- iLaw Website
- Documentation Center
Case
Case name
Natchacha and Tatchapong: Took action in front of the BACC
Disorderly assembly
Defying NCPO order 7/2014
Name of persons / Name of Media
Natchacha Kongudom
Case status
คำอธิบายสถานะคดี ภาษาอังกฤษ
Judgment / End of trial
Status of Accused
Dismissed
Offense / order
Defying NCPO order 7/2014, Others (Order of the Head of NCPO no. 3/2015)
| Name of persons / Name of Media | Status of Accused |
|---|---|
| Tachapong | On bail |
| Pornchai | On bail |
Summary
Natchacha and Thatchapong participated in an symbolic activity held at the Bangkok Art and Cultural Center in the occasion of the Coup Anniversary. Both were later charged with defying order of the Head of the NCPO no. 3/2015, prohibited all kind of political gathering.
There are 32 people arrested and 9 people recieved summon. Other 7 people initially declared ‘civil disobedience’ and not cooperated with the procedure. Later, Pornchai surrendered because he needs to travel abroad for his education. The three accused then prosecuted together.
The case was under jurisdiction of the military court and the case took too long due to the motion to challenge jurisdiction of the military court. While the case was going on, the Head of NCPO Order was lifted and the case was ended.
Basic information
Background of accused
Legal Claims
Disorderly assembly, Others (Political Gathering up to 5 persons)
-
Form of restriction on freedom
Charge filed
-
Type of media
Public Assembly
-
Province
Bangkok
-
Court
Bangkok Military Court
Details of offence according to charge
22 May 2015, Nutchacha, Tatchapong and other activists altogether 37 people were arrested while participating in a symbolic activity to commemorate 1 year anniversary of the coup in front of Bangkok Art and Cultural Center (BACC). After that the arrest warrant was grant for at least 9 activists with the charge of political gathering more than 5 persons under Head of NCPO oder no.3/2558.
Circumstance of arrest
22 May 2015, hundread of policemen and policewomen surronded the area in front of BACC before the time of the activity. When activists gathered at the entrance gate, the authorities stayed behind the barricades.
Authorities did not arrest eveyone in one time but both uniformed and plaincloth officers opened the barricades and came out to drag 4-5 activists into the BACC building per time.
After the arrest, police officers stayed bbehind the barricades to wait for new arrest again and again. Some activists were also arrested while tried to break through the police line to help their friends. Some activists claimed that, during the arrest, they were also beaten.
After the activity was forced to end, 37 activists including the defendant in this case were arrest and taken to Pathumwan Police Station. They all were released at dawn of the next day.
After that an arrest warrant was issued against 9 activists for political gathering more than 5 persons under Head of NCPO order no.3/2558. Most of activists declared that they don't accept the procedure and conducted civil disobedience. They refused to report under the warrant. Only some of them reported and were prosecuted while Nutchacha were arrested at the hospital on 24 June 2015.
Progress of case
22 May 2015
Nutchacha, Tatchapong and other 37 activists were arrested after participating in an event to commemorate the 1 year anniversary of military coup. They were taken to be interrogated at Pathumwan Plice Station for 1 night and released in the morning of 23 May 2015.
The officer later informed that there will be 8-9 activists charged.
24 June 2015
The lawyer from Thai Lawyers for Human Rights informed that in the late morning, plainclothes officers from Pathumwan Police Station went to Vibhavadi Hospital to arrest Nutchacha who has got an arrest warrant for gathering in front of BACC. That morning, Nutchacha was going to be released from the hospital after recovering from Tonsilitis and had been hospitalized since 22 June 2015.
At 1.30pm, the lawyer said that the inquiry official was interrogating Nutchacha and would request the court for pre-trial detention. At 4.40pm, the lawyer revealed that he had opposed the detention, giving the reason that Nutchacha was sick. Besides, she had to attend university classes and, most of all, she was a transgender.
