In Thailand, SLAPP laws are silencing environmental journalists and activists

When Pratch Rujivanarom became a journalist, he understood the legal risks that came with the work, but underestimated their extent.

A seasoned Thai environmental journalist specialising in the Mekong region, Rujivanarom encountered his first lawsuit in 2017 as a junior reporter at The Nation reporting on a Thai mining company operating in Myanmar and its impact on a local village. In response, the company sued him for defamation, accusing him of violating Thailand’s Computer-Related Crime Act. The lawsuit sent a powerful message to the young reporter: those with the means to litigate could weaponise the law to silence dissent.

It would not be the last time the 35-year-old found himself in court because of his work. In 2020, the same company sued him again, filing cases in two provincial courts. By then, Rujivanarom was editor of Green News, a platform covering environmental issues. He had published an article summarising a Myanmar court verdict ordering the company to compensate a villager for land damage. After years of legal battles, Rujivanarom was acquitted on October 31.

“I kind of accepted it as an occupational hazard,” he said. “But my dad and other family members were taken aback.” As a family of immigrants, “we try our best to stay clear of legal troubles”, he added.

His story is just one of many that highlight the pervasive misuse of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) – a tool often used to stifle journalists, activists and ordinary citizens – in Thailand. Globally, SLAPPs allow powerful entities to intimidate critics through defamation claims and exploit legal loopholes to suppress dissent.

In Thailand, SLAPP cases are particularly prevalent in the mining and energy sectors, where “environmental issues are often in direct disagreement with business interests, the state and mega-projects”, notes Panumas Sanguanwong, president of the Thai Society of Environmental Journalists. “Environmental journalists are not just reporting on environmental issues; these are interwoven with human rights conflicts.”

The financial and emotional toll of SLAPPs

SLAPPs are a severe financial and emotional burden on those targeted. In Thailand, court fees for civil suits are calculated as a percentage of the amount in dispute, making it easier for corporations to sue than for journalists or citizens to defend themselves. Even for Rujivanarom, who received support from colleagues, legal advisors and NGOs, the toll was immense. “It could be a lot worse for other journalists who don’t have the same access and support,” he notes.

According to the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, SLAPP suits have become a global tactic to stifle dissent, particularly in Asia. In a report, it found that from January 2015 to May 2021, mining companies were the leading initiators of SLAPP suits worldwide. In Thailand, the Human Rights Lawyers Association revealed that of 212 SLAPP cases between 1997 and May 2019, 196 were criminal suits. Only nine were civil cases, with seven classified as both.

The skew toward criminal litigation suggests that companies prefer to intimidate with the threat of criminal sentences rather than seek monetary damages, creating a chilling effect that has led many journalists to self-censor. “SLAPPs don’t just silence journalists in court – they cast a shadow over every newsroom, pushing conversations underground and stifling public discourse,” said Tewarit Maneechai, a senator and former editor of independent newspaper Prachatai.

SLAPPs and public health

As climate change intensifies, environmental journalists increasingly report on its public health impacts. In Thailand, rising temperatures and frequent heatwaves threaten manual labourers, with research suggesting that extreme heat can exacerbate kidney dysfunction among workers. Yet, the threat of SLAPPs discourages journalists from exposing corporate negligence, with many important issues going unreported.

“The wave of lawfare has been devastating,” said Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang, assistant professor at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Political Science. “In Thailand, attitudes toward freedom of expression are deeply polarised. On one side, there are unspoken topics no one dares to address; on the other, misinformation and fake news are rampant. When defamation lawsuits became a tool for silencing criticism, it triggered a ‘regime of defamation’, where almost anything can lead to a legal threat.” This culture of fear even extends to customers, who hesitate to post negative reviews about shops, hotels or products, he added.

Young journalists face additional risks. Rujivanarom said he had never heard of the “SLAPP” term until he was targeted by one, and now advocates for better training and resources to help journalists navigate legal hazards. However, he notes that the problem often lies with enforcement: cases that could be dismissed at the police or prosecutor level end up in court, forcing journalists into drawn-out legal battles.

