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 2, 2021

Thailand’s New Electronic Meeting Laws and Security Measures

Informed Counsel

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a significant increase in the popularity of electronic meetings among businesses across the world, as physical meetings became unfeasible due to government lockdowns and regulations limiting gatherings to limit the risk of further spreading the disease. In Thailand, this turn of events has resulted in the promulgation of a new electronic meeting law to modernize rules that facilitate the convening of corporate entities’ statutory meetings as required under Thai law.

Electronic meetings in Thailand have been permitted to some degree since June 27, 2014, when the Announcement of the National Council for Peace and Order No. 74/2557 on Teleconferences through Electronic Means B.E. 2557 (2014) first allowed the practice, subject to various restrictions. However, many companies considered two strict requirements under this announcement to be impractical: at least one-third of the quorum for the electronic meeting had to physically attend the meeting at the designated meeting venue, which implies that no more than two-thirds of the quorum could choose to attend the meeting via electronic means; and all participants of the electronic meeting (whether attending electronically or in person) had to be physically present in Thailand at the time of the meeting, which effectively prohibited overseas participation.

New Rules for Electronic Meetings

The new electronic meeting law, the Royal Decree on Teleconferences through Electronic Means B.E. 2563 (2020), came into effect on April 19, 2020, replacing the 2014 order and relaxing its most onerous limitations in order to facilitate meetings of directors and shareholders via electronic means during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The key relaxations codified by the royal decree include allowing all attendees to attend meetings via electronic means, such as by phone or videoconferencing, from anywhere in the world. Furthermore, there is no longer a physical attendance requirement, and notices (and enclosures) calling a meeting can be distributed to participants via electronic mail, replacing the standard postal requirement of the 2014 announcement.

The new royal decree also needed to introduce certain statutory protocols in order to safeguard the integrity of the new meeting procedures. First, the meeting organizer must keep records of the meeting notice that is sent out electronically, and must verify the identities of the participants before the meeting starts. There must also be an audio or audiovisual record of the entire meeting (except for secret meetings), and the electronic traffic data of all attendees (i.e., the log file of usernames and login/logout dates and times) must be kept as evidence. Minutes of the meetings must also be documented, whether in an electronic or physical format.

Similar to the previous law, the new royal decree applies to board meetings and shareholders meetings of both private and public companies in Thailand, as well as to meetings of partnerships, trade associations, and chambers of commerce. Companies may choose to hold electronic meetings regardless of whether their articles of association have any provision specially permitting this. In addition, the standard rules and conditions for physical meetings still apply to electronic meetings, for instance, appointment of a proxy is allowed at a shareholders meeting but not at board meetings.

Security Measures for E-Meetings

To supplement the new royal decree, the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) issued a new set of mandatory security standards for electronic meetings in its Notification Re: Standards for Maintaining Security of Meetings via Electronic Means B.E. 2563 (2020). The notification, which came into effect on May 26, 2020, outlines various mandatory security measures and procedures for electronic meetings. It also regulates the role and functions of the “conference control system” and the “system controller.” While the new royal decree already addressed security measures to some degree through its statutory protocols, the MDES notification added the following key requirements:

  • Method of identity check. The meeting organizer may adopt any secured method of identity verification, such as username and password or one-time password.
  • Two-way communication. The meeting must have sufficient bandwidth to provide a clear and continuous communication channel—whether via interactive audio or video communication—to allow participants to interact and express opinions to one another without interruption throughout the meeting.
  • Conference control system. The chair of the meeting (or the system controller) must have technological access to control or restrict, whether permanently or temporarily, the participation of attendees during the meeting in case of necessity or emergency.
  • Access to documents and data. Attendees must be able to access documents and data presented during the meeting.
  • Voting mechanism. The meeting must grant access to the technological tools to facilitate voting by the attendees, whether in the form of a general vote or a secret vote;
  • Storage of records. The meeting must keep records and data in connection with the meeting, including method of identity check, method and results of votes, audio or audiovisual recording (except for secret meetings), attendees’ electronic traffic data, and occurrence of disruptions during the meeting (if any).
  • Troubleshooting. Attendees must be able to report disruptions and errors that occur during the meeting, and the organizer must arrange for proper solutions and preventive measures.
  • IT security standards. The meeting must meet minimum IT security in terms of confidentiality, integrity, accessibility, privacy and protection of personal data, and other IT security measures.

It has become a general and convenient practice for electronic meetings to be conducted via free or paid conference applications or platforms, such as MS Teams, Zoom, Google Meet, and so on. The Electronic Transaction Development Agency (ETDA) is empowered to verify and certify whether the conference control systems have the technical capabilities or functions to comply with the security measures set out by the MDES notification on e-meeting security. To date, several conference control systems have voluntarily completed the ETDA’s self-assessment, but only a few have opted to apply with ETDA for its official certification. Both groups are published on the ETDA website at https://www.etda.or.th.