The Court dismissed the lawyers’ opposition, giving the reason that she was the leader of the agitated mob, causing public disorder along with the mass in that area. Later, the lawyer submityed a bail request with 10,000 baht cash; the Court approved.
The Court also set conditions for bail that Nutchacha was prohibitted from joining any political gatherings and in any agitating mobs concerning political protest both directly and indirectly.
As an accused under military court procedure, she must be released at a male prison. The correctional officer informed that Nutchacha would be released at Bangkok Remand Prison and would have a female nurse to take care of her.
Nutchacha said later that when she arrived at Bangkok Remand Prison, she had been body searched by a male prisoners who were assistants to the correctional officer. During that time, she was bullied and made fun of by other male prisoners, which made her felt embarrassed with those harassments. She said she felt like being intentionally sexual harassed. During the process, she had stress and worries because she had been through strip search by male staff, to open the body in front of a group of men.
29 June 2015
It was written on the Facebook page of Thai Lawyers for Human Rights that, at 12 o’ clock, the prosecutor of Military court issued a prosecution order to Thatchapong and Nutchacha, charging them as violating the Head of National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order No. 3/2015. Both of them asked to bail themselves out with 10,000 baht cash each and the Court approved.
Nutchacha sent a request for the release process to be conduct at female prison, but the Court unapproved. Colonel Phisetsak Khamchoo, Judge Advocate noted that, legally, Nutchacha was biologically male and Thai law still did not approve the male-to-female transgender as female. Hence, the request was rejected.
5 November 2015
Deposition Examination
The Military Court set a schedule for a deposition examintion at 8.30am under strict security measures. The court officers asked to make a photocopy of each observer’s ID card. Outside the Courtroom, a number of reporters from various news agencies waiting to break news while a group of people were also waiting to give flowers to the defendant for emotional support.
At Courtroom 1, Judges came to the bench at 11.30am and questioned the two defendants – Chatchai (Thatchapong) and Nutchacha, who joined the protest in front of the Bangkok Art and Cultural Center (BACC). Chatchai rejected the plaintiff’s accusations and decided to defend in Court. Therefore, the therefore plaintiff requested for witness inquiries.
However, Nutchacha’s lawyer submitted a request to the Bangkok Military Court to decide jurisdiction of the Court. Considering that the request of Defendant no.2 (Nutchacha) was related to that of Defendant no.1 (Chatchai), Judge ordered to the case to be temporarily postponed until the plaintiff finished the explanation and later sent to Pathumwan District Court after receiving opinion from the Military Court. When Pathumwan District Court gave back the opinion, defendants would be informed the date for hearing the jurisdiction order.
1 January 2016
Pornchai, one of defendants in the Bangkok Art and Cultural Center (BACC) event also appeared in the deposition examination at military court. The military prosecutor requested to merge Pornchai’s case with these two defendants as three of them and other 6 people, who had not been caught yet, collaboratively violated the law and had the same kinds of evidence and same group of witnesses. Judge, therefore, ordered the prosecutor to submit a request to the Judge in this case to merge the 3 cases altogether, making 3 defendants in one case.
7 June 2016
Deposition Examination
The Bangkok Military Court set the date for hearing of Nutchacha’s statement of defense (Defendant no. 2) at Courtroom no.2. The judges came to the bench at 11am, then read the decision on jurisdiction of the Court. The Judge of Pathumwan Civil Court considered that the order of NPCO, even though not endorsed by HM the King or the Parliament, is at the same level as the Act because NPCO came to control the country since 22 May 2014, hence having the power to issue laws to make the country in order.
Moreover, NPCO Annocenment No. 37/2014 stated that those, including citizens, who violated the laws against monarchy, national security and NPCO orders, could be tried at military courts as well. Civillians are also subjected to this order and the military court has jurisdiction over this case.
Nutchacha’s lawyer submitted the request demanding the Constitutional Court to consider whether the NCPO announcement no.37/2014 is contradict to the consttution and asked to postpone the hearing. The court then asked to review the formerly submitted request and decided to make consideration within 30 days.
