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

February 5, 2024

Cambodia Issues Directive Highlighting Alcohol Advertising Limits

Subscribe to Updates

On January 9, 2024, Cambodia’s Ministry of Information (MOI) issued an official notification letter reminding the alcohol and advertising industries of past directives, instructions, and the MOI’s Code of Conduct surrounding alcohol advertising. The step comes as the MOI reports that they are seeing increased noncompliance in this area of advertising. In addition, several recent high-profile traffic accidents that involved drunk driving are likely serving as a trigger for the government to review its alcohol-related policies, including on advertising.

Alcohol Advertising Rules and Limits

The notification letter reminds the industry that there are limits to alcohol advertising, including:

  • Advertising alcohol alongside potential prizes or undertaking “other activities that motivate, encourage, or entice people to overindulge on alcohol”; and
  • Using women or minors to advertise alcohol.

Furthermore, all alcohol advertising must also include the phrase “Don’t Drink and Drive” or “Drink Responsibly.”

The notification letter explains that media outlets failing to comply with the instructions may be subject to penalties. Although the penalties are not clearly identified in reference to a specific law or regulation, it is possible that actions could include the consequences outlined under the agreement between each media outlet and the MOI, with potential suspension of the media license being an option in case of persistent noncompliance. However, this rather strong enforcement tool would only affect the media outlet that carries out the advertising rather than the alcohol producer that instigated the advertising. Penalties for the alcohol industry are not immediately clear, although it may be that the possible suspension or taking down of noncompliant advertising is considered a sufficient penalty for the time being.

Past MOI Circulars and Letters

The notification letter further reminds the industry to follow Circular No. 492 on Alcohol Advertisement (2014). It also references two notifications (Nos. 1134 and 1294) on the same subject that were issued in 2017.

The 2017 notifications refer to a requirement to register and seek permission for advertising with rewards, suggesting that certain forms of alcohol advertising with prizes or rewards may be permitted by the MOI.

Furthermore, the notifications state that alcohol advertisements may only mention brand information and where to purchase the products without containing further enticing imagery.

The latest notification letter does not repeat these strict content requirements, and in practice, the prohibition on enticing imagery has often been ignored. A quick survey of the current state of the alcohol advertising industry in Cambodia shows that noncompliance is widespread, with many brands using, for example, images of influencers to advertise their products.

In addition, the conflicting or unclear instructions in the letters, notifications, and circular do not seem to encourage effective self-regulation, as the rules leave room for interpretation or at least an argument that there is confusion over the exact rules.

Alcohol Control Legislation

Hopes are pinned on the draft Law on Alcohol Control, although the law has been lingering in the draft stages since 2015.

This law would likely include clearly legislated penalties and should set a clear framework for authorities to enforce, rather than relying on circulars, letters, instructions, and codes of conduct that may not have clear legal bases or penalties tied to noncompliance.

