DOCSLIB.ORG

The Freedom of Thought Report 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Freedom of Thought Report 2019 The Freedom of Thought Report 2019 Key Countries Edition A global report on the rights, legal status and discrimination against humanists, atheists and the non-religious The Freedom of Thought Report 2019 Key Countries Edition A global report on the rights, legal status and discrimination against humanists, atheists and the non-religious The Freedom of Thought Report 2019: A Global Report on the Rights, Legal Status and Discrimination Against Humanists, Atheists and the Non-religious, was created by Humanists International. Humanists International is the global representative body of the humanist movement, uniting a diversity of non- religious organisations and individuals. Its vision is for everyone to live a life of dignity in a world where universal human rights are respected and protected, and where states uphold secularism. Its mission is to build, support and represent the global humanist movement, defending human rights, particularly those of non-religious people, and promoting humanist values world-wide. If you have updates, additions or corrections for the report please email [email protected] or visit the website at fot.humanists.international To receive updates and news from Humanists International, or to join as a supporter, visit humanists.international Constitution & Government Education & Children’s Rights These maps depict the findings of the full Freedom of Thought Report which is available in a complete Online Edition at fot.humanists.international The maps correspond to each of the four thematic strands of the Report: Constitution & Government, Education & Children’s Rights, Society & Community, and Freedom of Expression & Advocacy of Humanist Values. Each map shows the highest severity level (see key, right) of any boundary condition applied in each thematic strand. 6 Freedom of Thought 2019 | Maps Society & Community Expression & Advocacy of Humanist Values Grave Violations Severe Discrimination Systemic Discrimination Mostly Satisfactory Free and Equal No Rating Maps | Freedom of Thought 2019 7 This map depicts the findings of the full Freedom of Thought Report Grave Violations which is available in a complete Online Edition at fot.humanists.international Severe Discrimination Systemic This map shows as a colour gradient the “summary score” for each country (the average of the worst severity level (see key, right) of any Discrimination boundary condition applied in each thematic strand. Mostly Satisfactory Free and Equal 8 Freedom of Thought 2019 | | Freedom of Thought 2019 9 Preface to the 2019 edition By Andrew Copson Laws against ‘apostasy’ and ‘blasphemy’ always violate the human rights to freedom of thought and freedom of expression. They also remain one of the most egregious forms of legal discrimination against the non-religious, as well as other religion or belief minorities, in that they are used most often against members of religion or belief groups outside the mainstream of a country. The ‘blasphemy’ cases that most often hit the headlines include artists and writers, protesters and activists, who through their creative or social work cause ‘offence’ to a mainstream religion. Sometimes the offence as such is somewhat intentional, as when a novelist plays with the bounds of faith, or an artist depicts some aspect of faith or criticism in a novel, or satirical mode. Other times, Andrew Copson is president of ‘blasphemy’ laws and taboos are used to intimidate or Humanists International prosecute people who express dissent against some aspect of mainstream religion, whether from ‘inside’ or ‘outside’ the tradition. This can mean that criticism of particular belies, practices, leaders or institutions is the mere expression of thoughts must be punishable by made taboo, even when there is a clear moral case for imprisonment or even death. debate, criticism, reform or justice. There is no trade-off here: it is not the case that we Every society contains people who in the exercise of need ‘blasphemy’ or ‘apostasy’ laws despite the huge their own judgement arrive at conclusions about the downsides. Laws against ‘blasphemy’ and ‘apostasy’ do broadly philosophical questions to which different not achieve some good, or protect persons from harm. religions purport to offer answers. In so doing, they Rather they prevent open discussion of ideas. And in may be turning away from particular beliefs; beliefs that particular, these laws usually actualize a particular were presumed of them, or impressed upon them by interpretation and ‘respect for’ conservatively-held family or society. Just for seeking their own answers, or beliefs, which of course are never shared by every single for expressing their own ideas, especially but not limited person in society, but are broadly shared among all the to when these ideas contradict a majority religion, then most radical or extremist believers. And yet ‘blasphemy’ laws against ‘blasphemy’ and ‘apostasy’ cast such people and ‘apostasy’ laws compel upon all members of society as heretics, infidels or dissidents. conformity with those beliefs. Sometimes they are told the very expression of their Defenders of ‘apostasy’ laws tend to rely most heavily change (or supposed change) in beliefs is a crime on a specifically religious defence and a circular bit of because it contradicts a religious prohibition against logic (the religion says that apostates must be shunned, ‘apostasy’, which of course is a peculiar circular logic punished or killed, therefore the law must enact this, and not something that should have any moral let alone and if people ‘belong to’ the religion then they must legal hold over a non-sharer of those beliefs. Or they are obey its strictures, including the stricture that they told that the expression of their ‘apostasy’ is a form of must not abandon it!). This is such a bad and slippery betrayal against consanguinity, treason against culture argument that there’s almost no way of grasping it, or country, which of course an overreaction in the suffice it to say that it flies in the face of all human extreme. Or they told that their ideas “shake the faith” of psychological experience, and undermines its own others, as if the fact of one’s own beliefs giving another premiss: the very existence of the law itself presupposes a pause for thought or a moment’s doubt is some great that obviously people’s minds do change and that crime, and belying also the fragility of any beliefs that given freedom of enquiry people will reach different need such coddling protection from the mere fact of conclusions about the various metaphysical, moral and disagreement, or that any of these things is so grave that historical questions that religions hope to address. 10 Freedom of Thought 2019 | Preface Defenders of ‘blasphemy’ laws may also make a human rights advocates, and this is followed by further narrowly religious case, such as that ‘blasphemy’ is an demands, in a cycle of increasing demands and the “offence against God”; though they often produce a religionification and hardening of laws. more secular argument around the deleterious effects on ‘society’ upon hearing criticism, ridicule, or insult As such, ‘blasphemy’ and ‘apostasy’ laws not only to beliefs that many members of society hold dear. violate the rights of the individual, it is not even true This argument at least deserves attention, though it that ‘society’ as a whole somehow benefits. On the is also easily dismissed. We all have a right to express contrary, time and time again, it is clear that where ourselves, criticism is a legitimate part of speech, more there are cultural taboos against sacrilege, non-belief, or than that it is often morally necessary, while there is religious conversion, to codify those taboos in law only no right not to hear general criticism, and while rights increases the confidence of religious radicals, diminishes protect people from discrimination and persecution by the space for both personal freedoms and civil society, other people and institutions, they don’t protect ideas and propagates ever more extreme beliefs, extreme from other ideas. taboos, and the primacy of religious beliefs, particularly conservative religious beliefs, over the welfare of One can always construct scenarios in which a everyone in society. particular expression both fits the general description of being ‘blasphemous’ and is employed in some manner that is actually hateful or discriminatory (for example, a criticism of a religious institution may be legitimate and protected when written in a book, but if shouted in the face of an arbitrary adherent it may well become harassment, intimidation, or incitement). But to the extent that it is necessary and desirable to curb behaviour that is genuinely hateful, laws can target incitement to hatred and violence per se, and are the stronger for doing so without employing the incommensurable, ambiguous, religious concept of ‘blasphemy’. ‘Blasphemy’ laws always overreach the legitimate purposes that can be satisfied by laws against incitement to hatred or violence. Given that the legal and human rights case against ‘apostasy’ and ‘blasphemy’ laws is strong, it’s also worth considering the extrajudicial impact of such laws. It is sometimes argued that such laws help to combat social ‘disharmony’ or extremism. However, as will be clear in the country chapters in this report, countries with the most severe and widely-enforced ‘blasphemy’ laws are usually those with the most religious tension and extremism. One could argue about cause and effect here:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion Or Belief
    Level 1, 4 Campion St 594 St Kilda Rd DEAKIN ACT 2600 MELBOURNE VIC 3004 T 02 6259 0431 T 02 6171 7446 E [email protected] E [email protected] 14 February 2018 The Expert Panel on Religious Freedom C/o Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet By email: [email protected] RE: Submission to the Commonwealth Expert Panel on Religious Freedom 1. The Human Rights Law Alliance and the Australian Christian Lobby welcome this opportunity to make a submission to the Inquiry into the Status of the Human Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief. 2. The Human Rights Law Alliance implements legal strategies to protect and promote fundamental human rights. It does this by resourcing legal cases with funding and expertise to create rights-protecting legal precedents. The Alliance is especially concerned to protect and promote the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief. In the past 24 months, the Alliance has aided more than 30 legal cases, and allied lawyers appeared in State Tribunals and Magistrates, District and Supreme Courts as well as the Federal Court. 3. With more than 100,000 supporters, ACL facilitates professional engagement and dialogue between the Christian constituency and government, allowing the voice of Christians to be heard in the public square. ACL is neither party partisan or denominationally aligned. ACL representatives bring a Christian perspective to policy makers in Federal, State and Territory parliaments. 4. This submission focusses on the intersection between freedom of religion and other human rights first in international law, second in Australian law, and third in the lived experience of Australians.
