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

June 25, 2025

Setting the Ground Rules: The Importance of Implementing Internal GenAI Policies

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is no longer a distant innovation confined to science fiction and research labs; it has become an integral part of daily business operations worldwide. Employees across industries are adopting GenAI tools at a remarkable pace—including in Southeast Asia, where a tech-savvy workforce and widespread internet and mobile access have driven early adoption.

The reality facing organizations today is clear: employees are integrating GenAI into their daily work, often without official approval or clear policies. This phenomenon, often called “Bring Your Own AI,” comes out of a disconnect between organizational governance and employee behavior and reveals the urgent need for proactive AI policies and oversight.

For business leaders and legal teams, GenAI is both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, these tools can deliver real business value and boost efficiency. On the other, the unsanctioned and unmonitored use of GenAI introduces substantial legal risks, such as data privacy violations, confidentiality breaches, and intellectual property issues.

The widespread adoption of GenAI tools by employees, regardless of official organizational stance or guidelines, demonstrates that prohibition is neither practical nor effective. A more strategic approach involves establishing comprehensive governance policies that encourage responsible AI use while managing the risks.

Organizations that take the lead in developing GenAI governance policies are better positioned to benefit from its transformative potential. The question isn’t whether GenAI will change how we work, but how quickly organizations can put the right safeguards in place to manage this change successfully.

Risks of GenAI Use

The use of GenAI in business operations, whether sanctioned or not, exposes organizations to a unique set of risks. The following are particularly relevant:

  • Data security and confidentiality: General GenAI tools in the market may transmit data to external servers, retain conversation histories, and use inputs for model training. Further, employees may share confidential organization or client information without realizing the implications, increasing the risk of unintentional data leakage and unauthorized disclosure—especially since it can be difficult for organizations to know which GenAI tools employees are using and what types of information they are sharing.
  • Data protection and regulatory compliance: The evolving legal landscape regulating AI creates compliance challenges across multiple jurisdictions. Organizations must navigate complex data protection laws like Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) and Vietnam’s Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD), each with different compliance requirements. In the absence of AI-specific legislation, sector-specific regulations also add additional complexity, while unclear regulatory guidance often leaves organizations operating in legal uncertainty, particularly when using AI for decision-making that impacts individuals or when deploying AI systems that interact directly with customers.
  • Intellectual property risks: AI-generated content raises yet-to-be-answered questions about ownership, originality, and copyright infringement. Additionally, proprietary information shared with GenAI tools can be inadvertently incorporated into model training data, potentially compromising trade secrets or violating confidentiality agreements.
  • Governance and accountability: Disjointed and unregulated or inadequately governed GenAI adoption creates oversight gaps, making it difficult to track usage, assign responsibility for outputs, or respond to incidents. In addition, traditional approval processes may not account for AI-assisted work, creating quality control issues.

Developing an Internal GenAI Policy

Forward-thinking organizations across Southeast Asia are establishing internal policies that provide clear direction for both approved and unapproved AI use. These policies form the cornerstone of responsible AI adoption in these organizations by balancing innovation with effective risk management.

An effective AI policy functions as both a protective framework and an enablement tool. Rather than simply listing restrictions, the most effective policies provide practical guidance that empowers employees to leverage AI capabilities while maintaining organizational standards. This approach requires addressing several critical components when developing an AI policy, including, among others:

