อภัยโทษ And นิรโทษกรรม

[DavidHouston]

From the Royal Institute Dictionary

___________________

อภัยโทษ [อะไพยะโทด] (กฎ) ก. ยกโทษหรือเปลี่ยนโทษหนักเป็นเบาหรือ

ลดโทษให้แก่ผู้ต้องคำพิพากษาให้ต้องรับโทษทางอาญาเมื่อคดี

ถึงที่สุดแล้ว เป็นพระราชอำนาจของพระมหากษัตริย์ตามรัฐธรรมนูญ.

To lift or lessen the punishment (imposed on a convict) or to reduce the punishment of someone for whom a criminal conviction has been reached at the end of a trial. This (action) is within the power of the King under the constitution.

นิรโทษกรรม [นิระโทดสะกํา] (กฎ) น. . . . ตามกฎหมาย อาญา หมายถึง การลบล้างการกระทําความผิดอาญาที่บุคคลได้กระทํามาแล้ว โดยมีกฎหมายที่ออกภายหลังการกระทำผิดกำหนด ให้การกระทำนั้นไม่เป็นความผิด และให้ผู้ที่ได้กระทําการนั้นพ้น

จากการเป็นผู้กระทำความผิด.

Under criminal law this term means the elimination (from consideration) of the offense committed by an individual due to the passage of a law subsequent to the commission of the offense. Such law provides that the offense which had been committed is no longer a crime (and never has been). In addition, the person who committed the offense will no longer be treated as having committed such offense.

___________________

From a law encyclopedia comes the following:

"Pardon is the action of an executive official of the government that mitigates or sets aside the punishment for a crime."

"Amnesty refers to a blanket overlooking of an offense by the government, with the legal result that those charged or convicted have the charge or conviction wiped out."

So, it appears that "อภัยโทษ" means pardon where as "นิรโทษกรรม" means amnesty.

Please validate that my understanding from these sources is correct; some dictionaries use both English terms for each of the two Thai words. Thanks.

Edited April 22, 2009 by DavidHouston

[CSS]

From the Royal Institute Dictionary

___________________

อภัยโทษ [อะไพยะโทด] (กฎ) ก. ยกโทษหรือเปลี่ยนโทษหนักเป็นเบาหรือ

ลดโทษให้แก่ผู้ต้องคำพิพากษาให้ต้องรับโทษทางอาญาเมื่อคดี

ถึงที่สุดแล้ว เป็นพระราชอำนาจของพระมหากษัตริย์ตามรัฐธรรมนูญ.

To lift or lessen the punishment (imposed on a convict) or to reduce the punishment of someone for whom a criminal conviction has been reached at the end of a trial. This (action) is within the power of the King under the constitution.

นิรโทษกรรม [นิระโทดสะกํา] (กฎ) น. . . . ตามกฎหมาย อาญา หมายถึง การลบล้างการกระทําความผิดอาญาที่บุคคลได้กระทํามาแล้ว โดยมีกฎหมายที่ออกภายหลังการกระทำผิดกำหนด ให้การกระทำนั้นไม่เป็นความผิด และให้ผู้ที่ได้กระทําการนั้นพ้น

จากการเป็นผู้กระทำความผิด.

Under criminal law this term means the elimination (from consideration) of the offense committed by an individual due to the passage of a law subsequent to the commission of the offense. Such law provides that the offense which had been committed is no longer a crime (and never has been). In addition, the person who committed the offense will no longer be treated as having committed such offense.

___________________

From a law encyclopedia comes the following:

"Pardon is the action of an executive official of the government that mitigates or sets aside the punishment for a crime."

"Amnesty refers to a blanket overlooking of an offense by the government, with the legal result that those charged or convicted have the charge or conviction wiped out."

So, it appears that "อภัยโทษ" means pardon where as "นิรโทษกรรม" means amnesty.

Please validate that my understanding from these sources is correct; some dictionaries use both English terms for each of the two Thai words. Thanks.

