The Criminal Court has dismissed a royal defamation charge filed against online influencer Supakchaya, or Thidaporn, Chaokuwiang, also known by the internet alias “Nurat,” for video advertisements on the online shopping platform Lazada on the grounds that Princess Chulabhorn is not covered by the royal defamation law.

Supakchaya was charged with royal defamation and violation of the Computer Crimes Act along with two other influencers, Aniwat Prathumthin or “Nara Crepe Katoei” and Kittikhun “MonDew” Thamakitirat after they were accused of making fun of Queen Sirikit, King Vajiralongkorn’s mother, and Princess Chulabhorn, the King’s youngest sister, in their videos.

The videos were initially released on Aniwat’s TikTok account in May 2022, but have since been removed. The first video features Thidaporn in traditional Thai dress sitting in a wheelchair with Kittikhun, also in traditional Thai dress, standing next to her as Aniwat is giving her skincare products. The second video features Thidaporn, still in traditional Thai dress and sitting in a wheelchair, while Aniwat accuses her of stealing her clothes and recommends that she buy clothes from Lazada during their 5.5. sales campaign. Thidaporn then gets up from her wheelchair in shock.

Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) reported that the Criminal Court yesterday (30 October) ruled to acquit Supakchaya of all charges. Noting that the public prosecutor inducted her on the grounds that she made fun of Princess Chulabhorn, who is an heir to the throne, the Court ruled that Princess Chulabhorn is not an heir to the throne because, under the Palace Law of Succession, an heir must be appointed by the monarch. Since the King has not appointed an heir, Princess Chulabhorn is not an heir to the throne and therefore not covered by the royal defamation law.

The Court noted that the indictment was also made because the videos are defamatory towards the monarchy, but ruled that an expression that would constitute an offense under the royal defamation law must mention an individual since the law covers the King, the Queen, an heir to the throne, or the regent, and not the monarchy itself. The ruling also noted that the royal defamation law should not be interpreted in a manner that is broader than the text of the law.

As for the videos themselves, the Court ruled that the performance could not be interpreted to refer to a specific member of the royal family, and that it could not see any negative impact of the videos or how they are defamatory or cause conflict. Charges against Supakchaya were therefore dismissed.

In December 2023, the Criminal Court also dismissed charges against Aniwat that the content of the videos does not constitute an offence under the royal defamation law, because they were produced as part of a marketing campaign and contain no “anti-monarchy symbols.” The videos use normal speech, and did not contain the coat of arms of a member of the royal family, while traditional Thai dress is something anyone can wear. They were also deemed not defamatory because those involved were only playing a role to promote their products.

Kittikhun, meanwhile, is seeking asylum overseas. The court has temporarily struck her case from the case list until she can be brought to court.