Court of Justice

[Bossza007]

The Court of Justice of Thailand, as defined by the Constitution, is responsible for adjudicating all legal disputes except those specifically assigned to other courts. It operates as a hierarchical system with the Supreme Court at the apex, serving as the final court of appeal for civil and criminal cases. Below the Supreme Court are the Provincial Courts of Justice, maintained by Provincial Administrative Organizations, which handle cases within their respective provinces and may hear appeals from District Courts. District Courts of Justice, maintained by District Administrative Organizations, preside over cases within their districts and can also consider appeals from the People's Court. Justices of the Supreme Court are elected democratically by all personnel within the Courts of Justice, ensuring a degree of internal accountability. Personnel administration for judges across all levels of the Court of Justice is managed independently by the Judicial Commission of the Courts of Justice, composed of judicial officers and elected non-judges, to maintain judicial independence and integrity.​

 

[Bossza007]

---

---

Case No: SCJ-Crim-2006-0017
Classification: Official
Security Type: Public

---

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Socialist Republic of Thailand

The Socialist Republic of Thailand
Plaintiff
v.
Tanachan Sabma
Defendant

VERDICT
Delivered this Third Day of February, B.E. 2549 (2006)

Before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court:

• Justice Anya Chanokphan, Presiding Justice
• Justice Decha Poompuang
• Justice Jiraporn Phimolsathean
• Justice Komsan Siriwong
• Justice Laksamee Thongyai
• Justice Montree Ruengsakul
• Justice Niran Wongwai
• Justice Onanong Wongthong
• Justice Panya Srisuksai

Representation:

• For the Plaintiff: Attorney General’s Office of the Socialist Republic of Thailand
• For the Defendant: Public Advocate Thantat Gongkasemsab, Esq.

Proceedings:

This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Justice on appeal from the Provincial Court of Justice of Bangkok, which upheld the District Court of Justice of Bangkok’s conviction of the Defendant, Tanachan Sabma, for the offense of attempted hostage-taking, specifically targeting the Prime Minister of the Socialist Republic of Thailand, Comrade Thaksin Shinawatra. The proceedings were conducted openly, with designated seating for community observers and representatives from worker cooperatives, ensuring transparency and public accountability, core tenets of our socialist justice system. In accordance with our commitment to transparency and digital accessibility, all proceedings were digitally recorded and are available for public review, subject to standard redactions to protect personal privacy.

The Defendant, a Thai national who resided outside the Republic for a period of eight years following the Revolution of B.E. 2541 (1998), was apprehended on the 25th of January, B.E. 2549 (2006) at the Sukhumvit MRT station, Bangkok, after being found in direct proximity to the Prime Minister with a concealed firearm. The Defendant was afforded the full benefit of the Socialist Republic's commitment to universal legal aid, represented by Public Advocate Thantat Gongkasemsab, Esq., a testament to our principle that justice is a right, not a privilege.

The Defendant, represented by Public Advocate Thantat Gongkasemsab, Esq., appealed the lower courts’ rulings on grounds of mitigating circumstances, arguing that the Defendant’s actions, while factually constituting attempted hostage-taking, were driven by a profound misunderstanding and misapprehension of the reality of the Socialist Republic, stemming from prolonged exposure to capitalist indoctrination during his time abroad.

This Court has carefully reviewed the extensive evidentiary record, including testimonies from the Defendant, law enforcement officers of the Department of Special Investigation (DSI), expert psychological evaluations, and submissions from both the Attorney General’s Office and Public Advocate Thantat Gongkasemsab. We have also considered the prevailing socio-political context and the newly enacted Socialist Resilience and Reform Act B.E. 2549 (2006), although its provisions are not directly applicable to the temporal jurisdiction of the initial offense.

