Bangkok Legal Service

The Prosecutor charged the defendant on the charge of abduction of a minor under the age of fifteen years from their father for acts of lasciviousness without reasonable cause, committing sexual assault of a minor girl who was not his ward, without the girl’s consent, using a firearm, restraint, and deprivation of bodily freedom, possessing an unloaded firearm, without carrying a firearm in the city or public places without reasonable cause. Subsequently, the minor’s mother, , filed a motion to join as co-plaintiff with the Prosecutor in all counts. The Prosecutor then filed charges. The court ordered permission to join as a co-plaintiff without specifying which charges he was charged with. The defendant pleaded not guilty. After the presentation of the plaintiff’s evidence, the defendant retracted his testimony and admitted to all charges. The court dismissed all charges except the charge of restraint and detention, which was dismissed as the defendant did not commit the offense, thus sentencing him to acquit.

It is ordered that (1) whether the mother of the minor’s request to join as a co-plaintiff in the charges is in accordance with the law; (2) whether the court’s permission to the mother of the minor to join as a co-plaintiff without specifying which charges she was charged with is in accordance with the law; (3) whether the court’s acquittal of the defendant in the charge of restraint and detention, where the defendant admitted to the facts, is in accordance with the law.

(1) The charge of abduction of a minor under the age of ten years from parents for acts of lasciviousness without reasonable cause is a violation that is committed against the mother, who is the guardian, and the mother of the minor is a victim of this offense. The offense of committing sexual assault of a minor under the age of ten years, who is not his ward, where the girl did not consent and used a firearm and restraint, deprivation of bodily freedom, is a violation that directly involves a child. Both of these offenses, as well as the offenses of possessing and carrying a firearm, etc., are violations against the state. For the violation involving a minor, since the mother is the legal representative of the child, the mother has the authority to manage the case on behalf of the minor according to Section 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This authority includes the power to be a plaintiff, to sue, and to work with the Prosecutor. Therefore, the mother’s filing of a motion to join in the same charges as the Prosecutor is unlawful. The mother can only join as a co-plaintiff in the charges where the minor is a victim, and the offenses of possessing and carrying a firearm according to the Weapons Act, which are violations against the state, cannot be claimed by the mother as a co-plaintiff. The court’s order to allow the mother to join as a co-plaintiff without specifying which charges she was charged with, is therefore valid. (4 points) (3) According to Section of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court may impose a sentence on a defendant only if the court finds that the defendant has committed the offense or that the defendant’s actions do not constitute an offense. The facts of this case do not support that the defendant committed the offense of restraint and detention, and since the defendant admitted to the facts, it cannot be ruled that the defendant committed this offense. The court’s acquittal of the defendant in the charge of restraint and detention is therefore justified. (3 points)