webfact Posted Friday at 10:26 PM Share Posted Friday at 10:26 PM Bangkok Criminal Court. File photo In a dramatic turn of events, the Criminal Court has handed down a suspended one-year jail sentence to Move Forward Party MP Jirat Thongsuwan, coupled with a hefty fine of Bt500,000. The ruling comes following Jirat's defamation of Air Chief Marshal Thares Punsri, a former deputy permanent secretary for defence, two years ago. During a parliamentary session in 2022, Jirat accused Thares of corrupt practices related to the procurement of aircraft and other military equipment. These serious allegations have now led to Jirat's sentence, underscoring the legal consequences of defamation in public office. While Jirat's jail term is suspended, meaning he won't serve time unless he commits further offences, he is still required to pay the significant fine. Additionally, the court has mandated Jirat to publish apologies in three leading newspapers for five consecutive days, adding a public element to the legal remedy sought by the court. The public gained insight into the court's decision when Jirat shared the news on his Facebook page, creating a stir on social media. Reactions have been mixed, with some showing support for Jirat and others agreeing with the court's verdict, highlighting the divisive nature of the case within the community. The case itself has raised important questions about the responsibility of public officials in making allegations and using their parliamentary platform. It also underscores the legal and ethical lines involving public accusations and the defence of personal reputation. Thares Punsri has not publicly commented on the ruling. The outcome of this case may serve as a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly within the realm of Thai politics. -- 2024-06-29 Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe 2 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ChrisY1 Posted Saturday at 12:11 AM Popular Post Share Posted Saturday at 12:11 AM No governments like whistle blowers.....parliamentry privelidge doesn't work here! 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post dinsdale Posted Saturday at 01:37 AM Popular Post Share Posted Saturday at 01:37 AM (edited) 3 hours ago, webfact said: During a parliamentary session in 2022, Jirat accused Thares of corrupt practices related to the procurement of aircraft and other military equipment. This is why parliamentary privilege exists. Said outside of parliament one is open to defamation but this wasn't. Just another example of why democracy in Thailand is nothing but a facade. Edited Saturday at 01:51 AM by dinsdale 1 1 1 2 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post spidermike007 Posted Saturday at 05:45 AM Popular Post Share Posted Saturday at 05:45 AM If he is a top dog in one of the military branches chances are he's super corrupt. So kudos to this the guy for calling him out and shame on Thailand for charging someone, charging anyone with defamation of any kind. It is a law designed by cowards and passed by cowards who are not real men. In no way, shape or form are they paying tribute to the gender these are tiny tiny boys. 2 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinsdale Posted Saturday at 06:07 AM Share Posted Saturday at 06:07 AM 13 minutes ago, spidermike007 said: If he is a top dog in one of the military branches chances are he's super corrupt. So kudos to this the guy for calling him out and shame on Thailand for charging someone, charging anyone with defamation of any kind. It is a law designed by cowards and passed by cowards who are not real men. In no way, shape or form are they paying tribute to the gender these are tiny tiny boys. Agree but in a democracy what is said in parliament is immune from defamation prosecution under parliamentary privilege. This should never happen. Any abuse of parliamentary privilege is sorted out in parliament but this isn't abuse. It's simply pointing out corruption under what I would think to be parliamentary privilege. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotchilli Posted Saturday at 06:40 AM Share Posted Saturday at 06:40 AM But was he stating the truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mason45 Posted Saturday at 06:46 AM Share Posted Saturday at 06:46 AM 4 minutes ago, hotchilli said: But was he stating the truth? So did Julian Assange and look where it got him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBKK Posted Saturday at 06:47 AM Share Posted Saturday at 06:47 AM Where is parliamentary privilege? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamblingOn Posted Saturday at 06:56 AM Share Posted Saturday at 06:56 AM 16 minutes ago, hotchilli said: But was he stating the truth? Good question!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post John Drake Posted Saturday at 07:48 AM Popular Post Share Posted Saturday at 07:48 AM 1 hour ago, hotchilli said: But was he stating the truth? It doesn't matter. