Law / Thailand

Thailand

11 of 14 named instruments researched to a stage, across five of the ten areas of law we track: 11 in force. As of .

When each starts11 of 11 carry a date. Earlier is before 2014.
Before 2014: 4 instruments (4 in force) earlier 2014: 0 instruments 2015: 0 instruments ’15 2016: 0 instruments 2017: 0 instruments 2018: 0 instruments 2019: 2 instruments (2 in force) 2020: 0 instruments ’20 2021: 0 instruments 2022: 5 instruments (5 in force) 2023: 0 instruments 2024: 0 instruments 2025: 0 instruments 2026: 0 instruments ’26 today

in forcenot yet in forceblocked by a courtproposedno longer in force

  1. AI law
  2. Privacy law 5
  3. Scraping law 2
  4. Cybersecurity law 2
  5. Communications law not researched
  6. Content moderation law not researched
  7. Product and AI liability law not researched
  8. Digital accessibility law not researched
  9. Age gating law 1
  10. Reuse law 1

Privacy law5 instruments, 5 in force

Research summary (159 words)

Thailand's comprehensive private-sector data-protection law is the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), published in the Government Gazette and fully enforceable since .

Lawful basis is consent by default under Section 24, General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)-style, with an explicit consent standard for sensitive categories under Section 26, which names biometric data directly and gives facial recognition data as an express statutory example; a voiceprint is not separately named but falls within the same catch-all covering any data that may affect the data subject in the same manner.

Cross-border transfer requires the destination to have an adequate data protection standard (Section 28), and breach notification to the regulator's Office is required within 72 hours where feasible (Section 37(4)). Thailand arms a private plaintiff: Section 78 lets a court award punitive damages up to twice actual compensation, on top of the civil liability Section 77 creates, alongside administrative fines that reach Baht 5,000,000 for the most serious violations.

Breach notification

Personal Data Protection Act, breach notification

Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), Section 37(4)unofficial English translation hosted by a government mirror, Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES)

In force since . Binds private bodies.

What this law does

The Data Controller must notify the Office of any personal data breach without delay and, where feasible, within 72 hours after becoming aware of it, unless the breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of the affected individuals. Where the breach is likely to cause high risk, the Data Controller must also notify the data subject without delay, together with remedial measures.

This section number is inferred from a cross-reference in the retention clause rather than confirmed against its own article heading directly.

What it requires

Comprehensive regime

Personal Data Protection Act, comprehensive regime

Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), Government Gazette Vol. 136, Special Issue 69 Kor, fully enforceable unofficial English translation hosted by a government mirror, Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES)

In force since . Binds private bodies.

What this law does

The Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) is Thailand's comprehensive personal-data statute, published in the Government Gazette and, after enforcement of most operative provisions was twice postponed, fully enforceable since . Lawful basis is consent by default under Section 24, a General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)-style model, with heightened requirements for sensitive categories under Section 26. The Personal Data Protection Committee and its Office enforce the Act. The text cited is the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) copy of the Act.

What it requires

Cross border transfer

Personal Data Protection Act, cross-border transfer

Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), Section 28unofficial English translation hosted by a government mirror, Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES)

In force since . Binds private bodies.

What this law does

Section 28 requires that where a Data Controller sends or transfers personal data to a foreign country, the destination country or international organization must have an adequate data protection standard and the transfer must follow rules the Personal Data Protection Committee prescribes, subject to exceptions including legal compliance, informed consent where the data subject is told the destination's standard is inadequate, and contract necessity. This is an adequacy-based restriction; no data-localization mandate was found.

What it requires

Enforcement supervision

Personal Data Protection Act, enforcement and private right of action

Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), Sections 77, 78, 84-88unofficial English translation hosted by a government mirror, Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES)

In force since . Binds private bodies.

What this law does

The Personal Data Protection Committee and its Office enforce the Act with administrative fines that vary by provision violated: up to Baht 5,000,000 for Section 26 sensitive-category, Section 27 use or disclosure, and Section 28/29 cross-border transfer violations (Section 84 and Section 87), up to Baht 1,000,000 for data processor non-compliance (Section 85), and up to Baht 3,000,000 under Section 86.

