The Supreme Court has acquitted a protester of royal defamation for putting a sticker on a portrait of King Vajiralongkorn in front of the Supreme Court during a protest on 19 September 2020.

Narin (last name withheld) was accused of placing a sticker saying “ku kult,” the logo for a political satire page, over the eyes of a portrait of King Vajiralongkorn while participating in a 19 September 2020 protest in front of the Supreme Court at Sanam Luang, according to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights.

In 2022, the Criminal Court sentenced him to three years in prison. His sentence was later reduced to two years without suspension, as the Court ruled that a complaint he filed at the Chana Songkhram Police Station about being followed by an undercover police officer was useful to the case.

In 2023, the Appeal Court overturned the Criminal Court’s ruling and dismissed the charge against Narin on the grounds that he was not wearing the same clothes as the man seen in photos of the incident and that, given the location of his residence, it was impossible for him to change before going to Chana Songkhram Police Station. As the clothes were also not collected, the court concluded that there was not enough evidence to prove that Narin was the man in the photos.

The Supreme Court on Thursday (27 November) upheld the dismissal of the royal defamation charge against Narin.

Ku Kult, a Facebook page known for its satirical political content, emerged in 2011 after the Red Shirt protests. Its content often went viral, becoming widely shared memes on social media.

After the 2014 coup, access to the page was blocked at the request of the Thai authorities. It is unclear when the original page was officially closed. Several similar pages with the same logo later appeared, however.  It is not clear if they were run by the same person. The Ku Kult logo has also been reproduced in various forms, including stickers and T-shirts.

Previously, Narin was also accused of running the Ku Kult Facebook page and was charged under the royal defamation law and the Computer Crime Act. However, the Criminal Court dismissed the charges against him.