It’s Time For Thailand to Amend Its Controversial Lese-Majeste Law

On September 26, 2023, my fellow human rights lawyer Arnon Nampa was imprisoned in Thailand for calling for the reform of the Thai monarchy. He has been behind bars ever since. I had the opportunity to talk to him early last month at the Bangkok Criminal Court, where he appeared for a hearing in one of the remaining three lese-majeste cases he is facing under Article 112 of Thailand’s Criminal Code. This draconian provision punishes with prison terms of three to 15 years whoever defames, insults, or threatens the Thai king, queen, heir apparent, or regent. Eleven additional lese-majeste cases filed against Arnon have already resulted in 11 convictions and a cumulative prison term of more than 31 years. When I met Arnon in court, he was barefoot, wearing his prison uniform. I was shocked to see he was being kept ankle-shackled the entire time, a clear form of ill-treatment and a violation of his right to be treated humanely and with respect for his dignity. I briefly spoke with him about his trial and expressed my full solidarity. When he was eventually escorted out of the courtroom to return to prison, he turned to me, and knowing I am from beer-loving Belgium, he smiled and promised me the next time he would meet me in Brussels for a beer. This rendezvous will likely have to wait many years. A day earlier, I was in the same court for another lese-majeste case. This time, the defendant was a young woman pro-democracy activist, Tantawan Tuatulanon, known as “Tawan.” Visibly stressed but putting on a brave face, she reminded me of my own daughter – same age, same studies, same demeanor. This was the day of the verdict, which, as it happens in most lese-majeste cases, turned out to be a conviction. Her crime? She livestreamed on Facebook the relocation of a farmer sit-in protest in Bangkok to make way for the passage of a royal motorcade. She was violently arrested on the spot and charged with violating Article 112. The Criminal Court sentenced her to two years in prison without suspension. Tawan spent the rest of the day in the holding cell in the court’s basement, while awaiting the outcome of her bail application, which was successful and resulted in her temporary release pending appeal. I managed to talk to her through a phone line across a series of partitions to convey my support and encouragement. In a striking and surreal contrast, just before Tawan’s verdict, the same judge had delivered another verdict, in which a convicted child sex offender was sentenced to six years in prison. His sentence was suspended for two years so that he could be free and have a chance to demonstrate he is “a good person.” Like Arnon and Tawan, in recent years, hundreds of Thais have faced criminal prosecution under Article 112. About 30 of them are currently behind bars, with 19 serving prison terms of up to 50 years. Those who are on trial have little or no hope of avoiding prison. In a discriminatory move, Article 112 has been excluded from offenses covered by recently adopted legislation designed to promote a “peaceful society” to clear records, dismiss pending cases, and release individuals detained in connection with the political turmoil that Thailand experienced for two decades (2005-2025). In addition, authorities have made no progress in the adoption of alternatives to detention (such as home detention) for prisoners convicted of certain crimes – which should include non-violent offenses such as lese-majeste. Like Thailand, my own country, Belgium, is a constitutional monarchy with the King as the head of state. In October 2021, the Constitutional Court ruled that Belgium’s lese-majeste law – introduced in 1847 and rarely used – violated freedom of expression and that monarchs were not entitled to greater protection than ordinary people for defamation. As a result, in Belgium’s current Criminal Code, lese-majeste can only be punished by a fine, and no deprivation of liberty is possible for those who insult the monarch. This sensible reform could provide a blueprint for Thailand and would bring Article 112 closer to compliance with international human rights law. Indeed, under international human rights law, imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty for insult or defamation, including when insults are directed towards public figures, such as heads of state. The task of reforming Article 112 falls exclusively on the Thai people. Nonetheless, like-minded states, including Belgium, must play a positive role by supporting such domestic efforts and backing them with calls for the amendment of Article 112 and respect for international human rights law. Freedom of expression is a fundamental and universal right that protects all opinions, including those that shock, offend, or hurt – let alone those that call for the reform of the monarchy or question the appropriateness of royal motorcades. As Thailand has learned in recent years, without freedom of expression there is no “peaceful society.” It is as simple as that.