Below are a couple longer dictionary entries for pardon and amnesty taken from Black's Legal Dictionary:

amnesty, n. A pardon extended by the government to a group or class of persons, usu. for a political offense; the act of a sovereign power officially forgiving certain classes of persons who are subject to trial but have not yet been convicted <the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act provided amnesty for undocumented aliens already present in the country>. • Unlike an ordinary pardon, amnesty is usu. addressed to crimes against state sovereignty -- that is, to political offenses with respect to which forgiveness is deemed more expedient for the public welfare than prosecution and punishment. Amnesty is usu. general, addressed to classes or even communities. -- Also termed general pardon. See PARDON. [Cases: Pardon and Parole Key Number26. C.J.S. Pardon and Parole §§ 3, 31.] -- amnesty, vb.

"Amnesty ... derives from the Greek amnestia ('forgetting'), and has come to be used to describe measures of a more general nature, directed to offenses whose criminality is considered better forgotten." Leslie Sebba, "Amnesty and Pardon," in 1 Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice 59, 59 (Sanford H. Kadish ed., 1983).

express amnesty. Amnesty granted in direct terms.

implied amnesty. Amnesty indirectly resulting from a peace treaty executed between contending parties.

pardon, n. The act or an instance of officially nullifying punishment or other legal consequences of a crime. • A pardon is usu. granted by the chief executive of a government. The President has the sole power to issue pardons for federal offenses, and state governors have the power to issue pardons for state crimes. -- Also termed executive pardon. See CLEMENCY. Cf. COMMUTATION (2); REPRIEVE. [Cases: Pardon and Parole Key Number23. C.J.S. Pardon and Parole §§ 11-12, 14-16, 22-26, 29-30.] -- pardon, vb.

"The term pardon is first found in early French law and derives from the Late Latin perdonare ('to grant freely'), suggesting a gift bestowed by the sovereign. It has thus come to be associated with a somewhat personal concession by a head of state to the perpetrator of an offense, in mitigation or remission of the full punishment that he has merited." Leslie Sebba, "Amnesty and Pardon," in 1 Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice 59, 59 (Sanford H. Kadish ed., 1983).

absolute pardon. A pardon that releases the wrongdoer from punishment and restores the offender's civil rights without qualification. -- Also termed full pardon; unconditional pardon. [Cases: Pardon and Parole Key Number23. C.J.S. Pardon and Parole §§ 11-12, 14-16, 22-26, 29-30.]

conditional pardon. A pardon that does not become effective until the wrongdoer satisfies a prerequisite or that will be revoked upon the occurrence of some specified act. [Cases: Pardon and Parole Key Number23. C.J.S. Pardon and Parole §§ 11-12, 14-16, 22-26, 29-30.]

faultless pardon. A pardon granted because the act for which the person was convicted was not a crime.

general pardon. See AMNESTY.

partial pardon. A pardon that exonerates the offender from some but not all of the punishment or legal consequences of a crime. [Cases: Pardon and Parole Key Number23. C.J.S. Pardon and Parole §§ 11-12, 14-16, 22-26, 29-30.]

Based on these it seems to me that อภัยโทษ would be a partial or full/absolute pardon depending. and นิรโทษกรรม would be a faultless pardon and could be an amnesty in certain situations.

[DavidHouston]

Thank you, Khun CSS for those definitions from Black's.

Several more points to make. The current Thai Constitution contains the following line:

"มาตรา ๑๙๑ พระมหากษัตริย์ทรงไว้ซึ่งพระราชอำนาจในการพระราชทานอภัยโทษ"

Translated by the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok as:

"Section 191. The King has the prerogative to grant a pardon."

This usage of terms seems to be in accordance with Black's "A pardon is usu. granted by the chief executive of a government. The President has the sole power to issue pardons for federal offenses, and state governors have the power to issue pardons for state crimes. -- Also termed executive pardon."

The term "นิรโทษกรรม" is not found in the Thai constitution.

When Thaksin asked for a pardon from the King, he was asking for "พระราชทานอภัยโทษ". If the parliament were to vote to lift the 5-year prohibition for political participation for the 111 + 109 party officials, such revocation would have the effect of "นิรโทษกรรม".

