Legal Action Initiated Against Cambodian Senate President for Alleged Sedition
Cambodian Senate President Hun Sen faces sedition allegations over social media interference in Thailand's politics.
The Cyber Crime Investigation Division 1 (CCID 1) in Thailand has initiated legal proceedings against Hun Sen, the President of the Cambodian Senate, citing his alleged interference in Thailand’s internal political matters through social media.
On Monday, CCID 1 commander Pol Maj Gen Siriwat Deepor submitted a comprehensive 50-page case file to public prosecutors, marking a significant development in the ongoing tensions surrounding digital communication and political discourse in Southeast Asia.
The case follows a formal complaint lodged by Somkid Chueakong, deputy secretary-general to Thailand's Prime Minister, who accused the Facebook account named 'Samdech Hun Sen of Cambodia' of breaching Section 116 of Thailand's Criminal Code, which pertains to sedition, as well as the Computer Crime Act.
The controversy primarily revolves around a recently released 17-minute audio clip allegedly containing a phone conversation between Thailand’s Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and Hun Sen. The complaint asserts that the post could jeopardize national security and potentially constitutes various criminal offenses.
Commander Siriwat indicated that investigators discovered that the Facebook account in question is operated by several administrators, raising queries about whether Hun Sen directly controls the account.
He emphasized that the decision to escalate the matter to prosecutors stemmed from the conclusion that the actions exhibited were 'deliberate and harmful in intent.'
Additionally, Sakkasem Nisaiyok, a spokesman for the Office of the Attorney-General (OAG), remarked that if adequate evidence is established, the case is likely to advance to the Criminal Court.
Notably, he cautioned that should the accused fail to appear for legal proceedings, Thai authorities would pursue arrest warrants internationally through Interpol.
Sakkasem also highlighted that a specific timeline for the process could not be determined at this stage, given the sensitive legal and diplomatic nuances involved in the case, necessitating a careful review.