Related Professionals

Practices

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 28, 2026
On September 15, 2026, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) opened a public consultation period on the principles of a proposed Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) notification establishing specific Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) requirements for foods derived from cultured animal cells. The proposal would build on Thailand’s existing safety assessment framework by proposing GMP requirements specifically tailored to the production of cultivated meat. As cultivated meat advances toward commercial production, its unique manufacturing processes present food safety challenges involving aseptic conditions, starting cell quality, culture media, and specialized equipment. Thailand’s Food Act B.E. 2522 (1979) provides the legal basis for regulating food manufacturing, but no GMP requirements specifically tailored to cultivated meat have been issued under it. The proposed framework aims to address this gap. The Thai FDA has not yet released a complete draft notification, so the proposed requirements outlined below may change before adoption. However, they indicate the direction the regulator intends to take, and companies preparing to enter the Thai market can use them now to anticipate their compliance obligations. What Is Cultivated Meat? Cultivated meat, also known as cell-based food or cell-cultured meat (and referred to in the proposed notification as food derived from cultured animal cells), is produced by cultivating animal cells rather than raising and slaughtering animals through conventional meat production. The process generally begins with the selection of animal cells or stem cells, which are cultivated in an appropriate culture medium within a bioreactor to promote cell growth and proliferation. Scaffolding materials or other techniques may subsequently be used to develop cells into tissue or other forms suitable for consumption. Unlike conventional meat production, this process introduces specific food safety considerations relating to starting cells, culture media, production substances, contamination controls, and potential residues in the final product. Thailand’s Safety
Read More
September 9, 2026
On August 5, 2026, the Consumer Case Division of Thailand’s Civil Court rendered a judgment in a case involving a beauty clinic that advertised acne scar treatments using claims that the clinic was operated by a specialist physician and that the treatment, allegedly involving stem cell technology, could permanently remove acne scars. The plaintiff brought a claim against both the physician-owner and the clinic company, alleging that the advertisements were false and induced her to purchase the treatment. The court found that the clinic was liable for the false representations and that the physician-owner, as both the authorized director of the company and the medical practitioner who provided treatment, was jointly responsible. Although the plaintiff could not fully prove all damages claimed, the court awarded compensation of THB 20,000, together with interest. While the judgment arose from a consumer protection dispute, it serves as a valuable reminder that medical facility advertisements in Thailand are regulated and may expose clinics and healthcare providers not only to regulatory enforcement but also to civil liability from patients who rely on misleading promotional claims. Regulatory Framework Governing Medical Facility Advertisements Medical facility advertising in Thailand is governed by the Medical Facility Act B.E. 2541 (1998), as amended by the Medical Facility Act (No. 4) B.E. 2559 (2016). The principal secondary legislation is the Department of Health Service Support (DoHSS) Notification Re: Rules, Procedures, Conditions, and Fees for an Advertisement or Publication Concerning a Medical Facility, which came into force on November 25, 2019. Under this notification, “advertising” includes any act, by any means, that causes members of the public to see, hear, or otherwise become aware of a message, sound, or image for the commercial benefit of a medical facility. This broad definition covers not only traditional media but also clinic websites, social
Read More
September 9, 2026
On June 30, 2026, Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) issued BPOM Regulation No. 11 of 2026 on Food Packaging, which expands the list of approved food-contact substances and recognizes a broader range of permissible functions for those substances. The new regulation, which revokes BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019, reflects developments in packaging technology and materials science. Although the new regulation provides more advantages to business actors by adding more food contact substances to the approved list for use in food packaging, there are more stringent rules and restrictions for testing. One of the most significant changes is a comprehensive migration-testing framework that sets out requirements for packaging materials, testing conditions, food simulants, and specific migration limits. Overall and Specific Migration Under BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019, migration requirements were primarily set out within the lists of approved food-contact substances and packaging materials. BPOM Regulation No. 11 of 2026 instead expressly requires packaging materials that come into direct contact with food to meet both overall and specific migration limits. These are defined as follows: Overall migration: The total quantity of all substances that migrate from the packaging, regardless of whether the substances are hazardous or nonhazardous to health. Specific migration: The quantity of a particular identified substance known to be hazardous to health that migrates from the packaging. Stricter Limits on Heavy Metals The overall migration limit for plastic packaging remains unchanged under both regulations at 60 mg/kg or 10 mg/dm². However, the new regulation introduces significant changes to the regulation of heavy metals. Under the 2019 regulation, four heavy metals—lead, cadmium, chromium VI, and mercury—were subject to a single combined limit of 1 mg/kg. The 2026 regulation, however, requires each heavy metal to meet its own individual specific migration limit, adds arsenic as
Read More
September 4, 2026
Blind boxes and collectibles have become increasingly popular, driven by the excitement of not knowing which character or design will be revealed until the package is opened. While most visible in the art toy market, the same concept is also used in the food industry. Confectionery, snacks, and other food products are sometimes sold with toys, character figures, cards, or other collectibles. A package might, for example, contain one of ten possible characters, with consumers knowing that an item is included but not which one they will receive. Some collections may also feature rare or “secret” items. For food businesses, however, adding a randomized toy or collectible involves more than a marketing decision. The food, the nonfood item, and the randomized mechanism may each raise different regulatory considerations in Thailand. Thai FDA Requirements for Nonfood Objects Packaged with Food The main food regulatory consideration is Ministry of Public Health Notification No. 310 B.E. 2551 (2008), which regulates food packaged together with things or objects that are not food. Under Notification No. 310, certain nonfood objects may be packaged together with food where they fall within specified exceptions, including objects that serve the following purposes: Maintaining the quality or standard of the food, such as a desiccant or oxygen absorber; Serving as a seasoning or as part of food preparation, such as chili powder sachets or seasoning sachets contained in instant noodle packages; or Functioning as an eating or food-preparation utensil, such as a spoon or fork included with instant noodles. Other nonfood objects that do not fall within these categories generally should not be placed inside the food container together with the food. Where a toy, collectible, or other nonfood object is intended to be sold together with a food product, businesses should therefore carefully consider the nature of
Read More