Gag Order - Media Censorship expected soon...

[Guest travelerjim]

Here we go!

 

Gag order expected in Thailand...

IMPORTANT UPDATE FOR THAIVISA MEMBERS

 

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a media gag order banning all Thai media to speculate on the judicial decision ahead of the Thaksin verdict session, scheduled for February 26.

 

If the gag order is approved, we may not be able to update you on current news via our forum, website or newsletter.

 

So, be sure to follow Thaivisa on Facebook or Twitter to keep you instantly updated:

 

Join us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/farang

Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/georgebkk

 

(see link to full story below)

----------

Media gag order sought for Thaksin's asset seizure case

Full story:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Media-Gag ... 37903.html

[Bob]

Rather unbelievable to westerners who hold some notion of the freedoms of speech and press.

 

As I noted elsewhere, can you imagine a court in England or the US issuing a gag order prohibiting all print media from speculating about what that court might do in a given case? I'd bet the first headline would read: "Fuck You, You Moron Judges!" hehe

[Guest RichLB]

Hmm, I thought there was such a law in GB. Isn't the press prevented from identifying the accused until a trial has ended there? I always thought that was the case and a far superior rule than what exists in the US where a defendent is often tried in the press before there is even a tiral.

[Guest fountainhall]

Hmm, I thought there was such a law in GB. Isn't the press prevented from identifying the accused until a trial has ended there?

Not in all trials. I think only in the case of minors. But I am no lawyer! There is however a universal press ban which the government can issue called the "D Notice". These effectively clam up the media on matters of national security. According to wikipedia, there are 5 types of D Notice still in existence -

 

DA-Notice 01: Military Operations, Plans & Capabilities

DA-Notice 02: Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Weapons and Equipment

DA-Notice 03: Ciphers and Secure Communications

DA-Notice 04: Sensitive Installations and Home Addresses

DA-Notice 05: United Kingdom Security & Intelligence Special Services

[Guest RichLB]

This will most probably outrage the Constitutionalists (US variety) among us, but I think there SHOULD be gag orders on evidence unearthed against a defendant before he goes to trial. I remember a case in the United States (the McMartin case) where the faculty and administrators of a school were accursed of running a child sex business through their school. Due to the salacious nature of the case, every detail was spread across the papers for months. The accused were subsequently found not guilty, but all of their lives were ruined, nevertheless. I'm sure three are countless other examples. I just think that the press should not be in the business of trying the accused and that should be left to the courts.

[Guest]

I just think that the press should not be in the business of trying the accused and that should be left to the courts.

 

I agree. There are too many journalists who don't try hard enough to find the facts before writing articles.

[Gaybutton]

I think there SHOULD be gag orders on evidence unearthed against a defendant before he goes to trial.

I agree that there have been times when innocent people suffered because of the media, but on the other hand I think that allowing these kinds of gag orders to restrict the press is too great a price to pay. Had that been the norm, Woodward and Bernstein might very well have been prevented from reporting on their investigations and Watergate might never had come to light.

 

I don't think judges should have the option of overriding the Constitution. The Constitution provides the basis for the courts to issue rulings in the first place.

 

I think the press should police itself into responsible reporting, but I don't have any idea how that can be accomplished. However it can be done, if it can be done at all, I would not want to see it done through gag orders. That would, as I said, override the Constitution, set a precedent for the courts to be able to override other areas of the Constitution, and would give carte blanche for judges to rule subjectively without any standard criteria they would have to follow for gag orders to be issued.