  • Policy scope: Effective AI policies begin with a clear articulation of their purpose, defining exactly which AI tools and use cases are governed by the policy, including distinguishing between enterprise-approved solutions and general AI tools in the market.
  • Access and authorization: Organizations should define user tiers and access levels, specifying which roles are permitted to use specific AI tools and under what circumstances. This includes establishing approval processes for new AI tool adoption and creating exceptions for specialized use cases.
  • Data governance and privacy protection: As GenAI tools may process personal information, policies must establish strict protocols for data handling. This encompasses defining what types of data can be shared with AI systems and ensuring compliance with regional privacy regulations such as Thailand’s PDPA or Vietnam’s PDPD.
  • Accountability and verification: Policies should also assign internal accountability for AI-generated content and outputs. It is important to establish appropriate review protocols based on the type of AI-assisted work, along with guidelines for transparently disclosing when and how AI was used, especially in client-facing materials or critical decision-making, which may require human validation.
  • Monitoring and incident response: Effective policies establish clear procedures for tracking AI usage, identifying potential misuse or unacceptable output, and responding to security incidents, policy violations, and AI-related incidents such as hallucinations or biased outputs. This includes defining escalation procedures and reporting mechanisms.
  • Vendor management: As organizations increasingly rely on third-party AI services, policies must address vendor evaluation criteria, contract requirements, and ongoing performance monitoring to ensure external AI providers meet legal obligations, data protection requirements, and operational expectations related to security, accountability, and transparency.

Given the rapid pace of AI development, policies should include review cycles, update mechanisms, and processes for incorporating new regulatory requirements or technological capabilities. They should also provide a framework for assessing emerging technologies and adapting policy coverage to reflect evolving risks and capabilities.

Finally, organizations should hold comprehensive education and training sessions to ensure that employees understand both the capabilities and limitations of AI tools, recognize potential risks, and follow organizational policies when using AI in their work.

Proactive Implementation

The GenAI revolution isn’t waiting for businesses to catch up—it’s already here, integrated into daily workflows. Organizations can either proactively implement robust governance frameworks to safely harness AI’s immense potential or risk falling behind in an increasingly complex and fast-moving landscape.

By establishing clear guidelines, accountability structures, and effective risk management protocols, organizations can confidently leverage AI capabilities to encourage innovation while maintaining oversight and minimizing risks. This approach not only builds stakeholder trust and ensures regulatory compliance but also encourages greater AI adoption and transparency among employees. With well-designed guardrails in place, employees can confidently and responsibly integrate GenAI into their work.

