Bangkok: The powers of the Committee for Reviewing Article 112 Cases, as well as the role of the public prosecutor in the appeal process of the Thanathorn case, are currently being revealed. The public prosecutor is contemplating an appeal in the case involving Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, which pertains to the royally bestowed COVID-19 vaccines.
According to Thai News Agency, the public prosecutor is closely monitoring the outcome of the Thanathorn case under Section 112, which involves the royally donated vaccines. The roles of both the Committee for Consideration of Section 112 Cases and the Public Prosecutor's Office in considering appeals are being clarified. The deputy spokesperson of the Attorney General's Office has explained the procedural aspects of the case.
On May 28th, reporters highlighted the Criminal Court's decision to acquit Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, chairman of the Progressive Movement, in a defamation case. The case, brought by the Public Prosecutor's Office, Criminal Division 5, accused him under Section 112 of the Criminal Code and the Computer Crime Act for defamation, insult, or expressing malice towards the monarchy.
The allegations stemmed from a Facebook live-stream by Thanathorn on January 18, 2021, where he criticized the government's vaccine procurement, titled "Royal-granted vaccines: Who benefits, who loses?" The broadcast allegedly contained distorted information, misleading the public, and referenced the monarchy in relation to Siam Bioscience and vaccine procurement.
Following the court's verdict, Deputy Spokesperson Chaiyarat Pavakanan of the Attorney General's Office disclosed that the Office has acknowledged the judgment. The decision to appeal will depend on the facts and legal issues presented in the case file and judgment.
Chaiyarat further elaborated on the legal procedures, stating that once a court verdict is issued, the prosecutor handling the case secures a copy of the judgment and forwards it to the High Court prosecutor. This does not require an opinion on whether an appeal should be filed. The High Court prosecutor must then send the case file and judgment to the Committee for Reviewing Article 112 Cases to decide on an appeal. If the committee recommends an appeal, their opinion is sent to the High Court prosecutor to file with the Court of Appeal. Conversely, if the committee advises against appealing, their opinion goes to the Commissioner General of Police for consideration and a counter-opinion. If the Commissioner General concurs, the case is closed; if not, the Attorney General makes the final decision.
A source from the Office of the Attorney General commented on the appeal process for Article 112 cases, explaining that the Committee for Reviewing Article 112 Cases, established by the Attorney General, is tasked with reviewing and deciding on Article 112 cases nationwide. This excludes cases outside the Kingdom, which fall under the Attorney General's sole authority. For general offenses under Article 112 within the Kingdom, the committee assesses whether to indict or appeal.
In cases such as those under Article 112 occurring in Bangkok, the case file from the police must be submitted to the Article 112 Committee for consideration on filing charges. Public prosecutors at the Public Prosecutor's Office lack the authority to issue such orders. If the committee recommends indictment, the public prosecutors file the charges. Should the court dismiss the case, the prosecutor obtains a copy of the judgment and submits it to the Article 112 Committee for appeal consideration, a process not within the High Court prosecutor's authority, unlike general cases.