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

March 20, 2020

COVID-19 Prevention Measures under Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act

Subscribe to Updates

Measures to limit the spread of COVID-19 are being implemented in Thailand just as the country approaches the implementation of its landmark new Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), which will come into effect in May 2020. This adds another layer of complexity to the COVID-19 issue, as employers find that they need to consider new categories of employee personal data, just as restrictions on doing so are due to come into force. From an employment perspective, employers are considered to be personal data controllers under the PDPA, and will thus be subject to extensive requirements when collecting, using, or disclosing employees’ personal data, once the PDPA comes into force.

To help employers stay compliant, we address below the most common questions about the legality of common COVID-19 prevention measures under the PDPA. Note that, while these FAQs specifically address issues for employers, the PDPA also protects the personal data of customers, business partners, vendors, and any other individuals whose data you might hold or process. Businesses should therefore be ready to comply with the PDPA in relation to all personal data that they hold.

Screening Measures: Checking Physical/Health Conditions

Can you check the temperature of visitors for the purpose of preventing the outbreak?

Yes.

Can you record their temperature? Can it be detailed with the individual’s personal data?

The temperature of visitors can be recorded, but the purpose should be communicated to the individuals, and it is imperative to keep information about a person’s COVID-19 status strictly confidential.

The data in question is considered to be personal data under the law, so retention of the data must be in strict compliance with the requirements and restrictions of the PDPA. Moreover, a person’s temperature reading, when combined with other personal data (e.g., name, contact information, physical symptoms), could be considered what the law terms “sensitive personal data,” for which the PDPA provides enhanced requirements, restrictions, and penalties.

Thus, it is preferable from a compliance point of view to refrain from recording the temperature of everyone entering the premises alongside their personal details. Regardless, the Communicable Disease Act also requires that this type of information, if retained or processed, be kept confidential and processed anonymously.

Forced Disclosure of Certain Physical or Health Conditions

Can you order your staff to disclose symptoms associated with COVID-19?

This is allowed under current data privacy and employment law, and employers may ask employees to disclose this information to HR. Employers can also require a health certificate or medical report.

Once the PDPA is fully effective, any such information already held may still be kept. However, restrictions on obtaining such sensitive personal data (i.e., health-related data) may need to be revisited.

Can you order your staff to disclose their travel history?

Yes—this is also allowable under both data privacy and employment regulations, and the requirement can be issued as a single announcement together with the requirement to disclose symptoms. This position will be unaffected by the PDPA.

Can you order your staff to disclose the travel history of their family members or close contacts?

Yes. However, it would be prudent to request this information only on a need-to-know basis—a practice referred to as “data minimization.”

If a COVID-19 Infection Is Confirmed

Can you publically communicate the presence of a confirmed case?

Yes. However, any data that could identify the infected individual should not be disclosed. All written communications should be carefully drafted, keeping in mind that information that might not identify an individual to one audience (such as the public) could identify them to another (such as coworkers).

Can you require (and retain) a medical certificate to confirm the case?

Yes. However, once the PDPA is fully effective, the infected individual, once fully recovered, is entitled to exercise his or her right to be forgotten.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

