In front of hundreds of supporters who had assembled at the court, the judge announced that the defendants, including Supinya, were innocent of the charges laid against them and subsequently dismissed them.

This judgement is a good and fair outcome for Supinya and the Thai Post newspaper. It upholds the basic principles of freedom of expression, as outlined in Article 39 of the Constitution. It also clears Supinya and the other defendants of a charge - criminal defamation - that should never have been brought against them.

While we certainly welcome this news, the AHRC remains concerned about criminal defamation in Thailand, as this case demonstrates the huge financial and human resources required to fight such a charge, despite the court stating that there was never any basis for it in the first instance. This is particularly disturbing for the many other cases like Supinya's currently pending before the courts.

Supinya's case also demonstrates that it is vital that proposed legal reforms in Thailand address the antiquated laws that violate the principle of free expression established both under the Constitution of Thailand and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Thailand is a party. Foremost among these are the criminal defamation law, which should be abolished without delay, and the existing civil defamation law reviewed to bring it into line with international standards. Until these changes take place, the people of Thailand will not feel free to speak, broadcast or publish their comments without fear of being prosecuted for them.

Urgent Appeals Programme

Asian Human Rights Commission

Hong Kong

------------------------------------------------

Thank you for staying strong in Shin Corp legal case

Re: "Supinya wins Shin Corp case", News, March 15. Dear Khun Supinya: Congratulations on your victory over Shin Corporation. I believe you have had a very hard time during the past few years, and I am sure that your efforts overcoming this difficulty will give great confidence to people who truly love democracy in this country.

KT

Bangkok

------------------------------------------------

Strong institutions essential for free and fair elections

Re: "The government's opponents are undermining democracy", Opinion, March 12.

At this time of high-profile political activity, there still seem to be people around who do not grasp some fundamental ideas. Some people are accusing the Democrats and other parties boycotting the April 2 election of being undemocratic. An example was the letter by "SL" on Sunday.

To make an election in Thailand remotely democratic, one would have to freeze the bank accounts of all wealthy individuals and large companies for several months before and after the election and put a freeze on loans for such people. They could be given a generous daily withdrawal allowance of, say, Bt500 for living expenses.

This would reduce the ability of the wealthy to buy votes and sponsor rent-a-crowd demonstrations. Those running the election would need to be given immunity from being threatened or influenced by those in the political system in perpetuity so that they could conduct the election and punish those who break the electoral laws with complete neutrality.

But elections are not the sole measure of democracy. Democracy involves the right of all to express their opinions on issues without fear of reprisal and have a free-flowing debate within very broad boundaries. People should have the potential to influence government decisions on an ongoing basis, not just during an election.

Gareth Clayton

Bangkok

------------------------------------------------

Is democracy always necessarily a good thing?

The word democracy has been bandied about in Thailand a great deal in the last couple of months. Everyone says they are for it. No one says they are against it. But is democracy necessarily and always a good thing?

After all, democracy could be two wolves voting to eat a sheep.

In short, democracy without individual liberty codified in a constitutional bill of rights is no different from dictatorial or oligarchic rule.

Linus G

Rebecca Garcia

Chiang Mai

------------------------------------------------

An alternative premier needs to be put forward

I know that you do not like "Thak Sin" and his team, but one thing you can tell me would be whom would you like to support as the new prime minister. Mr Sonthi Limthongkul? Some old corrupt soldiers, mafia bosses, "vegetarian man" or scholars from universities?

Because I have no brain of my own, I ask you to think for me.

Surapon Pituctin

Bangkok

------------------------------------------------

Individuals matter less than political transparency

Re: "Protesters settle in for a long stay", News, March 15.

Listening to the speakers surrounding Government House, it seems to me that both sides are equally guilty of rabble-rousing, telling half-truths, being knaves and twisting events to set traps for fools.

Such an approach is irresponsibility of the highest order, divisive and not constructive. Tearing down our own house benefits no one.

As Khun Anant Asavabhokin, president of Land & Houses, said, "I'm not worried about whether the government stays or leaves. What I'm concerned about is our democracy, and the importance for a strong political and constitutional system."

As Khun Montree Sornpaisarn, CEO of Kim Eng Securities, noted, all parties should seek a peaceful resolution - including fully addressing the concerns raised by the opposition and the People's Alliance for Democracy. Our goal should be to get a government that is transparent and accountable to the people. Who is at the helm is secondary.

Stop rabble-rousing and build a democracy that is transparent, seeks the active participation of everyday Thais, and is answerable to us.

Burin Kantabutra

Bangkok

------------------------------------------------

Only one side will come out of this crisis alive

To Thaksin Shinawatra and his clique, this is a life-and-death struggle. In order to survive and to continue to rule this country under Thaksin's system, they must win this battle. If they lose, Thaksin's empire will collapse and all they have gained through improper, illicit dealings will come to naught over night. But Thaksin is doomed to failure if he doesn't have the guts to take up the challenge of a live debate. He knows too well that he will meet his Waterloo in the public eye before we take the trouble to go to the polls on April 2.

To Thaksin's opponents - the People's Alliance for Democracy - this is also a life-and-death struggle. In order to protect the democracy our people have enjoyed over the decades, although imperfect, and to prevent this country from buckling under the rule of Thaksin, they must win this battle. If they lose, democracy will die and the people who are at the moment struggling against Thaksin's regime will lose their lives. But they are sure to win because they are waging a just struggle, which is gaining momentum with stronger and stronger support from all walks of life.

Abee

Bangkok

------------------------------------------------

The Army is making its own enemies in the South

No one seems to learn from history. The American revolution turned the corner when British soldiers started raiding villages and ransacking homes looking for rebels. Many pro-British towns and villages turned pro-rebel after experiencing one of these escapades. This, of course, added to the rebel ranks.

The US repeated this process in Vietnam, inevitably forcing the general population into the opposition. Now the Thai Army is in charge of the recruiting drive for the insurgents. The harder they push, the more people join the militants. When will people ever learn?

Michael Weldon

Udon Thani

------------------------------------------------

A pre-emptive US strike on Iran is madness

Re: "US should strike first against Iran's leaders", Opinion, March 15.

Is Al Eberhardt out of his mind? Isn't the mess the US made of Iraq, a country that was invaded incompetently and cowardly for the wrong reasons, enough? New declassified evidence appears almost every day in the world press.

And after Iran, would he suggest invading North Korea? But not to worry; Iran and North Korea would not be pushovers despite the sabre-rattling coming from the armchair braggarts in Washington, right?

Rumbling into Tehran or Pyongyang the way it happened in Baghdad, with "shock and awe", would certainly not be a piece of (American ) cake.

Sagittarius

Bangkok