Arnon Nampa (third-party intervention)

Share

Thai human rights lawyer and pro-democracy activist Arnon Nampa (Mr Nampa) challenged the routine use of physical restraints in Thai court proceedings after he was compelled to appear in leg shackles during his sentencing hearing. The case raises concerns about cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to a fair trial under international human rights law.

CASE BACKGROUND

Arnon Nampa is a prominent Thai human rights lawyer and pro-democracy activist who has been arbitrarily imprisoned since 26 September 2023 and has faced continuous prosecution for his peaceful advocacy and campaigns seeking reform of the Thai monarchy.

Mr Nampa first came under prosecution for speeches delivered during the 2020 pro-democracy movement, including during a peaceful demonstration at Bangkok’s Democracy Monument on 14 October 2020. On 26 September 2023, the Bangkok Criminal Court sentenced him to four years’ imprisonment for “lèse-majesté”  (defaming, insulting, or threatening the monarchy) under Thailand’s Criminal Code. He has been detained at Bangkok Remand Prison ever since.

Subsequent convictions have extended his imprisonment, including:

  • 17 January 2024:Four years for Facebook posts from January 2021 questioning the enforcement of the offence “lèse-majesté” under Article 112 of Thailand’s Criminal Code.
  • 29 April 2024:Two years and 20 days for an August 2021 speech criticising the transfer of public property to the King.
  • 25 July 2024:Four years for Facebook posts from January to February 2021, allegedly criticising the King.
  • 3 December 2024:Two years (reduced from three) for participation in a November 2020 campaign calling for monarchical reform.

Following this fifth conviction in December 2024, Mr Nampa faces a combined 16-year sentence and may be transferred to Klong Prem Central Prison, where those serving long-term sentences are held. He also faces nine additional pending criminal cases.

Mr Nampa has twice been held in pre-trial detention for 113 days in 2021 and 202 days between 2021–2022, and his bail requests were repeatedly denied.

On 30 August 2024, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) declared his detention arbitrary and called for his immediate release and reparations, following a petition filed by FIDH and Thai Lawyers for Human Rights.

Between 2020 and 2024, at least 276 people, including human rights defenders and minors, were prosecuted under Article 112 (“lèse-majesté”); and several remain detained or serving sentences.

INTERVENTION

REDRESS, together with the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT), and the Omega Research Foundation, submitted a third‑party intervention on 15 July 2025 to the Criminal Court of Thailand. The intervention addressed the use of leg shackles and other restraints in court hearings as a violation of the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and the right to a fair trial.

Our joint intervention examined the interface between torture, ill‑treatment and courtroom dignity, and explained how forcing an accused to appear in shackles without an individualised, evidence‑based assessment can humiliate, stigmatise, and psychologically harm the person concerned. The intervention also analysed the circumstances in which routine or punitive shackling practices may breach Thailand’s obligations under the UN Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The intervention noted that:

  • Routine or blanket shackling of detainees in court, without individualised and proportionate justification, can constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under international law.
  • The visible use of shackles in court may also prejudice the right to a fair trial, undermining the presumption of innocence.
  • States are obliged to prevent such treatment, ensure oversight, and provide remedies for violations.

On 21 July 2025, the Criminal Court acknowledged the dignity concerns raised but upheld the lawfulness of shackling in Mr Nampa’s case. The decision is subject to appeal.

QUICK FACTS

Case name: Amicus Curiae on the Use of Shackles in Court Hearings (Arnon Nampa)
Court/Body: Criminal Court of Thailand
Date intervention filed: 15 July 2025
Current status: Decision of 21 July 2025