Findings:

Upon thorough deliberation, this Court finds that the factual basis for the charge of attempted hostage-taking is unequivocally established. The Defendant, Tanachan Sabma, did indeed approach the Prime Minister, Comrade Thaksin Shinawatra, at the Sukhumvit MRT station with a concealed firearm and placed said firearm against the Prime Minister’s person. This action constitutes a clear and demonstrable attempt to unlawfully seize and detain another person, a grave offense under the laws of the Socialist Republic.

However, this Court also acknowledges the compelling evidence presented by Public Advocate Thantat Gongkasemsab regarding the Defendant’s state of mind and the mitigating circumstances surrounding his actions. The psychological evaluations, while not absolving the Defendant of responsibility, convincingly portray a deeply confused and disoriented individual. These evaluations reveal that the Defendant, subjected to a relentless barrage of capitalist misinformation and ideological distortions for eight years, effectively severing him from the reality of the Socialist Republic and replacing it with a manufactured dystopia, harbored a fundamentally distorted perception of the Socialist Republic of Thailand.

The evidence suggests that the Defendant’s actions were not motivated by inherent malice or a conscious desire to violently overthrow the socialist state, but rather arose from a profound shock and cognitive dissonance upon confronting the starkly different reality of utopian Thailand – a nation demonstrably prioritizing egalitarianism, human development, and collective well-being – compared to the dystopian caricature presented by anti-socialist narratives. The Defendant’s “clumsiness,” as noted by the victim, Comrade Thaksin Shinawatra, is not indicative of mere incompetence, but rather of a profound internal conflict and disorientation. He was, in essence, an agent indoctrinated for a reality that ceased to exist, confronted with a society he was fundamentally unprepared to comprehend.

This case poignantly illustrates the narrative challenges faced by the Socialist Republic in a world still dominated by capitalist ideologies. It underscores the seductive power of misinformation and the arduous task of conveying the genuine progress and humanistic values at the heart of our society to those indoctrinated by opposing systems. The Court recognizes that the Defendant's misperceptions are not isolated, but rather symptomatic of the broader ideological struggle between socialist and capitalist systems on a global scale, a conflict that necessitates both vigilance and a commitment to education and understanding. This Court recognizes that the Defendant’s background as a driver for the Chearavanont family, as highlighted by the Department of Special Investigation, links him to elements actively hostile to the Socialist Republic. However, the evidence before us does not definitively prove a malicious intent to commit violence or instigate counter-revolution in the strict, legally defined sense established by the Counter-Revolutionary Offenses Act B.E. 2543 (2000) as amended, particularly within the narrowed scope articulated by the Socialist Resilience and Reform Act B.E. 2549 (2006).

Verdict:

Guilty of Attempted Hostage-Taking. However, in alignment with the Socialist Republic's foundational commitment to restorative justice and rehabilitation, and in profound consideration of the significant mitigating circumstances, specifically the Defendant’s demonstrable confusion, indoctrination, and the absence of proven malicious intent to violently subvert the socialist state, this Court hereby reverses the custodial sentence imposed by the lower courts. This verdict stands in stark contrast to the retributive justice models prevalent in capitalist societies, which prioritize punishment and incarceration over understanding, rehabilitation, and the restoration of social harmony, underscoring our unwavering socialist belief in the inherent potential for human transformation and reintegration, even in the face of wrongdoing.

Reasoning:

The Socialist Republic of Thailand is founded upon the principles of restorative justice, rehabilitation, and the unwavering belief in the potential for human transformation. While the offense committed by the Defendant is serious and cannot be condoned, the unique circumstances of this case necessitate a departure from purely punitive measures. Our socialist justice system, unlike the punitive models of capitalist societies, is fundamentally rooted in restorative principles. We seek not merely to punish, but to understand, to heal, and to reintegrate. Retributive justice, focused on incarceration and suffering, perpetuates cycles of alienation and harm. Socialist justice, conversely, aims to address the root causes of unlawful behavior, to repair the harm caused, and to facilitate the offender's return to productive membership in our collective.

