The Human Rights Institute at Columbia Law School, in partnership with the Clooney Foundation for Justice’s TrialWatch initiative, has released a new Fairness Report evaluating the trial of thirteen protesters who were members of the New Democracy Movement (“NDM”). The defendants, many of them students at the time, were charged with sedition under Section 116 of the Thai Criminal Code for participating in public gatherings and political expression critical of the then-military government in 2015. Although ultimately acquitted in a decision upholding the defendants’ right to free speech, they endured more than eight years of legal uncertainty before trial. The report concludes that the prosecution was marked by serious violations of fair trial rights, including undue delay, lack of evidence sufficient to proceed to trial, and reliance on an overly broad legal provision, earning the trial a grade of “C.” Read the full report here.
In the NDM case, more than eight years passed before trial began, leaving the defendants in prolonged uncertainty and undermining their ability to prepare a defense. As noted by TrialWatch Expert and Malaysian constitutional and human rights lawyer Andrew Khoo, this gravely compromised the defendants’ ability to mount a fair defense. When the case finally proceeded, the prosecution failed to describe how any statements made at the protests in question violated the sedition law—or even what statements were made and which of the thirteen defendants had made them. Section 116 of the Thai Criminal Code, the sedition provision, carries a potential seven-year prison sentence but is so broadly worded that it falls short of international standards requiring legal clarity.
These concerns are particularly urgent due to the ongoing “UN62 case,” another prosecution stemming from a similar pro-democracy protest in which 18 individuals were charged under Section 116 and the Public Assembly Act in connection with a May 2018 protest at Thammasat University and a march toward Government House that was blocked in front of the United Nations in Bangkok. Like the NDM defendants, they have faced years of legal proceedings for their participation in peaceful political activity; and they too face up to 7 years in prison. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights has also raised additional concerns about procedural fairness, including the court’s questioning of whether detained human rights lawyer Anon Nampa should be allowed to continue representing several defendants while incarcerated (1).
As the court prepares to deliver its judgment in the UN62 case on March 26, 2026, the NDM Fairness Report offers a timely reminder of the procedural flaws and legal concerns that have come to characterize many of these sedition prosecutions, and of the important role courts can play in upholding fair trial standards, including by assessing whether prosecutions are supported by sufficient evidence and a clear legal basis.
For more information about HRI TrialWatch Project, please visit https://hri.law.columbia.edu/our-work/equality-and-justice/trialwatch-project.
For more on CFJ’s global work, visit https://cfj.org/trialwatch.
The views expressed in this report are those of the Human Rights Institute and do not necessarily reflect the views of Columbia Law School or Columbia University.
(1)Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, “The Criminal Court for UN62 is still attempting to examine the conduct of "Lawyer Anon" as a prisoner, even though there is no prohibition against it, and is preparing to summon the Lawyers Council of Thailand for clarification at the next hearing.”
https://tlhr2014.com/archives/70452.
The Human Rights Institute advances international human rights through education, advocacy, fact-finding, research, scholarship, and critical reflection. We work in partnership with advocates, communities, and organizations pushing for social change to develop and strengthen the human rights legal framework and mechanisms, promote justice and accountability for human rights violations, and build and amplify collective power.