Tag: Cyber-Protection

on by

Computer Crime and Telephone Scams: Advancing Legal Frameworks with the Second Royal Decree

Introduction:

Following the implementation of the amended Royal Decree on the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes in February 2024, as detailed in our previous article Computer Crime and Telephone Scams: Strengthening Legal Frameworks to Combat Cyber Fraud. Thailand has further strengthened its defenses against cybercrime and telephone scams. The Second Royal Decree, which was published earlier, officially took effect on April 13, 2025. This decree builds on the initial framework’s successes while addressing remaining challenges. With daily financial losses now averaging 50–60 million baht, down from 60–70 million baht in early 2024, the need to adapt to evolving cyber threats remains urgent. The new decree introduces enhanced measures to close loopholes, strengthen enforcement, and deepen international cooperation, ensuring a more resilient digital ecosystem for Thai citizens.

The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has continued its proactive role, collaborating with public and private stakeholders to refine compliance mechanisms and ensure accountability across sectors. The Second Royal Decree responds to emerging trends, such as the rise of AI-driven scams, decentralized fraud networks, solicit calls impersonating officials, and the misuse of digital assets, while reinforcing victim protections and stakeholder responsibilities.

Key Provisions of the Second Royal Decree:

  1. AI and Deepfake Regulations: The decree introduces specific measures to combat AI-generated scams, including deepfake voice and video fraud. Platforms hosting such content must deploy detection tools and face penalties for non-compliance.
  2. Real-Time Monitoring of Transactions: Financial institutions are now required to implement real-time monitoring systems to flag suspicious transactions instantly, preventing funds from leaving victim accounts before scams are detected.
  3. Expanded SIM Card Accountability: Telecom providers must verify SIM card ownership more stringently and suspend services linked to scam networks within hours of detection. Additionally, SMS messages containing suspicious links will be blocked to curb phishing attempts.
  4. Victim Compensation Fund: A centralized fund, supported by contributions from financial institutions and telecoms, will streamline refunds for victims, reducing delays and ensuring fair compensation.
  5. Social Media Accountability: Social media platforms must remove fraudulent content within 24 hours of notification and share data with authorities to track scam origins.
  6. Strengthened Extraterritorial Enforcement: The decree enhances mechanisms for pursuing overseas offenders by establishing dedicated cybercrime task forces with international law enforcement agencies, such as AOC 1441, to combat cross-border fraud.
  7. Public Awareness Mandates: Financial institutions and telecoms must fund and distribute public education campaigns to inform citizens about scam tactics, including solicit calls impersonating officials, and prevention methods. The Ministry of Digital Economy and Society has launched initiatives to warn citizens about these scams, emphasizing the importance of vigilance.
  8. Know Your Customer (KYC) Enhancements for Digital Assets: The decree aligns with industry standards by mandating stricter KYC protocols for opening bank accounts, digital wallets, and other financial services, with a particular focus on digital assets. This measure aims to prevent the creation of mule accounts often used in the trade of digital assets. As of April 2025, the Thai SEC reports that over 200,000 digital wallets linked to fraudulent digital asset transactions have been blacklisted, a significant step in curbing the misuse of these financial tools.
  9. Inter-Agency Collaboration: The decree fosters cooperation between agencies like the Thai SEC and other authorities to share information, track scams, and blacklist offenders, ensuring a unified approach to cybercrime prevention. The Thai SEC has been actively involved in identifying solicit calls and fraudulent schemes, particularly those involving digital assets, working closely with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society.
  10. Protection Against Solicit Calls: The decree specifically addresses solicit calls impersonating officials, a growing threat highlighted by the Thai SEC. Citizens are warned not to engage with unsolicited calls requesting personal information or payments, especially those related to digital asset investments, and authorities are cracking down on such scams through targeted investigations and public alerts.
woman wearing earpiece using white laptop computer

Impact on Stakeholders:

The Second Royal Decree places greater demands on financial institutions, telecom providers, and social media platforms to invest in advanced technologies and compliance systems. Banks must upgrade fraud detection algorithms and adhere to stricter KYC standards, particularly for digital asset transactions, while telecoms are required to enhance SIM verification processes and block suspicious SMS links. Social media platforms face increased scrutiny to curb misinformation and fraudulent ads, including soliciting calls impersonating officials and scams promoting fake digital asset investments. For citizens, the decree promises faster refunds and better protections but underscores the need for ongoing vigilance against sophisticated scams like AI-driven fraud, impersonation tactics, and fraudulent digital asset schemes.

