BANGKOK: A ruling by an Appeal Court on the legality of the Prakanong Court's 2014 dismissal of the Natural Fruit criminal defamation charge against Andy Hall will be read at Prakanong Court at 9.30am on Friday September 18.
Andy Hall is required to attend the hearing tomorrow in person. The hearing has several possible outcomes.
First, the Appeal Court may reject the appeal. If not satisfied wit the decision, the plaintiffs Natural Fruit or the Attorney General can then appeal the dismissal further to the Supreme Court.
Second, if the Appeal Court accepts the appeal, it can also rule on the facts of the case immediately based on the previous 2014 trial. The Appeals Court can find Andy Hall either guilty or not guilty of criminal defamation.
If Andy Hall is found guilty, he can be imprisoned, asked to
pay a fine and/or detained pending a bail request and filing of an
appeal.
Third, the Appeals Court can also accept the appeal but order the Prakanong Court to look anew at the case again. In this case, the Prakanong Court will have to rule on the facts of the case as per the information presented during the trial in September 2014.
No further hearings will be held and no new information considered. Andy Hall can be detained pending the ruling. If detained, he can seek release on bail.
BACKGROUND
The charge in this prosecution case by the Attorney General and Natural Fruit Company Ltd. relates to an interview Andy Hall gave to Aljazeera English in Yangon, Myanmar in April 2013 and carries a maximum penalty of one year's imprisonment if convicted.
Natural Fruit filed the case in July 2013 and the Prakanong Court heard the case in September 2014. In October 2014, the Prakanong Court dismissed the case on the grounds of flawed interrogation process that was in breach of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code.
Thailand's Attorney General/Public Prosecutor and Natural Fruit filed their appeal on the legality of the dismissal to an Appeal Court in January 2015.
Ironically, the Aljazeera interview concerned another case Natural Fruit had filed against Andy Hall - a criminal defamation and computer crimes case which relates to the publication of Finnwatch report 'Cheap Has a High Price' in January, 2013.
The report exposed labor rights violations at the Natural Fruit pineapple processing plant, and Andy Hall had conducted interviews with the workers at the plant for the report.
The preliminary hearings on this criminal defamation and computer crimes case concluded on July 20, 2015. The Bangkok South Criminal Court subsequently decided to proceed with this case and Andy Hall will be formally indicted in a separate hearing on October 19, 2015.
Andy Hall will plead not guilty to all charges and he will then be
detained pending a bail request.
Natural Fruit has also filed two corresponding civil defamation claims against Andy Hall requesting over 400 million baht in damages.
The cases brought against Andy Hall have been widely criticised as judicial harassment and an attempt to silence a human rights defender.
Criminal defamation charges also breach the right to freedom of
expression.
Independent trial observers who attended the trial against Andy Hall in September, 2014 concluded in their report that Andy Hall should have been released on merit, and that the Thai Courts did not have jurisdiction on the case as the Aljazeera interview took place in Myanmar.
Andy Hall is required to attend the hearing tomorrow in person. The hearing has several possible outcomes.
First, the Appeal Court may reject the appeal. If not satisfied wit the decision, the plaintiffs Natural Fruit or the Attorney General can then appeal the dismissal further to the Supreme Court.
Second, if the Appeal Court accepts the appeal, it can also rule on the facts of the case immediately based on the previous 2014 trial. The Appeals Court can find Andy Hall either guilty or not guilty of criminal defamation.
If Andy Hall is found guilty, he can be imprisoned, asked to
pay a fine and/or detained pending a bail request and filing of an
appeal.
Third, the Appeals Court can also accept the appeal but order the Prakanong Court to look anew at the case again. In this case, the Prakanong Court will have to rule on the facts of the case as per the information presented during the trial in September 2014.
No further hearings will be held and no new information considered. Andy Hall can be detained pending the ruling. If detained, he can seek release on bail.
BACKGROUND
The charge in this prosecution case by the Attorney General and Natural Fruit Company Ltd. relates to an interview Andy Hall gave to Aljazeera English in Yangon, Myanmar in April 2013 and carries a maximum penalty of one year's imprisonment if convicted.
Natural Fruit filed the case in July 2013 and the Prakanong Court heard the case in September 2014. In October 2014, the Prakanong Court dismissed the case on the grounds of flawed interrogation process that was in breach of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code.
Thailand's Attorney General/Public Prosecutor and Natural Fruit filed their appeal on the legality of the dismissal to an Appeal Court in January 2015.
Ironically, the Aljazeera interview concerned another case Natural Fruit had filed against Andy Hall - a criminal defamation and computer crimes case which relates to the publication of Finnwatch report 'Cheap Has a High Price' in January, 2013.
The report exposed labor rights violations at the Natural Fruit pineapple processing plant, and Andy Hall had conducted interviews with the workers at the plant for the report.
The preliminary hearings on this criminal defamation and computer crimes case concluded on July 20, 2015. The Bangkok South Criminal Court subsequently decided to proceed with this case and Andy Hall will be formally indicted in a separate hearing on October 19, 2015.
Andy Hall will plead not guilty to all charges and he will then be
detained pending a bail request.
Natural Fruit has also filed two corresponding civil defamation claims against Andy Hall requesting over 400 million baht in damages.
The cases brought against Andy Hall have been widely criticised as judicial harassment and an attempt to silence a human rights defender.
Criminal defamation charges also breach the right to freedom of
expression.
Independent trial observers who attended the trial against Andy Hall in September, 2014 concluded in their report that Andy Hall should have been released on merit, and that the Thai Courts did not have jurisdiction on the case as the Aljazeera interview took place in Myanmar.
This disgraceful case should not be wasting the courts time. Face saving at it's worst.
Posted by Arun Muruga on September 17, 2015 13:05