US scholar leaves Thailand after charges of insulting monarchy are dropped
Thailand's attorney general's office has confirmed that it will not prosecute an American academic arrested in early April on a charge of royal defamation, his lawyer said Thursday. The offense is punishable by up to 15 years in prison.
Paul Chambers, who had been employed as a political science lecturer at Naresuan University in the northern province of Phitsanulok, departed Thailand after the ruling, said his lawyer, Akarachai Chaimaneekarakate, who declined to reveal his destination.
The attorney general's office had already announced on May 1 that it did not intend to press charges against 58-year-old Chambers, an Oklahoma native, due to lack of evidence. But it had allowed the police in northern Thailand, which originally handled the case, to review its decision.
The group Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, which aided Chambers' defense, said on its website that police contested the decision, which was then referred back to the attorney general, who in turn reaffirmed his own office's decision to drop charges.
An appeal of the revocation of Chambers' Thai visa, and another contesting his firing by Naresuan University are still pending, Akarachai said.
Chambers' arrest drew concern from the academic community, especially from Asian scholars around the world, as well as from the U.S. government over free speech restrictions.
Thailand's lese majeste law calls for 3-15 years imprisonment for anyone who defames, insults or threatens the king, the queen, the heir apparent or the regent. Critics say it is among the harshest such laws anywhere and has also been used to punish critics of the government and the military.
The monarchy has long been considered a pillar of Thai society and criticizing it used to be strictly taboo. Conservative Thais, especially in the military and courts, still consider it untouchable.
Chambers has specialized in studying the power and influence of the Thai military, which plays a major role in politics. It has staged 13 coups since Thailand became a constitutional monarchy in 1932, most recently 11 years ago. He was arrested on a complaint made by the northern regional office of the army's Internal Security Operations Command.
One of its officers told a parliamentary inquiry that it filed the complaint based on a Facebook post that translated words from a website operated by ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute, a think tank in Singapore, about a webinar on Thai politics that included as Chambers as a participant.
Chambers' supporters said that the blurb for the webinar, which was cited in his charge sheet as evidence, was not written by him.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Christian worker gains final victory against school after it sacked her for LGBT posts
A Christian worker has won her years-long legal battle against a school which sacked her for sharing social media posts about LGBT+ relationships. Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was fired from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in schools. In February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with three senior judges finding that the decision to sack her for gross misconduct was 'unlawfully discriminatory' and 'unquestionably a disproportionate response'. The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court in March, but three justices refused to give the school approval to challenge the decision in the UK's highest court. In a decision published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen and Lady Simler said the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four grounds. But they said that the Supreme Court 'does not have jurisdiction' to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth 'does not raise an arguable question of law'. In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: 'I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision. 'Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.' 'Censorship is illegal' Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which supported Mrs Higgs' case, said: 'We welcome the Supreme Court's decision, which brings a decisive closure to this extraordinary case.' She continued: 'The Court of Appeal confirmed, loud and clear, that ideological censorship in the workplace, particularly against sincerely held Christian convictions, is illegal. 'This latest decision from the Supreme Court is further proof that our tireless work at the Christian Legal Centre, in defending so many Christian freedoms cases, has not been in vain.' Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary school. She either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to 'brainwashing our children'. Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary schools. An employment tribunal found in 2020 that while Mrs Higgs' religion was a protected characteristic, her dismissal was lawful, but this decision was overturned by an employment appeal tribunal (EAT) in 2023. But the EAT ruled the case should be sent back to an employment tribunal for a fresh decision, which Mrs Higgs' lawyers challenged in the Court of Appeal as 'unnecessary'. In a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: 'The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act.'
BBC News
4 hours ago
- BBC News
Gloucestershire school cannot take sacked woman to Supreme Court
A school cannot take its case against a teacher who shared social media posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships to the Supreme Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was sacked from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with judges finding the decision to sack her was "unquestionably a disproportionate response".The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court, but three justices refused to give the school the green light to challenge the decision. In a decision on Thursday, which was published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, and Lady Simler said that the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four they said that the Supreme Court "does not have jurisdiction" to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth "does not raise an arguable question of law".In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: "I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision."Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer."Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to "brainwashing our children".Pupils were due to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: "The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act."
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
School loses Supreme Court bid over Christian staff member sacked for LGBT posts
A school in a years-long legal battle involving a staff member who was sacked after sharing social media posts about LGBT+ relationships teaching cannot take the case to the Supreme Court, justices have ruled. Kristie Higgs, a Christian mother of two, was sacked from her role at Farmor's School in Fairford, Gloucestershire, in 2019 for sharing Facebook posts criticising teaching about LGBT+ relationships in schools. In February, she won a Court of Appeal battle related to her dismissal, with three senior judges finding that the decision to sack her for gross misconduct was 'unlawfully discriminatory' and 'unquestionably a disproportionate response'. The school sought to appeal against the ruling at the Supreme Court in March, but three justices refused to give the school the green light to challenge the decision in the UK's highest court. In a decision on Thursday, which was published on Monday, Lord Reed, Lord Hamblen, and Lady Simler said that the school had asked for the go-ahead to appeal against the ruling on four grounds. But they said that the Supreme Court 'does not have jurisdiction' to hear three of the grounds, and the fourth 'does not raise an arguable question of law'. In response to the decision, Mrs Higgs said: 'I am relieved and grateful to the Supreme Court for this common-sense decision. ' Christians have the right to express their beliefs on social media and at other non-work-related settings without fear of being punished by their employer.' Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre – which supported Mrs Higgs' case, said: 'We welcome the Supreme Court's decision, which brings a decisive closure to this extraordinary case.' She continued: 'The Court of Appeal confirmed, loud and clear, that ideological censorship in the workplace, particularly against sincerely held Christian convictions, is illegal. 'This latest decision from the Supreme Court is further proof that our tireless work at the Christian Legal Centre, in defending so many Christian freedoms cases, has not been in vain.' Mrs Higgs, who worked as a pastoral administrator and work experience manager at the school, shared two posts on a private page under her maiden name in October 2018 to about 100 friends, which raised concerns about relationship education at her son's Church of England primary school. She either copied and pasted from another source or reposted the content, adding her own reference in one post to 'brainwashing our children'. Pupils were to learn about the No Outsiders In Our School programme, a series of books that teach the Equality Act in primary schools. An employment tribunal found in 2020 that while Mrs Higgs' religion was a protected characteristic, her dismissal was lawful, but this decision was overturned by an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in 2023. But the EAT ruled the case should be sent back to an employment tribunal for a fresh decision, which Mrs Higgs' lawyers challenged in the Court of Appeal as 'unnecessary'. In a judgment, Lord Justice Underhill, sitting with Lord Justice Bean and Lady Justice Falk, ruled in Mrs Higgs' favour in February, stating: 'The dismissal of an employee merely because they have expressed a religious or other protected belief to which the employer, or a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation, objects will constitute unlawful direct discrimination within the meaning of the Equality Act.'
