Extracts from the ruling
The following is an excerpt from the Criminal Court's three-page order denying a police request for arrest warrants against seven key members of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD). The order can be interpreted as a boost to people's right to participate in politics, including the right to scrutinise and demand the resignation of the prime minister
"[The Court] has considered the matter and thinks that people have the liberty to peaceful and unarmed assembly and limiting such right [which is guaranteed under Article 44 of the Constitution] cannot be done ... unless the country is in a state of war or while a state of emergency is being declared ... "[In deciding] whether the assembly and speech of the People's Alliance for Democracy is a violation of Article 116 of Criminal Code [conspiring to overthrow the government and law by force] or not, one must consider each individual's speech ... In considering the speech, the content of the speech must be considered in toto and mere words or parts of it should not be used. "[The alleged offenders] chiefly intended to attack the policy, governance and also the ethics of Pol Colonel Thaksin Shinawatra as prime minister, who is a public figure, and demanded that he resign from the post. There appears to be no intention to overthrow the law of the land or the government by using force to cause havoc and unrest among citizens … "As for the speech of Ms Rosana [Tositrakul] which was made on March 5, 2006 ... it is apparent that Ms Rosana's intention was to see protesters boycotting goods of certain private firms [the names of AIS, Nescafe, CP and 7-Eleven were read out], and as for the talk of delaying tax payment and engaging in a general strike as a next-step measure to be adopted if Pol Colonel Thaksin still refused to resign ... Rosana has yet to show the intention to instigate citizens into not paying tax or staging a general strike, which is against the law." Pravit Rojanaphruk
The Nation
|
