An ex-detainee and socialist activist has addressed activists' difficulties in getting bail. This, together with poor conditions within prisons, has forced many political prisoners to confess.

The public panel was held via Zoom. Sirapob is on the upper-right corner and Saowalak is on the lower-right corner.

On 19 May, the Committee for Campaigning for the People's Constitution hosted an online panel "Losing when the right to bail is lost”.

Panelists were Sirapob Phumphuengphut from the SWU Change Gen student activist group, who was temporarily detained in Bangkok Remand Prison from 6-9 May, and Saowalak Pho-ngarm from the Socialist Labour group.

Charged and detained under the royal defamation law, Sirapob said he was taken to the quarantine wing. The area is constructed of bricks and separated into blocks by plastic sheets. CCTV cameras have been set up everywhere including the toilets.

Conditions there were harsh and compared by Sirapob to "the stone age with instant noodles”. Meals were served 3 times a day at 07.00, 12.00 and 13.00. A warden told him to keep the last meal for dinner. He received stir-fried vegetables and vegetable soup,  which looked the same except one had chopped chicken bones and the other was very sour. The food could not be kept long as it would go bad.

According to other inmates, prisoners in each wing are given work like making paper bags or lighters. However, payment from the companies that hire them goes to the prison.

Citing Department of Corrections data, Sirapob stated that the number of prisoners has increased in the past 10 years. There are currently about 300,000 prisoners which is still considered excessive, despite a decrease of 10,000 in 2021.

Made to confess by law and prison

Saowalak said royal defamation cases under Section 112 of the Criminal Code started after the coup in 2006 when people started to question the coup makers of trying to protect the interests of the elite. Many were denied bail or bail was delayed, like the deceased activist, Daranee 'Da Torpedo' Charncherngsilpakul who was detained pending trial for more than a year, found guilty on 3 charges of royal defamation and imprisoned for more than 7 years before being given royal pardon in 2016.

Another example given was Somyot Pruksakasemsuk, who was jailed for 6 years on 2 royal defamation charges and 1 year on a defamation charge. He was denied bail from 2012 until the final verdict was delivered at the Supreme Court on 23 February 2017.

Saowalak questioned the fairness of royal defamation trials when the accused are usually kept in detention after being charged, violating the principle of presumption of innocence. When combined with poor prison conditions, detainees usually choose to confess to ensure that at least they know when their detention would end and then fight to have their sentence reduced or receive a royal pardon.

Another problem in royal defamation trials is that the ideology of the court has as its core value the framework of nation, religion and monarchy. So the trials see the clash between royal nationalism and the freedom of expression of those who voice opinions on public institutions.

"The court must allow people the right to bail, By which I mean in other cases as well, not only Section 112. Some cases concern economics. Some people who do not have money work to clear their debts, some people have bounced cheques, some people commit minor theft; they should also have the right to bail. If you don't have security, you [the court] must find them security that is not very expensive so they can be released temporarily," said Saowalak.

Inmates need proper rehabilitation, not further punishment

Sirapob pointed to 2 problems that cause overcrowding. First, in 2020, there were about 10,000 people detained pending trial without a court ruling. This number should be reduced by replacing detention with bail. Second, many cases are unnecessarily punished with prison sentences, such as credit card-related charges.

He suggested that the Corrections Department should see inmates as human. Those found guilty are vulnerable people that the state needs to develop, not oppress them further with poor prison conditions, which must be on par with universal standards. Civil society should be allowed to engage with inmates' rehabilitation and development programmes. Also, other measures, such as community service, should replace prison terms.

Saowalak said the creation of state welfare can contribute to a decrease in crimes related to economics, which will also reduce the number of inmates.

She added that the court's recent conditions on the release of pro-democracy protesters, specifically prohibiting them from participating in political gatherings or expressing anything that counts as the same offence for which they have been charged, contradict the constitution that guarantees freedom of expression. Conditions for temporary release normally only prohibit tampering with evidence and flight.