- iLaw Website
- Documentation Center
Case
Case name
Ponlawat : Dropped leaflets in Rayong
Sedition
Name of persons / Name of Media
Ponlawat
Case status
คำอธิบายสถานะคดี ภาษาอังกฤษ
On trial in Court of Appeal
Status of Accused
On bail
Offense / order
Article 14 (3) Computer Related Crime Act, Article 116 Criminal Code, Others (Sanitation Act)
Summary
Ponlawat was arrested on 27 March 2015 for disseminating leaflets against the military government in four public places in Rayong Province. He was charged under sedition law and defying official's order under Criminal Code Section 116 and 368 and violating Sanitation Act.
This case was tried under Military Court in Chonburi Province, the witness examination went slowly due to the absence of plaintiff witnesses. The case then transferred back to Rayong Provincial Court after the end of NCPO power.
The trial went quite fast at civillian court. On 26 March 2020 Rayong Provincial Court delivered a verdict found guilty under Sedition charge and sentenced the defendant to 4 months in prison. The defendant was released on bail during appeal process.
Basic information
Background of accused
Ponlawat was arrested on 27 March 2015 for disseminating leaflets against the military government on three public places in Rayong Province. He was charged under sedition law and defying official's order under Criminal Code Section 116 and 368 and violating Sanitation Act. This case is tried by Chonburi Military Court.
Inquiry officer from Muang Rayong Police Station responsible for this case.
Legal Claims
Sedition
-
Form of restriction on freedom
Charge filed
-
Type of media
Print media
-
Province
Rayong
-
Court
Military Court Circle 14th, Rayong Provincial Court
-
Black case
คำอธิบายคดีดำ ภาษาอังกฤษ
Court: ศาลมณฑลทหารบกที่ 14 จ.ชลบุรี No: 31 ก./2559 -
Red case
คำอธิบายดคีแดง ภาษาอังกฤษ
Court: ศาลจังหวัดระยอง No: อ. 265/2563 Date: 2020-03-26
Details of offence according to charge
On 21 March 2015, around 1 am., Polawat allegedly produced leaflets copying picture and messages from leaflets he had seen in Burapha University and in online media. The leaflets contained message 'Wake up and rise now! ... All democracy lovers, Down with dictatorship! Long live democracy.' and a picture of three fingers salute in A4 paper. Polawat allegedly rode a motorcycle to drop leaflets in 4 places which are in front of Rayong Kindergarden School, Suan Sri Muang Park, infront of Rayong Wittayakom School and Rayong Technical College. In front of Rayong Wittayakom School, he allegedly attached leaflets at the bus stop. In front of Rayong Technical College, he allegedly attached leaflets with mable tables.
The request for pre-trial detention that the inquriy officer subnitted to the military court stated that the expression of Polawat can cause conflict and confusion to the society and can lead to violence. The act was a violation of NCPO annoucement no. 12/2557 and 97/2557. He then was charged for Sedition and disobey the authority's order under the Criminal Code Section 116 and 368 and distributing leaflets without permission under Section 10 of the Sanitation Act.
Circumstance of arrest
On March 2015, day time, a police officer informed the security officer of Polawat's company to see and arrest him.
Polawat said that, bofore the arrest, there was arumor about the leaflets in Rayog Province and there were some police officers waited to see him near his house. Becuase he was worry about his company's responsibility which he has to work during Friday, Saturday and Sunday, he then decided to complete his duty and surrender on Monday. But he was arrested while working.
Progress of case
Examination of witnesses for the prosecution
A military prosecutor asked the court to postpone today proceeding as Pol.Lt.Gen. Weerawut was on an important assignment and could not present in the court for the examination. The defense lawyer made no objection regarding the postponement. The Court then scheduled next hearing on 28 August 2018 and concluded a proceeding around 10:20 a.m.
14 June 2018
Hearing of evidence
The judge took the bench around 9:50 a.m., at Nawamindhachini Army Base, Chonburi Province. The judge examined another case and gave verdict around 9:55 a.m.
Third Plantiff's Witness: Police Lieutenant General Weerawut Melai
The judge starts the progress at 10:00 a.m., a military prosecutor asked to postpone the hearing since Pol.Lt.Gen. Weerawut was at the important government duty and asked the Court to set out an appointment warrant to hearing the fourth witness, Colonel Navee Mayai instead. The defendant did not oppose the postpone by the plaintiff. The Court scheduled the next hearing on 28 August 2018 and wrapped up this hearing around 10:20 a.m.14 June 2018
Hearing of evidence
The judge took the bench around 9:50 a.m., at Nawamindhachini Army Base, Chonburi Province. The judge examined another case and gave verdict around 9:55 a.m.