The BOT’s continued oversight ensures that stakeholders align with these regulations, with non-compliance leading to substantial fines and reputational risks. The blacklisting of over 200,000 digital wallets linked to digital asset fraud as of April 2025, as reported by the Thai SEC, marks a significant step toward fraud prevention, particularly for vulnerable populations targeted by scammers. Additionally, the Thai SEC’s warnings about soliciting calls impersonating officials, especially those related to digital assets, have heightened public awareness, encouraging citizens to verify the legitimacy of communications before sharing sensitive information or investing in digital assets.

Global Collaboration:

Recognizing the borderless nature of cybercrime, the Second Royal Decree strengthens Thailand’s partnerships with global entities like INTERPOL, ASEAN cybersecurity networks, and AOC 1441. These collaborations focus on sharing intelligence, tracking cross-border mule accounts, and extraditing offenders, with a particular emphasis on scams involving digital assets. The decree’s extraterritorial provisions empower Thai authorities to target scam hubs in neighboring countries, ensuring no safe haven for perpetrators. The Thai SEC’s involvement in international efforts further enhances these collaborations, particularly in addressing solicit calls and other cross-border scams related to digital assets.

Effective Date:

The Second Royal Decree took effect on April 13, 2025, following its earlier publication in the Royal Gazette. The government has allocated a 60-day transition period for stakeholders to align with the new requirements, with full enforcement expected by June 13, 2025.

Conclusion:

The Second Royal Decree, effective as of April 13, 2025, marks a pivotal advancement in Thailand’s fight against cybercrime and telephone scams. By addressing emerging threats like AI-driven fraud, solicit calls impersonating officials, and the misuse of digital assets, while reinforcing accountability across sectors, the government demonstrates its commitment to safeguarding citizens’ financial security. The BOT’s leadership, inter-agency collaboration with entities like the Thai SEC, and global partnerships further bolster these efforts, creating a robust framework to tackle both domestic and international cyber threats. For more details on the initial framework, refer to our previous article Computer Crime and Telephone Scams: Strengthening Legal Frameworks to Combat Cyber Fraud. However, sustained success will require cooperation from all stakeholders—banks, telecoms, platforms, and citizens—to stay ahead of increasingly sophisticated criminals.

Key Takeaways:

Swift Implementation: Full enforcement of the second Royal Decree is expected by June 13, 2025.

Proactive Evolution: The Second Royal Decree, effective on April 13, 2025, targets new threats like AI-driven scams, solicit calls impersonating officials, and digital asset fraud, ensuring Thailand’s laws keep pace with technological advancements.

Enhanced Protections: Real-time monitoring, SMS link blocking, and a victim compensation fund prioritize rapid response and fair recovery for scam victims.

Stakeholder Accountability: Stricter KYC mandates for digital assets, blacklisting of 200,000 digital wallets as of April 2025, and shared responsibility among banks, telecoms, and platforms strengthen fraud prevention.

Global Reach: Strengthened international cooperation with entities like AOC 1441 and the Thai SEC targets cross-border scam networks, including those involving digital assets.

Public Empowerment: Mandatory awareness campaigns, supported by the Thai SEC and the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, equip citizens with tools to recognize and avoid scams, including impersonation tactics and digital asset fraud.

Related Article: Computer Crime and Telephone Scams: Strengthening Legal Frameworks to Combat Cyber Fraud – The Legal Co., Ltd.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

Protecting Children and Youth: Thailand’s Amended Laws Against Online Cyberbullying

As previously discussed in our articles Thailand – defamation and insult can be considered as cyberbullying   – The Legal Co., Ltd. The current Thai legal framework addressing cyberbullying presents notable challenges. While existing laws, such as the Penal Code (Sections 326 and 328), allow victims to pursue defamation charges, significant limitations persist. These gaps are particularly evident in private digital forums where third-party witnesses are absent or when prosecutorial intent cannot be definitively established. Despite the existing Computer Crime Act B.E. 2560 (2017), a more nuanced and comprehensive legal approach is necessary.

