Rethinking Thailand’s Defamation Law

[webfact]

Thailand’s defamation laws, historically designed to protect individuals’ reputations against false statements, are now facing scrutiny for their strict and punitive nature. While the aim of safeguarding reputation is noble, the broader implications of these laws on freedom of expression and democratic values are becoming increasingly evident. The need for reform is pressing as the country navigates the challenges of a modern and interconnected world.

 

One primary concern arising from the current defamation framework is its impact on press freedom. Journalists in Thailand often grapple with the pressures and fears associated with potential legal repercussions. This hinders them from robustly reporting on matters of public interest, which is a foundational role of the media in any democratic society. Reporters should be in a position to hold power to account without fear, thereby ensuring that citizens are well-informed.

 

The World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders has consistently highlighted concerns related to Thailand’s press freedom. A significant factor influencing this ranking is the looming threat of criminal charges, fines, or even imprisonment that journalists face in their line of duty. For a nation that seeks to strengthen its democratic foundations, ensuring a fearless press is vital.

 

by Friedrich Artur Blair

 

Full story: THAI ENQUIRER 2023-10-11

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[OneMoreFarang]

And is there any political will to change those laws?

Or is it just the author of this article who rethinks it? 

[digbeth]

5 minutes ago, webfact said:

Thailand’s defamation laws, historically designed to protect individuals’ reputations against false statements,

They also protect individual's reputation against truth too, 

 

If someone were a convicted fraud, and you go around parroting that fact and he felt his business or reputation was damaged, truth is no defense, or even argued to be worse damaging. 

there might be a clause out for case of public interest but in order to prove your innocence in court, it'd already cost you time and money

[SooKee]

Protecting people from false statements is WAY different from protecting them from things they don't want to hear!

[bamnutsak]

This is the bedrock of the Thai Social System, based on Sakdina and codified with the Law of the Three Seals.

 

Granted, it is abused, but what's the point of having power if you can't abuse it?

 

 

It will NEVER change. Why would the Powers-that-Be allow it?

 

 

[retarius]

I had apparently misunderstood the law. I thought it was different than in other countries. This article (first sentence, bolded) implies that it is not defamation if the statements made are true. 

I understood that it didn't matter in Thailand whether the statements made were factually true or not, simply the act of saying or repeating them damaged the reputation of the important person and so it was illegal i.e. it was the intended damage to the reputation rather than the truth of the accusation that was criminal.

Can someone clear up my befuddled brain.

[ChrisY1]

Protecting from false statements.....or protecting from the truth?

[daveAustin]

System is abused here, no doubt, by even mentioning a truth. But we could do with a bit of this in the West... i.e. people making false claims through the media of historical sexual abuse on innocent parties, who are deemed automatically guilty and subsequently have their name and reputation dragged through the mud with no affect to reputations of false accusers.

[ikke1959]

The truth can hurt, but that is not always defamation. Outdated laws that can be used for everything should be all reviewed. Protecting people is ok, but over protecting or use a law to hide the truth is wrong. I know several laws more that be revised

[connda]

4 hours ago, digbeth said:

They also protect individual's reputation against truth too, 

Exactly. 
I believe that defamation/libel in the Western requires the proof that the statements were false and slanderous (although I'm sure that there are exceptions).

Here in Thailand, truthful statements and statements of verifiable fact regarding another person can get you thrown into prisons. 

[jippytum]

Politicians use this law to prevent people speaking truthfully  about how corrupt the system  is. 

[hotchilli]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Thailand’s defamation laws, historically designed to protect individuals’ reputations against false statements,

And those that are true.

[spidermike007]

The defamation laws were written by sold out cowards, to protect rotten players from reprisals, due to bad service, faulty products and bad business. They have no place in today's world. They represent a heinous over reach of toxic power. 

 

Thailand deserves whatever comes its way as a result of this. Those insane and cowardly defamation laws have been around way too long. They were written and passed by sold out politicians, for men who sell inferior products, offer inferior services, and steal alot of money. And do not intend to be answerable to anyone. Perhaps some of that will change. 

 

For those of us who have been here a awhile, we know that positive change only happens here through utter embarrassment, humiliation, and a loss of face. It never happens because it is the right thing to do, or due to fairness or equity. So, it must be thrust upon them, such as in this incident. 

 

The lack of vision prevents them from seeing it coming. Egg on the face can be a cure for many diseases and weaknesses. 

 

 

[DPKANKAN]

4 hours ago, SooKee said:

Protecting people from false statements is WAY different from protecting them from things they don't want to hear!

The truth always hurts!!! As the saying goes????????????????

[Purdey]

Anyone who has been here a while knows not to defame someone in writing or verbally in front of witnesses.

[spidermike007]

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

Anyone who has been here a while knows not to defame someone in writing or verbally in front of witnesses.

Just imagine mentioning bad service or a faulty product. The world would come to an end. 