Reform and resistance

The movement to combat SLAPPs is gaining momentum. As a member of the Committee on Political Development, Mass Communications and Public Participation, Maneechai, who faced a SLAPP suit as a journalist, is currently exploring the feasibility of anti-SLAPP legislation. He acknowledged the need to gain senate support for it, but remains cautiously optimistic. “I believe we need to address this issue both culturally and structurally,” he said. “This means creating legal measures to protect the rights, freedoms and safety of the media.”  

Journalist Nontarat Phaicharoen argues that the collaborative model used by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights and the Siddhi-Issara Foundation – which offers free legal and financial support to pro-democracy activists – could be adapted for journalists. “But that shifts the responsibility away from newsrooms to individual journalists,” he acknowledged. “Ideally, newsrooms should support their journalists, but in Thailand, many rely on sponsors closely tied to powerful groups.” Phaicharoen also called for greater accountability from newsrooms: “When a story is published, it’s gone through multiple layers of editorial scrutiny. If a lawsuit is filed, it should target the newsroom, not the individual journalist.”

Among those spearheading the fight for reforms is Chonthicha ‘Lookkate’ Jangrew, a human rights activist turned politician and MP for the People’s Party. “Even MPs aren’t exempt from SLAPP,” she said, citing defamation suits filed against fellow MPs Rangsiman Rome and Bencha Saengchantra during the 2021 censure debate. Since then, a fear of legal repercussions has led many parliamentarians, journalists and citizens to avoid naming names, even when discussing critical issues, she noted.

“Parliament should be a safe space… these issues reflect the welfare of Thai people – our families, our communities,” Jangrew added. “This air of fear has a greater impact on society than we realise.” She cites an incident involving a chemical spill, in which the media refrained from identifying the factory or its location, leaving people wondering whether the site was near their home. “But they can never be sure which one it is. And to me, that is truly frightening,” she said.

Jangrew is working on efforts to revive anti-SLAPP legislation that lapsed when parliament was dissolved last year, but conceded that it will be challenging, as amending the Criminal Code alone may not suffice. Related laws, such as the Computer Crime Act and Labour Protection Act, might also need to be reviewed, to address other ways workers and activists are silenced, she noted.

“These laws are meant to protect people’s rights and reputations, but their application must be proportional, reasonable and appropriate”, Jangew said. She added that development plans often prioritise economic growth over environmental concerns, leaving affected communities with little recourse. “The prevalence of environmental SLAPP lawsuits reflects deeper, systemic issues.”

A divided political landscape

Thailand’s political shifts in 2023, with the Pheu Thai Party leading a coalition government, have added complexity to the reform agenda. In opposition, Pheu Thai criticised the previous administration’s involvement in controversial mining operations, including Akara Resources’ gold mining activities. The party did not respond to Dialogue Earth’s request for comment, but its past stance on corporate accountability suggested a potential willingness to pursue reforms. However, its decision to exclude the Move Forward Party (MFP) – a since-dissolved party whose primary goal was to change Thailand’s strict lèse-majesté laws – and align with military-backed parties, despite MFP winning the most votes, has left many sceptical about its commitment to change.

Thailand’s People’s Party, MFP’s successor, has also faced SLAPP-related controversy. The party recently announced it is taking legal action against an individual accused of spreading disinformation about its involvement in violence related to the Patani independence movement. This has sparked debate over the fine line between protecting reputations and suppressing free speech.

Earlier this year, Nada Chaiyajit, a lecturer and prominent human rights activist, was summoned to court over social media posts criticising a then-MFP member and Bangkok councillor for alleged sexual harassment, highlighting the internal inconsistencies within the party. Chaiyajit was later acquitted.

SLAPP suits are not about journalistic incompetence. As Patrycja Maciejewicz pointed out in a recent piece for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, they target journalists who unearth uncomfortable truths that challenge the powerful. For reporters like Rujivanarom, facing a SLAPP may eventually feel like a “badge of honour”. Yet the severe personal impacts mean each SLAPP case risks deterring other journalists.