Third Plantiff's Witness: Police Lieutenant General Weerawut Melai
The judge starts the progress at 10:00 a.m., a military prosecutor asked to postpone the hearing since Pol.Lt.Gen. Weerawut was at the important government duty and asked the Court to set out an appointment warrant to hearing the fourth witness, Colonel Navee Mayai instead. The defendant did not oppose the postpone by the plaintiff. The Court scheduled the next hearing on 28 August 2018 and wrapped up this hearing around 10:20 a.m.14 June 2018
Hearing of evidence
The judge took the bench around 9:50 a.m., at Nawamindhachini Army Base, Chonburi Province. The judge examined another case and gave verdict around 9:55 a.m.
Third Plantiff's Witness: Police Lieutenant General Weerawut Melai
The judge starts the progress at 10:00 a.m., a military prosecutor asked to postpone the hearing since Pol.Lt.Gen. Weerawut was at the important government duty and asked the Court to set out an appointment warrant to hearing the fourth witness, Colonel Navee Mayai instead. The defendant did not oppose the postpone by the plaintiff. The Court scheduled the next hearing on 28 August 2018 and wrapped up this hearing around 10:20 a.m.23 March 2015,
Matichon online reported that there were leaflets against the dictatorship at Suan Sri Muang Park in Rayong Province and at the bus stop in front of Rayong Technical College.
27 March 2015,
Plain clothe police officers went to see Polawat at his company and took him to the Military Camp in Chonburi. While he was detaning, there were 3-4 military officers talked to him for an attitude adjustment. The military officers told Polawat that he would be taken back on the next day.
28 March 2015,
Polawat was taken back to Rayong Police Station in the evening. At the polict station he was taken to a press conference before a lot of media. After that he was detained at the police station for 2 nights.
30 March 2015,
Police officers took Polawat to the court at 34th military circle in a military camp in Chonburi Province to request for a pre-trial detention. A lawyer from Thai Lawyer for Human Rigths accompanied him to request for a temporary release with 70,000 baht cash. The court allowed him on bail in the afternoon. Polawat was taken to Chonburi prison to be released.
31 March 2015,
Police officer told Polawat to bring his motocycle to be taken photos as an evidence in the case. When he arrived at police station he was informed of additional charge under Computer Crime Act for sending photos of the leaflets to the Facebook Page Thai Student Center for Democracy. Polawat admiited that he took photos and sent them but he had no intention to incite the public to damage the national security.
11 November 2016,
The Military Court scheduled the deposition examination to ask for his plea. Polawat and the clerk from the lawyer arrived the court. At the court room no.1. the military judges appeared on the bench around 10.30 am, Polawat told the court that he has just appointed his lawyer today and ask to postpone the trial. The court allowed to postpone the trail until 6 February 2017.
6 February 2017
Deposition Examination
Polawat along with his parents and lawyers arrived at the court around 8.30 am. Upon arrival, Polawat report himself to the court officer then take a seat and wait to be called. Around 10.20 am the court officer told polawat to go to proceeding room no.1
The court began a proceeding around 10.35, asking if Polawat had already recived a copy of the statement of accusation or not? Polawat replied that he had already recieved it. The court then asked whether Polawat is ready to plea or not? Polawat said he is ready. The court then read the statement of accusation to Polawat once again and asked for his plea. Polawat denied all charges.
The court then asked for the Polawat's name, age, address, occupation and other information for the record.The military prosecutor requested the court to conduct witnesses examination while the defense lawyer request for the examination of evidences.The court and the military prosecutor then told the lawyer that they also have to submit list of witnesses and evidences 7 days prior to the examination date. Both parties agreed to examine evidences on 9 May 2017.
14 June 2018
Examination of witnesses for the prosecution
The court took the bench around 9:50 a.m. then proceed with verdict rendering of other case around 5 minuites. It then began a proceeding of this case around 10.00 a.m.
Examination of the third witness for the prosecution Pol.Lt.Gen.Weerawut Melai
A military prosecutor asked the court to postpone today proceeding as Pol.Lt.Gen. Weerawut was on an important assignment and could not present in the court for the examination. The defense lawyer made no objection regarding the postponement. The Court then scheduled next hearing on 28 August 2018 and concluded a proceeding around 10:20 a.m.
On 26 March 2020
Verdict Annoucement
Rayong Provincial Court scheduled a hearing for the case of Ponlawat. Despite the fact that the Judicial Administration Commission recently announced an order to postpone the hearing date due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, however, in this case, the court at its discretion decided to deliver the verdict as previously scheduled. The defendant alongside with his father and his lawyer then needed to be present for hearing.
