Thai anti-junta activists indicted under the junta’s political gathering ban have refused the jurisdiction of military courts in their cases, reasoning that they should be tried by the courts of justice.

The Military Court of Bangkok on Thursday morning held deposition hearings for Pansak Srithep, the core leader of Resistant Citizen, an anti-junta activist group, Natchacha Kongudom, and Tatchapong Kaedum, three anti-junta activists charged with violating the junta’s National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) ban on political assemblies.

Natchacha and Tatchapong were indicted in June 2015 for breaking NCPO Order No. 3/2015, which gives military officers full power to maintain national security. Their offence was participating in a gathering to commemorate the 2014 coup d’état in downtown Bangkok on 22 May.

Pansak was indicted under Article 116 of the Criminal Code, the sedition law, and NCPO Order No. 7/2014 for participating in a political gathering of five or more people after he led a three-day march called “I Walk Therefore I Am” on 15 March 2015 to campaign against the use of military courts to try civilians.

In court, Pansak and his defence lawyer submitted a request under Article 10 of the 1999 Court Jurisdiction Act to the military court judges, asking whether the court has jurisdiction over the case since he is not a military officer, but a civilian.

The court then temporarily halted the hearing and ordered the suspect to submit documents to justify his request within 15 days.

In the case against the two other activists, Tatchapong denied the charges during the hearing and vowed to fight the case, while Natchacha submitted a request to ask whether she should be tried by a civilian rather than a military court.

In brief, Article 10 of the Court Jurisdiction Act stipulates that if the accused has doubts over which court should have jurisdiction over a case, the suspect can submit a request before trial to the court of justice or the military court to rule on the jurisdiction over the case. If rulings from different courts over jurisdiction vary, the Court Jurisdiction Committee shall determine which court should handle the case.

Since Pansak was indicted under Article 116, he could be imprisoned for up to seven years if found guilty.

According to the BBC Thai service, at a seminar on ‘The Military Court: the Judicial System under Dictatorship’ held at Thammasat University on Wednesday, 4 November 2015, law lecturer Piyabutr Saengkanokkul pointed out that in accordance with international judicial standards, civilians should not be tried by military courts in any case.

He added that although the military government has tried to explain to the international community that only cases related to national security are tried by military courts, under the UN framework on judicial systems, military courts have no jurisdiction to try civilians.

“National security is a magic pill that allows the authorities to do whatever,” BBC Thai quoted Piyabutr as saying.