 October 2016.
Sarawut’s Lawyer later filed a request for a temporary release providing a THB 400,000 worth land title deed owned by Sarawut and his wife. The lawyer asserted that Sarawut had showed no sign of escape, and he also had a burden of looking after his family whose son was only 3 months old. The military court, however, dismissed the petition given that: the case was a severe-penalty case; there is a tendency that the accused will escape, interfere with the evidence, or commit further complication.
22 October 2016
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that Sarawut’s relative and lawyer filed the second request for a temporary release following the completion of Sarawut’s second detention session. This petition incorporated THB 500,000 worth asset as a guarantee and provided the same ground for the release. The court’s officer received the petition. However, it was asserted that the military judges went on a duty to the other court. Therefore, the petition could not be reviewed on that day.
25 October 2016
Sarawut’s relative and lawyer were informed that the military judge dismissed the petition given that there were no new causes to revise the previous order. The reasons were the case was a severe-penalty case; there is a tendency that the accused will escape, interfere with the evidence, or commit further complication.
3 November 2016
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that the inquiry official filed a petition for pre-trial detention (the third session) by asserting the investigation was still pending three witness testimonies and the result of the accused’s fingerprint test. The court granted another 12-day detention without the present of the accused whose the second session had duly been complete.
Sarawut’s relative filed the third request for a temporary release providing the equivalent asset guarantee to the previous petition.
The court, again, reviewed and dismissed the petition given that: the case carries severe penalty; there is a tendency that the accused will escape and cause a hardship to the investigation. Conclusively, the court reasoned that there were no new causes to revise the previous order.
17 November 2016
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that Sarawut’s relative repeated the petition filing for the fourth time, standing the same ground. This petition narrated that the accused fully complied with the search on 26 August 2016 and the investigation thereafter, also the accused had not showed a signs of escape nor tried to mess with the evidence from the beginning of the investigation.
The court reviewed the petition and subsequently questioned the inquiry official on the accused’s behaviour. The inquiry official concluded not to object the bail given that the accused had showed no sign of escape and fully complied with the investigation. The court granted the petition for the temporary release, concluding the guarantee in an amount of THB 100,000 with the condition that the accused is prohibited from leaving the country without consent. Sarawut was finally released from Chiang Rai Central Prison after being detained for 38 days.
29 December 2016
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that the military prosecutor filed a complaint to the court.
Sarawut primarily denied that he was not the person posting the content as described in the complaint. He insisted to continue the process in the court. The court scheduled the hearing of the defendant’s plead to be proceeded on 7 February 2017.
7 February 2017
Deposition Examination
At 10 am, the Court began the hearing by reading the complaint. In sum, the defendant was accused of violating Section 112 of the Criminal Code and Sections 14 (3) and (5) of the Computer-related Crimes Act B.E. 2007 as per his posting of the images and the comments relating to King Maha Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun during the time the King was the Crown Prince. After the reading, Sarawut denied all the allegationห and requested to fight the case. The court then scheduled the evidence examination to be proceeded on 11 April 2017.
11 April 2017
The evidence examination
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights reported that Chiang Rai Military Court began the evidence examination at 10.30 am. The military prosecutor declared the list of evidence which requested for the testimony of 10 witnesses and submission of 17 documentary evidence. The defendant’s lawyer requested for the testimony of 4 witnesses and submission of 2 documentary evidence. After the examination, the court scheduled the first hearing of the plaintiff’s witness to be proceeded on 12 June 2017.
Verdict
No information