    [Show full text]
  • DOWNLOAD 2019 UK Audited Accounts
    H. \I-t Hurnanists INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL HUMANIST AND ETHICAL UNION (operating as HUMANISTS INTERNAIIONAL) FINANGIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31 DECEMBER 2019 COMPANY NUMBER FC O2O6r',2 Humanists lnternational is a trading name of the lntemational Humanist and Ethical Union. INTERNATIONAL HUMANIST AND ETHICAL UNION REPORT OF THE DIRECTORS FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31ST DECEMBER 2019 The Directors of the lnternational Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), operating as Humanists lnternational, present their annual report with the annualaccounts of the company for the year ended 31st December 2019. The accounts have been prepared in accordance with the accounting policies set out in Note 1 and comply with current statutory requirements. IHEU is the world federation of organizations making up the global humanist movement, inclusive of all nontheistic traditions such as humanist, atheist, rationalist, secularist, laique, ethical culture, freethought, and skeptic. We want a secular world in which human rights are respected and everyone is able to live a life of dignity. We work to build and represent the global humanist movement that defends human rights and promotes Humanist values world-wide. Our Aims are: o We will have successful and sustainable member organisations in every part of the world o We will create a coordinated global movement by supporting and developing our network o We will influence and shape international and regional government policies o We will have sufficient reputation, resources, and effectiveness to achieve our objectives LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS The IHEU is a Membership Corporation pursuant to the Membership Corporation law of the State of New York. lt is registered in England and Wales under the Companies Act as an overseas company having established a place of business in England and Wales.
    [Show full text]
  • Humanism and Christianity: Shared Values?
    Shipton et al.: Humanism and Christianity: Shared Values? WARREN SHIPTON, YOUSSRY GUIRGUIS, AND NOLA TUDU Humanism and Christianity: Shared Values? Introduction The word humanism is derived from the Latin humanitas that originally meant the study of human nature. The idea was to elevate humanity with a focus on human dignity and potential through education (Ritchie and Spencer 2014:15, 16). The meaning attributed to the word humanism, in its broadest sense, allowed Christians and non-believers initially to oc- cupy common territory (64-78). In the early-middle Christian era, some thinkers sought to acquaint themselves with the achievements, literature, and thought of past civilizations, particularly Greek, with a view to rec- onciling theology with the philosophy of the classical philosophers (New World Encyclopedia n.d.; Odom 1977:126-128, 183-186). Outside Christian circles, elements supportive of the pre-eminence of human thought and abilities have long been seen among philosophers; however, not all forms of humanism were atheistic, as seen in Confucian thought (Gupta 2000:8- 12). There also are those who have been called “religious” or “spiritual” humanists (Eller 2010:10). The Medieval civilization that followed the collapse of the Roman Em- pire (AD 476) was marked by the rule of kings with nobles supporting the king in return for privileges. The majority of the population existed in serfdom; the Church reigned supreme. A change came in the 14th century helped by the fact that famine and disease created disaster. The abuses in the Church and the pessimism prevalent in society created a climate for change in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freedom of Academic Freedom: a Legal Dilemma
    Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 48 Issue 2 Article 4 October 1971 The Freedom of Academic Freedom: A Legal Dilemma Luis Kutner Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Luis Kutner, The Freedom of Academic Freedom: A Legal Dilemma, 48 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 168 (1971). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol48/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THE FREEDOM OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM: A LEGAL DILEMMA Luis KUTNER* Because modern man in his search for truth has turned away from kings, priests, commissars and bureaucrats, he is left, for better or worse, with professors. -Walter Lippman. Complete liberty of contradicting and disproving our opinion is the very condition which justifies us in assuming its truth for purposes of action.... -John Stuart Mill, On Liberty. I. INTRODUCTION IN THESE DAYS of crisis in higher education, part of the threat to aca- demic freedom-which includes the concepts of freedom of thought, inquiry, expression and orderly assembly-has come, unfortunately, from certain actions by professors, who have traditionally enjoyed the protection that academic freedom affords. While many of the professors who teach at American institutions of higher learning are indeed competent and dedicated scholars in their fields, a number of their colleagues have allied themselves with student demonstrators and like organized groups who seek to destroy the free and open atmosphere of the academic community.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion
