Showing illegal activities on TV is not defamation

Mr. Chirmsak told public about illegal activities, King Power sued him, but Supreme Court says Mr. Chirmsak was right.

MEDIA, THE TRUTH & DEFAMATION SUITS

Supreme Court acquits TV host of defaming King Power

3/08/2016
Online Reporters

Telling people what is happening in the world, that is what the media and newspapers do.

This week Thailand's Supreme Court sided with TV show host Chirmsak Pinthon who was doing exactly that.

The message sent was clear: Mr. Chirmsal, you did the right thing, informing the public about illegal activities, even though they involved King Power brand-name and might even damage that brand-name.

The public had the right to know and Mr Chirmsak made sure they knew.

In case you don't know, King Power Duty Free has a very profitable monopoly on duty-free shops at all airports in Thailand.

TRUTH ABOUT KING POWER REVEALED ON TV SHOW

Chirmsak Pinthong is a former senator and the host of a TV show. 

On his show "Long Euy Yang Rai" programme on Channel 11 on Feb 10, 2010, Mr. Chirmsak revealed some startling things about King Power.

Mr. Chirmsak claimed that King Power goods were being sold to people who were not leaving or arriving in the country, which is clearly illegal.

A video showed the delivery of liquor, wine and champagne packaged by King Power to a house, and the buyer there did not have to show a passport or an air ticket for the purchase.

KING POWER'S FAILED ATTEMPT TO SUPPRESS TRUTH

The Supreme Court on Wednesday acquitted TV host Chirmsak Pinthong of a defamation lawsuit brought by King Power Duty Free over the episode implicating the company in illegal sales of duty-free goods.

On Sept 26, 2013, the Criminal Court acquitted Mr. Chirmsak.

The company appealed and the Appeals Court on May 9 last year upheld the acquittal, stating Mr Chirmsak had made an honest criticism.

In its ruling, read at the Criminal Court in Bangkok on Wednesday, the Supreme Court said Mr Chirmsak raised the issue honestly to protect the interests of the state as he was a director of Airports of Thailand (AoT) at that time.

The question remains, would Mr. Chirmsak have won the case if he had not been a senator and a director of the Airports of Thailand?

What if he had just been an ordinary but concerned citizen "speaking truth to power" ? 

DEFAMATION LAWSUITS: HOW THEY CAN SUPPRESS THE TRUTH 

If a company or person is wealthy, they can easy hire a lawyer and sue the media so that the truth never gets out.

If a newspaper or TV channel is sued often enough or loses some lawsuits, they may be forced to stop trying to inform the public entirely.

At that point, telling the truth about wealthy and powerful people or companies will simply be too expensive and potential lawsuits will threat

company that became wealthy from a government-enforced monopoly or concession that makes King Power the only company to sell duty-free goods at Suvarnabhumi, Thailand's gateway to the world.

King Power can use its wealth to make sure that people do not know what is happening by sueing people for defamation. 

This time they failed.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1051841/supreme-court-acquits-tv-host-of-defaming-king-power

สามารถฝึกอ่านออกเสียงและดูคำแปลได้ที่ : http://www.bangkokpost.com/learning/learning-from-news/1051854/showing-illegal-activities-on-tv-is-not-defamation