Tantawan gets two years in Section 112 livestream case

The Criminal Court sentenced activist Tantawan “Tawan” Tuatulanon to two years in prison without suspension on Monday (August 31, 2026) over a Facebook livestream made shortly before a royal motorcade passed in March 2022.

The court found her guilty of an offence under Section 112 of the Criminal Code and ruled that the same livestream also violated Section 14 of the Computer Crime Act. It fined her THB600 for failing to comply with a police order, ordered the confiscation of an iPhone and acquitted her of using force against officers.

Judges initially imposed a three-year prison sentence under Section 112 and a THB900 fine for disobeying an official order. Both penalties were reduced by one-third because the court considered parts of the defence evidence beneficial, leaving a two-year prison term without suspension and a THB600 fine.

As the livestream constituted a single act violating several legal provisions, the court applied the penalty under Section 112 as the offence carrying the heaviest punishment.

The verdict was delivered in Courtroom 906 at the Criminal Court on Ratchadaphisek Road in Black Case No. Aor.1237/2565. The case was brought by prosecutors from the Office of Criminal Litigation 5.

Tantawan, a former leading member of the Thaluwang activist group, had denied charges under Section 112 and the Computer Crime Act, as well as counts of using force to resist or obstruct officers and failing to comply with an official order. She had been released on bail during the trial.

The case arose from a livestream she conducted from a pavement on Ratchadamnoen Nok Road, opposite the United Nations office, before a royal motorcade was due to pass through the area.

Court rejects freedom-of-expression defence

The court said it had considered the entire Facebook Live broadcast rather than individual remarks in isolation.

Judges found that police at the scene were carrying out security duties for the head of state, which the court described as consistent with international practice. The ruling also noted that Tantawan had studied law and should have understood the principles governing such security operations.

The court found that she had repeatedly used leading language that referred improperly to the King. It concluded that the remarks demonstrated an intention to insult the King rather than an exercise of freedom of expression, as the defence had argued.

Because the comments were broadcast on Facebook, the court also ruled that the conduct constituted the introduction of false information into a computer system under Section 14 of the Computer Crime Act.

Police order was within officer’s authority

The court found that officers had told Tantawan three times to stop livestreaming because a royal motorcade was expected to pass near Makkhawan Rangsan Bridge.

Pol Col Somyot Udomraksasap, who was superintendent of Nang Loeng Police Station at the time, then ordered two female officers to restrain her by holding her arms and legs.

Judges ruled that Somyot had the authority to issue the order because police were responsible for security along the route.

Tantawan ignored all three instructions, the court found, making her guilty of failing to comply with an official order.

Court accepts fear explanation for struggle

The court reached a different conclusion on the charge that Tantawan had used force against the officers.

Judges noted that police did not tell her that she was being detained or explain where they intended to take her before restraining her arms and legs.

The court found that it was natural for Tantawan to become frightened in those circumstances and accepted that her struggling was a reaction to fear. The evidence was therefore insufficient to establish that she had deliberately used force against the officers, and she was acquitted on that count.

Tantawan stands by remarks before ruling

Before entering the courtroom, Tantawan said she was ready to face the judicial process despite feeling that she had lost hope in Thailand’s justice system and remaining uncertain about the country’s future.

“I am still here today and I am not going anywhere,” she said.

Tantawan acknowledged that she was nervous but said she had prepared herself for the judgment and would accept the outcome.

She also stood by what she had said during the 2022 livestream, explaining that farmers had been demonstrating for several days and that she had previously attended protests involving local communities.

Tantawan said she wanted people in positions of power to pay greater attention to those affected by such disputes.

Her lawyers had prepared security for a bail application in the event of a custodial sentence. At the time of reporting, the legal team was applying for bail pending an appeal against the first-instance ruling.