Separately, Section 77 creates civil liability for a Data Controller or Data Processor whose PDPA operation causes damage, subject to narrow defenses of force majeure, the data subject's own act, or compliance with an official order, and Section 78 lets the court additionally order punitive damages up to twice the actual compensation awarded. This is a genuine private right of action with punitive-damages exposure, distinct from the administrative fine regime.

What it requires

Sensitive categories

Personal Data Protection Act, sensitive and biometric categories

Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), Section 26unofficial English translation hosted by a government mirror, Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES)

In force since . Binds private bodies.

What this law does

Section 26 prohibits collecting personal data on race, ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, sexual behavior, criminal records, health data, disability, trade union information, genetic data, or biometric data, or any data that may affect the data subject in the same manner, without the data subject's explicit consent, subject to enumerated exceptions such as vital interest and substantial public interest.

Biometric data is defined as data arising from technical processing of a person's physical or behavioral characteristics used to identify them, with facial recognition, iris recognition, and fingerprint recognition data given as express statutory examples. A voiceprint is not named as an express example, but the same-manner catch-all and the general physical-or-behavioral-dominance definition plausibly reach it; no provision was found excluding voice.

What it requires

Scraping law2 instruments, 2 in force

Research summary (396 words)

The Act on Computer Crime B.E. 2550 (2007) criminalises accessing a computer system or computer data protected by a security measure not intended for the accessor's use (Sections 5 and 7), and illegally disclosing another person's security measures or intercepting computer data (Sections 6 and 8); the amending Act (No. 2) B.E. 2560 (2017) left the wording and penalties of Sections 5 to 8 unchanged.

A scraper reading a public, unauthenticated page without defeating any access-prevention measure falls outside a plain reading of these provisions; no reported Thai case tests the point, and none addresses whether a cease-and-desist demand alone, without also defeating such a measure, brings these sections into play.

Terms of service actively agreed to, such as by creating an account, form a binding contract: the Electronic Transactions Act B.E. 2544 (2001), Section 13, gives an offer or acceptance made by electronic data message the same legal effect as one made on paper. No Thai statute or reported case addresses whether terms posted only behind a link a crawler never clicked can still bind it.

The Copyright Act B.E. 2537 (1994) gives the copyright owner exclusive reproduction and communication-to-the-public rights, subject to a free-standing general exception in Section 32 paragraph one for an act that does not conflict with normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the owner's legitimate rights; Section 32's list of specific permitted acts, and the acknowledged-quotation exception in Section 33, are additional to that general exception rather than the only source of it.

Thailand has not enacted a specific text-and-data-mining exception, so training a model on scraped copyrighted text rests only on the general Section 32 test, an unsettled fit for large-scale automated copying. The Copyright Act creates no sui generis database right.

The Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) governs personal data scraped from Thai sources; its Section 4 exemptions cover household use, state-security operations, media and the arts for the public interest, Parliament, the courts, and credit bureaus, with no general exemption for personal data an individual has already made public. No statute assigns a robots.txt directive any legal weight, and Thai law establishes no scraping-specific unfair-competition or misappropriation doctrine.

A draft set of AI-law principles that names text-and-data-mining as a needed measure went through a public hearing led by the Electronic Transactions Development Agency in 2025; no bill implementing it has been introduced.

Computer misuse

Act on Computer Crime, unauthorized access and interception

Act on Computer Crime B.E. 2550 (2007), Sections 5 to 8official Thai text of the Act on Computer Crime B.E. 2550 (2007)

In force since . Binds public and private bodies.

What this law does

Section 5 punishes illegally accessing a computer system that has specific security measures not intended for the accessor's use. Section 7 punishes the same act against computer data.

Section 6 punishes knowing another person's security measures and illegally disclosing them in a manner likely to cause injury, and Section 8 punishes illegally intercepting, by electronic or any other means, computer data of another person transmitting in a computer system where that data is not for public benefit or available to others.

The Act's own Section 2 sets commencement at thirty days after publication in the Government Gazette; the Act was published in the Government Gazette on , thirty days before its commencement.

The amending Act (No. 2) B.E. 2560 (2017), published in the Government Gazette on and commencing 120 days later, left the wording and penalties of Sections 5 to 8 unchanged; its changes reach other matters, including updating the administering ministry's name to the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society.

