Legal Limits on Co-Prosecutor Status in Private Criminal Cases
Legal Narrative: Improper Joinder of a Co-Prosecutor under Sections 30-31 of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code
In this case, the offense was of a private nature, and one injured person had already exercised his legal right to initiate criminal proceedings by filing a complaint with the Court as a private prosecutor. The case was therefore properly commenced in accordance with the provisions of the Thai Criminal Procedure Code.
Subsequently, another injured person filed a motion requesting permission from the Court to join the proceedings as a co-prosecutor alongside the original private prosecutor. However, Sections 30 and 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code grant the right to join as a co-prosecutor only in circumstances where an injured person seeks to join the public prosecutor in a criminal case already instituted by the public prosecutor. The law does not provide authority for one injured person to join another injured person who has filed the case as a private prosecutor.
Despite this legal limitation, the Court of First Instance issued an order allowing the second injured person to join as a co-prosecutor. Such order was legally improper, as it was inconsistent with the statutory provisions governing the status and rights of co-prosecutors.
Because the second injured person did not have lawful standing as a co-prosecutor, he was not recognized as a legitimate party to the proceedings. Consequently, he had no legal authority to perform procedural acts reserved for parties, including the withdrawal of the complaint.
Therefore, the withdrawal of the case made by the second injured person was invalid and without legal effect. The proceedings must be considered based solely on the rights and actions of the original private prosecutor, who remains the only lawful party entitled to prosecute or withdraw the case.