June 11, 2026
Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released a revised draft Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) for public hearing from May 12, 2026, to June 15, 2026. This is not merely an amendment to certain provisions of the current ETA, but a comprehensive redrafting of the entire act. The revised draft ETA introduces several significant changes from the current framework, with practical implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Unified Coverage of Public and Private Sectors The current law segregates government transactions into a separate chapter with distinct rules. The draft ETA eliminates this division, defining “transaction” to encompass civil and commercial juristic acts as well as administrative procedures, administrative contracts, and other acts of government agencies. Enhanced E-Signature Definition The definition of “electronic signature” is broadened to expressly include biometric data and refocused on identifying the signatory and demonstrating intent regarding the content of the electronic data. Shift in Burden of Proof When a party challenges the reliability of electronic data created using a “trusted electronic method” or a method prescribed by the ETDA, the burden of proof and the cost of proving unreliability shifts to the challenger. Introduction of New Digital Method Concepts The draft ETA introduces several new digital method concepts that are not currently recognized under the existing ETA framework. These include: Electronic timestamping (e-timestamp) Electronic registered delivery Electronic company seals Electronic stamp duty compliance Electronic identity authentication and verification Electronic transferable records (electronic bills of lading, promissory notes, and similar negotiable instruments) Recognition of Automated Systems and Electronic Contracting The draft ETA expressly recognizes the legal validity and enforceability of contracts formed through automated systems, including contracts concluded entirely between automated systems or between an automated system and a person. A party may not deny the binding effect of such contracts solely because no human review
Read More
June 5, 2026
Vietnam’s AI regulatory framework has reached an important milestone. While the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law) established the foundation for AI governance, many practical compliance requirements were left to implementing regulations. On April 30, 2026, the government issued Decree No. 142/2026/ND-CP (Decree 142), which took effect on May 1, 2026, and provides the first detailed guidance on the implementation of the AI Law. Although an official list of high-risk AI systems is still pending from the prime minister, Decree 142 provides valuable insight into how Vietnam’s risk-based AI regulatory framework will operate in practice. Risk Classification Framework The AI Law adopts a risk-based approach under which AI systems are classified as high-risk, medium-risk, or low-risk. Decree 142 builds on this framework by providing detailed guidance on how these classifications are determined. High-risk AI systems are determined based on factors such as (i) their potential impact on life, health, property, human rights, public interests, or national security; (ii) the sector in which they are deployed; and (iii) the scale of affected users or integration with critical infrastructure. The latest draft list of high-risk AI systems appears to follow these same principles. Medium-risk AI systems generally include systems that may mislead, influence, or manipulate users, particularly where users may not realize they are interacting with AI or AI-generated content. The focus is therefore on transparency and authenticity risks rather than broader societal or safety concerns. Low-risk AI systems are those that do not meet the criteria for either high-risk or medium-risk classification. Importantly, Decree 142 seeks to avoid over-classification. Certain systems may fall outside the high-risk or medium-risk regimes, including internal-use systems, office-support tools, technical editing applications, certain back-end processing systems, and AI systems used in artistic, gaming, cinematic, or other creative contexts. Providers must also review and
Read More
June 5, 2026
On May 11, 2026, Thailand’s Ministry of Social Development and Human Security released a draft Child Protection Act (“CPA”) for public review. The draft CPA would completely repeal and replace the current Child Protection Act B.E. 2546 (2003). This represents the most comprehensive overhaul of Thailand’s child protection framework in over two decades, reflecting the government’s stated objective of modernizing the law to address evolving social challenges—including those arising from digital technology—and to promote greater coordination among government agencies, local authorities, and civil society. The public review period closes on June 9, 2026. Key changes introduced by the draft CPA that could have significant implications for businesses, particularly online platform providers, media companies, and entities operating child-related services in Thailand, are set out below. Expanded Definition of “Child” Under the current CPA, a “child” is defined as a person under the age of 18, excluding those who have attained legal majority through marriage. The draft CPA removes the marriage exception entirely, broadening the scope of the law’s protections to include all individuals under 18 without exception. Replacement of “Abuse” with Broader Concept of “Violence” The current CPA uses the term “abuse/cruelty,” which covers acts causing harm to a child’s liberty, body, or mind; sexual offenses against children; and using children in harmful or immoral activities. The draft CPA replaces this with the broader concept of “violence,” which encompasses any act or omission causing harm to a child’s body, mind, or development; abandonment or neglect; improper exploitation; and sexual abuse. Notably, the new definition adds developmental harm as a recognized category of injury and captures all forms of misconduct regardless of the child’s consent. New Standalone Definition of Sexual Abuse, Including Online Conduct One of the most significant additions in the draft CPA is the introduction of a standalone definition
Read More
May 25, 2026
After several years of policy discussion and continued efforts led by the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) to relax the list of reserved businesses under the Foreign Business Act B.E. 2542 (1999) (FBA), the reform process has now reached a significant milestone. On May 12, 2026, the Thai cabinet approved in principle two draft subordinate legislative instruments aimed at delisting certain reserved business activities under the FBA and reducing licensing requirements for foreign business operators. These developments signal a renewed and concrete effort by the government to modernize Thailand’s business regulatory framework in order to attract foreign investment and boost Thailand’s competitiveness in the global market. Nine Businesses Set for FBA Delisting Below is a list of the nine businesses that are being targeted for delisting from the FBA’s restrictions. A draft ministerial regulation would delist the first eight reserved businesses, while a royal decree has been drafted to delist the ninth business: Telecommunications services (Type 1 license only, covering operators without their own telecommunications infrastructure), under the supervision of the Office of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission. Treasury center services subject to the Foreign Exchange Control Act B.E. 2485 and under the supervision of the Bank of Thailand. Securities-collateralized lending, pursuant to the laws governing securities and exchange and derivatives regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. Agency, dealer, advisory, or fund management services relating to derivatives where the underlying assets fall outside the scope of the Derivatives Act B.E. 2546 (2003) Intra-group shared services, including administrative, human resources, and IT functions Intra-group domestic debt guarantee services Leasing of partial space for installation of financial service machines and automatic vending machines for employee use Petroleum drilling services Trading of agricultural product derivatives through a futures exchange, with physical delivery or receipt of agricultural products at a futures exchange–designated
Read More