Prachatai English

Neighbourhood in Bangkok’s Bang Khen district still underwater

eng editor 1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 16:56:40 +0000

Neighbourhood in Bangkok’s Bang Khen district still underwater

Photos: Ginger Cat

While floodwaters have receded from most locations in central Bangkok, the Saphan Mai neighbourhood in Bang Khen district is still underwater.

As of Tuesday (29 September), side streets and communities near canals in Saphan Mai are still flooded. In Ruamjai Pattana Nuea community, which lines a canal, several areas remain under deep floodwater. Some houses in the community are lower than the street level and are the worst affected.

One resident said they own a boat and the district director brought residents food. The community flooded in 2011, when the water level was much higher, but this time the flood came suddenly and they did not have time to put her belongings on high grounds.

Another resident said that the 2011 flood was worse, but she could not go out to get supplies because she is elderly. Community leaders have been bringing her food.

Some residents have been scooping water out of their houses to prevent it from becoming stagnant. In some locations, the water is starting to become putrid as waste is caught in the area.

Another resident has been transporting people in and out of the community in a boat. The resident said that the water is now lower than before, but normal travel is still not possible.

Residents also said that people with two-storey houses can use the toilet and cook on the second floor, while those with single-storey houses cannot use the toilet or kitchen as the first floor of their houses are still flooded. Some said that they try to limit their water use, while others said they have been using trash bags in lieu of a toilet.

Residents said that food have been brought in by government agencies and other individuals, such as the Land Development Department, the district director, local community leaders, and People’s Party MP Suphanat Minchaiynunt. They would like the authorities to drain the water from the community so they can return to normal routine.

Meanwhile, stretches of Phahonyothin Road and its side streets remain flooded, such as in front of Big C Saphan Mai supermarket. Despite the flood, vendors have been setting up roadside food stalls, and deliver riders were coming back to work. For the locals, they still have to wade through water to get supplies, while some needed a boat to get through deep water in several locations. Some roadside shops were damaged by the flood and remain closed.

Parts of Bangkok have been flooded since Saturday morning (26 September) following days of continuous heavy rain, rendering several main roads impassable. Floodwater have now receded from inner city locations and most of the main thoroughfares. However, eastern districts like Bang Khen, Bang Kapi, and Lat Krabang remain the worst affected. These locations are now entering their fifth day of flood.

eng editor 1 Tue, 2026-09-29 - 23:56

News

Constitutional Court upholds legality of ballot barcodes in 2026 general election

eng editor 3 — Tue, 29 Sep 2026 04:02:11 +0000

Constitutional Court upholds legality of ballot barcodes in 2026 general election

The Constitutional Court has ruled that there was no illegality in the use of barcodes on the constituency ballots and party list MP ballots in the 8 February general election, and that the allegedly disclosure of voter identities did not violate the Constitution.

The case stems from 22 complaints against the Election Commission (ECT) over the inclusion on ballot papers of controversial barcodes and QR codes. The Constitutional Court judges ruled, by 8 votes to 1, that the barcodes and QR codes on ballot papers were not unconstitutional.

The QR codes on constituency ballot papers had to be decrypted to reveal a number corresponding to one on the ballot booklet. Since each ballot booklet contained 20 ballot papers, The barcodes could reveal individual voter identities only under the specific scenario where all 20 voters receiving ballot papers from the same booklet voted for the same candidate. The Court stated that such a scenario was highly unlikely.

The Court concluded that the barcodes on the constituency ballot papers could not be used to identify how individual voters voted.

The party list MPs’ ballots had a QR code on the top and barcode at the bottom. It was found that the barcodes directly revealed a number which matched the one on the ballot stub, making it possible to track individual voters and how they voted.

However, the Court stated that the identification of individual voters would require access to additional materials, including ballot stubs and voter lists, which were kept separately and securely. This made it impossible for ordinary citizens or even state officials to track individual voters, because when a voter enters a polling station, the polling official write on the ballot stub the voter’s number according to the voter list.

The Election Commission officials responsible for each constituency retain the ballots and ballot stubs, while the voter lists must be submitted to the local registrar within three days. As a result, it is impossible to access all three sets of documents.

