Home

Somyot subject of Amnesty International appeal

Sun, 13/01/2013 - 04:42 | by prachatai
Amnesty International

Amnesty International has issued an Urgent Action alert for Somyot Prueksakasemsuk ahead of the verdict in his lèse majesté trial scheduled for 23 January.  

The appeal, which can be expected to trigger a deluge of messages to the Prime Minister, Minister of Justice and National Human Rights Commission from Amnesty International members around the world, names Somyot as a Prisoner of Conscience.  It also notes that Article 112 of the Criminal Code violates the right to freedom of expression under international human rights law and contravenes Thailand’s obligations as a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

URGENT ACTION
EDITOR AT RISK OF UNJUST SENTENCE IN THAILAND

Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, a labour activist and editor of the Voice of Taksin, is a prisoner of conscience. He has been detained since April 2011, having been charged in relation to publishing articles deemed critical of Thailand’s monarchy. Authorities have repeatedly turned down his requests for bail.

In May 2012, Somyot Prueksakasemsuk's trial ended; he is still awaiting the verdict. The court has rescheduled the date for announcing the verdict three times, most recently from 19 December to 23 January 2013.

He was arrested on 30 April 2011, shortly after launching a campaign to gather support for a parliamentary review of Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code. He was charged and tried under Article 112 which prohibits any word or act which “defames, insults, or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent, or the Regent”. The charge carries a sentence of up to 15 years’ imprisonment for each offence.

Since 2006, authorities in Thailand have increasingly used Article 112 to silence peaceful dissent. Article 112 violates the right to freedom of expression under international human rights law, as it goes far beyond permissible restrictions of this right. Thailand is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and is legally bound to uphold the right to freedom of expression.
Please write immediately in Thai, English or your own language:

  • Expressing concern that Somyot Prueksakasemsuk has been detained on account of his peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression;
  • Calling for charges against him to be dropped, and for him to be immediately and unconditionally released from detention;
  • Calling for him to be given redress for the months he has spent in detention and for the authorities to amend Article 112 so that it complies with Thailand’s obligations under international human rights law, and to suspend its use until it has been amended in such a way.

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 22 FEBRUARY 2013 TO:

Prime Minister
Yingluck Shinawatra
Government House
Pitsanulok Road, Dusit District
Bangkok 10300, Thailand
Fax: +662 280 0858; +66 2 288 4016
Email opm@opm.go.th
Salutation: Dear Prime Minister
    
Minister of Justice
Pracha Promnok
Ministry of Justice
22/f Software Park Building,
Chaeng Wattana Road,
Pakkred Nonthaburi 11120, Thailand
Fax: +662 502 6699; +662 502 6734; +662 502 6884 Email: om@moj.go.th
Salutation: Dear Minister

And copies to:
National Human Rights Commission
120 Chaengwattana Road
Laksi District
Bangkok 10210
E-mail : info@nhrc.or.th

Also send copies to diplomatic representatives accredited to your country.

Tags:

Comments

#29112 - by john francis lee (visitor) () | Sun, 13/01/2013 - 07:21

Article 112 violates the

Article 112 violates the right to freedom of expression under international human rights law, as it goes far beyond permissible restrictions of this right. Thailand is party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and is legally bound to uphold the right to freedom of expression.

There's been a revolution at AI ... ?

  1. Expressing concern that Somyot Prueksakasemsuk has been detained on account of his peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression;
  2. Calling for charges against him to be dropped, and for him to be immediately and unconditionally released from detention;
  3. Calling for him to be given redress for the months he has spent in detention and for the authorities to amend Article 112 so that it complies with Thailand’s obligations under international human rights law, and to suspend its use until it has been amended in such a way.

... and AI has adopted the position of the UN High Commission on Human Rights?

Better late than never!

I'll be delighted to send another letter - citing the AI's belated discovery of principle - to PM Yingluck, MOJ Pracha and with a copy to the bit-bucket (that's what they think of humans and their rights) at what is referred to as the Thai Human Rights Commission.

