MEDIA-THAILAND: Libel Case Backfires on PM’s Firm

By Marwaan Macan-Markar Reprint | | Print |

Marwaan Macan-Markar

BANGKOK, Mar 15 2006 (IPS) - “This is a victory for freedom of speech and freedom of the press,” said the plucky young woman as she stepped out of a criminal court Wednesday after winning a legal battle that may well mark the end of profit without public accountability in this country.

The odds were against Supinya Klangnarong, who faced twin libel cases filed against her and Thai Post, a Thai language newspaper, in 2003 by Shin Corp., Thailand’s most powerful conglomerate, founded by Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

“This is an unprecedented moment in the history of Thai politics and media,” Ubonrat Siriyuvasak, a professor of communication studies at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University and a witness in the case, told IPS.

“The acquittal offers the right for the public to openly criticise and scrutinise the profits of large companies and corporations in the public interest.”

The ”Supinya case,” as it was known here, grabbed public attention, owing to the high-profile protagonists involved and the stakes in it for the public.

Supinya was faulted by Shin Corp. for saying during an interview in the Thai Post that the telecom giant had profited unfairly after Shinawatra became prime minister in 2001. In a bid to silence her, Shinawatra’s business empire ensnared Supinya in criminal and civil cases.

Had she lost the criminal case on Wednesday, Supinya would have faced a two-year jail term and a fine up to 200,000 baht (5,000 U.S. dollars).

In the civil case, which is also expected to go in her favour, Shin Corp. demanded a staggering 400 million baht (ten million dollars) in compensation.

The twin demands enraged sections of the public, more so after it became known that this giant killer earned a small salary of 15,000 baht (375 dollars) a month from her writings and speeches to promote greater media freedom.

Yet, as recently as in 2004, media analysts saw the case as a warning to activists and journalists to steer clear of big companies linked to members of the ruling Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thai – TRT) party. Typically, the business interests of leading TRT members include empires in the entertainment, transport and the industrial sector.

Shin Corp., was Thailand’s dominant mobile phone company, the country’s only satellite communications provider, the biggest Internet provider and also owner of the only independent, privately held television station.

In January this year, in a bid to help Thaksin deflect criticism of his business and political links, members of the Shinawatra family sold their shares of Shin Corp for 1.88 billion dollars to Temasek, the investment arm of the Singapore government.

But that deal brought far more troubles for Shinawatra than it solved. The discovery that it was tax-free triggered a massive political backlash, bringing thousands of anti-Thaksin demonstrators on to Bangkok’s streets since February.

The protesters, who number in the thousands and who are now in their sixth week of agitation, have held up the Shin-Temasek deal as the defining symbol of a government that has an alleged record of corruption, nepotism and suppression of institutions meant to check political power.

Wednesday’s verdict is expected to boost the confidence Thais have in their judiciary, including the lower courts. Said Chokchang Chutinaton, a medical doctor who was among the nearly hundred people in the court: ”Thai courts are the last stronghold of democracy.”

The criminal court’s verdict comes on the heels of four judgements, delivered late last year, that went in favour of journalists. They included a high-profile case that upheld the reporter’s right to expose and criticise the actions of public figures.

Thai journalists and media rights campaigners operate in a climate of fear that is visible in the fact that, during 2005, there were some 50 libel cases filed against them, marking a two-fold increase in such suits over the previous year.

The two-and-a-half-page verdict read out by the presiding judge at the Supinya trial offered hope that journalists and media rights campaigners can pursue their mission as the country’s watchdogs. It said that Supinya and the Thai Post had no intention of tarnishing Shin Corp.’s reputation but had criticised it on the basis of facts and that Shin Corp., as a company using public resources for profit, should be subject to scrutiny.

The verdict also argued that a link between a public figure such as the prime minister and the company he founded was reason enough for criticism in the public interest.

For Supinya, a Buddhist, the verdict was the answer to her prayers. ”I prayed this morning before coming to court like I have been doing since last year,” she told IPS on the steps of the courthouse before the verdict was delivered. ”It was for kindness and for forgiveness – even for Shin Corp.”