The Court clarified that the secrecy o/f the ballot can be divided into two principles: “absolute secrecy” and “conditional secrecy”. Absolute secrecy requires that ballots be confidential, with no way to link ballot papers to individual voters This, however, contains the drawback is that all ballot papers will be identical, making them easier to counterfeit and making it difficult to investigate electoral fraud.

Under the principle of conditional secrecy, ballots remain confidential, but specific markings may be added to ballot papers in order to help prevent counterfeiting and electoral fraud. The Court noted that this principle reflects the intent of the Constitution.

The Court concluded that the barcodes and QR codes in this case were included to control the production of the ballots and to make it easier to track which constituencies specific ballot booklets were allocated to. They were also intended to ensure the integrity of the election administration process.

Ultimately, the Court concluded that the voting procedures in the 2026 general election did not violate the constitutional principle of direct and secret suffrage prescribed in the Constitution. To restore public trust, the Court also ordered the ECT to implement measures to ensure that ballots are designed without any traceable markings and are securely stored.

Barcode case saga

After the 8 February 2026 general election, the ECT, which had been allocated over 7.8 billion of taxpayers’ money to stage the election, faced a legitimacy crisis over the transparency of the polls. Serious concerns were raised by the discovery of barcodes and QR codes with unique numbers on ballot papers.

Thai netizens raised concerns that each ballot paper may have been assigned a unique running number, as it was found that the 20 ballot papers in each booklet carried different numbers. The number on each ballot paper corresponded to the one on the ballot stub.

Each ballot paper could therefore be scanned to connect it to its ballot stub where voters are required to sign their names. The ballot stub also contains the voter’s number from the voting lists in each constituency. This made it possible to identify which voter completed each ballot paper and which MPs or parties they voted for.

On 13 February, the ECT argued that the election law allows it to prescribe codes or marks on ballot papers as a safeguard against “forgery”. The barcodes were also used to track the polling stations where the ballots were distributed, and that would help prevent ghost voting and electoral fraud.

The ECT also asserted that identifying individual voters was impossible. It said that this would require access to additional materials, including ballot stubs and voting lists, which are now kept separately, and that the Commission could not verify whether the numbers on the barcodes aligned with the ballot stubs as requested by the media and general public.

These concerns led to dozens of complaints filed with the Constitutional Court, asking for a ruling on whether the barcodes on ballots violated the secret ballot guaranteed in the Constitution. If it had ruled that the barcodes and QR codes violated the Constitution, the 8 February election could be declared void.

On 22 February, a re-run election was held in Constituency 15 in Bangkok’s Khan Na Yao District where citizens gathered at one polling station to observe vote-counting to ensure electoral transparency. They allegedly took photos of marked ballot papers and zoomed in to display the controversial QR code on each ballot paper. They then attempted to decode the barcodes in question to demonstrate that the elections lacked transparency.

The ECT later sued several citizens involved in this action for sedition and membership of an unlawful secret society.

On 10 March, the Ombudsman resolved to forward to the Constitutional Court 22 complaints that it had received, noting that there were grounds to question whether the ECT infringed on voters’ rights and freedoms, potentially violating ballot secrecy.

On 18 March, the Constitutional Court judges resolved, by 6 votes to 3, to accept the 22 complaints forwarded by the Ombudsman.

The Court held a witness hearing on 26 August. The witnesses included the ECT Secretary-General Sawaeng Boonmee, two other ECT officials, and two individuals from printing companies. On the following day, the Constitutional judges also conducted an on-site inspection of the venue where the ballot papers, ballot stubs and other relevant materials were kept.

eng editor 3 Tue, 2026-09-29 - 11:02

News

Royal defamation detainee released after serving three-year sentence

eng editor 1 — Mon, 28 Sep 2026 08:34:25 +0000

Royal defamation detainee released after serving three-year sentence

A 23-year-old former secondhand clothes vendor sentenced to prison on a royal defamation charge was released yesterday (27 September) after completing his three-year sentence.

