[ad_1]
The court dismisses the lawsuit 9 leaders who want to vote are not wrong 116 – Rally Act, Skywalk Rally Case Revealing speeches calling for elections Do not instigate harshness
Follow the news, press follow the line fresh news
Dec 25 atBangkok South Criminal Court The court reads the verdict, Black Case No. 3207/2561 in the Prosecutor’s Office of the Bangkok South Criminal Office. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against a political activist and former leader of nine electoral groups as a defendant for inciting provocation. According to article 116 of the Penal Code, a public assembly was organized within a 150-meter radius of the Royal Palace in accordance with the Public Assemblies Law of 2015 and violated the Head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO). ) 3/2558, Article 12 prohibits political gatherings of 5 or more people (the order has been canceled).
By defendants 1-9 consisting of Mr. Weera Somkid Secretary General of the Network of Anti-Corruption People, Mr. Rangsiman Rome Kao Klai Parliamentary Party List, Mr. Sirawit Serithivat O new sergeant, Mrs. Nuttamahattana Or lean Mr. Anon Nampha Citizen Leader 2020, Mr. Ekachai Hongkangwan, Mr. Sukrit Piensuwan, Mr. Nativit Chotiphatpaisan andMr. Sombat Boonngamonong Or land. Moles
The case against the defendants in the case on January 27, 2018, the defendants organized an activity “Stop buying elections. Stop the succession of power” Point out to the NCPO that the people do not want the elections to be postponed again. At the Sky Walk Pathumwan intersection Across from the MBK Center Mall All the defendants denied and received bail. When the appointment time The defendant gradually came to court.
The court examined the evidence that the plaintiff and the defendant had testified and the nine defendants committed a gathering offense within 150 meters of the Royal Palace under the Public Assembly Law. Within 150 meters until the measurement was done after AND there were no signs announcing the ban of the 9 defendants and the public would not know that the meeting was prohibited.
Also in front of the Bangkok Art and Culture Center which is closer than the scene, there are frequent events. Make the accused understand that he is not in the prohibitions It is believed that the nine defendants had no intention of raping. The plaintiff’s testimony was not enough to hear that the 9 defendants committed this crime.
The 9 defendants committed the crime of inciting the state According to the Penal Code, Art. 116 or not from interviews with defendants 1 and 9, holding a poster and talking about the defendants 6 and the speech of the defendants. There is a call for elections to be held from November 2018 because General Prayut Chan-o-cha The Prime Minister has postponed several elections. Even if the speeches convey meaning But not wanting to postpone an election is not incitement. According to the purpose of the Constitution, the speeches and interviews of the defendants did not go so far as to incite harshness among the people. The plaintiff’s witnesses had no weight to hear that the defendant committed a crime under Section 116 of the Penal Code.
[ad_2]