28 December 2016
Deposition Examination
The military judges came to the bench at 10.05am and announced the names of the three defendants, then read the indictment to them and informed that Thatchapong, Defendant no.1 had rejected the indictment to the Court since 5 November 2015 and Pornchai, Defendant no.3 also rejected the indictments since 11 January 2015. Therefore, only testimony of Defendant no.2 would be examined today.
The court asked if defendant no.2 had a lawyer whom she could ask for legal consultation. Nutchacha answered “Yes”, then Judge asked what Nutchacha would say in concern with the indictments. She said she rejected the indictments. Judge asked if Nutchacha’s rejection was similar to the message as stated in the submitted document. Nutchacha said “Yes”, then Judge told the parties concerned to set a schedule for witness examination.
The Military Prosecutor, Military Judge, and defendant’s lawyer agreed to set the date on 3 April 2017 for witness examination. However, the lawyer asked if defendant could investigate the evidences in advance before the set date. The military prosecutor objected, giving a reason that this case was not complicated, so witness hearing could be performed immediately. The lawyer objected, claiming that defendant had the right under Criminal Procedure Code which started from investigating the evidences.
The judge said it was the discreation of judge to allow defendant in investigating all evidences or not. If the date for evidence investigation was set, defendant was also committed to bring all evidences for the court to investigate. Defendant accepted, hence Judge ordered the evidence investigation to be performed on 3 April 2017.
The written testimony that Nutchacha’s lawyer submitted to Judge concluded that defendant no.2 rejected the indictments of the Prosecutor. It said that she had the right to free expression according to the Universal Declaration of Human Right (Item 19) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) - ICCPR Item 19. Besides, all constitutional laws had acknowledged freedom of expression as well as in current one in Section 4. Therefore, freedom of expression was protected as both international obligations and Thai conventional practice.
The Constitutional Court ever had a verdict No. 12/2012, using international obligations as a basis for considering judgement. Therefore, all Thai government agencies had to abide and follow to this practice. Although the constitution and ICCPR had some limitations to freedom of expression, it is regulated that the limitations must conform to these following conditions: 1) Limited by virtues of legislative acts issued by the parliament; 2) Limited under objectives for public health and good morals; 3) Limited as necessary and in good proportion. Regarding this, the NPCO Order No. 3/ 2015 – Item 12 having banned political gatherings of 5 or more people was against the necessity and not in a good proportion rule. The term “political gatherings” was too broadly defined, too ambiguous to easily understand, and not related reasonably with the objective that it was aimed to protect. Besides, it had some adverse unnecessary impact on freeom of the citizens. Therefore, the Head of NCPO Order No. 3/2015 was announced arbritarily and not enforceable.
3 April 2017
Inspection of evidences
10.15am – At Courtroom No.3, Military Judges – Colonel Theerapon Pattamanon, Colonel Nirun, Kamsorn, and Navy Captain Surachai Salamteh - came to the bench for trial of 3 defendants : Chatchai, Nutchacha, and Pornchai.
After the plaintiff and defense lawyer inspected evidences of the other party, noone declares any of thier arguments. Judges then set the dates for hearing of Prosecutor’s witnesses – Pol. Col Jaru Sarutyaporn on 6 July, 2017 and Pol. Col Athit Choenyim on 7 July 2017. Both of them were policemen at Pathumwan Police Station who were in the incidence.
26 June 2017
Rangsiman was arrested according to the arrest warrant in the case accusing him of distribution of leaflets on constitutional referendum and was filed a lawsuit at Bangkok Military Court. When he arrived at the Court, he was informed that he will be prosecuted together with this case. During the prosecution process and bail processes, Rangsiman was sent to the Bangkok Remand Prison with attention of the media. At 14.30pm, the prosecution was finished and Judge ordered that Rangsiman could be bailed out with 10,000 baht cash. Rangsiman, then, had been released from the prison in the evening.