Weeraphap Wongsaman was charged with royal defamation for spraying painting a message calling for monarchy reform during a protest at the Din Daeng Intersection in September 2021. He was sentenced to 3 years in prison on 28 September 2023. He was subsequently denied bail by the Appeal Court and has been detained since.

Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) said that, in October 2025, Weeraphap withdrew his appeal as he has been detained for a long time and being detained pending appeal means he is not eligible for pardon, sentence reduction, or parole.

On Sunday morning (27 September), activists and regular protest goers waited in front of the Bangkok Remand Prison despite deep floodwater. He was released at around 8.00. He then boarded a large truck driven by prison personnel to Ngam Wong Wan Road, where his father was waiting for him.

The Bangkok Remand Prison and its vicinity has been affected by continuous heavy rain and flooding in Bangkok. As of Sunday (27 September), the prison was surrounded by deep floodwater and officials had to travel by large vehicles or boats to get in and out of the prison.

Weeraphap said that the situation inside the prison has been difficult. Due to the flood, which he said was about knee-deep inside the prison, the use of water has been limited as the prison’s power generator and water pimp are on lower grounds. All activities have been cancelled, and food and drinking water amount have been reduced.

He and other royal defamation detainees are held on the ground floor. When the cells were flooded, they were moved to the upper floor and had to sleep in the hallway.

According to TLHR, 54 people remain imprisoned on charges relating to political expression or paticipation in protests, 30 of whom are detained for royal defamation.

eng editor 1 Mon, 2026-09-28 - 15:34

News

Empower Foundation demands ministerial support for sex worker protection law

eng editor 1 — Sat, 26 Sep 2026 16:51:40 +0000

Empower Foundation demands ministerial support for sex worker protection law

Representatives of the sex worker rights group Empower Foundation and other civil society groups marched from Ratchadamnoen Road to the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security (MSDHS) on Thursday (24 September) to call for Ministry support of a sex worker protection bill proposed by civil society organisations. In an announcement, the Foundation noted that civil groups have spent some 40 years campaigning for sex work decriminalisation and demanded that sex workers have a say in drafting a law that directly affects them.

The bill, backed by 10,293 voters, calls for the repeal of the 1996 anti-sex work law and outlines protection for sex workers. Empower formally proposed the draft in June 2026. On 10 July, in a meeting of the House Speaker and House Committee chairs, it was deemed to be a finance-related bill that must be approved by the Prime Minister before being considered in Parliament. Civil society groups later raised concerns that Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul would shelve the bill. It could be dismissed entirely if he does not sign off on it.

At the Ministry, sex workers took turns giving speeches about the work-related rights violations they experienced, including underpayment and exploitation by employers, harassment from customers and the police, and discrimination against trans women and migrant sex workers.

Empower said in a statement that the network is calling for the MSDHS to support sex worker protection in accordance with the recommendations made by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which called on Thailand to decriminalise sex work and protect labour rights.

It noted that it has been waiting over 2 months for the Prime Minister to approve the bill. Acknowledging that MSDHS drafted its own version of a sex worker protection bill in 2023, it added that no progress has been made in adopting it. Empower also disagreed with amendments in the Ministry draft, which included punishments for sex workers, as well as a provision that social security insurance for sex workers would be a financial burden for the government. The Foundation stated that sex workers should be given the same rights as other labourers. It also noted that a sex worker protection centre proposed in the bill could be set up using existing MSDHS agencies without the need to form a new system.

Empower called on the Minister of Social Development and Human Security to push for Prime Ministerial approval of the draft so that it can be publicly debated in Parliament. It also asked that sex workers be included in every step of the legislative process.

Anekchai Rueangrattanakorn, advisor to the Minister of Social Development and Human Security, received the petition. Asked if the MSDHS would push for the bill, he said that the Ministry had yet to receive any communication on the matter from the Prime Minister‘s Office. The Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Public Health have reportedly already contacted however and both have informed the Prime Minister‘s Office and Empower that they support the bill.

