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

April 9, 2026

Thailand’s Public Consultation on Proposed PDPA Guidelines: Key Updates

Subscribe to Updates

As part of its ongoing public consultation process for the development of new practical guidelines under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA), Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) held a two‑day public hearing on April 1–2, 2026. The hearing followed an online questionnaire and stakeholder engagement activities conducted in March 2026 and reflects the PDPC’s continued efforts to develop guidance that aligns international regulatory standards with Thai operational realities.

The public hearing provided a forum for participants from both the public and private sectors to exchange views with the PDPC on the proposed guidance so that it responds to the needs of the business community while supporting effective and balanced enforcement of the PDPA. The PDPC emphasized that the consultation process is part of a wider policy objective to build trust in the convenient, secure, and internationally aligned exchange of data.

Structure of the Consultation Process

According to the PDPC, the initiative to develop the draft PDPA guidelines is being implemented through three core phases:

  • Review of international best practices. The PDPC has conducted a comparative review of data protection guidance and regulatory approaches in jurisdictions with internationally recognized standards, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, the European Union (EU), and Japan. These materials are intended to serve as a reference point for developing practical recommendations across key subject areas under the PDPA.
  • Identification of practical issues and challenges. To ensure that the guidelines respond to real‑world compliance challenges in Thailand, the PDPC has gathered views from a broad range of stakeholders across the public sector, the private sector, and the general public. This phase included focus group discussions and questionnaires aimed at identifying areas to provide organizations with greater clarity and consistency on regulatory expectations.
  • Preparation of draft guidelines. Insights from the comparative study and stakeholder feedback are being consolidated to prepare draft guidance covering six core thematic areas (see the following section), intended to reflect both international standards and the practical realities of PDPA implementation in Thailand. The input gathered will be used to inform a draft set of guidelines.

Overview of Draft Guidelines

The consultation process has now advanced beyond open‑ended issue identification, with the PDPC presenting substantive draft guidelines that provide clearer insight into the regulatory focus of the six core thematic areas:

  • Lawful basis for processing personal data. The draft guidelines clarify the importance of lawful basis and lay out how organizations should identify, assess, and document lawful bases for the collection, use, and disclosure of personal data. They emphasize necessity, proportionality, and accountability and address both general and sensitive personal data, supported by practical examples, checklists, and FAQs.
  • Security measures and personal data breach notification. To address this area, the draft guidelines set out a structured framework for security measures, covering technical, administrative, and physical measures, as well as consideration for conducting data protection impact assessments (DPIAs) and managing risks arising from third parties and data transfers. They further provide detailed operational guidance on identifying and assessing personal data breaches, determining notification obligations, incident response procedures, documentation, and timelines for notifying the Office of the PDPC and affected data subjects.
  • Data protection officers (DPOs). The draft guidance clarifies when an organization is required to appoint a DPO and sets out expectations regarding the DPO’s role, professional qualifications, independence, reporting lines, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. It also includes checklists for key compliance concerns, such as the appointment process, the DPO’s position within the organization, and accessibility to data subjects and the Office of the PDPC.
  • Marketing and direct marketing. These guidelines also set out relevant data protection principles for the use of personal data for marketing and direct marketing purposes, such as purpose limitation, data minimization, lawful bases for processing, and applicable data subject rights. They categorize different types of marketing activities (including direct marketing, online tracking, profiling, and platform‑based targeting), provide practical organizational procedures on transparency, opt‑out mechanisms, and consent withdrawal, and provide illustrative case studies and FAQs on common marketing scenarios.
  • Records of processing activities (ROPAs). The draft ROPA guidelines position ROPAs as a core accountability and compliance tool, highlighting mandatory content, the roles of controllers and processors, and a structured approach to preparation, review, and updating ROPAs. This includes practical examples (e.g., HR, customer management, IT vendors, CCTV), templates, and a questionnaire for gathering information within the organization for filling in the ROPA.
  • Use of CCTV and access control systems. The guidelines address personal data processing involving CCTV and related surveillance technologies in housing estates and condominiums, with the objective of promoting PDPA‑compliant, industry‑consistent practices. Also covered are common risk areas, such as visitor management, biometrics, license plate recognition, and resident portals, as well as practical guidance and FAQs for typical operational scenarios.

Regulatory Signals

The April 1–2 public hearing indicates that the PDPC is moving into a more mature, internationally informed phase of PDPA guidance development while remaining attentive to domestic operational challenges. Although the forthcoming guidelines will not have the force of law, they are expected to influence regulatory expectations, compliance assessments, and enforcement decisions.