    Freedom of thought, COUNCIL CONSEIL conscience OF EUROPE DE L’EUROPE and religion A guide to the implementation of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights Jim Murdoch Human rights handbooks, No. 9 HRHB9_EN.book Page 1 Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:08 PM HRHB9_EN.book Page 1 Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:08 PM Freedom of thought, conscience and religion A guide to the implementation of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights Jim Murdoch Human rights handbooks, No. 9 HRHB9_EN.book Page 2 Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:08 PM In the “Human rights handbooks” series: No. 1: The right to respect for private No. 6: The prohibition of torture. A Directorate General and family life. A guide to the implemen- guide to the implementation of Article 3 of Human Rights tation of Article 8 of the European Con- of the European Convention on Human and Legal Affairs vention on Human Rights (2001) Rights (2003) Council of Europe F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex No. 2: Freedom of expression. A guide to the implementation of Article 10 of the No. 7 : Positive obligations under the © Council of Europe, 2007 European Convention on Human Rights European Convention on Human Cover illustration © Sean Nel – Fotolia.com (2001) Rights. A guide to the implementation of No. 3: The right to a fair trial. A guide to the European Convention on Human 1st printing, June 2007 the implementation of Article 6 of the Rights (2007) Printed in Belgium European Convention on Human Rights (2001; 2nd edition, 2006) No. 8: The right to life.
    [Show full text]
  • The Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion Or Belief
    Level 1, 4 Campion St PO Box 232 DEAKIN ACT 2600 DEAKIN WEST ACT 2600 T 02 6259 0431 T 02 6171 7446 E [email protected] E [email protected] 04 May 2017 Committee Secretary Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade PO Box 6021 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 RE: Inquiry into the status of the human right to freedom of religion or belief 1. The Human Rights Law Alliance and the Australian Christian Lobby welcome this opportunity to make a submission to the Inquiry into the Status of the Human Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief. 2. The Human Rights Law Alliance implements legal strategies to protect and promote fundamental human rights. It does this by resourcing legal cases with funding and expertise to create rights-protecting legal precedents. The Alliance is especially concerned to protect and promote the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief. In the past 12 months, the Alliance has aided more than 20 legal cases, and allied lawyers appeared in State Tribunals and Magistrates, District and Supreme Courts as well as the Federal Court. 3. With more than 80,000 supporters, ACL facilitates professional engagement and dialogue between the Christian constituency and government, allowing the voice of Christians to be heard in the public square. ACL is neither party partisan or denominationally aligned. ACL representatives bring a Christian perspective to policy makers in Federal, State and Territory parliaments. 4. Broadly, the terms of reference invite submissions concerning the status of the right in Australia and around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Freedom and Education in Australian Schools
    laws Article Religious Freedom and Education in Australian Schools Paul Babie Adelaide Law School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; [email protected] Abstract: This article examines the constitutional allocation of power over primary and secondary education in Australia, and the place of and protection for freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in Australian government and religious non-government schools. This article provides both an overview of the judicial treatment of the constitutional, legislative, and common law protection for FoRB and a consideration of emerging issues in religious freedom in both government and religious non-government schools, suggesting that the courts may soon be required to provide guidance as to how the available protections operate in both settings. Keywords: