Chiranuch expects bail extension in Khon Kaen this afternoon
Six weeks after the postponement of her trial under charges from the Computer Crimes Act, Chiranuch Premchaiporn of Prachatai (better known as Jiew) finds herself unexpectedly back in a courtroom.
Reporting to police in Khon Kaen earlier this morning, Ms. Premchaiporn was advised by police that in order to extend her bail, she will be required to attend court later this afternoon. The court is currently in session in Isaan province, and is being attended by Ms. Premchaiporn and her defense team.
On Wednesday evening, Ms. Premchaiporn received a phone call from police stating that her initial six-month bail period was due to expire today. Having yet to finish investigating charges against her, officials seek to extend her bail for an additional 84 day period.
Ms. Premchaiporn is required by law to report regularly to police in Khon Kaen. Given that the police station is some 450k away, it takes almost a day to reach the city from Bangkok.
On Wednesday she asked police whether, given the late notice, if she could delay travel for a day or two. She was told this it would not be possible. "No, because it has expired," she tells me. "If I didn't come to Khon Kaen today then my assets would be seized."
"The intent of the law is to protect the rights of the accused," she says.
She expects that the police in Khon Kaen will not raise objections to a bail extension. She expects that again, she will be required to report to local police every twelve days.
Her lawyers will request that given the distance and inconvenience, she be asked to report to police in Bangkok, rather than Isaan province.
Ms. Premchaiporn expects that bail will again be set at 200,000B.
Print version
Send by email
Comments
so, at the whim of any
so, at the whim of any accuser the accused has to travel to their convenience even though any crimes are alleged to have been committed at the accused notmal work place
makes sense... only in Thailand
lucky Thailand is a relatively small country
pity its ruled by an elite clique and their military colleagues who intentionally humiliate the ordinary people
As to the significant
As to the significant inconvenience - the prosecutor's office has no effective sympathy. Recently, regarding the two fraudulent criminal defamation cases filed against me by police based on allegations by Akbar Khan and pol. Col. Wattanasak, proseuctor's office told me, in effect, that the requirement for such frequent appearances was to provide an alternative to prison for people who were trustworthy. But then the lady insinuated that I should feel grateful for being allowed to be free given the fact that the law was designed for major cases such as murder, etc. When I told her I was not a murderer and that there was an issue of humanity here, she became a bit irate and clearly indicated that the prosecutor's office was in no mood to reform its internal procedures, from which these frequent visits are mandated, just to protect human rights, etc. We are probably back to this "Thainess" aspect of why things here are justified. "This is Thailand, they are Thai, and what else could be right?"
My current criminal defamation problems resolve around my insistence on speaking against the law and the wrongful and even criminal manner foreigners and Thais are treated here in country by those who, as said by Ajarn Sulak, paraphrasing, view themselves as more Thai than Thai. I voiced criticism about the Jonathan Head and Prachatai cases, and others. The problem is will power, malice, amazing propensity to falsely expound on one's own virtues, and to completely trample on the legitimate rights of others - in the name of damage to reputation, and more often than not a reputation that either does not exist or which is undeserved.
" ...regarding the two
Defamation is a criminal, not a civil, case in Thailand because the authorities need a 'catch-all' means of imprisoning those they feel like imprisoning for whatever reason, and it's easy to find someone to allege defamation.
In Thailand it's sentence first - verdict afterwards in any case, and that is the point to which the prosecutor was apparently drawing attention.
Remand sentencing
From the prosecutor's point of view, Frank should be grateful she didn't throw him in prison for a few years while she 'investigated' the allegation of 'defamation'.
Lèse majesté is just one end of the stick, the 'high end'. The low end can be just as brutal, just as 'effective'.
In a country ruled by law defamation is in fact a losing proposition, since it covers saying things which are true, unlike libel which covers saying things which are false.
The bottom line is that the 'elite', the amaat, reserve to themselves the 'right' to harass, to intimidate, to humiliate, and to inconvenience anyone they feel like harassing, intimidating, humiliating,and inconveniencing whenever they feel the urge to do so.
That is in independent of and in addition to the 'elite', amaat 'right' to disappear, to torture, and to murder at will, of course.