What it requires

Cybersecurity law2 instruments, 2 in force

Research summary (627 words)

Thailand's standalone cybersecurity statute is the Cybersecurity Act, B.E. 2562 (2019), Government Gazette Vol. 136, Special Issue 69 Kor, published and in force since (Section 2, in force the day after Government Gazette publication).

The Act creates a National Cyber Security Committee (NCSC), chaired by the Prime Minister (Section 5), a Cybersecurity Regulating Committee (CRC), chaired by the Minister of Digital Economy and Society (Section 12), and the Office of the National Cybersecurity Committee, a juristic-person government agency (Section 20) commonly referred to in English-language sources as the National Cyber Security Agency, NCSA, matching the ncsa.or.th domain, though the Act's own translation names it only as the Office.

The Act's operative duties (Chapter 3) bind three named categories only: a Government Agency, a Supervising or Regulating Organization, and an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure, a government agency or private organization the NCSC designates case by case (Section 49) within a listed mission area: national security, substantive public service, banking and finance, information technology and telecommunications, transportation and logistics, energy and public utilities, public health, or another area the Committee adds.

A designated Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure must maintain a Code of Practice and standard framework for maintaining cybersecurity (Sections 44 to 45), submit to examination of its minimum cybersecurity standard by its Supervising or Regulating Organization (Section 53), conduct a cybersecurity risk assessment by an internal or independent external auditor at least once a year (Section 54), and report a significant Cyber Threat to the Office and its Supervising or Regulating Organization (Section 57), on top of a broader duty in Section 58 for any Government Agency or Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure facing an actual or possible Cyber Threat to examine its systems and notify the Office and its Supervising or Regulating Organization without delay.

Failing to make the Section 57 report without reasonable cause carries a fine of up to Baht 200,000 (Section 73). Critical Information Infrastructure status turns on a case-by-case Committee notification tied to a listed sector, and the duties of a designated operator are filed as rows of their own.

The Act sets no product-security or design requirement, and no vulnerability-handling or incident-reporting duty running to an ordinary software or platform business that has not been designated Critical Information Infrastructure. No general reasonable-security or information-security-programme statute reaches a Thai business simply because it holds data.

The nearest analogue is the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562's own security duty (Section 37(1)), which requires a Data Controller to provide appropriate security measures against unauthorized or unlawful loss, access, use, alteration, correction or disclosure of personal data, reviewed when necessary or when technology changes; that duty is an article inside the comprehensive privacy regime this jurisdiction's privacy row already researches, the same architecture as General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Article 32, so it is not repeated here.

The same Act's breach-notification duty (Section 37(4)) is likewise a privacy-topic finding rather than restated here. The Computer Crime Act's unauthorized-access and interception offences, already held under this jurisdiction's scraping row, punish an intruder rather than bind an operator or manufacturer, so they are not a security-topic presence either.

Because none of the instruments described above binds a private actor on any activity this corpus's vocabulary reaches, there is no enforcement record to report against this topic for a declared activity in this jurisdiction. Section 54 of the Cybersecurity Act, B.E. 2562 (2019) requires an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure to conduct a risk assessment on Maintaining Cybersecurity at least once per year.

Section 73 of the Cybersecurity Act, B.E. 2562 (2019) provides a fine not exceeding Baht two hundred thousand for an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure that does not report a Cyber Threat incident in accordance with section 57 without reasonable cause.

Sector security regimes

Cybersecurity Act, Critical Information Infrastructure Code of Practice, Risk Assessment and Monitoring

Cybersecurity Act, B.E. 2562 (2019), ss. 44 to 46, 49, 52 and 54 to 56Ministry of Digital Economy and Society

In force since . Binds public and private bodies.

What this law does

Section 44 requires an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure to prepare a Code of Practice and standard framework for Maintaining Cybersecurity without delay. Section 44 requires that Code of Practice to include a plan for examining and assessing risks at least once per year and a plan for coping with Cyber Threats.

Section 45 gives an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure a duty to prevent, cope with and mitigate risks from Cyber Threats in accordance with its Code of Practice and standard framework. Section 46 requires the organization to notify the Office of the names of its executive officials and operational officials for coordination.

Section 49 gives the National Cybersecurity Committee the power to prescribe by notification the characteristics of organizations that have a mission or provide services in national security, substantive public service, banking and finance, information technology and telecommunications, transportation and logistics, energy and public utilities, public health, and others the Committee prescribes.

