Case

Case name

Sugar factory sued Nam Oun Basin Lover for Defamation

Defamation

Name of persons / Name of Media

Duenpen

Status of Accused

Others(The plaintiff withdrew. The case ended.)

Offense / order

Article 326 / 328 Criminal Code

Summary

On 11 November and 16 December 2016, Nam Oun Basin Lover group filed a complaint to Oum Jhan Municipality asking to suspend the construction of public utility system that will support sugar and biomass power plant as the construction of such utilities will effected to public road and pubilc water drain.

As a consequence, the Thai Rung Roeng company, filed defamation lawsuit against 20 members of the Nam Oun Basin Lover group. This case is in a process of reconciliation between the plaintiff and defenses.

There was a mediation between both sides but could not find a solution. Before the preliminary hearing started the plaintiff withdrew the case claiming to have a reconciliation.

Basic information

Background of accused

Complainant / Plaintiff

Thai Roong Ruang Sugar Company is a plaintiff who directly filed the case to the court.

Legal Claims

Defamation

Form of restriction on freedom

Charge filed
Type of media

Other
Province

Sakon Nakhon
Court

Sakon Nakhon Provincial Court
Black case

คำอธิบายคดีดำ ภาษาอังกฤษ

Court: ศาลจังหวัดสกลนคร No: 6640/2560

Details of offence according to charge

On 11 September 2016, all defendants signed in a complaint submitting to Ratthawut Butrat, the chief executive of the Oum Jhan Subdistrict Administrative Organization (SAO), Kusuman District, Sakon Nakhon Province over the plaintiff company. The defendant asked the SAO tto suspend the expedition of the sugar factory after the compay started to clear the land and cause the damage to the road and local creek.

Thereafter, on 16 September 2016, the defendants filed more complaints to other official units to oppose the construction of sugar factory and biomass power plant claiming that the company did not comply with the Ministry of Industry's standard. Some of the defendants organized to invite other people to sign the petition as well.

The message that the defendants filed to the authorities were allegedly false. Furthermore, it was an imputation by publication that likely to impair the reputation of the plaintiff or to expose such other person to be hated or scorned.

Circumstance of arrest

The defendants came to the court as schedule. There is no arrest.

Progress of case

11 September 2016

A group of villagers under the name of “Nam Oun Basin Lover” group signed in the complaint and submitted to Ratthawut Butrat, the chief executive of the Sub-District Administrative Organizations (SAO) of Oum Jhan, Kusuman District, Sakon Nakhon Province. The complaint indicated that the utilisation of forest area for the construction of sugar factory and biomass power plant of Thai Roong Rueang Industry Co., Ltd. could affect roads and public water in the area. The manufacturing activities in the factory themselves could cause such problems, including disruption of ground water flow. The “Nan Oun Basin Lover” group, therefore, requested the SOA Oum Jhan to suspend the mentioned operations until it is officially permitted by law.

16 December 2016

All defendants signed in the complaints to oppose the construction of the sugar factory and biomass power plant. The complaint accused Thai Rungreuang Industry Co., Ltd. for not following the standards indicated by the Ministry of Industry and such wrongdoing could cause negative effects on the local people. The two measures were as follows:

1. Machines switch and performance extensions were valid for five years since the permission from the Ministry of Industry was issued, but the company could not follow the timeframe due to certain issues.

2. Although the national agenda on Sugarcane supported higher harvest rate of sugarcane per rai, the area had never produced sugarcane before. Thereafter, the company announced the two-phase sugar production, namely: 12,500 tons/day in the first phase and 40,000 tons/day in the second, which exceeded the production limit indicated in the National Agenda.

13 March 2017

Thai Post Online reported that the Sakon Nakhon provincial court sent warrants to 20 villagers to conduct a preliminary examination on this case.

20 May 2017

The Citizen Journalists website of ThaiPBS Online reported that 20 locals requested help from the Justice Fund of Sakon Nakhon Province after getting sued by the company that planned the sugar factory under defamation by publication.

Acting Lt. Somyos Yaemsopit told that help of a single lawyer or a team of lawyers would be considered together for this case as the defendants were sued in group. The subcommittee would consider the case in the meeting this month.

The next process is the preliminary examination by the court which was scheduled to be on 22 May 2017 at 9.00.

22 May 2017

Cross Cultural Foundation reported that the plaintiff's lawter withdrew the charges against defendants number 11 and 12, stating that the plaintiff knew that they did not participate in the offense. The lawyer also declared that the plaintiff had not yet spoken with the locals and other defendants about the complaints against the sugar factory and the biomass power plant plans of the plaintiff’s company.

The plaintiff requested to postpone the legal process in order to try to negotiate the problems with the locals. If any agreement was reached, the plaintiff would declare it to the court in the next appointment. The defendants did not object the offer and, therefore, both side schedule to mediate at Center for Dispute Resolution of Sakon Nakhon Provincial Court on 1 June 2017.

1 June 2017

The schedule for mediation

Sakon Nakhon provincial court ordered Thai Roong Reuang Industry Co., Ltd. and the 18 defendants for the mediation. According to information from one of the locals, resolution was not reached on the day because the plaintiff requested that the defendants to withdrew their complaints to SAO asking the company to suspend the operations and construction of infrastructures. The defendants did not agree as they believed that such complaints did not related to the defamation case.

The court schedule for the next mediation on 6 July 2017 which used to be a pre-trial schedule.

18 June 2017

The Facebook page opposing the sugar factory and biomass power plant reported that Thai Roong Reuang Industry Co., Ltd. had added “Yuanjit”, a member of “Nam Oun Basin Lover” group, as another defendant to the case for defamation by publication with documents. The added defendant also petitioned against the construction of the sugar factory and biomass power plant. Accordingly, the number of defendants in this case was 21 in total. Thereafter, Sakon Nakhon provincial court ordered to have a preliminary hearing on 21 August 2017.

6 July 2017

The second schedule for mediation

The Facebook page opposing the sugar factory and biomass power plant reported that Sakon Nakhon provincial court ordered an appointment for a notification of settlement result. Previously on 1 June 2017, the plaintiff suggested that the defendants accepted the investigation result from SAO Oum Jhan and proceed no further complaints related to the plaintiff with other governmental offices. If so, the plaintiff would withdraw the case against all defendants.

On this day, the defendants’ attorney announced that the defendants did not accept the suggestions. The attorney further stated that the defendants had been rejecting not only the investigation result by the SAO, but also the appointment of the committee panels and the investigation processes. The defendants believed they could not accept such result from the SAO as the plaintiff suggested.

The court found that a settlement could not be made and agreed to proceed on the case. The appointment for preliminary hearing of the plaintiff;s witness was to take place on 3-4 October 2017 at 9.00-16.00.

3 October 2017

Preliminary examination

Around 9.00am, 8 defendants with families arrived the court accompanied with observers from OHCHR and Fortify Rights organization who attended the hearing. Around 9.45am, the judges appeared on the bench and said that the plaintiff already submitted a motion to withdraw the case of 21 defendants in 2 cases. The plaintiff stated that in order to have a reconciliation in the society to live together between the company and the defendants in the far future, the plaintiff had to initiate by expressing its sincerity to reconciliate.

The court considered the motion and allowed the plaintiff to withdraw the case and disposed this case.

Skip to Top

Case

Summary

Primary links