Group members stayed at the Ministry until evening to hear back from Ministry representatives. Anekchai returned at 17.30 to inform them that the Ministry has received the petition and would need 2 weeks to follow up on the matter. Empower representatives plan to return to the Ministry in two weeks for answers.

eng editor 1 Sat, 2026-09-26 - 23:51

News

Social Security Board election postponed due to flood

eng editor 1 — Sat, 26 Sep 2026 16:35:28 +0000

Social Security Board election postponed due to flood

The Social Security Board election, which was to take place tomorrow (27 September), has been postponed to 11 October due to heavy rain and flooding in several areas.

The Social Security Office said that the election is being postponed so that the election can be conducted fairly, ensure that voters can participate, and so that no particular candidate would be put at a disadvantage.

Heavy rain and flooding have been reported in several areas of the country. The Social Security Office said that this may affect voters’ ability to get to the poll and disrupt the voting process. A meeting of board election commission therefore decided on Saturday (26 September) to postpone the election.

Calls for the Social Security Board election to be postponed began on Saturday morning (26 September). The Progressive Social Security group, a team of reformist candidates running in the election, issued a statement saying that the flood situation mean voters may not be able to fully participate and going ahead with the election as scheduled would mean disenfranchising voters in flooded areas.

Sahassawat Kumkong, a People‘s Party MP for Chonburi, published an open letter to the Minister of Labour and the Social Security Board election commission calling for postponement. He said that over half of those eligible to vote in the Social Security Board election are registered in Bangkok, Chonburi, Samut Prakan, Nontaburi, Pathumthani, and Rayong — areas on alert for heavy rain and flood. Voters in these areas or may be preoccupied with moving their belongings out of the flood or taking care of family, and should not be asked to put themselves at more risk than others to get to the poll.

The election observation network We Watch issued a statement calling on the Social Security Office and the board election commission to postpone the election. Flooding would affect the voting process, and although some polling stations might be able to open, voters who live in flooded areas may not be able to get to their designated polling station. Polling officials might also be among those affected by the flood.

Panas Thailuan, President of the National Congress of Thai Labour and a candidate in the Social Security Board election, wrote on his Facebook page that the election should be postponed so that every candidate are competing on even ground.

Bangkok declared all 50 of its districts a public disaster zone after nearly 48 hours of coninuous rain caused flooding in several areas and closure of several main roads. Flooding has also been reported in other provinces, while the Thai Meteorological Department has issued a heavy rain warning until Sunday (27 September).

eng editor 1 Sat, 2026-09-26 - 23:35

News

Bangkok declared public disaster zone after sustained rainfall, flooding

eng editor 1 — Sat, 26 Sep 2026 09:04:55 +0000

Bangkok declared public disaster zone after sustained rainfall, flooding

All 50 districts of Bangkok have been declared a public disaster zones after sustained rainfall caused widespread flooding across the city.

The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) announced this morning (26 September) that the declaration, which previously covered three districts, has been extended to cover all of Bangkok to enable relevant agencies to promptly and systematically respond to the situation.

Several main roads have been flooded, with some impassable, including stretches of Vibhavadi Road, Ratchadapisek Road, Phattanakan Road, Chaeng Wattana Road, Phaholyothin Road, and New Phetchaburi Road, as well as side streets in Lat Phrao and Ramkhamhaeng. Small cars are advised to avoid heavily flooded locations due to safety concerns.

Residents can check which locations are flooded on the BMA’s flood alert website before travel. Meanwhile, those living near canals have been advised to move cars and belongings to high grounds.

Nearly 48 hours of continuous rains have caused widespread flooding in several areas of the city, especially in the eastern districts, said Bangkok governor Chadchart Sittipunt on Saturday morning (26 September). Several districts, including Min Buri and Klong Sam Wa, experienced almost 300 milimetres of accumulated rainfall, while more water is coming down from Pathumthani and Nontaburi. The BMA is working to reduce water levels in main canals, provide assistance to vulnerable population, and open temporary shelters. Residents are advised to stay home due to flooding on main roads.

On social media, netizens reported convenience stores and supermarkets being emptied as residents stock up on essentials in case the flood worsens.

Meanwhile, the Thai Meteorological Department has issued a heavy rain warning until 27 September, with continuous rainfall and isolated heavy to very heavy rain likely in the central region including Bangkok and its vicinity.

