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 18, 2022

Overview of Anticorruption Laws in Thailand

Subscribe to Updates

As many countries have experienced firsthand, corruption and bribery can have severe and far-reaching effects throughout a country’s political and economic systems. They not only impact the financial status and administrative ability of the countries involved, but at the same time, can also create and perpetuate a negative image of those countries to current or potential trade or investment partners. Recognizing the importance of minimizing or eliminating the damaging effects of bribery and corruption, many countries have made—and continue to make—efforts to strengthen their anticorruption and antibribery capabilities.

Thailand has enacted relevant laws and enforced anticorruption measures in both the public and private sectors. Under Thai law, a bribe can take the form of property or a benefit. “Property” can be tangible (such as money, a car, a house, etc.) or intangible (such as copyrights, patents, etc.), while a “benefit” can be a gift, a discount, entertainment, healthcare costs, a job promotion, and so on.

This article discusses the key provisions related to criminal offenses committed by private parties under three anticorruption laws in Thailand:

  • Organic Act on Anti-Corruption B.E. 2561 (2018)
  • Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Act, B.E. 2560 (2017)
  • Act on Offenses Relating to the Submission of Bids to State Agencies B.E. 2542 (1999)

Organic Act on Anti-Corruption

The key provision of the Organic Act on Anti-Corruption (OAAC) is Section 176, which prohibits giving, offering, or promising property or a benefit to a public official, foreign public official, or official of a public international organization with the intent to induce the official to wrongfully perform his or her duty. Violations are subject to criminal liability, punishable by imprisonment for up to five years, a fine of up to THB 100,000 (approx. USD 3,000), or both.

If the offender is a person associated with a company that does not have appropriate internal control measures to prevent bribery—and the offense was meant to benefit that company—the company would be deemed to have committed the offense and could face a fine of one to two times the damages caused or benefit received. “Company” in this instance refers to a company established under Thai law or established under a foreign law and operating in Thailand, while “a person associated with a company” includes representatives, employees, agents, affiliated companies, and any other person acting on the company’s behalf.

The required “appropriate internal control measures” are evidenced by the following conditions:

  • Anticorruption must be emphasized as an important policy issue by the company’s top management.
  • The company must apply anticorruption measures to parties who have business relations with it.
  • The company’s human resources management guidelines must correspond to the anticorruption measures.
  • The company must have measures for reporting offenses or suspicious incidents.

Public Procurement Act

The purpose of the Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Act (“Public Procurement Act”) is to establish rules for the procurement activities of public officials. As such, the public procurement must be worthwhile (i.e., priced reasonably for meeting the project’s objectives), transparent, verifiable, and effective.

Under the Public Procurement Act, “public procurement” refers to operations related to the acquisition of supplies through a sale, hire, lease, or exchange transaction. The “supplies” referred to under this law include goods, services, construction work, consultancy work, and design or construction supervision work.

Section 19 of the Public Procurement Act provides that a business operator who would like to engage in public procurement for a project valued at THB 500 million (approx. USD 15 million) or more must put in place an anticorruption policy and have appropriate anticorruption measures—similar to the measures mentioned above with respect to the OAAC.

Section 120 of this law imposes criminal liability for violations on both the public officer responsible for the public procurement and the private person (individual or corporate entity) involved in the corruption. Punishments can include imprisonment for one to ten years, a fine of THB 20,000–200,000 (approx. USD 600–6,000), or both.

Submission of Bids Act

The Act on Offenses Relating to the Submission of Bids to State Agencies (also known as the “Submission of Bids Act” or the “Collusion Law”) addresses corruption by means of bid rigging. Bid rigging takes place when two or more bidders agree to submit their separate bids with the objective of fixing the price to take advantage of a government agency, to avoid a real and fair price competition, or to gain any benefit for the bidders.

The law defines “submission of bids” as submitting an offer in order to get a contract with a government agency for purchase, hire, exchange, lease, disposal of property, acquisition of a concession, or acquisition of any other rights.

Bid rigging can take the following forms:

  • Cover bidding is when bidders agree to submit their offers with the intention to let the agreed bidder win the bidding. To ensure that they will not be awarded the contract, the losing bidders may submit offers with higher prices or more difficult conditions for performing the work.
  • Bid suppression can occur when bidders agree not to submit any offer or agree to initially submit an offer and withdraw it later, so that a certain bidder can win.
  • Bid rotation refers to bidders agreeing to rotate the winning bidder—for example, bidder A will win one project, and bidder B will win the next one.