Rationale for Legislative Enhancement

Protecting children and youth in the digital landscape is paramount. Their inherent vulnerabilities expose them to multifaceted online risks, including:

  • Cyberbullying
  • Online grooming
  • Sexual exploitation
  • Exposure to inappropriate content

Proposed Legislative Amendment

The Minister of Justice has drafted a comprehensive amendment to the Penal Code (“Draft Law”), specifically targeting online offenses against children and youth. Key provisions of the Draft Law include:

  • Precise definition of cyberbullying offenses
  • Clear penalties for actions causing psychological harm, shame, or adverse psychological effects
  • Potential consequences including:
    • Imprisonment up to one year
    • Fines up to 20,000 Baht
    • Combination of imprisonment and financial penalties

Notably, the amendment introduces an escalated penalty structure, increasing punishments by one-third for cyberbullying conducted on public platforms. This approach acknowledges the broader societal impact of such digital transgressions.

children finger pointing at a boy sitting on a wooden floor

Implementation and Comprehensive Strategy

While legislative reform represents a critical initial step, a holistic approach is essential. The proposed strategy encompasses:

  1. Rigorous legal enforcement
  2. Comprehensive educational initiatives
  3. Targeted awareness programs for:
    • Children
    • Youth
    • Parents
    • Educators

Next Procedural Steps

Following public consultation and feedback from authorities, the Draft Law awaits cabinet and parliamentary review and formal legislative enactment. This collaborative process ensures thorough consideration and refinement of the proposed legal framework.

Conclusion

The proposed Draft Law represents a significant advancement in digital child protection. By establishing clear legal boundaries and penalties, Thailand demonstrates a proactive commitment to safeguarding its youth in an increasingly complex digital ecosystem. Successful implementation will require sustained, multi-sectoral collaboration, balancing legal deterrence with educational empowerment.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Related Article(s)

Cyberbullying VS Defamation – The Legal Co., Ltd.

Other Articles

on by

Computer Crime and Telephone Scams: Strengthening Legal Frameworks to Combat Cyber Fraud

Introduction:

In response to the escalating threat of cybercrime and telephone scams, the Thai government has taken decisive steps to enhance its legal framework. The Cabinet has approved amendments to the Royal Decree on the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes. This move comes amid growing concerns over the daily financial losses suffered by citizens, which currently average between 60 to 70 million baht. Prior to the implementation of recent measures, these losses were even higher, ranging from 100 to 120 million baht per day. The urgency of the situation has necessitated immediate action to address the vulnerabilities in the existing legal framework.

Bank of Thailand (BOT) also supports the principles of this draft Royal Decree and has collaborated with relevant agencies to provide input to refine the draft, ensuring it effectively enhances measures to prevent and suppress technological crimes.

The BOT has been actively working with both public and private sector stakeholders to establish mechanisms where service providers must share responsibility and compensate for damages if they fail to comply with regulatory standards. This policy direction is a priority for the BOT, which is in the process of clearly defining the responsibilities of financial institutions in addressing technological crimes. These responsibilities will be used to assess liability for damages caused by such crimes, in conjunction with other relevant service providers under this Royal Decree and related regulations.

crop cyber spy hacking computer system in darkness

The original Royal Decree, enacted in 2023, was found to lack sufficient authority and penalties in several critical areas. These gaps include the inability to take action against “mule accounts” on peer-to-peer (P2P) platforms, the absence of mechanisms to refund victims, and the lack of shared liability among parties involved in criminal activities. The proposed amendments aim to address these shortcomings by introducing several key provisions:

1. Enhanced Authority Over P2P Platforms: The amendments grant authorities greater power to take action against peer-to-peer (P2P) platforms involved in illegal activities. This includes the ability to investigate, suspend, or shut down platforms facilitating fraudulent transactions.

2. Mandatory SIM Card Suspension: Telecommunications providers are now required to suspend SIM cards associated with fraudulent activities. This measure aims to disrupt the operations of scam networks that rely on mobile communication.

3. Faster Refunds for Victims: Banks are mandated to share information about “mule accounts” (accounts used to launder money) with the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO). This will expedite the process of identifying and refunding victims of cyber fraud.

4. Stricter Penalties for Non-Compliance: P2P platforms and banks that fail to prevent the opening of accounts by criminals will face increased penalties. This provision ensures that financial institutions take proactive measures to verify the legitimacy of account holders.

