When Pratch Rujivanarom became a journalist, he understood the legal risks that came with the work, but underestimated their extent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A seasoned Thai environmental journalist specialising in the Mekong region, Rujivanarom encountered his first lawsuit<\/a> 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\u2019s Computer-Related Crime Act.<\/a> The lawsuit sent a powerful message to the young reporter: those with the means to litigate could weaponise the law to silence dissent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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<\/a> on October 31.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI kind of accepted it as an occupational hazard,\u201d he said. \u201cBut my dad and other family members were taken aback.\u201d As a family of immigrants, \u201cwe try our best to stay clear of legal troubles\u201d, he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n His story is just one of many that highlight the pervasive misuse of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) \u2013 a tool often used to stifle journalists, activists and ordinary citizens \u2013 in Thailand. Globally, SLAPPs allow powerful entities to intimidate critics through defamation claims and exploit legal loopholes to suppress dissent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Thailand, SLAPP cases are particularly prevalent in the mining and energy sectors, where \u201cenvironmental issues are often in direct disagreement with business interests, the state and mega-projects\u201d, notes Panumas Sanguanwong, president of the Thai Society of Environmental Journalists. \u201cEnvironmental journalists are not just reporting on environmental issues; these are interwoven with human rights conflicts.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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. \u201cIt could be a lot worse for other journalists who don\u2019t have the same access and support,\u201d he notes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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<\/a>, 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<\/a> that of 212 SLAPP cases between 1997 and May 2019, 196 were criminal suits. Only nine were civil cases, with seven classified as both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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. \u201cSLAPPs don\u2019t just silence journalists in court \u2013 they cast a shadow over every newsroom, pushing conversations underground and stifling public discourse,\u201d said Tewarit Maneechai, a senator and former editor of independent newspaper Prachatai.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe wave of lawfare has been devastating,\u201d said Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang, assistant professor at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Political Science. \u201cIn 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 \u2018regime of defamation\u2019, where almost anything can lead to a legal threat.\u201d This culture of fear even extends to customers, who hesitate to post negative reviews about shops, hotels or products, he added. 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. \u201cI believe we need to address this issue both culturally and structurally,\u201d he said. \u201cThis means creating legal measures to protect the rights, freedoms and safety of the media.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Journalist Nontarat Phaicharoen argues that the collaborative model used by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights and the Siddhi-Issara Foundation \u2013 which offers free legal and financial support to pro-democracy activists \u2013 could be adapted for journalists. \u201cBut that shifts the responsibility away from newsrooms to individual journalists,\u201d he acknowledged. \u201cIdeally, newsrooms should support their journalists, but in Thailand, many rely on sponsors closely tied to powerful groups.\u201d Phaicharoen also called for greater accountability from newsrooms: \u201cWhen a story is published, it\u2019s gone through multiple layers of editorial scrutiny. If a lawsuit is filed, it should target the newsroom, not the individual journalist.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Among those spearheading the fight for reforms is Chonthicha \u2018Lookkate\u2019 Jangrew, a human rights activist turned politician and MP for the People\u2019s Party. \u201cEven MPs aren\u2019t exempt from SLAPP,\u201d 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cParliament should be a safe space\u2026 these issues reflect the welfare of Thai people \u2013 our families, our communities,\u201d Jangrew added. \u201cThis air of fear has a greater impact on society than we realise.\u201d 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. \u201cBut they can never be sure which one it is. And to me, that is truly frightening,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThese laws are meant to protect people\u2019s rights and reputations, but their application must be proportional, reasonable and appropriate\u201d, Jangew said. She added that development plans often prioritise economic growth over environmental concerns, leaving affected communities with little recourse. \u201cThe prevalence of environmental SLAPP lawsuits reflects deeper, systemic issues.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thailand\u2019s 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<\/a> the previous administration\u2019s involvement in controversial mining operations, including Akara Resources\u2019 gold mining activities. The party did not respond to Dialogue Earth\u2019s request for comment, but its past stance<\/a> on corporate accountability<\/a> suggested a potential willingness to pursue reforms. However, its decision to exclude the Move Forward Party (MFP) \u2013 a since-dissolved party whose primary goal was to change Thailand\u2019s strict l\u00e8se-majest\u00e9 laws \u2013 and align with military-backed parties, despite MFP winning the most votes, has left many sceptical about its commitment to change. Earlier this year, Nada Chaiyajit, a lecturer and prominent human rights activist, was summoned<\/a> 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. The Kingdom\u2019s laws are being misused to silence critics, suppressing vital reporting on human rights and the environment. Can reform protect free speech?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":50000660,"featured_media":60060473,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[50039900],"tags":[50041623,560,566],"hashtags":[],"country":[20029326],"class_list":["post-60060138","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-justice","tag-environmental-defenders","tag-law","tag-mining","country-thailand"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nThe financial and emotional toll of SLAPPs<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
SLAPPs and public health<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The wave of lawfare has been devastating<\/blockquote>Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang, Chulalongkorn University<\/cite><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
Young journalists face additional risks. Rujivanarom said he had never heard of the \u201cSLAPP\u201d 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\nReform and resistance<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
This air of fear has a greater impact on society than we realise<\/blockquote>Chonthicha \u2018Lookkate\u2019 Jangrew, a human rights activist turned politician and MP for the People\u2019s Party<\/cite><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n
A divided political landscape<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Thailand\u2019s People\u2019s Party, MFP\u2019s successor, has also faced SLAPP-related controversy. The party recently announced it is taking legal action against an individual accused of spreading disinformation<\/a> 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.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
SLAPP suits are not about journalistic incompetence. As Patrycja Maciejewicz pointed out in a recent piece<\/a> 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 \u201cbadge of honour\u201d. Yet the severe personal impacts mean each SLAPP case risks deterring other journalists.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"