Here is a piece from a newspaper which seems to make this point:

ไม่รู้เหมือนกันว่า พ.ต.ท.ทักษิณจะกลับเข้ามาด้วยหนทางไหน เพราะคำพิพากษาของศาลฎีกายังมีอยู่ หรือจะรอให้มีการนิรโทษกรรมก่อนก็ไม่รู้ เพราะเป็นเรื่องของกฎหมายที่ต้องผ่านสภาผู้แทนราษฎร ก็ไม่รู้ว่าจะผ่านสภาได้หรือไม่ และถ้าจะนิรโทษกรรมควรที่มีเหตุผล ไม่ใช่นิรโทษกรรมไปหมดทุกเรื่อง

"I do not really know under what circumstances Pol. Col. Thaksin would return because the verdict from the Supreme Court still stand. Perhaps he would await until he received an official amnesty because as a legal matter this issue must be voted on by Parliament. I do not know whether in fact (the amnesty bill) would pass or not. And, if there were to be an amnesty, would there be amnesty for specific reasons, rather than a general amnesty for all acts and charges."

In this paragraph should the word "amnesty" be replaced by "pardon" in all instances or in just some? For example, the last sentence could be read to say, "And, if there were to be an amnesty or a pardon, would there be pardon for specific reasons, rather than a general amnesty for all acts and charges."

I am still not sure whether there is a clear distinction such that there is a one-for-one relationship between the Thai word and the English word or whether the use of the English term depends on the circumstances. It may be as simple as that the King issues "อภัยโทษ" whereas the Parliament initiates a "นิรโทษกรรม".

Alternatively, a given individual may be subject to both a อภัยโทษ and นิรโทษกรรม. For example, Thaksin could receive a "นิรโทษกรรม" from the 5-year political ban and a "อภัยโทษ" for the Ratchadapisek land conviction, the former being a political offense, the latter a criminal offense.

Finally, given the definition in the RID, "อภัยโทษ" could be used where the law remains in place but the individual receives absolution from the crime whereas "นิรโทษกรรม" is used with the activity itself is subsequently declared to not violate the law.

What do you think?

Edited April 22, 2009 by DavidHouston

[mangkorn]

Interesting rhetorical question. But, in politics, all is permitted, surely. Although there may be a difference in English, depending on the particular political system, between "pardon" and "amnesty" - as you suggest, the first is bestowed by the executive; the second by the legislature - they both pretty much mean the same thing, in fact: the guy gets off scot-free and goes whistling happy down the street (to commit the same crimes again, if he is of a mind to). In Latin America, those terms are also interchangeable - and perdon/amnistia is granted every couple of years; you can set your clock to it...)

Perhaps that is why the Thai constitution doesn't even bother with a possible semantic difference?

In any event, the fact that Thaksin sought พระราชทานอภัยโทษ is the most telling detail of all: he wants a ROYAL pardon, so that there could never be any appeal to a higher authority.

[Barabbas]

Good topic David, as all of yours here

In my yellow-stained eyes (please forgive the bad pun), Thaksin asking for pardon (พระราชทานอภัยโทษ) means him admitting his wrongdoing (was it another political pose is a different matter).

[DavidHouston]

Good topic David, as all of yours here

In my yellow-stained eyes (please forgive the bad pun), Thaksin asking for pardon (พระราชทานอภัยโทษ) means him admitting his wrongdoing (was it another political pose is a different matter).

That's a great question: Under Thai law, does the granting of "พระราชทานอภัยโทษ" require an admission of guilt by the pardoned criminal?

[Barabbas]

That's a great question: Under Thai law, does the granting of "พระราชทานอภัยโทษ" require an admission of guilt by the pardoned criminal?

Let's look at it the other way around - if one has been convicted, and admits his guilt, the pardon is granted as a sign of forgiveness etc.

OR: a convicted felon doesn't admit his fault but asks for pardon anyway - does this mean that the justice has been served wrongly, or that he is persisting in his crime (in the Middle Ages for those "relapsi" the Church didn't offer any forgiveness huhu)?