5. Penalties for Data Breaches: Individuals or entities that disclose personal . information without authorization will be subject to harsher punishments. This aims to deter data breaches and protect citizens’ privacy.

6. Shared Liability for Financial Institutions: Financial institutions, mobile networks, and social media platforms will now bear partial responsibility for damages resulting from cybercrimes. This shared liability framework encourages all stakeholders to implement robust security measures.

7. Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: The amendments include provisions to hold offenders and their supporters accountable, even if they are located overseas. This ensures that international perpetrators involved in cybercrimes affecting Thailand can be pursued and penalized. This provision is crucial for addressing cross-border cybercrime and ensuring that offenders cannot evade justice by operating from outside the country.

Impact on Stakeholders:

The amendments will have significant implications for various stakeholders, including financial institutions, telecommunications providers, social media platforms, and the general public. Financial institutions and telecom companies will need to invest in robust compliance mechanisms to avoid penalties and ensure adherence to the new regulations. Social media platforms will be required to enhance their monitoring systems to detect and prevent fraudulent activities. For the public, these changes promise greater protection against cyber fraud and telephone scams, but they will also need to remain vigilant and informed about the risks associated with online transactions.

Effective Date:

The amended Royal Decree is expected to take effect immediately after its publication in the Royal Gazette. The Secretary-General of the Council of State has indicated that the process of finalizing the draft and publishing it will take no more than 30 days. As a result, the new regulations are anticipated to be enforceable by February 2024. This swift implementation underscores the government’s commitment to addressing the growing threat of cybercrime and protecting citizens from financial losses.

Conclusion:

The amendments to the Royal Decree represent a significant step forward in Thailand’s efforts to combat cybercrime and telephone scams. By addressing the gaps in the existing legal framework and introducing stricter penalties, the government aims to create a safer digital environment for its citizens. The inclusion of extraterritorial jurisdiction ensures that offenders and their supporters, even those located overseas, can be held accountable. However, the success of these measures will depend on the collective efforts of all stakeholders, from financial institutions to individual users, to remain vigilant and proactive in the face of evolving cyber threats. The BOT’s proactive involvement in defining responsibilities and ensuring compliance further strengthens the framework, paving the way for a more secure financial and technological ecosystem in Thailand.

unrecognizable hacker with smartphone typing on laptop at desk

Key Takeaways:

Urgency of Action: The Thai government has recognized the urgent need to combat cybercrime and telephone scams, given the substantial daily financial losses incurred by citizens.

Strengthened Legal Framework: Amendments to the Royal Decree introduce stricter penalties and broader authority for law enforcement agencies to tackle cyber fraud and telephone scams effectively.

Shared Responsibility: The new regulations emphasize the shared responsibility of financial institutions, telecom providers, and social media platforms in preventing cybercrime.

Enhanced Victim Protection: Faster refund mechanisms and increased penalties for data breaches aim to provide better protection for victims of cyber fraud and scams.

Global Collaboration: The Thai government is working with international partners to address cross-border cybercrime, highlighting the importance of global cooperation in combating this growing threat.

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: The amendments include provisions to hold offenders and their supporters accountable, even if they are located overseas. This ensures that international perpetrators involved in cybercrimes affecting Thailand can be pursued and penalized.

Effective Date: The amended Royal Decree is expected to take effect immediately after its publication in the Royal Gazette, with enforcement anticipated by February 2024.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by

NCSA Tackles Cloud Security with New Measures

The National Cyber Security Agency (NCSA) has recognized the growing reliance on cloud services by both government agencies and private sectors, along with the increasing number of cyberattacks targeting users. In response, the agency has drafted the Notification on Cloud System Cyber Security Standard (“Notification“), aiming to establish a robust standard of security measures for cloud systems.

Applicable Entities and Scope: The draft Notification is applicable to government agencies, supervising or regulating organizations, and organizations of critical information infrastructure (as defined under the Cybersecurity Act B.E. 2562 (2019)) that utilize cloud services and have official contracts with Cloud Service Providers (CSPs). These entities are collectively referred to as Cloud Service Customers (CSCs).

