You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 29, 2022

An Overview of Criminal Litigation in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates

Disputes are unavoidable in the business world—not only civil disputes between business partners but also criminal matters, in which a company or its representatives, or even an individual, are accused of legal or regulatory violations or other crimes. While this can be a daunting situation—especially for those facing a criminal matter in a jurisdiction with unfamiliar laws or litigation processes—knowing what to expect out of criminal proceedings can bring clarity and make the situation feel much more manageable.

Thailand, for instance, is a vibrant economy in the heart of Southeast Asia that has attracted many businesses to pursue opportunities in the country. However, the relatively well-developed and sometimes unfamiliar regulatory regime in Thailand means that companies can unintentionally fall afoul of the legal requirements and find themselves having to defend against criminal litigation. In such a situation, understanding  how criminal proceedings work in Thailand  is critical step to  prepare for the case.

Thailand’s legislative system is  based on a civil law system. Notably, however, Thai courts are still influenced by previous Supreme Court decisions as precedent references for adjudicating cases. Most criminal offenses are contained in the Penal Code (also called the Criminal Code). There are also other offenses prescribed in the country’s acts (of which there are approximately 1,000), which specify the obligations and prohibitions people must observe. Although most offenses are misdemeanors, many are nonetheless punishable by imprisonment—a dire prospect for anyone, and even more so for an accused party whose home country is not Thailand.

By its nature as a juristic person, a company charged with a criminal offense is subject only to fines. However, company directors or other representatives are often accused as codefendants along with the juristic person itself. These individuals can be found guilty for the offense conducted by the juristic person if the accuser (i.e., the plaintiff) can prove that they were involved with the offending act.

Regarding the burden of proof for a criminal case, the plaintiff must prove to the court “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the defendant is guilty by showing that the defendant committed the offense and the defendant possessed intention or awareness of the wrongdoing. Cases are considered and decided by the judge, as there is no jury system in Thailand.

In Thailand, courtroom proceedings are conducted in an adversarial system, whereby the two opposing advocates represent their clients’ cases before one or more judge. Judges may also question witnesses to seek further clarification on the testimony given by the witnesses. However, the witnesses must be presented by one of the parties to the case. The judge cannot summon a witness to testify at a hearing. Only in the court investigation stage of a criminal case does a judge have authority to summon a witness in order to investigate whether the case has a basis.

Initiation and Procedures

Generally, a criminal prosecution is initiated when someone submits a complaint to either the police or the court. Both methods are described below.

Police Complaint

If the complaint is submitted to the police, the prosecution will be handled by a police officer and a public prosecutor. Upon reviewing and accepting the complaint, the police will initiate an investigation. The investigation usually involves interviewing witnesses and related parties and gathering evidence. If the police determine that the accusation has merit, they will press charges against the accused. The accused must then submit a plea in response. The accused may need to request bail to avoid being kept in custody. If the police want the accused to remain in custody during the investigation, the police will have to explain and justify their reasoning in their request for a court order to keep the accused in custody.

After completing the investigation, the police will issue an opinion to the public prosecutor. The public prosecutor will then review the investigation file and the police’s opinion, and decide whether to prosecute the defendant in court. The court procedure starts from this point. The defendant has to attend all hearings, including evidence inspection hearings, witness examinations, and judgment hearings. The first hearing is for receiving the defendant’s plea in the case. A person who has received injury from the offense can also become part of the court litigation by submitting a petition to be a co-plaintiff.

Private Criminal Court Action

A complainant has the option to bypass the police and prosecutor by bringing a “private” criminal action against an accused party directly to the criminal court. To determine whether to accept the case, the court will conduct a preliminary “investigative” hearing to determine whether the accusation has merit. (In contrast, Thai courts generally accept cases filed by public prosecutors without holding investigative or preliminary hearings.) At this investigative hearing, the plaintiff must present at least one witness to the court to show that the case has a basis to continue for a full trial. Otherwise, the court will dismiss the case.

Defendants are not required to attend the investigation hearing, but they may submit a statement with supporting documents to the court. They can also cross-examine the plaintiff’s witness. The defendant has the additional option to petition the court to summon additional witnesses in an effort to obtain an early dismissal.

If the court finds that the case has no basis, the case will be dismissed. If the court concludes the case has enough merit to be considered, the court will accept the action, and the defendant must enter a plea in response to the accusation.

