“Let the punishment fit the crime,” wrote Cicero in his treaty, On the Laws, in 106 BCE.
“Let the punishment be excessive and arbitrary,” says the reality in Thailand a few days ago.
On Thursday, February 6, the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases sentenced Pirongrong Ramasoota to two years’ imprisonment. Pirongrong is a respected academic and the commissioner of the NBTC (National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission).
Her crime? Violating Section 157 of the Thai criminal code. Intent to corrupt. Intent to inflict harm. Abuse of power. Gross misconduct. Falsifying reports and acting with prejudices. To name but a few.
What exactly did she do? She went against the CP Group, one of Thailand’s most powerful conglomerates, a giant in the food industry, manufacturing, real estate, retail, investment, telecommunication, and e-commerce. In 2023, its revenue was 96.5 billion USD, while the Chearavanont family that owns the business has a net worth of 44.1 billion USD.
What actually happened? The True Digital Group, the telecommunication arm of the CP group, operates the True ID app, a streaming platform classified as an Over-the-Top (OTT) service. True ID bundled Thailand’s digital TV channels into the app for its customers’ viewing pleasure on mobile phones at a friendly price. However, consumer complaints were made to the NBTC that the True ID app violates the “Must Carry” rule, meaning commercials are prohibited. But there’s a problem: technology outpaces the law. NBTC doesn’t have jurisdiction over the platform OTT.
Pirongrong issued a warning letter to all digital TV channels on the platform. In the letter, she insisted on naming the True ID Group. In the meeting about the letter, she boldly announced that she would “take down the giant.” But somebody recorded the audio of the meeting and released it to the public. The True Digital Group got a hold of the audio clip and compiled evidence to file a lawsuit with the Criminal Court, including the charge that Pirongrong proceeded without the permission of the NBTC’s board, which is the proper procedure.
The result? Two years’ imprisonment.
When the verdict was announced, the hashtag #savepirongrong trended on social media. Universities and consumer protection groups issued statements in her defense. But, of course, none of that matters to the court.
However, there is more to the story. In 2022, two telecommunications giants, True and DTAC, reached a merger agreement that led to a public outcry by consumer groups and academic experts, criticizing that the merger would undermine healthy competition and lead to a monopoly. The case went to the NBTC, and the board voted 3-2 in favor of the merger. Pirongrong was one of the two commissions who voted no.
Supporters of Pirong accepted that although she intended to protect consumers and defend public interests, her bypassing the NBTC’s board violated the procedure. Her words of “take down the giant” showed prejudice. But does two years’ imprisonment equal “punishment fits the crime”? Perhaps she wasn’t the only one with a grudge.
Would anyone else dare to take on the CP Group following this precedent?
“Jack the Giant Killer” is a Cornish fairy tale. “Giant the Jack killer” is a Thai reality.
Leave a Reply