Section 52 requires the organization to notify the Office, its Supervising or Regulating Organization and the coordinating organization of the names and contact information of the owner, the person possessing the computer and the person monitoring the computer system, within thirty days of the Committee's notification.

Section 54 requires the organization to conduct a risk assessment on Maintaining Cybersecurity at least once per year and to submit a summary report to the Office within thirty days after the operation has been finished. Section 56 requires the organization to establish a mechanism or process to monitor Cyber Threats or Cybersecurity Incidents related to its Critical Information Infrastructure.

Section 53 requires the Supervising or Regulating Organization to examine the minimum cybersecurity standard of the organizations under its supervision. Under section 53 the Cybersecurity Regulating Committee may notify the chief executive of a private organization to make correction and comply with the standards. An Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure is a government agency or private organization that has a mission of or provides a Critical Information Infrastructure service. Section 2 brings the Act into force on the day following the date of its publication in the Government Gazette.

What it requires

Vulnerability and incident reporting

Cybersecurity Act, Reporting of Cyber Threats by Critical Information Infrastructure Organizations

Cybersecurity Act, B.E. 2562 (2019), ss. 57, 58 and 73Ministry of Digital Economy and Society

In force since . Binds public and private bodies.

What this law does

Section 57 requires an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure, in the event of a Cyber Threat significantly occurring to its system, to report to the Office and the Supervising or Regulating Organization and to cope with the Cyber Threat, and allows the Cybersecurity Regulating Committee to prescribe the criteria and method of the reporting.

Section 58 requires a Government Agency or an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure, where there is or may be a Cyber Threat to its information system, to examine its related information, computer data and computer system, to prevent, cope with and mitigate the risks, and to notify the Office and its Supervising or Regulating Organization without delay.

Section 73 provides that an Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure that does not report a Cyber Threat incident in accordance with section 57 without reasonable cause is subject to a fine not exceeding Baht two hundred thousand. The Act places section 73 in its chapter of penalty provisions.

A Cyber Threat is any action or unlawful undertaking by using the computer, computer system, or undesirable program with an intention to cause any harm to the computer system, computer data, or other relevant data, and be an imminent threat to damage or affect operation of the computer, computer system, or other relevant data.

An Organization of Critical Information Infrastructure is a government agency or private organization that has a mission of or provides a Critical Information Infrastructure service. Section 2 brings the Act into force on the day following the date of its publication in the Government Gazette.

What it requires

Age gating law1 instrument, 1 in force

Research summary (165 words)

Thailand binds a private film-exhibition licensee and a private film rental, exchange, or sale licensee to an age-based access restriction under the Film and Video Act, B.E. 2551 (2008), whose rating system reserves its most restricted viewable category to persons twenty years of age or older and requires the category to be displayed and enforced at the point of admission or sale. No other reviewed instrument reaches an online or on-demand service, a social media platform, or an app store.

The Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007) and the Child Protection Act B.E. 2546 (2003) bind any person to general criminal or protective prohibitions rather than a service duty. The Broadcasting and Television Businesses Act B.E. 2551 (2008) gives a television licensee a content-suspension duty naming no age threshold.

The Royal Decree on the Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses B.E. 2565 (2022) registers a digital platform service provider and sets transparency and standards requirements for that registration, and names no minor-access or age-verification duty.

Adult content age verification (AV)

Film and Video Act, Age-Rating Categories and Restriction on Admission or Sale to Minors

Film and Video Act, B.E. 2551 (2008), secs. 26, 44, 45, 80Official text of the Film and Video Act, B.E. 2551, mirrored by the Thailand Film Office from the Office of the Council of State's text

In force since . Binds private bodies.

What this law does

A cinema-exhibition licensee must post the age-rating category assigned to each film in a clearly visible place and must not knowingly or negligently admit a person below the age set for that category during its screening. A film rental, exchange, or sale licensee must not rent, exchange, or sell a film in that category to a person below that age.

The most restricted viewable category is reserved to persons twenty years of age or older, and a licensee who violates either duty is liable to a fine.