The key offenses—each detailed in its own section of the act—are as follows:

  • Collusion among bidders who dishonestly submit a bid (bid rigging).
  • Giving money, property, or any other benefit to induce a person to dishonestly participate in submission of a bid.
  • Dishonestly using force or coercion to get a person to participate in submitting a bid.
  • Using deception to prevent others from submitting a bid.
  • Submitting a bid (whether too low or too high) making it impossible for the bidder to fully perform its obligations under a contract with the government agency.

These offenses, depending on their seriousness, are punishable by various terms of imprisonment. Apart from imprisonment, offenders (both individuals and corporate entities) may be subject to a fine of 50% of the amount of the highest bid submitted, or the full amount of the contract concluded with the government agency—whichever is greater. The severity of this substantial fine indicates Thailand’s intention to seriously penalize offenders under this law.

Conclusion

Regardless of the strictness of a country’s anticorruption laws or the severity of penalties that can be imposed, implementation and enforcement of these laws would be inefficient or useless if public officials and business operators do not fully understand them or do not take anticorruption matters seriously.

Without sufficient knowledge of anticorruption laws and proper prevention measures, employees and management team members of business operators may be at risk of violating the applicable anticorruption laws. Therefore, prudent business operators should have an appropriate anticorruption policy in place to provide knowledge and training to their employees and other associates.

Related Professionals

Practices

Compliance and Investigations

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

December 11, 2024
On October 16, 2024, Thailand’s Anti-Corruption Cooperation Committee (ACCC) issued a notification to enhance anticorruption standards in public procurement. The new notification (officially “Notification of the Anti-Corruption Cooperation Committee on the Procurement Budget and Minimum Standards of the Policy and Directions for Anticorruption in Relation to Procurement according to Section 19 of the Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Act B.E. 2560”) supersedes previous guidelines and imposes stricter compliance requirements on business entities involved in the government procurement processes. The updates not only align with the goals of Thailand’s Public Procurement and Supplies Administration Act B.E. 2560 (2017) but also reflect the government’s resolution to mitigate corruption, particularly in high-value public contracts. The ACCC’s new notification introduces additional definitions, lowers budget thresholds for compliance, and strengthens business obligations. Key Components The new notification continues the previous guidelines’ requirement that businesses seeking to bid on government procurement projects meet the specified minimum standards—such as communicating and implementing anticorruption policies at all organizational levels, establishing a code of conduct, and providing related training programs to employees. The notification also introduces a number of changes, the most notable of which are detailed below. “Entrepreneur” definition. The definition of this term is narrowed to entities involved in the public procurement bidding process. Previously, the definition broadly applied to all business entities engaged in selling goods or services. Threshold for mandatory compliance. The project budget threshold that necessitates compliance with the minimum standards is  THB 300 million—a reduction from the previous threshold of THB 500 million. Minimum standards to prevent unfair competition. The new notification introduces a specific definition for “disturbing fair competition,” establishing clear parameters around actions that disrupt competitive fairness within public procurement. Continued compliance requirements. Businesses’ compliance with the minimum standards must now extend from the date of bid submission to the
Read More
December 4, 2024
Thailand Legal Basics, a valuable primer for foreign investors, explores all aspects of living and doing business in Thailand. Written by specialists at Tilleke & Gibbins in Bangkok, it is the only comprehensive English-language guide to the Thai legal system with a focus on the concerns of foreign business and investment.
Read More
June 27, 2024
On May 17, 2024, Thailand’s Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO) issued an amended Notification Concerning the Rules for Designating or Reviewing the List of High-Risk Customers Who Require Close Monitoring under the Ministerial Regulation on Customer Due Diligence B.E. 2563 (2020). This notification, which took effect the following day, updates the previous version of the notification from 2022 to cover cybercrimes listed under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023). The amended notification sets out the steps that all financial institutions in Thailand must take to manage money laundering risks and to comply with the AMLO’s mandatory Guidelines on Customer Due Diligence. Under the new notification, account holders suspected of engaging in or facilitating technological crimes, as recorded by the Anti Online Scam Operation Center (AOC), are to be classified as “high-risk persons.” The notification includes provisions for listing high-risk customers under two specific codes: HR-03-1: This code applies to individuals who are the subject of either a petition or a complaint related to a predicate offense accepted by the relevant inquiry officer and recorded as a criminal case. It also covers individuals whose bank accounts are suspected of being used to conduct transactions related to crimes under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023), with victims seeking prosecution. The names of individuals in this category are received from responsible agencies according to the Criminal Procedure Code or the AOC and are documented in a publicly accessible online notification system. HR-03-2: This code is for individuals involved in the commission of a predicate offense or those whose bank accounts are suspected of being used in such offenses, but whose cases have not been accepted or numbered by the relevant inquiry officer. Names
Read More
December 15, 2023
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2023. This guide outlines the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource for planning international business strategy and researching new markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand is available through the button below.
Read More