Court revokes bail for Arnon and Mike
The Criminal Court has revoked bail for human rights lawyer Arnon Nampa and student activist Panupong Jadnok after the pair broke bail conditions by joining in political protests.
Corrections Department officials yesterday evening took them to Bangkok Remand Prison.
Their supporters shouted as they gave them moral support and said they would show up at a mass rally on Sept 19.
Thai Lawyers for Human Rights Centre said the court yesterday allowed Mr Panupong, also known as Mike Rayong, to request his release on bail with a surety of 200,000 baht. He refused to put down the bail money.
The Criminal Court summoned Mr Arnon and Mr Panupong yesterday for a hearing after a police request for the court to withdraw bail granted to the pair.
They were arrested on Aug 8 and charged with sedition after taking part in an anti-government rally at Democracy Monument on July 18. They were released on bail on the condition that they must not repeat the offences they are accused of.
After his release, Mr Arnon travelled to Chiang Mai to speak at a rally. He and Mr Panupong also spoke at the rally at Thammasat's Rangsit campus on Aug 10.
Meanwhile, the House of Represen- tatives yesterday approved a report by a House committee garnering political opinions of students and other people demonstrating and calling for democracy, despite mixed reactions by political parties.
Thiratchai Phanthumat, a Move Forward Party list-MP, criticised the House committee for having many limitations while conducting this task and consequently failing to gain trust from pro-democracy protesters.
The main factor resulting in this failure was the fact that the last government didn't come from an election and certain coup makers still are in this government, namely Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, Deputy Prime Minister Prawit Wongsuwon and Interior Minister Anupong Paojinda, said Mr Thiratchai.
The protesters actually want to talk to the government, not this House committee, he said, adding these key government figures had better have a direct dialogue with the protesters.
Korrawee Prissananantakul, a member of the House committee, admitted the committee had several limitations, which could have made the protesting students feel uncomfortable expressing their opinions through the committee.
Despite insisting the committee had tried its best to maintain political neutrality in producing the report, he said anyone reading it can tell it was written in favour of the students.