Risk Assessment and Categorization: According to the draft Notification, the risks associated with cloud system usage can originate from either the CSC or the CSP. Despite the fact that the draft Notification’s applicability is extended to only the CSCs, the CSPs are to be bound by its service agreement with CSCs to comply with the requirements of the draft Notification as well. CSCs and CSPs are mandated to assess the level of risk in accordance with the security objectives prescribed by another NCSA’s notification. The risk levels are categorized as low, moderate, and high, each with different minimum requirements for security standards, CSC and CSP assessments, and certifications.

green and white line illustration

Minimum Requirements: The minimum requirements for cloud security depend on the assessed risk level and the related security objectives. These requirements may encompass various aspects, including:

  1. Cloud security governance, encompassing information security policies, organization of information security, supplier relationships, and compliance with rules and regulations.
  2. Cloud infrastructure security and operations, covering human resources security, asset management, access control, cryptography, physical and environmental security, operations security, communication security, system acquisition, development and maintenance, supplier relationships, and information security incident management.

Assessment and Certification: Depending on the risk level and the related security objectives, CSCs or CSPs may be required to conduct compliance assessments as follows:

  1. Self-assessment, conducted in accordance with NCSA’s prescribed requirements.
  2. Assessment by a regulator or regulatory agency (attestation).
  3. Assessment by an advanced certified body.

The frequency of assessments and certifications will also depend on the assessed risk level.

The draft Notification provides greater details, and CSPs and CSCs subject to its provisions are required to carefully assess their associated risks and obligations.

Conclusion: The NCSA’s draft Notification aims to establish a comprehensive framework for ensuring the security of cloud systems used by government agencies, regulatory bodies, and critical infrastructure organizations. By introducing risk-based minimum requirements, assessments, and certifications, the agency seeks to address the growing cybersecurity threats and enhance the overall resilience of cloud services within the country.

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Other Articles

on by 1 Comment

Thailand – defamation and insult can be considered as cyberbullying  

Previously, we discussed the difference between laws regulating cyberbullying in other countries and in Thailand. Some countries enact a law that enforces direct harm caused by one to another through electronic means either privately or publicly, such as the Cyber Protection Act 2017 in Canada, whereas Thailand uses the law on defamation, which requires a third party and intention to impute the others as components of offense.  

Therefore, in this article, we will now address cyberbullying legislation with an emphasis on children since bullying is more common among young people and children and it can now be engaged in social media. In accordance with the statistics of cyberbullying, the range between ages 14-18, the high school age, where reported bullying happened the most. Since the school is the place where the bullying happened physically and digitally. As a result, some countries have implemented legislation to protect minors against cyberbullying such as the United States and the Philippines which are Massachusetts Anti-Bullying Law and Anti-Bullying Act of 2013, respectively.  

two men about to kiss

In Massachusetts, following the incident involving Phoebe Prince, a student at the age of 15 at South Hadley School, the state adopted such Massachusetts Anti-Bullying Law governing in regard to cyberbullying. It includes district policy requirements such as the need for Massachusetts school districts to prevent and respond to bullying conducted by one or more students developing a bullying prevention and intervention plan, which districts must review and keep up to date at least biennially.  

The Philippines also enacted Republic Act No.10627, or the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013, which defines cyberbullying as an act of bullying and requires all elementary and secondary schools to adopt policies addressing the existence of bullying by specific acts such as prohibiting bullies, identifying the measures to take against perpetrators, and the Department of Education (DepEd) to provide training programs for school administrators and staffs to improve knowledge and skills in bullying. The aforementioned rules also encompass cyberbullying that happens outside of school premises or on non-school devices, since these criteria demonstrate the serious concerns and obligations for minors who engage in cyberbullying.  

In Thailand, there is no specific law governing cyberbullying act or protecting minors against cyberbullying at all. The case of cyberbullying will be governed by either the Penal Code (PC) regarding defamation and insult or the Computer-Related Crime Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (CRC Act).

The difference between defamation and insult is whether it involves a third party or not. For example, if the bully intends to impair the bullied’s reputation by spreading the message with a third party which can cause hate or scorn, it can be considered as defamation offense under Section 326 of the PC. However, if the bully decides to spread the intention to impair the bullied’s reputation through the publication on the social media platforms, i.e. posting on Facebook or Twitter, it can be considered as defamation offense under Section 328 of the PC.  