Floodings have also been reported in Nontaburi, Pathumthani, Nakhon Pathom, and Ayutthaya.

People living in low-lying areas along the Chao Phraya River and downstream from the Chao Phraya Dam have been advised to be on alert as discharges from the dam are gradually being increased.

eng editor 1 Sat, 2026-09-26 - 16:04

News

Activist network calls for repeal of 1976 coup-era order

eng editor 1 — Fri, 25 Sep 2026 10:14:39 +0000

Activist network calls for repeal of 1976 coup-era order

The October 6 Memorial Network has filed petitions with the Bhumjaithai Party and the People’s Party calling for the repeal of an order made following the military coup of 1976 which increased the penalty for royal defamation.

Network representatives at the People‘s Party headquarters. (Photo by Ginger Cat)

Network representatives visited the Bhumjaithai Party on the morning of 22 September, before going to the People‘s Party in the afternoon. The network also plans to visit the Democrat Party on 28 September and the Pheu Thai Party on 29 September.

The petition is part of a campaign marking the 50th anniversary of the 6 October 1976 Thammasat University Massacre, a violent crackdown and lynching by police and right-wing paramilitaries of protesters gathering at Thammasat University and nearby Sanam Luang to protest the return of Field Marshal Thanom Kittikachorn. The massacre resulted in the death of at least 45 people. That evening, Admiral Sangad Chaloryu ousted the government of Seni Pramoj in a military coup. He became head of the National Administrative Reform Council (NARC), the junta which would rule Thailand until 1980.

Within 15 days after the coup, the NARC issued Order 41, amending the Criminal Code to increase the penalties for several offences, such as defaming a foreign head of state, insulting a place of worship, flag desecration, defamation, and defamation by publication. It also increased the penalty for royal defamation from up to 7 years to between 3 and 15 years.

The October 6 Memorial Network plans to propose a bill repealing Order 41 and has launched an online campaign for voters to back the bill at https://decoup6octsins.com/. As of 25 September, the bill had over 25,000 signatures.

In its petition, the Network calls on political parties to back their proposal. The NARC no longer exists, says the petition, but the effects of its order still linger as people continue to be detained on royal defamation and similar charges. Repealing the order would show that juntas and their laws have no place in Thai society. Relics of military coups should not be allowed to stand without review, says the statement.

eng editor 1 Fri, 2026-09-25 - 17:14

News

Thailand passes new deportation regulation despite human rights concerns

eng editor 1 — Fri, 25 Sep 2026 10:03:06 +0000

Thailand passes new deportation regulation despite human rights concerns

A new regulation concerning the deportation of foreign nationals came into effect on 28 August, despite warnings from civil society groups that the proposed framework could weaken due process, undermine existing human rights safeguards and create uncertainty in the country’s relations with foreign governments and international organisations.

The government says that the regulation is meant to make deportation of foreign nationals who break the law more efficient and improve coordination among agencies responsible for immigration, corrections and foreign affairs.

It states that foreign nationals who commit six categories of offences will be deported after serving their sentences. These include illegal entry or stay, violations of foreign-worker legislation, violations of foreign-business laws, forgery or use of forged official documents, criminal offences carrying imprisonment of five years or more, and people acting as principals, instigators or supporters of those offences.

The regulation would also strengthen coordination between government agencies. The Department of Corrections would be required to notify the Interior Ministry before a foreign prisoner is released, allowing the Interior Minister to consider a deportation order without delay.

The government argues that the system would close administrative gaps and prevent foreign nationals who have violated Thai law from remaining in the country because of procedural delays.

Civil society raises concerns over due process, non-refoulement

A draft of the regulation was approved by the Cabinet on 14 July. Civil society groups then campaigned for it to be suspended and reviewed before adoption. Organizations like the Thailand Migration Reform Consortium (TMR), the Migrant Working Group (MWG), and the Coalition for the Rights of Refugees and Stateless Persons (CRSP) said Thailand does not lack the sovereign authority to deport people, but raised concerns that the proposed mechanism could allow that authority to be exercised without sufficient legal and procedural safeguards.

“Deportation, in and of itself, does not constitute a human rights violation, provided that it is carried out in accordance with the rule of law,” the three organizations said in a statement issued on 15 July.

