[Rigf_program] [governance] URGENT - anybody in Bangkok tomorrow?

Wed May 30 14:58:50 HKT 2012

The news according to AP wire at around lunch time Bangkok today is that she has been given a suspended sentence of 8 months.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hxzh_NRKiZ3kMcECG3Qfdjep9wRg?docId=2db4b7c640c94ff29eba5a776e9dddba

What this means is that, assuming the law is the same as in most other jurisdictions, if she does not break the same law, she will not have to spend any time in jail. She has paid a fine of US$625. Chiranuch herself describes the judge's verdict as "logical and reasonable" although she apparently harbored some hopes of being released.

The post in question had been left for 20 days, a period the judge considered too long. (Best/Common practice for intermediary immunity is five working days.)

As many of you would know, what you see is often not what you get because of the political factor in this equation. I will be in Thailand tomorrow Thursday presenting on media regulation. I will get more information.

Regards,
Peng Hwa

From: Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com<mailto:salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>>
To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>>, nhklein <nhklein at gmx.net<mailto:nhklein at gmx.net>>
Cc: APrIGF <program at ap.rigf.asia<mailto:program at ap.rigf.asia>>
Subject: Re: [Rigf_program] [governance] URGENT - anybody in Bangkok tomorrow?

Dear Norbert,

This is terrible news and not a good precedent and could prove viral especially in countries that have rule of law issues.

Hopefully her lawyers can file a Motion to suggestion is to judically review the  Computer Crimes Act (CCA), since it was passed by an unelected legislature operating under a military-appointed government passed in 2007 and another to temporarily stay the prosecution whilst the legality of the provision is being debated. This will give Human Rights Organizations and civil society to file amicus briefs.

It may be useful to consider whether it is worthwhile filing an amicus brief in this instance???

For the Attorney General to prosecute  Chiranuch Premchaiporn on someone's whim reeks nothing short of malicious prosecution. It will be great to know the outcome of the matter.

Kind Regards,
Sala

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Norbert Klein <nhklein at gmx.net<mailto:nhklein at gmx.net>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

this came in just now, late for an urgent court date tomorrow.

It relates to a case of freedom of expression and, in this case, specifically to a "crime" related to "transitory liability" of Chiranuch Premchaiporn - whether or not the provider of an Internet service is legally liable for what users do with this service. As this Urgent Appeal states: "Her alleged crime, to underscore the point, was that she removed the comments [not written by her or by staff of the Prachathai website], which consisted of allusions rather than direct references to the royal family, with insufficient rapidity."

The question of "transitory liability"  may not be central to Internet governance - but it is not only discussed in Thailand. I dare to share this here, as Chiranuch did participate in the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Governance Forum in Hongkong in June 2010, at that time already under investigation.

Norbert
--
Norbert Klein

Website: http://www.thinking21.org
Website: http://www.isoc-kh.org
eMail: nhklein at gmx.net<mailto:nhklein at gmx.net>

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        THAILAND: Court to read verdict in landmark freedom of expression case of Chiranuch Premchaiporn – call for observers
Date:   Tue, 29 May 2012 09:11:05 +0200
From:   AHRC Urgent Appeals <listadmin at ahrchk.net><mailto:listadmin at ahrchk.net>
To:     nhklein at gmx.net<mailto:nhklein at gmx.net>

<http://internal.ahrchk.net/phplist/?p=preferences&uid=db121d2a7df0b540482da7f95bd5ce3a>

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION -- URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-017-2012

May 29, 2012

[RE: AHRC-STM-099-2012<http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-STM-099-2012>: THAILAND: Concerns over delayed verdict in criminal case against free media advocate]
---------------------------------------------------
THAILAND: Court to read verdict in landmark freedom of expression case of Chiranuch Premchaiporn – call for observers

ISSUES: Freedom of expression<http://www.humanrights.asia/issues/freedom-of-expression>, Human rights defenders<http://www.humanrights.asia/issues/human-rights-defenders>
-------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

On 30 May 2012, at 10 am in the Criminal Court in Bangkok, the verdict in the case of Chiranuch Premchaiporn, charged with ten counts of allegedly violating the 2007 Computer Crimes Act in Black Case No. 1667/2553, will be read. The reading, which had been scheduled for one month ago, was unexpectedly postponed. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) urges all concerned persons to attend the court as observers, and calls on other interested persons to follow the case closely.

UPDATED INFORMATION:

<http://www.humanrights.asia/campaigns/chiranuch-prachatai>The formal proceedings against Chiranuch Premchaiporn, the 44-year-old webmaster Prachatai, an independent online news site, began on 3 March 2009, when the Criminal Court issued a warrant for her arrest. On 5 March 2009, a warrant to search the Prachatai office was issued and the next day police from the Crime Suppression Division raided the office and arrested Chiranuch in response to one complaint of her alleged violation of the vaguely worded, anti-democratic Computer Crimes Act (CCA), which an unelected legislature operating under a military-appointed government passed in 2007. The police released Chiranuch later that evening, but the next month nine further complaints were brought against her. On 31 March 2010, the Office of the Attorney General proceeded with the prosecution and she was arrested and held at the Criminal Court before again being released on bail.