Australia; education; freedom of religion; constitution; free exercise; section 116; implied freedom of political communication 1. Introduction This article examines the place of and protection for freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) in Australian government primary and secondary education (‘government schools’) 1 and in religious non-government schools. In order to understand that place, it is necessary to outline the legal foundations for education in Australia as well as the protection of FoRB Citation: Babie, Paul. 2021. Religious in Australian law. Australia, like the United States, is a constitutional federal democracy; Freedom and Education in Australian as such, the legal foundations for education involve an uneasy balance of federal (national, Schools. Laws 10: 7. https://doi.org/ or Commonwealth) and state and territory (regional) law and policy. This means that no 10.3390/laws10010007 one unitary source exists for the foundation of government schools, its funding, and for the protection of FoRB.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freedom of Thought Report 2018
    THE FREEDOM OF THOUGHT REPORT 2018 Key Countries Edition A Global report on the rights, legal status and discrimination against humanists, atheists and the non-religious THE FREEDOM OF THOUGHT REPORT 2018 Key Countries Edition Freedom of Thought 2018: A Global Report on the Rights, Legal Status and Discrimination Against Humanists, Atheists and the Non-religious, was created by the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU). The International Humanist and Ethical Union is the global representative body of the humanist movement, uniting a diversity of non-religious organisations and individuals. Its mission is to represent and support the global Humanist movement, and to build a world in which human rights are respected and all can live a life of dignity. If you have updates, additions or corrections for the report please email [email protected] or visit the website at freethoughtreport.com. To receive updates and news from IHEU, or join as a supporter, visit iheu.org. Constitution & Government Education & Children’s Rights These maps depict the findings of the full Freedom of Thought Report which is available in a complete Online Edition at freethoughtreport.com. The maps correspond to each of the four thematic strands of the Report: Constitution & Government, Education & Children’s Rights, Society & Community, and Freedom of Expression & Advocacy of Humanist Values. Each map shows the highest severity level (see key, right) of any boundary condition applied in each thematic strand. 6 Freedom of Thought 2018 | Maps Society & Community Expression & Advocacy of Humanist Values Grave Violations Severe Discrimination Systemic Discrimination Mostly Satisfactory Free and Equal No Rating Maps | Freedom of Thought 2018 7 This map depicts the findings of the full Freedom of Thought Report Grave Violations which is available in a complete Online Edition at freethoughtreport.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Limits to Freedom of Expression?
    LIMITS TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION? CONSIDERATIONS ARISING FROM THE DANISH CARTOONS AFFAIR (Published in IFLA Journal, 32 (2006) 181-188) Paul Sturges Professor of Library Studies Loughborough University, UK INTRODUCTION In September 2005 a Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten published a group of cartoons containing satirical depictions of the Prophet Mahommed. As Islamic communities throughout the world gradually became aware of the publication of the cartoons there were many passionate expressions of distress and anger, largely on two grounds: first that Muslim belief does not accept pictorial representations of the Prophet and second that the cartoons associated the Prophet, and Muslims generally, with terrorism. Public demonstrations, some of them violent and resulting in loss of life, and protests directed mainly at the newspaper and the Danish government followed, whilst the cartoons were reprinted by a number of newspapers in other countries in solidarity with the original publishers. The complex of issues contained within this case is obviously of deep concern to librarians for a number of reasons, most notably the commitment of the profession to freedom of expression as a basic value of library and information work, but also because of the global role of libraries in contributing to providing access to the widest possible range of information and ideas for communities whatever their beliefs. IFLA’s FAIFE core activity provides a central professional focus for addressing these issues and has called for informed and tolerant contributions to the debate. The present article is intended to respond to that call. The essence of the debate is a clash between two opposed views of freedom of expression.