 

What type of person uses the law to protect their reputation? A tiny, shameless coward who is aware of the low quality products or services they offer. Rather than improve, they cower behind a heinous law, meant to stop the public from expressing dissatisfaction. 

[stoner]

can i sue myself for all the dumb things i say on here ? 

[brianthainess]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

are now facing scrutiny for their strict and punitive nature.

By Whom? surely not by any government officials, they would never allow change.

[Felton Jarvis]

Thailand’s defamation law is like none in the rest of the world. When truth is no defense, all you really have is a legal mechanism to protect wealthy elites.

[brianthainess]

8 hours ago, webfact said:

The need for reform is pressing as the country navigates the challenges of a modern and interconnected world.

      democracy anyone?

[jvs]

Freedom of speech can also go too far!

Yes the law in Thailand should be changed but probably never will

as long as the old system of government stays in power.

[billd766]

7 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

This is the bedrock of the Thai Social System, based on Sakdina and codified with the Law of the Three Seals.

 

Granted, it is abused, but what's the point of having power if you can't abuse it?

 

 

It will NEVER change. Why would the Powers-that-Be allow it?

 

 

Very true.

[MangoKorat]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

For a nation that seeks to strengthen its democratic foundations

The nation may seek that - the government have other ideas.  The last election showed just how much 'democracy' exists in Thailand.

[MangoKorat]

The biggest problem with Thai defamation laws is the item that states, the truth is no defence.

 

So even if what you say is true, say something nasty about someone and you could be looking at a defamation charge.

 

I'm not saying there aren't others but Thailand is the only place I know where that caveat exists.  Its clearly there to protect the 'elite'.  They may well, be a cheating corrupt bstard,they may have been succesfully prosecuted in court for it.  But state it publicly and you could be in a lot of trouble.

 

Remember the case of Jonathan Head of the BBC and the Thai lawyer who had been convicted of being involved in a property fraud?

[MangoKorat]

1 hour ago, Felton Jarvis said:

Thailand’s defamation law is like none in the rest of the world. When truth is no defense, all you really have is a legal mechanism to protect wealthy elites.

Spot on - sorry I didn't see your post before posting myself We agree on that one 100%.

[SABloke]

16 minutes ago, MangoKorat said:

The biggest problem with Thai defamation laws is the item that states, the truth is no defence.

 

So even if what you say is true, say something nasty about someone and you could be looking at a defamation charge.

 

I'm not saying there aren't others but Thailand is the only place I know where that caveat exists.  Its clearly there to protect the 'elite'.  They may well, be a cheating corrupt bstard,they may have been succesfully prosecuted in court for it.  But state it publicly and you could be in a lot of trouble.

 

Remember the case of Jonathan Head of the BBC and the Thai lawyer who had been convicted of being involved in a property fraud?

There was also the case of some famous/powerful guy abusing his girlfriend, but she faced more jailtime for coming forwars with the information than he would for the physical assault, so she withdrew her statement (if I remember correctly) 

Edited October 11, 2023 by SABloke

[MangoKorat]

13 minutes ago, SABloke said:

There was also the case of some famous/powerful guy abusing his girlfriend, but she faced more jailtime for coming forwars with the information than he would for the physical assault, so she withdrew her statement (if I remember correctly) 

Its a shocker really and clearly designed to protect the rich and powerful.

[Sydebolle]

Another dinosaur law keeping the oligarch elite above the underlings - the underlings have to rob and kneel in front of the Phooyais and such laws make it crystal clear. 
If there is "misunderstanding" among the Phooyais, it is a welcome deviation smoke screen as well so defamation keeps the truth out. Your call! 

[Felton Jarvis]

13 hours ago, SABloke said:

There was also the case of some famous/powerful guy abusing his girlfriend, but she faced more jailtime for coming forwars with the information than he would for the physical assault, so she withdrew her statement (if I remember correctly) 

This is why I don’t do restaurant reviews. The defamation laws are as insane as the LM laws, quite similar, actually.

[Lorry]

“the libel capital of the world”

No, it is not Thailand.
Libel and defamation suits are a regular topic on AN.
It is often stated that Thailand has very harsh libel laws, and I always got the impression that the posters thought libel law in their home country wasn't as harsh.

So I found it interesting to read an article about libel law in another country.
The country is Britain, where many posters are from, and the article really made me think.

"the British libel industry has made it harder for people to subject the wealthy and powerful to legitimate scrutiny."
"Britain’s libel lawyers are the most intimidating in the world. They are also among the most expensive. British libel cases routinely cost hundreds of thousands of pounds to defend, and London’s top libel lawyers command rates of more than £500 per hour."
"If you have ever spoken out against one of the global super-rich with some link to Britain you are potentially in a London libel lawyer’s crosshairs, no matter how few followers you have or where you live."
"the person claiming to have been defamed is the one presumed to be telling the truth"

https://www.economist.com/1843/2023/12/01/britains-scariest-libel-firm-can-pursue-anyone-anywhere