At the court, a screening point and disinfection sprayer were set up to restrict visitors at the entrance. Initially the case observers were asked to wait outside the courtroom to minimise the risk of exposure to virus. But they were later allowed by the Court to participate in the hearing.
In the courtroom, the bench informed that audio recording was not permitted. Then it started to read the verdict from the case’s conclusion of facts.
The court found that the act of the defendant was considered as making an appearance to the public by using words, as stated in the leaflet, with the purpose to raise sedition and disaffection amongst the people against the NCPO government. The act of the defendant was found guilty as filed.
For an offence under the Computer Crime Act, the defendant stated that he never posted or saw a post on Facebook Page “Thai Student Center for Democracy (TSCD)”. The plaintiff did not provide clear attestation that the defendant was administering the Page, knowing the password, or being involved with Page “TSCD”. The Court saw no necessity to consider whether or not this case violated Section 14(2) (3), as the evidence provided by the plaintiff was not enough to justify that
After the judgement was rendered, Ponlawat posted a cash bail of 100,000 Baht in order to pursue the appeal. The bail was granted by the Court within less than an hour.
The Verdict
Summary of Verdict of the Court of the first Instance
In this case, the plaintiff “Pol.Lt.Col. Manit Boonmalert” stated that he was reported by his subordinate that someone handed out leaflets throughout 4 places in Rayong Province. Police investigators discovered from the CCTV footage and online source that the alleged individual was Ponlawat. He admitted to giving out the leaflets in both stages, upon arrest and in the military interrogation. Military Prosecutor consequently filed a complaint under Section 116 of the NCPO’s announcement no. 97/2557 and also Computer Crime Act Section 14(3). As the ground of complaint was happened under declaration of Martial Law, the prosecutor viewed that any individual’s means of expression must comply with the law and allowed by the NCPO only.
Regarding the offence of sedition according to Section 116, it was considered from the content in the leaflet which said “Wake up and fight! democracy devotees. Down with dictatorship, Long live democracy” with a three-finger salute featuring the message “Liberty Equality Fraternity”. In the meantime, the Nation was tightly controlled by the NCPO due to the intense political unrest. After the declaration of Martial Law followed with hundreds of the NCPO’s announcements, civil and political rights, freedom of expression and media freedom therefore were limited. Groups of people were affected by the announcements, and of course resulting in some disaffecting.
As the 2007 Constitution that certified rights and freedom of the people was revoked as the NCPO took power, the interim Constitution was later enacted with many restrictions of human rights. At that time, groups of university students tried to organize activities against the NCPO. The defendant and his friends were claimed by the plaintiff to knowingly carry on such activities that would cause unrest to the public. Even though his friend was summoned for “attitude adjustment”. It was said that the violence claimed by the defendant to have been used against the students was just a vague. The plaintiff also said that during the time of the NCPO’s administration, the society must be rearranged in order to raise peace with no insurrection.
The act of the defendant by disseminating leaflets in 4 places was done in a public place. So it was considered as making an appearance to the public by using words, as stated in the leaflet, with the purpose to raise sedition and disaffection amongst the people against the NCPO government. The act of the defendant was found guilty as filed.
Claimed as an exercise of rights under the Constitution by the defendant, the Court explained that the meaning of an act within the purpose of the Constitution referred to a lawful act without purpose of deceitfulness, and distortion. While the message on the leaflet appeared to raise unrest which was not either according to Constitutional purpose or expressed as an honest opinion or criticism. The defendant also stated that the message was once used in CU - TU traditional football match but the Court said the message must be considered with other factors as well such as appropriateness of usage and time. It further added that the message in the case of the football match was used to express an opinion and may not intend to cause incitement.
For an offence under the Computer Crime Act, the defendant stated that he never posted or saw a post on Facebook Page “Thai Student Center for Democracy (TSCD)”. But when being cross-examined the defendant stated that he had just sent pictures to inbox of the TSCD Page.
The public prosecutor informed the Court that the defendant himself had posted that picture with a message on TSCD Page. But from the investigation, the defendant just used his personal account to share the picture to TSCD only which contradicted to the plaintiff’s complaint.
The plaintiff did not provide clear attestation that the defendant was administering the Page, knowing the password, or being involved with Page “TSCD”. Even though the defendant admitted to import the picture into a computer system did not prove that the defendant created the post on TSCD Page. The Court saw no necessity to consider whether or not this case violated Section 14(2) (3), as the evidence provided by the plaintiff was not enough to justify that
Those leaflets (34 pieces) and the printer considered as tools in committing an offence must be confiscated. The defendant would be sentenced to 6-month prison term but as his testimony benefits the trial, he would serve two third of the prison sentence while the rest of the offences would be dismissed
