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 30, 2020

Laos Imposes Sweeping COVID-19 Lockdown Measures

Subscribe to Updates

On March 29, 2020, the Prime Minister of Laos issued Order No. 06/PM on the Reinforcement of Measures for the Containment, Prevention, and Full Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This order is by far the most serious announcement in the country since the crisis began, and follows the first official report of COVID-19 cases by the Lao authorities outside the capital, Vientiane. In a bid to limit transmission across the country as much as possible, the Prime Minister’s order imposes strong lockdown measures on businesses and the general public. It also expands the powers of the National Taskforce Committee for COVID-19 Prevention and Control—a special taskforce established on February 3, 2020, to provide appropriate responses and public information to prevent the spread of the virus in the country.

All measures below take effect on March 30, 2020, unless expressly stated otherwise.

Residential Lockdown Imposed with Limited Exceptions

All persons are prohibited from leaving their houses or residences, except in necessary circumstances, such as: 

  • Buying food and necessary consumables;
  • Going to hospital; and
  • Carrying out activities expressly authorized to continue operating, such as banks, financial institutions, the stock exchange, listed companies, hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, ambulances, post services, telecommunications, electricity, water treatment, collection and treatment of waste, agricultural produce markets, retail shops, supermarkets, and restaurants and beverage shops for the provision of takeaway and delivery services only.

Service providers that are allowed to remain open must practice staff rotation measures and other measures ordered by the taskforce.

Factories (expressly including garment factories, but covering all factories deemed to be “at risk,” which is expected to be interpreted broadly) and entertainment venues must close. Employers of factory employees must provide their employees with a necessary welfare allowance for the duration of the closure. However, factories that are involved in the production of equipment and medical devices can still operate.

Hotels and resorts are permitted to continue services relating to accommodation and restaurants only.

All persons are prohibited from traveling to a location in which infected people have been reported, or places which may be dangerous in this respect. Exemptions may be granted by the local authorities for certain specific reasons.

Government and Civil Service

All civil servants and government employees will stop working at their respective offices from April 1 until April 11, 2020. In practice, this break will be extended up to April 19, to accommodate the Lao New Year (although celebrations will be restricted by the prohibition of gatherings, outlined below). Certain civil servants and employees will be exempted from this, including police officers; firefighters; employees involved in the management of the electricity system, water treatment and distribution, and telecommunications; medical staff; volunteers (a category that is yet to be defined); and civil servants and employees who are mobilized for the prevention of the infection, and to control and treat infected persons.

In addition, the Prime Minister requires that all ministries and administrations, at the central and local level, should organize a minimum service so that important work can continue, and appoint enough staff to do so. All other government staff are to be encouraged to work using remote communication.

The Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) has not yet issued an official statement on the subject, but from information available to us, we understand that they currently remain open on a staff rotation basis. At this stage, it is not yet clear how the DIP plans to treat any deadlines falling within the lockdown period. We are in regular contact with the DIP, and we will update you accordingly as the situation develops.

Prohibition on Gatherings of More Than 10 People

Gatherings or events at which more than 10 people are assembled are prohibited (including gatherings for traditional events, such as religious events or for the Lao New Year). Exemptions for some events (such as funerals) may be provided, subject to the strict exercise of measures to prevent the spread of the virus (including two meter social distancing, wearing of masks, and hand washing).

Price Control

There is also a general prohibition on increasing prices on essential consumables such as masks, products to wash hands, medicine to treat symptoms, medical devices, rice, food, water, and others. The list is not exhaustive and will be considered on a case-by-case basis by trade inspectors, who are instructed to carry out surveillance and issue punitive measures in collaboration with the police.

Border Closures Except for Transportation of Goods

Borders will remain closed to individuals. Operators who are authorized to continue to operate in transportation of goods can cross borders at the international checkpoints, but they must strictly follow the measures required at the checkpoints. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is empowered to coordinate with relevant agencies to facilitate the return of foreign citizens who wish to return to their home country.

The order is effective from March 30, 2020, until April 19, 2020, subject to any amendments which the government will provide by way of a notification. The order also provides the website address https://covid19.gov.la/ (in Lao language) in order to stay updated on the situation in Laos.

If you have any questions about how these measures may affect your business in Laos, please contact Dino Santaniello, head of our Laos team, at [email protected].

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 4, 2026
Intellectual property (IP) protection sometimes hinges on fame and recognition. However, this alone will not always be sufficient to overcome an IP dispute when it involves contractual obligations or registered rights. Below are five cases from around the world that tackle some of the basic issues in IP registration, ownership, commercialization, and enforcement. 1. USA: Taylor Swift Trademark Application Refused Taylor Swift recently filed a trademark application to register “The Life of a Showgirl,” which is the title of her 12th studio album. When examining a trademark application, the examiner considers various factors before deciding whether it should be registered. One of these factors is whether there is a likelihood of confusion (i.e., would a regular consumer mistake the origin of the trademark). In Taylor Swift’s case, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) decided that that there would be a risk of confusion. This decision was based on the existing registered trademark, “Confessions of a Showgirl,” owned by Maren Wade, which was registered in 2015. The USPTO refused Taylor Swift’s application based on the shared key distinctive element “of a showgirl,” the lack of sufficient distinguishing terms, the marks being used in overlapping markets (entertainment and performances), and because consumers may assume a common commercial source. Maren Wade then filed a lawsuit in California against Taylor Swift and her affiliated companies, arguing that Taylor Swfit’s branding is confusingly similar in structure, wording, and overall commercial impression to her registered mark. She is also drawing on the USPTO’s refusal of Taylor Swift’s application to support her argument of a likelihood of confusion. A judgment has not yet been reached in this case, but it serves as an important reminder of the importance of satisfying the essential elements required for IP registration. 2. Australia: Katy Perry v. Katie Perry In
Read More
August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
Read More
July 30, 2026
Thailand’s cabinet has approved a draft ministerial regulation introducing significant changes to the calculation of old-age pension and old-age gratuity benefits under the Social Security Fund. The reform would replace the current pension calculation method with a career average revalued earnings (CARE) model designed to better reflect an individual’s lifetime contributions while supporting the long-term financial sustainability of the Social Security Fund. The changes are also intended to improve fairness and align Thailand’s pension framework with international practices. Key proposed changes under the draft ministerial regulation are outlined below. CARE-Based Formula for Old-Age Pension Calculations Currently, old-age pensions are calculated based on the insured person’s average salary over the preceding 60 months. The proposed regulation would replace this approach with the CARE model, under which pension benefits will be calculated based on earnings throughout an individual’s entire working life. Historical earnings will be revalued to reflect their present value before the pension benefit is calculated. According to the Ministry of Labor, this change is intended to better align pension benefits with an individual’s lifetime contribution history and provide a fairer basis for calculating benefits. Pension Accrual Rate for Contributions Exceeding 180 Months Under the current rules, insured persons who contribute for more than 180 months receive an additional pension accrual of 1.5% for each completed 12-month contribution period, with any remaining months disregarded. The proposed regulation would instead calculate the additional accrual on a monthly basis at a rate of 0.125% of actual monthly contributions; this aims to make pension benefits more accurately reflect the actual duration of each individual’s contribution history. Transitional Protections for Insured Persons The draft regulation includes transitional protections for both existing pension recipients and those who will become eligible within five years of the CARE model taking effect. For existing recipients, the following protections
Read More
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
Read More