Moreover, the case could be applied to Section 14 (1) of the CRC Act since cyberbullying must distort the computer data into a computer system such as a social media platforms. In the case of insult, if the bully insults the bullied in a private forum without the third party’s involvement, it could be applied to Section 393 of the PC. Whether it could be applied to Section 392 of the PC if the bully threatens the bullied causing fear or fright even though it is from the social network service platforms.  

Let’s be honest. Even though the Thai law has several ways to take the bully as guilty, it is just the offenses of defamation or insult. The Thai law should be more specified to cover the action of cyberbullying especially in minors since the high school age, between 14-18, were reported bullying happened the most. This can also reduce the increase of bullying behaviors and the depression or anxiety in the children since being bullied is the major cause.  

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Related Article(s)

Cyberbullying VS Defamation – The Legal Co., Ltd.

Other Articles

on by

Cyberbullying VS Defamation

Cyberbullying is repeatedly and intentionally harassment, mistreatment, or making fun of people through digital devices. This action occurs on social media that users can view, contribute to, or share contents.

One example of cyberbullying offense associated with suicide is Rehtaeh Parsons, a 17-year-old Canadian student, who was a victim of sexual violence. The offender published her pictures of being raped on the website. After that, Rehtaeh’s school friends brutally cyberbullied her by sending text messages requesting to have sex with her several times. Even though Rehtaeh’s family escaped from the community, people kept harassing her through the internet, which caused her a mood swing and led her to hang herself. Finally, there was no charge for the cyber-bully. In response to Parsons’ suicide, the Nova Scotia Government enacted Cyber-Safety Act 2015. However, the provision in the definition of cyberbullying terminology was broadly and ambiguously as it applies to every offense which beyond the law’s objective. Consequently, the Nova Scotia Government repealed the Cyber-Safety Act 2015 and then enacted the new law instead, i.e., the Intimate Images and Cyber Protection Act 2017, narrowing down the definition of cyberbullying and allowing victims to seek protection from cyberbullying and sue the offender.

shouting woman with hands on head in dim red light

Under the Intimate Images and Cyber Protection Act 2017, cyberbullying requires to have an electronic communication, direct or indirect, causing or is likely to cause harm to another individual’s health or well-being where the person responsible for the communication maliciously intended to cause harm to another individual’s health or wellbeing or was reckless with regard to the risk of harm to another individual’s health or well-being.

Defamation offense as specified in Section 326 of the Thailand Penal Code, it is required to have the offender intending to impute the others, a third party as a receiver, and messages must damage others’ reputation or cause the others to be insulted or hated. If defamation is done by social media, it will be considered under Section 328 of the Penal Code, the offense of defamation will be considered as conducting defamation offence by advertising. This action can occur physically and online. There is no need to be recurring action, just intentionally imputing others to a third party only once is considered as defamation.

person holding white android smartphone

Cyberbullying is similar to defamation in that it asserts a person’s facts with the intent to injure the other’s reputation and cause the person to be dishonored or hated. The difference is Cyberbullying can occur on a private forum without a third party as a receiver, the intent can be reckless with regard to the risk of harm to others, and the action is a variety of types. On the other hand, defamation must have a third party as a receiver, the intent to impute the others, and the only action is imputing.

In Thailand, the cases of cyberbullying require the element of defamation offense, allowing the victim to sue the cyber-bully in a criminal case. The victims cannot sue the offender if the cases happen on a private forum that has only sender and receiver because it lacks the element of defamation offense in which there is no third party as a receiver. Furthermore, if the action is not imputing the others or the intent of cyberbullying is reckless with regard to the risk of harm, the victim cannot sue the offenders because there is no cyberbullying offense in Thailand even if that action causes damage to the mentality and reputation of the victim as same as defamation. In summary, using the comparative law, the Penal Code, cannot cover to the extent of cyberbullying. All cases cannot be considered as offenses and applied to penalties under Section 326 and Section 328. Therefore, it is necessary to define a specific cyberbullying offense, the method for punishing offenders, and injury compensation for victims in which it can be specified in the Computer-Related Crime Act B.E. 2560 (2017). For this purpose, it should be specified covering the action on the private forums, all types of cyberbullying, and expanding the intention to cover negligence to reduce bullying behaviors and keep the bully at a consistently low level in Thailand.

red text on dark background

Author: Panisa Suwanmatajarn, Managing Partner.

Related Article(s)

Thailand – defamation and insult can be considered as cyberbullying   – The Legal Co., Ltd.

Other Articles