Meeting organizers from all Thai companies should familiarize themselves with these new laws and rules on electronic meetings and carefully choose a conference control system that both complies with the regulations and is compatible with their needs. Regardless of the platform chosen, the royal decree and the associated MDES notification have taken a much-needed, modernizing step that significantly eases the process of corporate operations in Thailand. These developments are an encouraging indication of Thailand’s intent to facilitate international business in the country, and a welcome innovation for shareholders and board members.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

November 13, 2025
Tilleke & Gibbins has contributed the Thailand chapter to Franchise 2026, part of the International Comparative Legal Guides (ICLG) series published by Global Legal Group. This annual guide offers comparative analysis of franchise laws and regulations across jurisdictions worldwide, providing practical insights for businesses and legal practitioners operating in the global franchise sector. Each country chapter in the 12th edition follows a Q&A format covering key aspects of franchise law and operations, including: Relevant legislation and rules governing franchise transactions Business organization options for franchised operations Competition law considerations Protection of intellectual property and brands Liability issues and risk mitigation Governing law and dispute resolution Real estate matters Online trading regulations Termination requirements Joint employer risks and vicarious liability Currency controls and taxation Commercial agency considerations Good faith obligations and fair dealing requirements Ongoing relationship management Franchise renewal processes Franchise migration procedures Sustainability commitments Electronic signatures and document retention Current developments in the franchise sector The Thailand chapter, authored by Alan Adcock and Kasama Sriwatanakul, provides an in-depth overview of the legal landscape for franchising and franchising-related activities in Thailand. The complete Thailand chapter is available as a PDF below. The Thailand chapter—and the full Franchise 2026 guide—are also freely available on the ICLG website.
November 7, 2025
Thailand and the United States signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) titled “Cooperation to Diversify Global Critical Minerals Supply Chains and Promote Investments” on October 26, 2025, signaling a new strategic alignment aimed at developing Thailand’s mineral sector, particularly in rare earth elements (REEs). The MOU has implications for investments in technology, manufacturing, and other related sectors. This update outlines the key provisions of the MOU and the potential opportunities and legal navigating points for businesses. Objectives The primary driver of this agreement is the US initiative to diversify global supply chains for critical minerals and reduce reliance on current market leaders, particularly China. For Thailand, it represents a major opportunity to attract high-tech investment and develop its downstream processing industries. The cooperation is set to focus on five main areas: Technical knowledge: Exchange of technical expertise and international best practices to strengthen Thailand’s mining and processing sector. Joint cooperation: Establishing workshops, seminars, and scientific collaboration to boost innovation. Regulatory practice: Promoting good governance and streamlining regulatory and licensing procedures. Information sharing: Sharing data on potential projects and global market prices. Full-value chain: The MOU covers the entire mineral lifecycle, from exploration and extraction to processing, refining, and recycling. “First Opportunity to Invest” Clause The most debated provision within the MOU states that “participants expect to have the first opportunity to invest . . . in critical minerals assets that may be sold in Thailand.” Business implications: This clause is widely interpreted as granting US companies a first look or preferential access to investment opportunities in Thailand’s critical minerals sector. This could be a significant advantage for US-based or affiliated companies in mining, technology, and energy seeking to secure a foothold in a developing REE supply chain. Thai government position: Thai officials, including the prime minister, have publicly clarified
October 31, 2025
On September 29, 2025, Thailand’s Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC Office) published its Regulations on the Review and Certification of Binding Corporate Rules B.E. 2568 (2025) (the Regulations). The Regulations provide clarity on the PDPC Office’s approach to reviewing and certifying binding corporate rules (BCRs) under Section 29 of the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), and aim to facilitate international data transfers within a group of undertakings or enterprises (a “corporate group”). In conjunction with this development, the PDPC Office also approved BCRs for two companies operating in Thailand on September 30, 2025. This milestone represents the first concrete progress since the PDPC’s Notification on Criteria for the Protection of Personal Data Sent or Transferred to a Foreign Country pursuant to Section 29 of the PDPA B.E. 2566 (2023) came into effect in March 2024. Some key features of the Regulations are set out below. Categorization of BCRs BCRs are classified into two types: (1) BCRs for Controllers (BCR-C) and (2) BCRs for Processors (BCR-P). The category must be clearly specified when submitting the BCRs to the PDPC Office. Documentation Requirement The applicant must prepare and submit the application (a standard template may be provided by the PDPC Office in the future) along with supporting documents for review and certification in the Thai language. If the supporting documents are in a foreign language, a certified Thai translation should be provided. The translation must be notarized by a notary public or qualified person. Supporting documents may include, among others, a binding instrument such as an intra-group agreement, or a list of entities subject to the BCRs. Expedited Process Requirement Organizations with existing BCR approvals under the EU or UK GDPR, or from countries announced by the PDPC under Section 28, may apply through an
October 30, 2025
Recent events at a Thai listed company, where a proposal to remove the director was not successful, amid claims that a competitor was attempting to gain control of the company, illustrate how disputes over corporate control can unfold differently at the board level and shareholder level. At the board level, removing directors of a listed company mid-term to gain corporate control is not an easy task under Thai law, as it requires a higher threshold than appointing a new director, which typically only requires a simple majority vote in a listed company. At the shareholder level, Thailand’s tender offer and competition regimes add complexity where different shareholder groups act in concert to remove opposing board representatives or otherwise influence control. In this article, we will explore why the attempted removal of a director may fail, and how the tender offer regime may apply. Key Issues at a Glance Shareholder groups may seek to convene meetings to propose changes to board composition or company authority. Such proposals can be delayed or complicated by regulatory requirements and the need for additional disclosures. Regulatory authorities and minority shareholders may raise concerns when major shareholders coordinate to influence board control, especially if such actions could trigger tender offer or merger control obligations. Companies often respond by seeking further information on shareholder relationships and potential conflicts before proceeding. Why the Director Removal Failed Under Section 76 of the Public Limited Companies Act B.E. 2535 (as amended), the early removal of a director requires two conditions to be satisfied at the same meeting of shareholders: Headcount test: At least 75% of shareholders attending and entitled to vote must vote in favor. If multiple shareholders appoint the same person as proxy, each proxy is counted as a separate head for the purpose of the headcount test,