Move Forward MP Sentenced for Defamation Against Military Officer

[webfact]

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

[ChrisY1]

No governments like whistle blowers.....parliamentry privelidge doesn't work here!

[dinsdale]

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. 

 

[spidermike007]

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. 

[dinsdale]

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.

[hotchilli]

But was he stating the truth?

[Mason45]

4 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

But was he stating the truth?

So did Julian Assange and look where it got him.

[BobBKK]

Where is parliamentary privilege? 

[RamblingOn]

16 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

But was he stating the truth?

Good question!!

[John Drake]

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

But was he stating the truth?

 

It doesn't matter.

[dinsdale]

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.

[spidermike007]

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. 

[herfiehandbag]

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!

[digger70]

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.

[hotchilli]

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.

[digger70]

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.

[Mason45]

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.

[spidermike007]

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. 

[john donson]

can they not check his wealth ?  salary x years in office ...   x 100

[Andycoops]

Yet again the corrupt use the neanderthal laws in Thailand to protect themselves from scrutiny.

[NoshowJones]

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.