    [Show full text]
  • DOWNLOAD 2019 Annual Report File Type
    Annual Report 2019 Bold and brave. We are the global representative body of the humanist movement. 2 Foreword 3 Foreword Much of 2019 was marked by the ongoing persecution of my dear friend and Board colleague Gulalai Ismail. You will read more in this report about the ongoing requests we continue to receive from humanists at risk around the world. I Annual Report and my fellow members of the Board take these concerns seriously, and in late 2019 2019 approved plans from the Chief Executive to greatly increase the resources available to support humanists at risk. These are needed Contents more than ever. 2019 also was the year where I was re- Introduction 4 elected for the second time directly by our members at the General Assembly. It is a Our objectives 6 Gulalai was detained by Pakistani security huge privilege to be President of Humanists services on her way home from a Humanists International, and I am very grateful to you Our people 7 International Board meeting in October all for your continued support. Our joint 2018. Within minutes of her being detained work for human rights and human progress Key figures 8 our staff were alerted and had begun the has never been more vital and I thank you process of compiling information and Update on Gulalai 10 for allowing me to serve in leading it in the coordinating our global campaign to ensure coming years. her safety. Report on the General Assembly 12 Thank you. Almost an entire year of campaigning and Advocacy 14 lobbying followed. You may remember that when we met in Reykjavik in June 2019, we Our members 20 took a moment to reflect on the situation for our friend, and to redouble our efforts Growth and development 22 to bring her to safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony of Rafida Bonya Ahmed, Humanist Activist and Author On
    Testimony of Rafida Bonya Ahmed, Humanist Activist and Author On behalf of the American Humanist Association Before the United States House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations and Oversight and Reform Committee Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Joint Hearing on “Ending Global Religious Persecution” January 28, 2020 Washington, District of Columbia 1 Chairman Raskin, Ranking Member Roy, Members of the Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Smith, and Members of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations, thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the American Humanist Association concerning the harm caused by the numerous prohibitions against blasphemy that exist around the world. My name is Rafida Bonya Ahmed. I am a Bangladeshi-American author and blogger. I am a humanist and atheist. I am a mother to a recent John’s Hopkins graduate. I am a U.S. citizen and a visiting fellow at the London School of Economics Human Rights Centre. And I am here today to provide a much-needed voice for the nonreligious communities and individuals harmed by religious persecution. While I would not venture to represent the interests of all nonreligious people, I am a person who knows first-hand the violence accusations of blasphemy can incite. I appreciate that the committees are putting an overdue spotlight on the egregious violations of human rights conducted in the name of religion, and I urge both committees and Congress to pursue policies that hold bad actors to account.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 04 30 LM Thailand
    Public Prosecutor, Office of the Attorney General (OAG) v Mr Somyot Pruksakasemsuk Written Comments of ARTICLE 19 ARTICLE 19 Free Word Centre 60 Farringdon Road London EC1R 3GA UK Tel: +44 207 324 2500 Fax: +44 207 490 0566 www.article19.org 24 April 2012 I. Introduction 1. ARTICLE 19 respectfully submits this amicus brief for the benefit of the Court’s consideration of the salient issues raised by the above-referenced case. 2. The present case before the Court involves the criminal prosecution of Mr Somyot Pruksakasemsuk, editor of the magazine “Voice of the Oppressed” (“Voice of Taksin”), under the lèse-majesté law of Thailand, specifically, Section 112 of the Thai Criminal Code on lèse-majesté which states: “Whoever defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years”. Lèse-majesté is also entrenched in the Thai Constitution, Section 8, which states: “The King shall be enthroned in a position of revered worship and shall not be violated. No person shall expose the King to any sort of accusation or action”. Furthermore, the 2007 Computer Crimes Act has been used as a law on lèse-majesté. 3. Mr Pruksakasemsuk was arrested and charged under Section 112 of the Thai Criminal Code on lèse-majesté on 30 April 2011 and has remained in pre-trial detention since then despite repeated bail requests. As well as being the editor of “Voice of the Oppressed”, Mr Pruksakasemsuk is a labour rights activist and is affiliated with the Democratic Alliance of Trade Unions.
    [Show full text]