Ultimately, organizations that strike the right balance between innovation and responsibility will be best positioned to lead in the GenAI era.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 10, 2025
After making revisions to the initial draft notification released in November 2024, Thailand’s Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) has released an updated draft Notification on Additional Obligations for Digital Platform Service Operators of Online Marketplaces for Goods with Specific Characteristics under Section 18(2) of the Royal Decree on the Operation of Digital Platform Service Businesses Subject to Prior Notification B.E. 2565 (2022) B.E. … . A focus group session was also held to gather feedback from business operators. Below is a summary of key provisions in the new draft. Unchanged Items Some key concerns that remain unchanged from the previous version of the draft notification include the following: Offshore business operators running online marketplaces that act as intermediaries for the sale or exchange of goods and provide facility services for the sale of goods (referred to as “specific marketplace operators” in the draft) are required to establish a local entity in Thailand. However, the criteria for determining which operators are specific marketplace operators are still under discussion due to feedback from business operators. Specific marketplace operators must submit a compliance report to the ETDA along with their annual report each year. Specific marketplace operators must verify that “business users” (e.g., merchants) provide complete details about goods in accordance with product standardization requirements. Removed Obligations The updated draft notification has removed specific marketplace operators’ obligations to: Conduct Identity Assurance Level 2 (IAL2) verification of business users before onboarding them on their platforms. Submit a registry of business users’ information to the ETDA. Retain business users’ information for a specified retention period. Implement measures to filter reviews of products subject to specific standards. Revisions Key revisions made to the draft notification include the following: The effective date has been extended to 120 days after the notification’s publication in the Government Gazette,
March 18, 2025
On February 6, 2025, the prime minister of Vietnam, Pham Minh Chinh, chaired an online meeting to review the progress of Vietnam’s digital transformation agenda. The meeting assessed achievements under the National Digital Transformation Program and Project 06 on the development and application of population data, electronic identification, and authentication for national digital transformation for the period 2022-2025, with a vision to 2030, approved by the prime minister in 2022. The meeting also outlined key legislative and regulatory priorities for 2025, as set forth in Notice No. 56/TB-BPCP issued by the Government Office on February 23, 2025 (Notice 56). One of the central focuses of the 2025 digital transformation agenda is the development and issuance of laws and regulations governing digital technology, data management, and cybersecurity. Below are the key legal developments provided in Notice 56 that stakeholders should anticipate in the coming months. 1. Law on Digital Technology Industry The Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) has been tasked with finalizing the draft Law on Digital Technology Industry (DTI Law) for submission to the National Assembly at its 9th session in May 2025. This law is expected to establish a comprehensive legal framework for the digital technology sector, addressing regulatory gaps in emerging fields such as artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), cloud computing, big data and platform services to promote innovation, ensure data security, and support the growth of the digital economy in Vietnam. Concurrently, the MIC will expedite the issuance of guiding decrees to ensure the swift implementation of the DTI Law once enacted. 2. Law on Personal Data Protection and regulations guiding implementation of Data Law The Ministry of Public Security (MPS) is making efforts to finalize the long-anticipated Law on Personal Data Protection (PDPL)—data protection is currently governed by Decree No. 13/2023/ND-CP on
March 17, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam chapters to Data Protection and Cybersecurity Regulation in Southeast Asia, a wide-ranging guide published by Drew Network Asia (DNA). The resource provides a comprehensive overview of data protection and cybersecurity laws across the region, offering practical insight into compliance requirements and regulatory developments affecting organizations that handle personal data or operate digital services in Southeast Asia. The guide begins with a regional overview, including the broader ASEAN context and cooperation initiatives. Jurisdiction-specific chapters follow a consistent structure—covering data privacy and governance obligations, security requirements and breach notification, outsourcing and cross-border data transfers, and broader accountability and compliance measures. This format allows readers to compare regulatory approaches across markets such as Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and others. In addition to the country chapters, the publication addresses cybersecurity and privacy engineering challenges, providing guidance for organizations and outlining obligations applicable to data controllers, processors, and intermediaries. A dedicated section on data breach management across ASEAN examines notification requirements, response considerations, and practical steps for managing incidents in a regional or global context. The guide is intended to serve as a practical reference, and the authors note that specific legal requirements may vary depending on sector, processing activity, or evolving legislation. Readers seeking more detailed advice can contact the practitioners listed in each chapter. The full guide is available for download using the button below or directly from the DNA website.
March 13, 2025
Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance has released a draft Decree on Tax Administration for E-Commerce and Digital Platforms (“Draft Decree”), introducing significant tax compliance obligations that could reshape how digital platforms, and individuals and business households conducting business through the platforms, manage their tax responsibilities. Aimed at strengthening tax enforcement, the Draft Decree requires e-commerce and digital platforms to actively track and withhold taxes from business households and individual sellers, and remit payments to tax authorities. While it has not yet been promulgated, the Draft Decree is expected to take effect on April 1, 2025, leaving platforms with a limited window to prepare for compliance. Who Is Affected by the New Tax Rules? The Draft Decree significantly broadens the tax administration scope beyond traditional e-commerce platforms to cover a wide range of digital economy participants. Specifically, the Draft Decree places direct tax-related responsibilities on two major categories (collectively, “Regulated Operators”): E-commerce and digital platforms with payment functions (e.g., platforms that process buyer payments via e-wallets, bank transfers, cards, or cash-on-delivery); and Other digital-economy players that enable e-commerce transactions, including (i) intermediary service platforms connecting service providers with consumers, (ii) digital content platforms, (iii) online advertising providers, (iv) cloud computing and data storage providers, (v) social media platforms engaged in business activities (e.g., live-stream, in-app transactions), (vi) online education, gaming, and digital entertainment platforms generating revenue from digital transactions, (vii) Vietnam-based partners of foreign digital service providers facilitating local payments for overseas platforms, and (viii) intermediary payment service providers handling financial transactions for e-commerce activities. Under the Draft Decree, Regulated Operators will be required to track, report, and enforce tax compliance for both resident and nonresident individuals and households conducting business through their platforms (“Sellers”). What New Tax Obligations Do Platforms Face? Onshore platforms For the first time, Regulated Operators will