To impose a lengthy custodial sentence in this case would be to prioritize retribution over rehabilitation, a principle fundamentally at odds with the ethos of our socialist Republic. Such a sentence would fail to address the underlying issues of ideological conflict and misunderstanding that contributed to the Defendant’s actions. Furthermore, our commitment to participatory democracy extends into our justice system. It demands that we consider the individual stories and complexities behind each case, recognizing that true justice is not blind adherence to abstract rules, but a nuanced and compassionate application of law that serves the collective well-being.

Therefore, this Court finds that a sentence focused on restorative justice and re-education is the most appropriate and just course of action. This approach is not merely a matter of leniency, but a direct application of the Directive Principles of State Policies, particularly Section 34, which mandates a justice system that is 'uncompromisingly humane, nonviolent, and generative in fostering social harmony,' and Section 50, which emphasizes 'participatory and restorative justice process in every aspect'. This verdict is a reaffirmation of our core socialist values: egalitarianism, which compels us to see the inherent worth in every individual, even one who has strayed; collective well-being, which prioritizes the reintegration of individuals into society; and human dignity, which forbids us from resorting to inhumane or degrading punishments.

Order:

1. The Defendant, Tanachan Sabma, is hereby sentenced to two years of mandatory participation in a comprehensive Socialist Re-education and Civic Reintegration Program, to be administered by the Ministry of Justice in conjunction with the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. This program will be a rigorous and transformative two-year undertaking. It will encompass modules on:

• Foundational Socialist Theory: In-depth study of Marxist theory, democratic socialism, council communism, and the unique evolution of Thai Socialism.
• Participatory Democracy in Action: Direct engagement in community assemblies, worker councils, and participatory budgeting processes to experience firsthand the mechanisms of our governance.
• Cooperative Economics and Labor Token Exchange: Practical immersion in worker cooperatives, learning the principles of collective ownership, self-management, and the functioning of the Labor Token Exchange system.
• Thai Socialist Culture and Values: Exploration of Thai socialist art, literature, history, and cultural traditions, fostering a sense of belonging and shared national identity.
• Psychological Reintegration Therapy: Individual and group therapy sessions to address ideological confusion, cognitive dissonance, and facilitate emotional and social reintegration.
• Digital Literacy and Critical Media Engagement: Developing skills to critically analyze information in the digital age, understand media manipulation, and navigate the online sphere within a socialist ethical framework.

2. Upon successful completion of the Socialist Re-education and Civic Reintegration Program, as certified by the supervising authorities, the Defendant shall be placed on probation for a period of three years. During this probationary period, the Defendant shall be required to:

• Actively participate in weekly community assembly meetings in his designated residential area.
• Contribute ten hours per week to a worker cooperative in a sector determined to be of societal benefit.
• Attend monthly mentorship sessions with a designated community leader who will provide guidance and support in his reintegration process.

3. The Defendant is explicitly warned that any future violation of the law, particularly any action that could be construed as counter-revolutionary or disruptive to public order, will result in the immediate revocation of probation and the imposition of a custodial sentence commensurate with the severity of the new offense, in addition to the original sentence for attempted hostage-taking.

4. Public Advocate Thantat Gongkasemsab, Esq., is commended and also celebrated for his exemplary and principled representation of the Defendant. His unwavering commitment to ensuring equal access to justice and upholding the highest ideals of our socialist legal system serves as a model for all public advocates and a powerful embodiment of our Republic's dedication to justice for all, regardless of circumstance or background.

Justice Anya Chanokphan, Presiding Justice
Justice Decha Poompuang
Justice Jiraporn Phimolsathean
Justice Komsan Siriwong
Justice Laksamee Thongyai
Justice Montree Ruengsakul
Justice Niran Wongwai
Justice Onanong Wongthong
Justice Panya Srisuksai
Supreme Court of Justice​

---

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Socialist Republic of Thailand​