What it requires

Reuse law1 instrument, 1 in force

Research summary (126 words)

Thailand has no press-publisher neighbouring right, no compelled platform-to-publisher bargaining code, and no reported hot-news misappropriation doctrine or case addressing hyperlinking or framing of news content.

The Copyright Act B.E. 2537 (1994) reaches an aggregator's reproduction of headlines and snippets only through two general exceptions: Section 32 paragraph two (4) excepts news reporting through mass media that acknowledges the copyright owner, and Section 33 excepts a reasonable recitation, quotation, copying, emulation, or reference in part from a copyright work with the same acknowledgement, both subject to the Section 32 paragraph one condition that the act not conflict with normal exploitation or unreasonably prejudice the owner's legitimate rights.

Neither exception is aggregation-specific, and no Thai court decision has been located applying either to an automated news aggregator.

Where nothing was found1 area of law

These areas of law were researched here and no instrument was recorded. Each finding says what the research checked, as of the date under it. It describes our search, not a guarantee that no such law exists.

AI law

Thailand has no enacted AI-transparency, AI-risk-obligation, AI-training-data, AI-prohibited-practices, AI-governance, or AI-sector-rules statute binding a private developer or deployer. The government adopted a National AI Strategy for 2022-2027 and Thailand's Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has published non-binding AI governance guidance, but neither creates a legal duty.

A Draft Act on Artificial Intelligence has circulated through ETDA-led public consultation, most recently a revised version released for public hearing in mid-2026, and a separate bill targeting physical and embodied AI systems was introduced to the National Assembly in mid-2026; neither had been enacted as of mid-2026, and no official government page describing either bill's current status was found: etda.or.th serves only a JavaScript shell.

AI systems that process personal data remain subject to the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), described in this jurisdiction's privacy-topic record rather than here.

As of .

Case law

  • No current case law for Thailand AI law
  • No current case law for Thailand privacy law
  • No current case law for Thailand scraping law
  • No current case law for Thailand cybersecurity law
  • No current case law for Thailand communications law
  • No current case law for Thailand content moderation law
  • No current case law for Thailand product and AI liability law
  • No current case law for Thailand digital accessibility law
  • No current case law for Thailand age gating law
  • No current case law for Thailand reuse law

Reporting clocks that run here2 instruments

The instruments whose obligation lines set a deadline for reporting an incident, a vulnerability or a personal-data breach, each deadline read from the sentence that carries it and listed shortest first. The law of Thailand comes first, then the law of the bodies above it that applies here.

Each flag is one law, and a link to it. Read down the scale: the clocks document's time axis, with the empty stretches shortened so the deadlines sit close. Flags on one line set the same duty at the same deadline, and the laws behind them are named to the right, with what each clock counts from.

72 hours
Breach notificationprivacy law
The deadlines above on one time axis, shortest at the top. The axis keeps its order and, between neighbors, its proportion, but a stretch with no deadline on it is shortened, so the hour marks on the left are what say how far apart two stations really are. Beside each action, the laws that set it, what each counts from, and a status where the law is not yet in force. The List tab has the same data in full, with the sentences.

The law of Thailand

72 hours

Personal Data Protection Act, breach notification

Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), Section 37(4)privacy law, in force since

The sentence the clocks are read from

An app that experiences a personal data breach affecting an individual in Thailand must notify the Personal Data Protection Committee's Office without delay and, where feasible, within 72 hours of becoming aware of it, unless the breach is unlikely to pose a risk to the affected individuals; where the breach is likely to cause high risk, the app must also notify each affected individual without delay.

without delay

Cybersecurity Act, Reporting of Cyber Threats by Critical Information Infrastructure Organizations

Cybersecurity Act, B.E. 2562 (2019), ss. 57, 58 and 73security law, in force since

The sentence the clocks are read from

If the examination shows that there is or may be a Cyber Threat, prevent, cope with and mitigate the risks in accordance with your Code of Practice and standard framework, and notify the Office and your Supervising or Regulating Organization without delay (section 58).

Which of these one incident starts turns on the facts: the incident method works that through. The clocks document draws every clock in the LexLint law library on one axis, with the sentence beside every rung.

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

This page covers the instruments LexLint has researched to a stage. Instruments named in the law library but not yet researched are counted in the head and are not listed here. Every entry carries its own primary source on its note page. This is a research index, not legal advice.