Thai MFA comments on Amnesty International’s press release regarding the trial of Darunee Charnchoengsilpakul
In response to the press query regarding Amnesty International’s press release regarding the trial of Darunee Charnchoengsilpakul, Mr. Thani Thongphakdi, Acting Director-General of Information Department and Foreign Ministry Spokesman, said on 26 June 2009 that the trial on this case like any other cases before the court has been in accordance with the process of law.
The defendant is accorded the right to a fair trial, due opportunity to contest the charges, and assistance from her lawyer.The acting spokesman added that under Section 177 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the judge has discretion in deciding to hold closed trials in certain cases if they are deemed to involve sensitive matters for the interest of public order, good moral or national security, which is consistent with international law (Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and not dissimilar to practice in other countries. It is therefore regrettable, indeed unwarranted, that Amnesty International should have raised any question about the integrity and professionalism of the Thai judiciary.
Print version
Send to friend
Comments
From the International
From the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 14
1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The press and the public may be excluded from all or part of a trial for
in a democratic society, or when the interest of the private lives of the parties so requires, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice; but any judgement rendered in a criminal case or in a suit at law shall be made public except where the interest of juvenile persons otherwise requires or the proceedings concern matrimonial disputes or the guardianship of children.
Reasons of morals: The public might be morally outraged to see Darunee led in chains before the tribunal and remember that she has already been imprisoned without trial for nearly a year while others accused of real, violent crimes including murder, walk free?
Public order: The wildly disproportionate use of the power of the state against individuals in opposition to the present regime might inspire public protests which, unlike those undertaken by the regime itself during its seizure of power, would now be deemed "disorderly"?
National security: The security and longevity of the present regime might be called into question as the public's attention is drawn to the way it treats its opposition? Of course the present regime identifies itself as "the nation".
The present regime is trying to set precedent for "secret trials". It has made unspecified charges against an unspecified number of the opposition and seems fully prepared to continue to do so.
The present regime wants to establish a free hand for its secret trials beforehand, as its detentions become ever more arbitrary and politically motivated.