They call on the government to incorporate legal safeguards into the regulation, including an explicit non-refoulement provision in line with Thailand’s anti-torture and enforced disappearance law. The regulation must also guarantee due process and individualised risk assessment prior to removal, as well as protection for children and family unity.

The coalition is also calling for stronger safeguards governing immigration detention. The regulation does not establish a clear maximum period of detention, judicial review mechanisms, or a clear time limit and review procedures for re-entry ban. Without effective review mechanisms, a system designed to speed up deportation could potentially leave people in prolonged detention when removal itself is not practically possible.

The groups said that the regulation presents structural concerns that could affect compliance with international human rights treaties to which Thailand is a state party. They also raise concerns about the hierarchy of laws and the coherence of Thailand’s legal framework.

Thailand already has several laws governing immigration, deportation, child protection and trafficking, and the coalition argues that the problem is not a lack of legal authority but the fragmentation of existing rules. Introducing another executive regulation risks adding another layer to an already complicated system. They argue that this could weaken legislative scrutiny and create uncertainty if subordinate legislation conflicts with provisions or principles contained in primary legislation

They are also concerned about using a Prime Minister’s Office regulation to establish rules that directly affect fundamental rights instead of going through the legislative process in parliament.

The most serious human rights concern raised by the civil society is about those who cannot safely return to their country of origin. The regulation states that people whose nationality cannot be determined will be sent back to the country where they last habitually resided. It does not explicitly require individual risk assessment of whether the person being deported will be safe upon return. This creates particular risks for stateless persons and those whose nationality is disputed. For the civil society, the absence of explicit safeguards could mean an individual is removed before the risks awaiting them have been properly assessed.

Thailand‘s Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act prohibits the return of individuals to countries where they would be in danger. Meanwhile, UN experts have stressed that removal decisions should involve an individual assessment of protection needs and access to fair procedures and an independent mechanism for challenging negative decisions.

Another concern is that there is no procedural guarantee of due process. The groups have called for guarantees that individuals facing deportation will be told the reasons they are being deported, receive copies of relevant orders and evidence, obtain interpretation, or have access to legal counsel. They also called for an appeal mechanism that can suspend deportation where removal could expose an individual to serious harm and for access to a court or independent body with the authority to suspend removal while a serious protection claim is being examined.

Another concern is the breadth of some of the proposed grounds for deportation.

Civil society groups say terms such as “principal offender, instigator, or supporter” could create uncertainty if they are not accompanied by clear evidentiary standards. They also question provisions that could permit removal without requiring a final criminal conviction in every circumstance.

A diplomatic problem hiding in the draft

The civil society coalition has raised a second, less conventional concern: the language of the explanatory memorandum accompanying the draft.

According to the coalition, the memorandum suggests that when a foreign government or international organisation asks Thailand not to return an individual but does not promptly take custody, this may indicate that the reasons given for the request are not genuinely serious or that the requesting party does not sincerely intend to receive the person.

The groups say such wording is problematic because delays in receiving a person can have many explanations, including security screening, visa procedures, refugee-admission processes, legal restrictions and coordination between multiple governments.

A delay, they argue, does not by itself establish that a protection claim is not genuine.

The coalition therefore wants the language removed and replaced with neutral criteria based on measurable factors such as reasonable deadlines and demonstrable progress by the requesting government or organisation.

The OECD question

The concern is particularly sensitive for Thailand, which is seeking closer international cooperation on migration and has also opened accession discussions with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Thailand formally entered OECD accession discussions in 2024. The OECD Council’s decision made clear that Thailand would be required to complete extensive technical reviews and adopt necessary legislative changes as part of the accession process.

Civil society groups argue that the proposed deportation regulation could therefore have implications beyond immigration policy.

They point to three areas: rule of law, human rights protections and regulatory quality.

The coalition also warns that uncertainty surrounding migrant workers could affect sectors already dependent on foreign labour, including construction, agriculture, food processing, services and tourism.

