In response to the Bangkok Civil Court’s dismissal of Thai activist, Jatupat Boonpattararaksa’s lawsuit against NSO Group Technologies Ltd for allegedly failing to prevent him from being targeted with spyware, Amnesty International’s Thailand Researcher Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong said: 

“The court’s failure to recognize NSO Group’s role in facilitating human rights abuses via the targeting of Thai human rights defenders with Pegasus spyware is deeply alarming. However, it won’t deter the fight against the unlawful use of spyware and the fight for justice for the victims of spyware in Thailand and around the world. 

“Despite repeated alerts regarding human rights abuses linked to Pegasus, NSO Group has not disclosed its due diligence processes which must be conducted in line with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. NSO has sold Pegasus without adequate safeguards against human rights violations, making it responsible for the rights abuses. 

“Thai authorities must take immediate actions to provide those targeted with Pegasus spyware with full information to facilitate their ability to access remedies and justice. Corporate and state actors must be held accountable for any unlawful surveillance against human rights defenders.” 

On 3 September, 2024, Amnesty International filed an amicus curiae brief at the Bangkok Civil Court in support of Jatupat Boonpattararaksa, whose phone was infected with Pegasus spyware three times between June and July 2021. 

In this lawsuit, Jatupat alleges that NSO Group facilitated the use of Pegasus to target him and other Thai activists violating their constitutional rights, including the right to privacy.  He demanded 2,500,000 Thai baht (72,129 USD) in compensation, an end to the use of Pegasus to infect his device, wants access to the data extracted from his device, and that the data be deleted from the company’s database. 

In its ruling, the court dismissed the case on the basis that there was insufficient evidence to prove that Jatupat’s device was infected. The court cited that the plaintiff did not adequately present details about the forensic investigation and its outcome that led to the conclusion that his device was targeted with the spyware....

In many instances, NSO says it is a mere developer of spyware with no control over its use and denies allegations of its misuse against human rights activists. 

The company argues that its products are exclusively for government agencies fighting crime and terrorism, a claim challenged by civil society research indicating misuse against journalists and activists globally.