Victory is in the air! Free Somyot!

#29113 - by john francis lee (visitor) () | Sun, 13/01/2013 - 07:29

Is this a bit of subtle

Is this a bit of subtle sabotage on the part of AI?

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 22 FEBRUARY 2013 TO:

Don't trust the Greeks bearing gifts! ... surely that should be ...

PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 22 JANUARY 2013 TO:

... and surely Prachatai can fix it without rolling back to AI?

Who will no doubt send a correction sometime in February!

#29121 - by prachatai () | Mon, 14/01/2013 - 18:06

Sorry about that.

Sorry about that.

#29122 - by john francis lee (visitor) () | Mon, 14/01/2013 - 20:00

No need to apologize ... AI

No need to apologize ... AI are the ones at fault. You should not be in the position of having to edit their public relations bulletins. It seems all to fall on you, doesn't it?

#29130 - by prachatai () | Wed, 16/01/2013 - 16:44

AI Thailand has confirmed

AI Thailand has confirmed that it will follow up on the case after the court verdict, and the deadline for sending the appeals was correct, 22 Feb 2013.

#29118 - by Emilio Esteban (visitor) () | Mon, 14/01/2013 - 00:49

I have prepared a template

I have prepared a template letter for anyone who wants to send a letter in response to AI appeal. Please find the letter plus details here: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/kmsfmr

#29119 - by Emilio Esteban (visitor) () | Mon, 14/01/2013 - 01:09

Hmmm... Look what I received

Hmmm... Look what I received when I tried to send an email to Yingluck, Prachatai:

Sorry, we were unable to deliver your message to the following address.

:
Remote host said: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in relay recipient table [RCPT_TO]

Could you double check the e-mails please.

#29147 - by john francis lee (visitor) () | Tue, 22/01/2013 - 10:27

While it is true that the

While it is true that the email address given for PM Yingluck is no good, it bounces immediately, and the fax number does seem to work.

The man who most emphatically spits in the faces of his constituents is Pracha Promnok. No only does he refuse to accept email ... he waits silently for the sending machine to time out, after trying days to deliver email to his 'address', the sender thinking it's been delivered ... and he refuses faxes as well.

So the only alternative is snail mail

Minister of Justice
Pracha Promnok
Ministry of Justice
22/f Software Park Building,
Chaeng Wattana Road,
Pakkred Nonthaburi 11120, Thailand

I'm just a farang and have no real standing in Thailand.
But if I were a Thai the arrogance and disdain of this man would not be lost on me.

I wouldn't get mad, but I would get even ... at the very next poll.
I'd make sure it was "Good night, Khun Pracha Promnok. Pleasant dreams."

#29148 - by john francis lee (visitor) () | Tue, 22/01/2013 - 11:11

THAILAND: Arbitrary detention

THAILAND: Arbitrary detention of a human rights defender and continued removal of constitutional protections

The Asian Human Rights Commission wishes to note one line in the Constitution not mentioned by the Court in their comment. The first sentence of Article 3 notes that "The Sovereign power belongs to the Thai people."

Throughout this comment, rather than specifying how the Constitution might be used to uphold the rights and liberties of the people, the Constitutional Court has instead specified the conditions under which the people do not have rights, or recourse to demand their rights.

Combined with a comment issued in 2011 in response to a petition filed by Daranee Charnchoengsilpakul (See AHRC-FAT-038-2011), the Constitutional Court seems to have taken up the task of systematically stripping rights and liberties out of the Constitution.

The Asian Human Rights Commission is concerned about what this comment may mean for the specific case of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk, who faces a maximum sentence of up to 30 years if convicted, as well as what it means broadly.

The AHRC urges all concerned parties to observe the Criminal Court decision in the case of Somyot Prueksakasemsuk tomorrow and to closely follow related developments in other cases and Thai state actions and comments in relations to Article 112 of the Criminal Code.