Politicians identified by iLaw in its Senate election collusion investigation should respond publicly first rather than resorting immediately to legal action, says Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva.
He argued that public figures should be open to scrutiny and that lawsuits intended to intimidate critics are inappropriate.
He was commenting on legal action brought against Yingcheep Atchanont, director of the Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw), after he disclosed the names of nine individuals allegedly linked to the Senate election collusion case.
Mr Abhisit said nobody wished to face criminal proceedings, but said the information was consistent with charges already notified by the Election Commission (EC).
Moreover, those familiar with the investigations conducted by the EC and the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) were already aware of those implicated, he said.
Public figures, he said, should therefore clarify their positions rather than rush to file lawsuits.
He added that public concern over the matter had intensified after the creation of a special subcommittee, alongside reports suggesting that no one would ultimately be found culpable.
Such reports conflicted with evidence that had entered the public domain, including financial transaction records, hotel accommodation records and photographs allegedly showing the use of voting lists, he said.
He said that if the allegations were eventually proven to be defamatory, those affected could still pursue legal remedies.
However, he believed those making the disclosures had not acted frivolously but had relied on information obtained through investigations by relevant authorities.
He said prosecutors had already returned the case to the DSI, identifying seven groups of individuals allegedly involved, including politicians and political parties accused of interfering in the Senate election process.
Asked whether complaints lodged by members of governing parties amounted to harassment or strategic lawsuits against public participation, Mr Abhisit said legal action was a legitimate right. However, he said public figures should remain subject to scrutiny, and that lawsuits intended to intimidate or discourage public oversight were improper.
