Watchdog bitten: Pirongrong Ramasoota and the risks of regulating Thai telecoms

Prof Pirongrong Ramasoota is not the first member of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) to be sued by big business in her role as a regulator.

Over a decade ago, another female commissioner faced similar legal trouble following her confrontation with a media giant.

Regulator handed jail sentence

In March last year, True Digital Group Co Ltd, which operates the True ID video-streaming platform, lodged a complaint with the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases, accusing Pirongrong of malfeasance in office under Article 157 of the Criminal Code.

The lawsuit claims the commissioner deliberately sought to harm the company when she ordered the issuance of a warning letter about True ID’s broadcast of advertisements on free-to-air television channels carried by its platform.

True Digital argued the letter could have misled TV channels into mistakenly believing it was breaking the law, prompting them to stop broadcasting via True ID.

The court found Pirongrong guilty and sentenced her to two years in prison for malfeasance on February 6, citing witness testimony that she instructed the NBTC Office to fast-track the warning's issuance. Witnesses recounted hearing her describe the warning as a “sudden attack” capable of “toppling a giant”.

However, Pirongrong retained her NBTC post after managing to secure bail release on a 120,000-baht surety. The law bans anyone with a prison record or sentenced to imprisonment and detained by court order from serving as an NBTC member.

The court ruling stunned most observers, who had expected a suspended sentence at worst. Many argued that Pirongrong was merely fulfilling her duty to protect consumer rights in response to complaints from True ID subscribers.

The verdict triggered a flood of support on social media under the hashtag #SavePirongrong.

Pirongrong is a professor emeritus at Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Communication Arts, serving as CU’s vice president between 2016 and 2020 before joining the NBTC in April 2022.

Targets for media giants

Pirongrong’s case is not without precedent. In September 2014, then-NBTC commissioner Supinya Klangnarong faced legal trouble when Bangkok Entertainment Co Ltd (BEC), the operator of Channel 3, sued her of malfeasance, defamatory libel, and violating the Computer Crime Act.

Supinya was the youngest member of the regulator and its first female appointee, having joined the NBTC at the age of just 35.

The case stemmed from comments she made to the media regarding a dispute between NBTC and Channel 3 over Thailand’s shift from analog to digital TV broadcasts.

NBTC made the switch in mid-2014, but Channel 3 continued to broadcast in analog while seeking a court injunction, arguing that technical issues prevented its three newly licensed channels from going digital.

Supinya, a media rights advocate before joining the NBTC in October 2011, publicly criticised Channel 3 for its failure to go digital.

Supinya, who left the NBTC in March 2017, recently acknowledged that the legal battle had consumed her attention and disrupted her work as a commissioner. She opined that Pirongrong was now facing a similar situation.

Supinya’s legal ordeal ended after just three months, when the plaintiff’s lawyers withdrew the case after both parties reached an out-of-court settlement.

She faced a far more challenging legal battle in 2003, long before joining the NBTC. While heading the Campaign Committee for Media Reform, she was sued for criminal defamation by Shin Corporation, a telecom conglomerate owned by then-prime minister

Thaksin Shinawatra’s family.

Shin Corp also sued her for 400 million baht in damages in a separate civil case.

The lawsuits stemmed from comments Supinya made to the Thai Postnewspaper, in which she claimed that Shin Corp was profiting from policies enacted by the Thaksin government.

The legal battle dragged on for three years before the Criminal Court dismissed the case in March 2006 on grounds that Supinya made her comments in good faith to protect the public interest. Shin Corp later withdrew its civil damages case.