However, some of the coalition’s broader economic projections — including the claim that failure to meet OECD-related standards could cost Thailand approximately 1.6 per cent of GDP — should be treated as an advocacy estimate rather than an established OECD forecast. The OECD’s official accession documents confirm the significance of legislative and institutional reforms but do not establish that the proposed deportation regulation itself would produce a specific GDP loss.

That distinction is important as the debate moves from human rights advocacy into economic policy.

eng editor 1 Fri, 2026-09-25 - 17:03

News

Thai Court to rule on detention of Chinese journalist on 9 October

eng editor 1 — Thu, 24 Sep 2026 04:45:53 +0000

Thai Court to rule on detention of Chinese journalist on 9 October

The South Bangkok Criminal Court will rule on 9 October whether Bai Zhaodong, a Chinese journalist and UN-recognised refugee held in immigration detention, is being unlawfully detained.

A hearing took place on 18 September at the South Bangkok Criminal Court after Bai’s lawyers filed a petition requesting his release due to unlawful detention.

According to the Immigration Act, the authorities can detain a person for as long as necessary pending departure to another country. Bai’s lawyers have argued that the Immigration Bureau may no longer have a reason to detain Bai since a third country has already approved his resettlement.

Bai was brought to court for the hearing. He testified that he was detained 6 times by the Chinese authorities. During each detention, he was placed on a chair with his hands tied behind his back and interrogated for 24 hours straight while officers beat him. He would then be released without being formally charged. He said that he came to Thailand in mid-2024 after being advised to do so by a friend.

Nadthasiri Bergman, Bai’s lawyer, said that Bai has tried to apply for a visa extension, but his application was refused and he was told that he has an arrest warrant on a charge of extortion issued by the Public Security Bureau of Yulin City. Bai subsequently filed an application with the UNHCR to be recognised as a refugee and received refugee status.

Bai previously said that the extortion charge was fabricated so that the Chinese authorities would have an excuse to bring him back to China.

Bai said that during his stay in Thailand, strangers often came asking around for him. This made him feel unsafe and he had to move around often. In 2025, he was detained by immigration officers in Chiang Mai. He also said that he does not know what would happen to him if he is deported to China.

Pol Lt Col Anan Insai from the Immigration Bureau‘s Investigation Division said that the Chinese authorities first requested Bai‘s extradition in 2024.

He said that Bai was originally staying in Thailand on a visa which was valid until 31 October 2024. On 28 October 2024, the Foreign Affairs Division of the Royal Thai Police received a letter from the Chinese Embassy stating that Bai was wanted in China. The Immigration Bureau revoked his visa on 11 December 2024.

On 30 May 2025, Bai was arrested in Chiang Mai for staying in Thailand without a visa. He was sentenced to 2 months in prison and fined 2000 baht. His sentence was suspended for 2 years.

Pol Lt Col Anan said that on 3 June 2025, the Chinese Embassy send an informal letter to the Foreign Affairs Division requesting Bai’s extradition.

Meanwhile, Bai was granted bail from immigration detention. He was subsequently approved for resettlement. With his flight scheduled for 5 February 2026, Bai reported to the Suan Phlu Immigration Detention Centre and was detained there while waiting for the Thai authorities to grant his exit permit.

On 16 September, the Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Bai on charges of extortion, triggering the extradition process.

Bai‘s lawyer asked Pol Lt Col Anan why the Immigration Bureau did not allow Bai to leave for resettlement. Pol Lt Col Anan said he was not sure because he is only responsible for detention, but he speculated that Bai was not allowed to leave because the Immigration Bureau had to check with the Office of the Attorney General, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the police if there is an extradition request for Bai.

The Office of the Attorney General and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told the Foreign Affairs Division on 4 August 2026 that Bai is in the process of being extradited.

Bai’s lawyer requested that the Court question Immigration Bureau representatives on when the Bureau receive a formal extradition request for Bai and whether there is documentation to confirm it. However, Pol Lt Col Anan did not bring the document to court.

Nadthasiri told reporters after the hearing that Bai’s legal team will have to protest his extradition. She explained that when an extradition request is filed, the Thai authorities will check whether it was filed according to the legal procedure and if it was, the individual will be extradited.

