Supreme Court acquits activist in defamation case
published : 30 Jun 2020 at 20:49
The Supreme Court has upheld the Appeals Court’s acquittal of human rights defender Andy Hall on criminal defamation and computer crimes charges brought against him by the pineapple company Natural Fruit Co Ltd in 2013.
The ruling was read on Tuesday at 9am at the Bangkok South Criminal Court. Mr Hall did not attend the hearing.
"The Supreme Court’s decision is welcome. The original conviction against Andy Hall was much criticised at the time as an abuse of justice that should never have happened in the first place. Researching human rights violations is not a crime," said Sonja Finér, the executive director of Finnwatch.
The case involves interviews Mr Hall conducted with migrant workers of Natural Fruit for the Finnwatch report Cheap Has a High Price, published in 2013. Worker interviewees’ testimonies detailed allegations of violations of labour and human rights at the Natural Fruit plant in the South.
In September 2016, the Bangkok South Criminal Court sentenced Andy Hall to four years’ imprisonment, reduced by one year and suspended by two years, and ordered him to pay a fine of 200,000 baht, reduced to 150,000 baht.
The Appeals Court in May 2018 overturned the verdict, ruling that Mr Hall had not acted unlawfully, and that based on all the evidence before the court, there was a real possibility of labour rights violations at the Natural Fruit's factory. The Appeals Court also ruled that Mr Hall’s research had been in the public interest. Natural Fruit appealed the Appeals Court’s ruling to the Supreme Court.
Natural Fruit has filed four criminal and civil cases against Mr Hall following the publication of the report. On July 14, the Supreme Court is due to issue a final ruling on Mr Hall’s appeal against a 10-million-baht civil defamation conviction imposed on him in 2018. This conviction is in relation to a case brought by Natural Fruit in 2013 concerning an interview Mr Hall gave to Al-Jazeera that year in Myanmar.
Mr Hall left Thailand in 2016, making clear his intention not to return unless judicial harassment against him ceases. He continues to work on migrant workers rights across Southeast Asia.
After Tuesday's ruling, Mr Hall told Finnwatch from Kathmandu, Nepal: “I welcome today’s final ruling in this case. But after years of ongoing judicial harassment that has taken a heavy toll on me, my family and my colleagues, the verdict does not feel like a victory.
"My activism for over a decade in Thailand was intended only to promote and uphold the fundamental rights of millions of migrant workers in the country. These workers continue to find themselves without a voice in high risk situations of forced labour and subject to systemic human and labour rights violations in global supply chains. I remain open to reconciliation to put an end once and for all to this continued irrational cycle of litigation against me and my colleagues that remain in Thailand.”