Organizations should therefore anticipate greater clarity but not a relaxation of PDPA obligations, and may wish to begin reviewing current compliance frameworks, particularly in higher‑risk processing areas, internal documentation practices, and governance arrangements, in preparation for the final guidance.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 9, 2026
Vietnam has taken a decisive step into the global artificial intelligence regulatory landscape with the promulgation of the Law on Artificial Intelligence No. 134/2025/QH15 (AI Law), adopted on December 10, 2025, and effective from March 1, 2026. As one of the earliest comprehensive, standalone AI statutes in Southeast Asia, the AI Law signals Vietnam’s ambition to position itself as both an innovation-friendly and governance-conscious AI market. In doing so, the legislature has also streamlined Vietnam’s AI regulatory architecture. The AI Law repeals most AI-related provisions previously embedded in the Law on Digital Technology Industry No. 71/2025/QH15, consolidating AI governance under a single, unified legal framework. This structural move underscores an intent to provide greater regulatory clarity and coherence for businesses operating across the AI value chain. Against this backdrop, the key question for AI developers, providers, deployers, and governance teams is how the new risk-based framework will shape compliance expectations, operational decisions, and governance design in practice. This article examines the new AI Law through that practical lens, focusing on what it means for AI businesses operating in or into Vietnam. Scope of Application The AI Law applies broadly to Vietnamese organizations and individuals, as well as foreign entities that participate in AI-related activities within Vietnam. The law expressly excludes AI activities conducted solely for national defense, security, and cryptography purposes. A defining feature of the AI Law is that it regulates by role, not by industry. It distinguishes between: Developers, who design, build, train, test, or fine-tune AI models and have direct control over the technical methods, training data, or model parameters; Providers, who place AI systems on the market or put them into use under their own names; Deployers, who use AI systems under their control in professional, commercial, or service-provision activities; Users, who interact with AI
Read More
January 9, 2026
Thailand continues to advance its legal and regulatory framework for the technology sector, with several key laws undergoing review and proposed amendments. These developments reflect Thailand’s broader efforts to ensure that its regulatory landscape keeps pace with rapid technological change and aligns more closely with international standards and best practices. The following are key legal developments and proposed legislative reforms in 2026 that are expected to impact businesses operating in the technology sector and the broader Thai business landscape. Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) Following the full enforcement of Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) in June 2022, businesses and practitioners have identified practical implementation challenges and interpretative issues. These challenges were reflected in an effectiveness assessment conducted by the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) in late 2024. The PDPC published a set of principles for public consultation to identify issues and directions for potential amendments to the PDPA. Key issues: Emerging issues include clarifying the definitions of “data controller,” “data processor,” and “criminal record”; revisiting the scope of sensitive personal data to better reflect Thailand’s context; proposing amendments to the hierarchy of legal bases to avoid misconceptions of consent as the default legal basis; and clarifying the required level of expressiveness for explicit consent, as well as rules for collecting personal data from other sources. Current status: The first round of public consultation has concluded. Next steps: The proposed amendments are proceeding to a revised draft following the consultation outcomes. Cybersecurity Act B.E. 2562 (2019) Thailand is moving forward with proposed amendments to enhance the effectiveness of its national cybersecurity framework, as evolving digital technologies bring new risks such as misinformation, system intrusions, and attacks on critical infrastructure, making cybersecurity a national priority. Key issues: The amendments aim to clarify and strengthen
Read More
January 8, 2026
Thailand’s Digital Government Development Agency (DGA) has proposed new standards that would require government agencies to select cloud services exclusively from a preapproved shortlist of providers. The draft Digital Government Standards re: Cloud Service Provider Standards aims to strengthen procurement confidence and reduce risks associated with selecting cloud service providers that do not meet the required standards. A public hearing period on these standards concluded on December 27, 2025. The DGA will now review submitted comments and consider revising the standards accordingly. Shortlisted Cloud Service Provider Tiers The draft standards establish three tiers of cloud service providers based on their assessed service capability levels, core qualifications, and certifications. The DGA sets qualification requirements for each tier, and it is at the discretion of each agency to select the tier of cloud service provider that best suits its operational needs, as follows: Tier 1 cloud service providers are suitable for providing services involving disclosable official data. Tier 2 cloud service providers are suitable for handling official data and protected data, such as personal data, which requires a high-security public cloud (e.g., virtual private cloud). Tier 3 cloud service providers are suitable for providing services to agencies with specific regulatory and security requirements that handle highly protected data, such as the national security system. These providers must offer sovereign or hybrid cloud as stipulated by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society. All tiers of cloud service providers must be legal entities incorporated under Thai law and can be authorized distributors of offshore cloud service providers. However, each tier will be subject to different requirements, including infrastructure obligations. Government agencies are encouraged to select a cloud service provider appropriate for their intended use. For example, if a government agency intends to procure cloud services for operating applications that process personal data,
Read More
January 8, 2026
Thailand has enacted comprehensive sexual harassment legislation that significantly expands criminal penalties and creates new compliance obligations for online platform operators. The Act Amending the Penal Code (No. 30) B.E. 2568 (2025), enacted on December 29, 2025, and taking effect the following day, introduces a comprehensive definition of sexual harassment, establishes new criminal offenses with graduated penalties, and imposes content removal obligations on social media platforms and computer system service providers. The amendment, which establishes a comprehensive framework for addressing sexual harassment in both physical and digital environments, significantly expands legal exposure for online service operators. It also grants courts authority to order takedowns of violating data accessible to the public. Definition of Sexual Harassment The law introduces “sexual harassment” as a distinct statutory concept covering physical conduct, verbal conduct, sounds, gestures, expressions, postures, communications, surveillance, stalking, and acts committed through computer systems or electronic devices. Conduct qualifies as sexual harassment when it is sexual in nature and likely to cause the victim distress, annoyance, embarrassment, humiliation, fear, or a sense of sexual insecurity. Criminal Offenses and Penalties The amended Penal Code establishes graduated penalties based on the severity and context of the harassment—including enhanced penalties for public or online conduct. For instance: Basic sexual harassment is punishable by imprisonment for up to one year, a fine of up to THB 20,000, or both. Continuous or repeated harassment that prevents normal life escalates penalties to imprisonment for up to two years, a fine of up to THB 40,000, or both. Critically for online operators, harassment committed in public places, in the presence of the public, or through computer systems accessible to the general public triggers imprisonment for up to three years, a fine of up to THB 60,000, or both. Acts of harassment committed by supervisors, employers, or others
Read More