Reading the above account, we might infer that Chiranuch had published some highly inflammatory, dangerous or secret material on the Prachatai site that warranted the heavy involvement of specialist police and state prosecutors and a series of events involving a raid and detention. In fact, her crime was to have not done something: to have failed to remove 10 comments alleged to be injurious to the monarchy from the Prachatai webboard quickly enough. Her alleged crime, to underscore the point, was that she removed the comments, which consisted of allusions rather than direct references to the royal family, with insufficient rapidity.

Examination of the specific provisions of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act under which these bizarre allegations were brought does not help us to clarify the thinking of those responsible for the prosecution of Chiranuch Premchaiporn. Under section 14 of the CCA, anyone can be jailed for five years if found to have imported to a computer "false computer data in a manner that it is likely to damage the country's security or cause a public panic… any computer data related with an  offence against the Kingdom's security under the Criminal Code". Under its section 15, the service provider found to have consented to the use of the computer for this purpose is equally liable as the person committing the offence, which in the case of Chiranuch is the crime of lese majesty, as stipulated in section 112 of the Criminal Code, that, "Whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished (with) imprisonment of three to fifteen years." The broad, vague provisions of the CCA, and the imprecise way in which it can be linked with equally vague provisions of the Criminal Code dealing with national security, post clear and direct threats to the rights of citizens in Thailand. The very basis of the allegations against Chiranuch Premchaiporn -- that not removing comments deemed to defame, insult, or threaten the monarchy, itself an allegation that is unclear, is a threat to national security -- threatens to make a mockery of the Court and the meaning of justice in Thailand.

The trial hearings occurred in February and September 2011, and February 2012, and summaries by Freedom Against Censorship-Thailand are available on the campaign webpage that the AHRC has set up for Chiranuch. As these show, much of the testimony turned on the interpretation of how the comments that she removed tardily, in the opinion of the police and prosecutor, constitute criminal content in the meaning of the law. Whether or not a written comment on a webpage or link to an image or video is "likely to damage the country's security or cause a public panic" is necessarily fraught with difficulty, even more so as the Computer Crimes Act does not specify what might constitute a likelihood to damage the country's security or create a public panic, or even define "security" or "public panic". What any of these terms mean, it seems, comes down to the opinion of the judge in the individual case. No standards exist to which we can refer. What is clear, however, are the effects of this legislation and the absence of clear standards contained. Chiranuch Premchaiporn, a long-standing human rights defender and media activist, has been forced to endure three years of harassment and fear by the Thai state security and legal apparatus.  In addition, during a critical period in Thailand’s modern history, the Prachatai webboard, a crucial site of discussion and debate, was forced to shut down, for fear that both users and more of its staff members could face additional prosecution.

The hearings in Chiranuch's case ended in February 2012 and the reading of the verdict was set for 30 April 2012. However, 20 minutes before the proceedings were to begin, court staff notified Chiranuch and her lawyers that the decision would be delayed for an additional month. The rather dubious reason given by the court for the delay was that the judges had too many documents to read, and was unable to complete preparing the verdict in time for the scheduled date. In a previous statement released at the time of the postponement (AHRC-STM-099-2012<http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-STM-099-2012>), the AHRC noted that both the delay to this case and the explanation for the delay were sources of serious concern. Whether caused by the court's inefficiency, overwork of the judges, or a more specious strategy to subject Chiranuch Premchaiporn to additional harassment and suffering.

On the eve of the re-scheduled reading of the verdict in this case, the Asian Human Rights Commission calls on the Criminal Court to ensure that no further delays are caused in the reading of this verdict, and that the trial be conducted openly, honestly and justly. In particular, given the unclarities and lacunae in the Computer Crimes Act, the onus is on the judges to act in the service of justice.
The AHRC urges all those persons and organisations concerned with human rights and freedom of expression in Thailand to return to the Criminal Court on 30 May 2012 for the re-scheduled reading of the decision to observe action in either the service of justice, or to witness its foreclosure.

(Visit the AHRC webpage on Chiranuch Premchaiporn at: http://www.humanrights.asia/campaigns/chiranuch-prachatai.)

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua at ahrc.asia<mailto:ua at ahrc.asia>)

Visit our new website with more features at www.humanrights.asia<http://www.humanrights.asia>.

You can make a difference. Please support our work and make a donation here<http://www.humanrights.asia/get-involved/donate>.

-----------------------------

Asian Human Rights Commission
#701A Westley Square,
48 Hoi Yuen Road, Kwun Tong, Kowloon,
Hongkong S.A.R.
Tel: +(852) 2698-6339<tel:%2B%28852%29%202698-6339>
Fax: +(852) 2698-6367<tel:%2B%28852%29%202698-6367>
Web: humanrights.asia<http://humanrights.asia>
twitter/youtube/facebook: humanrightsasia

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

powered by phplist<http://www.phplist.com> v 2.10.17, © phpList ltd<http://www.phplist.com/poweredby>

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
To be removed from the list, visit:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

--
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851

________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY:This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and may be confidential and/or privileged.If you are not the intended recipient,please delete it,notify us and do not copy,use,or disclose its content.

Towards A Sustainable Earth:Print Only When Necessary.Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.dotasia.org/pipermail/rigf_secretariat/attachments/20120530/16709092/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Rigf_program mailing list
Rigf_program at ap.rigf.asia
https://mailman.dotasia.org/mailman/listinfo/rigf_program