Net rights group 'dislikes' Facebook charges

Net rights group 'dislikes' Facebook charges

Police take Mr Thanakorn to the military court to seek the first round of his detention on Monday. (Photo by Pornprom Sattrabhaya)
Police take Mr Thanakorn to the military court to seek the first round of his detention on Monday. (Photo by Pornprom Sattrabhaya)

Thai Netizen Network has urged the government to stop taking legal action against people who click "Like" on allegedly illegal content.

People click Like on posts, photos or other content on social media websites for various reasons, it said in a statement on Thursday.

Doing so does not necessarily mean they support the content. More importantly, the Like clickers are not complicit in the crime, it said.

“While disseminating such content may be ruled an offence by court, it is not a crime to express one’s feeling toward the content. As well, the act cannot be considered supporting the crime because it did not occur before or when the crime is committed and the clicker has done nothing to help or facilitate the wrongdoing.

“Furthermore, clicking Like is not a reproduction of the content even though there is a chance the software used by social media websites may disseminate the posts automatically,” it said.

Such action is not the intention of the clicker, who has no control over the functions of the software, the statement continues, adding he also cannot put a stop to it.

“More importantly, the clicker has no control over the content of the post which he ‘Liked’, which may be altered by the poster at any time. Therefore, a post seen at a certain time may not be the same as when a person ‘Liked’ it.”

As well, the network said Section 14 (1) of the Computer Crime Act has been used extensively by authorities to build defamation cases against citizens over the past eight years even though the provision is intended to stop document forgery.

The provision outlaws “importing to a computer system forged computer data, either in whole or in part, or false computer data, in a manner that is likely to cause damage to a third party or the public”.  

"The terms ‘forged data’ and ‘false data’ under the section target forged email or websites. However, authorities have been using it in the wrong sense to file defamation charges. Its major weakness is that, unlike the Criminal Code, this law does not exempt liability when criticism is made honestly or for public benefits,” the statement said.

Athit Suriyawongkul, director of the Foundation for Internet and Civic Culture which runs the network, referred to several cases in recent years where authorities used the laws to stop public scrutiny into controversial affairs.

He cited to the use of Section 44 of the interim charter, which gives the prime minister absolute power, to arrest of Thanakorn. The man was taken into custody at his office after military intelligence found he had shared infographics on the Rajabhakti Park corruption scandal, which the military believed were false.

They later searched his house and seized his computer and mobile phone. Mr Thanakorn was interrogated by technology crime police at an unknown military base. He was denied lawyer.

Mr Thanakorn was later charged with importing false data under Section 14 of the Computer Crime Act, sedition under Section 116 of the Criminal Code and lese majeste under Section 112 of the Criminal Code for clicking Like on a Facebook post with alleged lese majeste content; copying and sharing on Facebook a picture with sarcastic remarks and copying and sharing infographics on the Rajabhakti scandal. In short, authorities claimed he had “obstructed government operations and instigated unrest".

"It is worth noting that the Like clicking and the lese majester photo sharing charges were added after the house search and mobile phone seizure," said Mr Arthit.

Authorities did not mention these two charges before but brought them up after the arrest, said Mr Arthit.

“A police general later said it’s a crime to click Like or comment on offensive Facebook posts.”

Government agencies have also tried to use charges of defamation, lese majeste, sedition and false data imports to thwart efforts to scrutinise possible corruption by the public while failing to show evidence.

"They also try to divert attention from the probe by accusing without evidence that the presenter of such information has hidden political agenda or is backed by certain groups.”

 

Do you like the content of this article?