protest at the Victory Monument. The protest, “Just Standing”, demanded the release of nine individuals who were abducted and held in military custody on the same day. Anon Nampa, the leader of the Resistant Citizen movement48 and organiser of the assembly, was charged with violating the Public Assembly Act for failing to notify the authorities about the assembly in advance, and was convicted of the charges by a municipal court. He was fined 1,000 baht. Case study 2: Sathanont49 A participant at an organised charity activity called “A March to Inform of Merit” in Sakon Nakhorn province was charged under the Public Assembly Act. The activity aimed to invite local villagers to participate in a cultural activity to protect the community’s river. In addition to the accusation of failing to notify the authorities, Sathanont was also charged under the Traffic Act for obstruction of the public highway. The case is still ongoing. Case study 3: Sama-ae50 Sama-ae, a fisherman from an association of fisherfolk, was charged for publicly gathering and delivering a letter to the Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives to call for an amendment to the Fishing Act. He was charged for failing to notify the local police. He fought the case on the grounds that he and his friends gathered to submit the letter only, without an intention of public gathering. The case has since been dismissed. Case study 4: Anti-mining protesters in Phichit51 A total of 27 villagers in Phichit province were charged for gathering on a road that vehicles of the Akara Mining Company were using to transport the ore from the gold mine. In addition, 48 https://www.facebook.com/Resistantcitizen 49 “Satanont: Public assembly case from merit activity”. Freedom of Expression Documentation Centre. https://freedom.ilaw.or.th/en/ case/796 50 “Sama-ae: Fish Flok’s Public Assembly Act case”. Freedom of Expression Documentation Centre. https://freedom.ilaw.or.th/en/ case/708 51 “Villagers in Phichit Protest against Mining”. Freedom of Expression Documentation Centre. https://freedom.ilaw.or.th/en/ case/782 the villagers were also charged under Section 309 of the Criminal Code52 for extorting the company. The protesters were fighting against the operation of the gold mine which they felt had an impact on the environment in their homeland. The court gave them suspended sentences. Overall analysis on freedom of assembly NCPO Announcement No. 7/2014 and Order No. 3/2015 completely remove the freedom of peaceful assembly. This blanket removal is a violation of Thailand’s obligation under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and is designed as a content-based restriction by the NCPO as a large majority of protests in this time were against the legitimacy of military rule and the military coup. As observed in the cases in this report, most of the charges under these two executive orders are activities directly against the NCPO. The many restrictions imposed by the Public Assembly Act show that these laws violate the principle of proportionality. The principle of proportionality dictates that the least intrusive restrictions should be prioritised by the authorities to ensure that the nature and character of the assembly are not fundamentally altered. However, the restrictions imposed by the Public Assembly Act on the locations, time and manner of assembly are not the least intrusive restrictions, and would fundamentally alter the nature and character of the assembly. For example, should a certain assembly intend on protesting an act of a ministry or the National Legislative Assembly, their rationally selected location of assembly outside the Government House or the Parliament would only be permissible if the protest is not within the compounds of those buildings or takes places at a distance further than 150 metres away from the buildings. This restriction has the effect of changing the character of the assembly should it be essential for the assembly’s message and methods that their location should be within the compounds of the buildings or at a proximate distance outside of them. The alteration of the character and nature of the assembly is also enabled by the other restrictions, if the group intends on using an amplifier to convey its message, or if it chooses to operate between 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. These restrictions also could potentially interfere with the message communicated by the assembly. 52 “Illegal Detention (Sections 309-311)”. Siam Legal. http://library.siam-legal.com/thai-law/ criminal-code-illegal-detention-sections-309-311 THAILAND / 135