Litigation and Appeal

In both of the above routes (i.e., submitting a complaint to police or directly to the court), the first hearing marks the starting point of the court litigation. Criminal cases usually take about a year for the lower court to complete all hearings and deliver its judgment. In general, a lower court judgment can be appealed within one month to the Court of Appeal. Appellate proceedings involve a review of the case files from the proceedings in the court of first instance, but no hearings. With exceptions, the Court of Appeal’s judgment can be appealed to the Supreme Court. The deadlines for appeal at each stage can be extended upon request, at the court’s discretion.

Rights and Restrictions for Defendants

Defendants are entitled to freely enter any plea in the case. They also have the right to present evidence and witnesses to prove their innocence to the court. The accused can request bail from the police or the court after the arrest or after charges have been pressed, should the police request to keep the accused in custody, or from the court during the court proceedings. However, the court can deny bail if it believes the accused may abscond, tamper with evidence, or be harmful to the public. If not allowed bail, the accused would remain in prison until the court of first instance reads its judgment or until the case is final.

Lastly, prosecution against a foreign defendant has some unique characteristics in Thailand. In granting bail to a foreign defendant, it is normal practice for the court to impose a travel restriction on the defendant. Also, conviction of a foreign defendant, with or without a sentence of imprisonment, may cause the defendant to be deported from Thailand and be added to an immigration blacklist prohibiting the defendant from returning to Thailand.

Handling Criminal Litigation in Thailand

In summary, like in many jurisdictions, criminal litigation can be complex in Thailand. However, the procedures are usually predictable. The most important thing a prospective defendant or plaintiff can do is secure experienced and qualified local counsel who is well acquainted with the criminal litigation process in Thailand, as it is crucial for defendants to establish a strong foundation for their defense from the beginning. At a minimum, a capable lawyer can prevent surprises by keeping the client informed of every development and of what to expect at each stage. And a truly skilled and seasoned lawyer will be able to work the process to the client’s advantage, build a strong case for the defense, and anticipate the moves of opposing counsel. In this way, parties who may face criminal litigation in Thailand can address the process proactively and minimize the risk of serious consequences.

Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 4, 2026
Thailand’s cabinet has approved two draft amendments aimed at improving labor-related judicial proceedings. The proposed amendments to the Act on the Establishment of Labor Courts and Labor Case Procedure B.E. 2522 (1979) and the Act on Procedures for Human Trafficking Cases B.E. 2559 (2016) are intended to make the process more efficient, appropriate, and fair. Key elements of these proposed amendments are outlined below. Expansion of Labor Court Jurisdiction Under the current framework, labor courts generally hear labor disputes, while criminal offenses under labor laws are handled separately. Matters involving both labor and criminal issues may therefore require the parties to pursue proceedings before different courts. To address this, the proposed amendments would expand the jurisdiction of labor courts to cover certain criminal offenses under labor laws. The government states that the change is intended to allow related issues to be heard by judges with expertise in labor law and to reduce the need for parallel proceedings. The proposed amendments also set out the following rules for cases involving multiple offenses. Where a single act gives rise to multiple offenses and at least one of those offenses falls within the jurisdiction of the labor court, the labor court may hear the related offenses as part of the same case. Where multiple connected acts give rise to different offenses, the labor court may hear the matters together or transfer part of the case to the appropriate court, taking into account convenience and the interests of justice. Criminal Offenses Covered The proposed amendments would extend labor court jurisdiction to criminal offenses under 11 labor-related laws, including laws concerning: Home workers protection Labor protection Labor protection in fisheries work Employment and job-seeker protection Management of foreign workers Social security Occupational safety, health, and working environment Compensation Maritime labor State enterprise labor relations
Read More
August 24, 2026
Significant economic challenges facing Thailand in recent years have placed financial pressure on both individuals and businesses. As a result, many debtors may find themselves unable to meet their repayment obligations, leading to bankruptcy proceedings. When an individual or corporate debtor in Thailand is subject to bankruptcy proceedings, the Thai Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) provides a legal framework for collecting a debtor’s assets and using them to repay creditors. Under the Bankruptcy Act, creditors wishing to recover outstanding debts must file a debt repayment application (DRA), which is the primary mechanism for asserting claims in bankruptcy proceedings. However, the filing of a DRA is subject to specific legal requirements, procedural rules, deadlines, and supporting documentation. Failure to comply with these requirements may adversely affect a creditor’s ability to recover its claim. This article highlights the key considerations that creditors should be aware of when filing a DRA in a bankruptcy case in Thailand. Filing a DRA In a bankruptcy case, after the court issues an absolute receivership order, the debtor loses the authority to manage or dispose of its assets. Control over the debtor’s assets is transferred to the official receiver, a government official responsible for administering the bankruptcy estate in accordance with the Bankruptcy Act. Creditors seeking repayment of their debts must file a DRA with the official receiver within two months of the absolute receivership order being officially published in the Government Gazette. For creditors outside of Thailand, the official receiver may extend the filing period by up to an additional two months. These filing deadlines are strictly enforced. Failure to file within the prescribed period may result in the claim being barred, except in limited circumstances permitted by the Bankruptcy Act. Where a late filing is accepted due to force majeure, the creditor may only
Read More
August 20, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Bankruptcy and Rehabilitation No. 142/2025/QH15, passed by the National Assembly on December 11, 2025, does something many regional counterparts do not yet attempt: it instructs parties and arbitral tribunals on exactly what happens to an arbitration once a debtor becomes insolvent. Together with the Law on Commercial Arbitration No. 54/2010/QH12, the new law improves upon what used to be an uncertain area of practice, now providing an explicit, mandatory sequence of procedures. Suspension and Termination of Arbitration Proceedings Under article 40(2) of the law, once a Vietnamese court accepts a bankruptcy petition, any arbitration that concerns the debtor’s financial obligations must be temporarily suspended as soon as the tribunal receives the court’s notification. If the court subsequently issues a decision commencing bankruptcy proceedings, article 59(2) takes a further step: the suspended arbitration is terminated outright, and the underlying case file is transferred to the court handling the insolvency for resolution. The two provisions work as a sequence: first suspension, then termination and transfer, rather than as independent triggers. Meanwhile, article 60(4) reinforces this effect by vesting the bankruptcy court with exclusive jurisdiction over all claims against the debtor from the date the petition is accepted. Notably, this mechanism operates automatically, without the need for the insolvency court to issue a separate anti-arbitration order. The tribunal simply suspends or terminates the proceeding by operation of law once notified; however, Vietnamese law currently provides no procedure by which a party can apply to the insolvency court for permission to continue the arbitration despite the statutory effect. Practitioners with a Vietnamese counterparty in arbitration should treat notification of a bankruptcy filing as something to flag to the tribunal immediately since continuing to arbitrate a claim that has become subject to article 40(2) or 59(2) risks producing an award vulnerable
Read More
August 20, 2026
Thai law contains no provision that speaks directly to what happens to an arbitration when one of the parties becomes insolvent. The interaction between arbitration and insolvency is derived instead from the general operation of two separately drafted laws: the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) and the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002). Because Thai courts have had few opportunities to interpret how these two statutes apply together, the practical answer to many questions, such as who represents an insolvent party in arbitration, whether an award will be enforced, and what happens to a foreign proceeding, depends on inference from general principles of insolvency, arbitration, and procedural law rather than on settled rules. Liquidation and Restructuring The Bankruptcy Act governs both liquidation, which winds up a debtor’s affairs, and restructuring (rehabilitation), which aims to preserve a business. The consequences for arbitration differ accordingly. In liquidation, the debtor’s assets vest in the official receiver, who alone can conduct or continue any arbitration affecting the estate; the debtor loses the authority to act on its own behalf. In restructuring, the plan preparer or administrator takes over that role, but there is more room for the debtor to remain involved, since the objective of rehabilitation is to keep the business operational. Restructuring carries an automatic stay that takes effect once the Bankruptcy Court accepts the restructuring petition. This stay can halt an arbitration regardless of where it is seated. In contrast, liquidation does not work through a stay; instead, the debtor’s loss of authority over its own assets and disputes is what constrains the arbitration. Neither proceeding provides a party a formal route to apply for permission to continue arbitrating—the Bankruptcy Act contains no such mechanism—though in restructuring cases the Bankruptcy Court may allow proceedings to continue where doing so will not prejudice
Read More