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinsdale Posted Saturday at 08:38 AM Share Posted Saturday at 08:38 AM 1 hour ago, hotchilli said: But was he stating the truth? This is more than likely correct but in this US style of litigation it doesn't matter it seems here in Thailand. There seems there is no parliamentary privilege here. If someone wants to charge deformation that's what they'll do and it will go to court. A court that if you not connected to the military elite you're chances of dismissal are very slim indeed if the person claiming deformation is from that very military elite sector. It was raised in parliament. This should never be allowed to happen. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post spidermike007 Posted Saturday at 09:21 AM Popular Post Share Posted Saturday at 09:21 AM 3 hours ago, dinsdale said: Agree but in a democracy what is said in parliament is immune from defamation prosecution under parliamentary privilege. This should never happen. Any abuse of parliamentary privilege is sorted out in parliament but this isn't abuse. It's simply pointing out corruption under what I would think to be parliamentary privilege. Defamation laws are greatly abused in Thailand, for the benefit of the cowards, the weaklings and the creeps. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herfiehandbag Posted Saturday at 09:29 AM Share Posted Saturday at 09:29 AM 3 minutes ago, spidermike007 said: Defamation laws are greatly abused in Thailand, for the benefit of the cowards, the weaklings and the creeps. And the lean mean steely eyed might have been but weren't veterans of combat. Don't forget the lean mean steely eyed might have been but weren't veterans of combat. We must respect the lean mean steely eyed might have been but weren't veterans of combat; their contribution to making the country what it is now is incalculable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger70 Posted Saturday at 09:33 AM Share Posted Saturday at 09:33 AM 2 hours ago, hotchilli said: But was he stating the truth? Most likely, TheTruth Hurts and on top of that no Free Speech/Expression. Is there freedom of speech in Thailand? The constitution provides for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media. This right, however, was restricted by laws and government actions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotchilli Posted Saturday at 10:04 AM Share Posted Saturday at 10:04 AM 29 minutes ago, digger70 said: Most likely, TheTruth Hurts and on top of that no Free Speech/Expression. Is there freedom of speech in Thailand? The constitution provides for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media. This right, however, was restricted by laws and government actions. It would appear not... and there are multiple laws in place that prevents it being told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger70 Posted Saturday at 10:25 AM Share Posted Saturday at 10:25 AM 19 minutes ago, hotchilli said: It would appear not... and there are multiple laws in place that prevents it being told. Yes , That's so they can use that stupid Defamation Cr@p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mason45 Posted Saturday at 11:16 AM Share Posted Saturday at 11:16 AM Q. What's the difference between a Toshiba vacuum cleaner and a senior Thai naval officer. A. A Toshiba vacuum cleaner sucks sucks and never fails. Whereas the Thai senior naval officer, well I'll leave the rest to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidermike007 Posted Saturday at 12:09 PM Share Posted Saturday at 12:09 PM 2 hours ago, herfiehandbag said: And the lean mean steely eyed might have been but weren't veterans of combat. Don't forget the lean mean steely eyed might have been but weren't veterans of combat. We must respect the lean mean steely eyed might have been but weren't veterans of combat; their contribution to making the country what it is now is incalculable! The army are like a vacuum, draining the blood, and treasury of the nation. And what does the nation and it's people get in return? Nothing. They are useless. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john donson Posted Saturday at 12:10 PM Share Posted Saturday at 12:10 PM can they not check his wealth ? salary x years in office ... x 100 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andycoops Posted yesterday at 12:06 AM Share Posted yesterday at 12:06 AM Yet again the corrupt use the neanderthal laws in Thailand to protect themselves from scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoshowJones Posted 20 hours ago Share Posted 20 hours ago 23 hours ago, dinsdale said: Agree but in a democracy what is said in parliament is immune from defamation prosecution under parliamentary privilege. This should never happen. Any abuse of parliamentary privilege is sorted out in parliament but this isn't abuse. It's simply pointing out corruption under what I would think to be parliamentary privilege. "Agree but in a democracy" This Banana Republic of Thailand is anything but a democracy. Even in Parliament, who decides what defamation is? It is only a word to suit those with the most power and that is not a PM who does not have a backing of soldiers with guns and tanks. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now