The Court of Appeal overturned Sonthiyan’s sentence to a one-year jail term for obstructing elections in Dusit District. The benefit was reduced to 8 months without parole. Thamrongthanyawong-Seree Wongmontha”, defendants 2-4 did not appear to cause the dismissal of the lawsuit.
Today (20 October) at the Criminal Court, Ratchadaphisek Road, the court made an appointment to read the verdict of the Court of Appeal for the treason case. PDRC’s first rhetoric Black No. 1191/2557, Or. 1298/2557, Or. 1328/2557, where the Public Prosecutor’s Office 4 is a plaintiff, filed a lawsuit against Sonthiyan Chuenruethainaitham, 59 years old, the PDRC leader, Mr. Sakolthee. Phatthiyakul, 44, former Bangkok MPs joined the rally, Mr. Sombat Thamrongthanyawong, 70, former president of the National Institute of Development Administration (NIDA) and former chairman of the Political Reform Commission. and the Political Reform Council (NHSO) and Mr. Seree Wongmonta, 72, a journalism and marketing academic, are the 1-4 defendants in the treason, making them appear verbally to the public. or any other means that is not an act in the constitutional purpose of causing disturbance or the unrest in the Kingdom
Gathering 10 or more people to use mayhem to cause chaos in the country with weapons. by being the head or the person who has the duty to give orders Joint closure of work, stop hiring to force the government, joint invasion According to the Criminal Code, Sections 113 , 116, 117, 209, 210, 215, 362, 364, 365 and jointly obstruct the officers at the polling station, together obstruct the operation of the Election Commission. With the election of the House of Representatives and the acquisition of the Senate, 2007, Section 76,152, including 8 charges
By this first batch of PDRC litigation cases Prosecutors have filed lawsuits since 2014 in connection with the rally of PDRC with Mr. Suthep led a rally to oust the government Miss Yingluck Shinawatra, former prime minister During the period between 23 Nov 2013 – 1 May 2014, which led the protesters to invade and close many government buildings. including obstruction of elections At the end of the complaint, the plaintiff’s prosecutor also asked the court to revoke the defendant’s right to vote for a period of five years.
While the four defendants denied all charges and appointed a lawyer to fight the case. During the trial, the four defendants were temporarily released. which the case began to examine witnesses from 2015-2019
In this case, the Court of First Instance ruled on 25 July 2019, dismissing the case by considering the evidence presented by the plaintiff and the defendant. After debunking it, it was seen that the evidence the plaintiff’s prosecutor had heard was only that the four defendants had attended a rally with the PDRC, but were not the leaders who ordered the protesters or made a speech ordering them to act. violence by the assembly of PDRC, the Constitutional Court has already ruled in its ruling No. 59/2556 that the PDRC assembly resulting from the comments Which is the right and freedom under Article 63 of the Constitution, which is due to the objection to the amnesty bill and dissatisfaction with the administration of the state government. Ms. Yingluck Shinawatra, the evidence presented by the plaintiff, was insufficient to hear that the four defendants had committed all 8 counts of wrongdoing.
By. This morning The four defendants came to court with several PDRC leaders such as Suthep Thaugsuban, former secretary-general of the PDRC, Thaworn Senniam, Sakolthee Phattiyakul, and Mr Nutt. Pol Theepsuwan who came to support
Before hearing the verdict, Mr Suthep revealed that today he came to support the four defendants and is ready to accept the court’s verdict. Even if it is any court He believes that the decision was made in accordance with the principles of justice, and in the treason case, his rhetoric is set to appeal in November.
Subsequently, the Court of Appeal reviewed the evidence and found that Mr. Sonthiyan, the 1st defendant, had committed an offense under Constitution Act On the election of MPs and Senators in the case of jointly obstructing advance elections at Sukhothai School and the Dusit District Office gave him one year’s imprisonment, but the testimony was beneficial to the trial, reducing the sentence to one third, maintaining 8 months of imprisonment, without parole, and revoking the right to vote for 5 years. He was the lead to obstruct the election and was not guilty of any other charges. Therefore judged only on the part of the first defendant, the rest shall be according to the judgment of the Court of First Instance.
After hearing the verdict, Mr Suthep told the press that The appeals court sentenced Sonthinana to eight months in prison, while Sakolthee, Dr. Sombat and Ajarn Seree dismissed the charges. We, as ideologists, would like to thank the court for the difficult trial of this case. And then there is the judgment that most of us consider to be unlucky and sorrowful. However, we have been fighting the lawsuit for a very long time. Unfortunately, Sonthiyan was jailed for 8 months, but saw that we had a chance to fight the case in the Supreme Court. Because from the ruling in the facts of the Court of Appeal, it is beneficial for us to use it as a defense in the Supreme Court.
.
