Appeal Court dismisses chicken farm company’s lawsuit against human rights defenders

The Appeal Court has dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by the chicken farm company Thammakaset against three human rights defenders for social media posts about abuse of migrant workers at its farm.

The company filed criminal defamation complaints in 2019 against Angkhana Neelapaijit, Puttanee Kangkun, and Thanaporn Saleephol for sharing and posting on social media in support of migrant workers who reported poor working conditions and other human rights defenders who had been sued by the company.

In August 2023, the South Bangkok Criminal Court dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that the posts were not about the company but expressed support for other advocates being sued by the company, while a video linked to the posts was found in another case to not be defamatory.

According to the Community Resource Centre Foundation (CRC), the Appeal Court ruled on 2 November to uphold the dismissal on the grounds that the defendants were exercising their right to freedom of expression about a public issue and defending human rights. It noted that the posts were not defamatory towards the company and that the business losses that the company claimed were not a direct result of the posts.

The lawsuits against Angkhana, Puttanee, and Thanaporn are among the over 30 civil and criminal cases filed by the company against human rights defenders, journalists, and workers since 2016 after 14 migrant workers from Myanmar submitted a petition to the National Human Rights Commission claiming that they were made to work for wages that were below-he legal minimum without overtime pay and that their documents had been confiscated by their employer.

The workers were sued by the company in October 2019 for defamation, but later acquitted.

Fortify Rights, where Thanaporn previously worked and Puttanee is now Director, issued a statement welcoming the verdict. It noted that under Section 220 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the acquittal is final as both the Court of First Instance and the Appeal Court have dismissed the case. Thammakaset will be barred from appealing to the Supreme Court unless a judge certifies that an appeal raises an important question to the Supreme Court or unless the Director-General of the Office of the Attorney General signs the appeal. Fortify Rights calls on the courts to consider the verdict as final, especially in light of the guidelines issued by the President of the Supreme Court on dismissal of bad-faith lawsuits brought to harass or unfairly burden defendants.

Fortify Rights calls on states reviewing Thailand during the upcoming Universal Periodic Review session of the UN Human Rights Council to press for enactment of an anti-SLAPP law that covers both criminal and civil cases, decriminalizes defamation, and ensures that cases against human rights defenders are resolved without undue delay.

"We should never have faced criminal charges for speaking out about workers' rights”, said Puttanee in a Fortify Rights press release. She said that while the ruling brings relief, it cannot bring back the seven years they spent defending themselves. She called for the decriminalization of defamation so that others do not have to go through the same experience.

Angkhana, a senator and former national human rights commissioner, said that the case shows how the lawsuit has been used for harassment and intimidation, causing serious physical and emotional harm to the defendants. She hopes that the judge will not allow an appeal to the Supreme Court so the case can finally end. Doing so would be in line with the Supreme Court President’s guidance that court proceedings should not be used to harass people or restrict their rights and freedoms, and would restore justice for the defendants. 

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)'s Southeast Asia regional office issued a statement welcoming the dismissal, noting that the court recognised that the defendants' social media activities constituted legitimate expression on matter of public interest.

"Following nearly seven years of legal proceedings, the case underscores the importance of safeguards against the misuse of litigation to restrict freedom of expression and human rights advocacy, including effective mechanisms for the early dismissal of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs)," says the statement.