Nadthasiri said that the arrest warrant will be presented to Bai, who will be taken to the Criminal Court to be formally charged. He will then be detained at the Bangkok Remand Prison pending extradition.

She alleged that the Chinese authorities tried to pressure Bai into returning to China voluntarily. A few days before the hearing, she learned that Chinese officials visited Bai‘s family and asked his child to try to convince Bai to return to China. The Criminal Court also issued an arrest warrant for Bai on 16 September, only 2 days before the hearing. For her, this shows that China will try everything to bring him back.

When asked if there is a possibility of halting Bai‘s extradition, Nadthasiri said that the chances are slim but Bai‘s legal representation will try their best. She noted that the human rights situation in Thailand is not good since it seems like the government is friendly with China.

“It is clear in this case that there has been pressure from China since the beginning. It may not be directed at me, but they use the legal process and every means they have to put Bai Zhadong in the most difficult position so that he would agree to go back to China,” Nadthasiri said.

Bai is a former investigative journalist for Caijing magazine. His work exposed large-scale corruption and a money laundering network involving local government officials and high-ranking officials in the Chinese Communist Party.

Between 2011 and 2022, at least five charges were brought against him by various public departments across the country due to his reporting on fraud and corruption, including a charge of inciting subversion of state power. In September 2024, the Public Security Bureau of Yulin City issued an arrest warrant for Bai on trumped-up charges of extortion.

Bai fled China in 2023 and arrived in Thailand in 2024. In January 2026, he was placed in a detention facility pending relocation to a third country, but Thai authorities have barred him from leaving Thailand on scheduled flights twice in February and June.

eng editor 1 Thu, 2026-09-24 - 11:45

News

Activist known for “Lost Faith” shirt faces another royal defamation charge

eng editor 1 — Tue, 22 Sep 2026 05:14:38 +0000

Activist known for “Lost Faith” shirt faces another royal defamation charge

Tiwagorn Withiton, an activist known for wearing a t-shirt printed with “I have lost faith in the monarchy” has been charged with another count of royal defamation over 5 Facebook posts made in 2022.

Pattana Sriyai, Tiwagorn‘s lawyer, said he visited Tiwagorn on 18 September. During the visit, Tiwagorn told him that Pol Lt Intrachai Intra, a deputy investigation inspector from the Technology Crime Suppression Division (TCSD)’s Sub-Division 3, visited Tiwagorn on 22 July along with a lawyer from the Lawyers’ Coucil. Tiwagorn was then notified that he is being charged with another count of royal defamation.

Pattana said that the charge stemmed from 5 Facebook posts Tiwagorn made in July 2022. The complaint against him was filed by serial complainant Sonthiya Sawasdee.

Pattana said that Tiwagorn refused to acknowledge the new charge and did not sign documents. He told his lawyer that Pol Lt Intrachai said to him that he is not a man because he does not own up to his crimes.

Tiwagorn responded by hanging up the phone used in the visiting room. He told Pattana he was disgusted and did not want to participate in an unjust process.

Pattana said that Tiwagorn wrote a letter to him in early Augsut about the new charge but the letter never arrives. Pattana has not seen documents relating to the case since he has to request it from the prison.

Tiwagorn also told the lawyer that he expects more royal defamation charges. Before his imprisonment, he received Facebook messages from members of royalist groups threatening to file complaints against him over a number of Facebook posts.

Tiwagorn is currently detained at the Khon Kaen Central Prison. Her was sentenced to 6 years in prison on a royal defamation charge for posting a picture of himself wearing the t-shirt, which went viral in 2020. The Appeal Court in August 2024 overturned the Khon Kaen Provincial Court‘s ruling dismissing the charges against him, finding him guilty and sentencing him to prison. In May 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the Appeal Court‘s ruling.

He was also charged with sedition and the Supreme Court is expected to soon issue a verdict. The sedition charge is one of the charges covered by the new political amnesty law, but Pattana said that Tiwagorn does not wish to participate in the amnesty process and wants a Supreme Court verdict. Nevertheless, he said there is nothing he could do if the court decides to dismiss the case under the new amnesty law.

eng editor 1 Tue, 2026-09-22 - 12:14

News