Akong can appeal verdict : court

'Man convicted of lese majeste given every opportunity to defend himself'

In the first public reaction from the courts of justice to widespread criticism of the "Akong" verdict, a court spokesman has written an article categorically defending the ruling and stating that the man given 20 years for lese majeste could still appeal.

In his article sent to many media outlets, Sitthisak Wanachakij acknowledged that public criticism over the verdict against Amphon Tangnoppakhun, known publicly as Akong, "came like a flood that overwhelmed the court and the Thai justice system" and the continued silence of the court might no longer be a good option.

The article addressed key issues surrounding the "Akong" verdict -the assumption that he was innocent, the "much too harsh" punishment, the age of the defendant, the international standard for this kind of cases, and calls for Thailand to do away with or amend Article 112.

Responding to the claims that the 61-year-old man was innocent, Sitthisak insisted that the suspect was tried fairly and given every opportunity to defend himself. "These claims by people not involved in the justice process should be backed by concrete evidence. This case went through an investigation process and then was screened by public prosecutors. During the trial, the suspect was fully allowed to defend himself in court in accordance with legal and international standards," the court spokesman wrote in his article.

In bold letters, Sitthisak said that this case was far from final and the suspect has every right to take it to the Appeals Court and then, if necessary, the Supreme Court. "The case is not concluded yet, and we have seen many incidents of lower-court verdicts turned around by higher courts," he said. "It's premature to describe him as someone punished by the ultimate court verdict."

That was repeated again near the end of the article.

Touching on the most controversial aspect of the Criminal Court's ruling - the 20-year jail sentence imposed on the man - Sitthisak said the penalty was based on the court's conclusion that the offence was not just an insult to the monarchy, but something committed repeatedly with malicious intent. The spokesman also noted that the defendant was sentenced to five years on each of the five counts, two years more than the minimum penalty prescribed for each count.

The text messages in question were a pre-meditated act against the monarchy and they carried threats and the suspect used different words each time, according to the court's spokesman.

"The text messages were barbaric and the language used was beyond what ordinary people would use against each other," he wrote, noting that the hate campaign was committed against a monarch known to have done everything for the Thai people and who everybody knows is protected by the law against insults.

Regarding the age of the defendant, Sitthisak said that while Amphon was portrayed as an elderly, helpless man, he was well aware of what he was doing, and at 61 was by no means too old to learn and use technology against the monarchy. "He was not a grandpa needing nursery care and he was capable of understanding and using modern technology," the court's spokesman said.

Sitthisak's article did not address observations that people convicted of some heinous crimes had received lighter punishment.

On the verdict not meeting international standards, Sitthisak said that even the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights calls for freedom of expression to be exercised responsibly. It also mentioned the importance of national security, public moral and individual dignity can be taken into account.

Regarding calls for Article 112 of the Constitution to be scrapped or amended, Sitthisak said the issue was up to Parliament. However, he said that attempts to change the law should take into account Thailand's political history, national identity and the existence of fair and constructive criticism, which is already allowed in this country.