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, 2020

What Cambodia’s New Law on Electronic Commerce Means for Business

Informed Counsel

On November 2, 2019, Cambodia enacted the Law on Electronic Commerce (“E-commerce Law”). This development makes Cambodia the last member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)—one of the world’s fastest-growing internet markets—to adopt a domestic e-commerce law. The E-commerce Law addresses electronic communications, signatures, records, and evidence, and serves to clarify the legal environment for e-commerce in Cambodia.

In the last decade, Cambodia has experienced rapid development in the financial technology sector, and financial services and products have become more accessible to Cambodians. This financial inclusion, coupled with the availability of smart devices connected to the internet, enables local e-commerce startups and encourages foreign e-commerce businesses to enter the market. To strengthen trust and security in the online realm, Cambodia’s E-commerce Law regulates the activities of e-commerce service providers and intermediaries. The law also imposes consumer protection obligations, including data protection and cybersecurity obligations, on all e-commerce businesses. 

The E-commerce Law aims to regulate domestic and cross-border activities in Cambodia. All commercial and civil acts, documents, and transactions executed via an electronic system are subject to the E-commerce Law unless they are related to powers of attorney, wills and successions, or real estate.

The E-Commerce Law will take effect in May 2020. During the six-month gap between the law’s passage and its implementation, companies should familiarize themselves with the new obligations under the law, while government agencies are expected to issue regulations to clarify and implement the law. 

Electronic Communications   

The provisions on electronic communications that are found in a portion of Cambodia’s E-commerce Law primarily derive from two influential works of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL); the 1996 Model Law on Electronic Commerce (MLEC) and the 2005 United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts (the “Electronic Communications Convention” or ECC).

Cambodia’s E-commerce Law explicitly recognizes the validity, legal effect, admissibility, and enforceability of electronic communications and reconfirms that contracts can be made electronically. Furthermore, electronic communications may satisfy requirements imposed by outdated  laws (e.g., “written,” “signed,” or “original” documents), if they fulfill certain conditions set out in the law.

The E-commerce Law generally considers an electronic communication to be sent when it leaves the originator’s information system and to be received when it becomes capable of being retrieved by the addressee. The places of business of the originator and addressee, respectively, are considered as the locations where an electronic communication is dispatched and received.   

It should be noted that Cambodia’s E-commerce Law does not include comprehensive provisions on matters related to the attribution of electronic communications and acknowledgment of receipt, as suggested by the MLEC. For example, the MLEC clarifies that if an originator states that an email is conditional on receipt of its acknowledgment, that email would not be considered as sent until the originator receives the acknowledgment. The Cambodian legislation contains no such clarification.

Electronic Signatures, Electronic Records, and Electronic Evidence

The E-commerce Law sets conditions for electronic signatures, including digital and biometric signatures, and electronic records to be deemed secure. By meeting these statutory qualifications, secure electronic records are presumed to have not been altered, and secure electronic signatures are presumed to be of the signatories having the intent to sign.   

In late 2017, prior to the enactment of the E-commerce Law, Cambodia introduced a sub-decree on digital signatures. This regulation provides legal recognition to digital signatures with a digital signature certificate issued by a licensed digital signature certification authority. However, the sub-decree has not been implemented yet as no license has been issued to any digital signature certification authority. Cambodia is likely to start implementing the regulation at the same time as the E-commerce Law. It will be important to observe how these two legal instruments correspond with each other in practice.

Cambodia’s E-commerce Law, with certain provisions similar to the Model Law on Electronic Evidence by the Commonwealth of Nations, also supports the admissibility of electronic records as evidence in legal proceedings. The mere fact that evidence is an electronic record cannot be used as grounds to render the evidence inadmissible.

The E-commerce Law also establishes rules on the validity, integrity, and authenticity of electronic evidence. The validity of electronic evidence relies on the integrity of the electronic system that stores or records the data in question. The E-commerce Law determines circumstances in which an electronic record satisfies the element of integrity unless proven otherwise. The party introducing the evidence has the burden to prove its authenticity, and to do so the E-commerce Law allows that party to present the court with an authenticity certificate issued by, for example, a competent authority or a court-appointed expert.

E-commerce Service Providers and Intermediaries, and Electronic Payment Systems

E-commerce service providers and intermediaries are now required under the E-commerce Law to obtain operating licenses from the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) and the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications (MPTC). However, the definitions of e-commerce service providers and intermediaries are crafted broadly, and it is unclear whether these licensing requirements also capture offshore e-commerce service providers and intermediaries operating without any local presence or permanent establishment in Cambodia. Since the E-commerce Law states that exceptions to this licensing regime will be clarified in the future, we hope Cambodia will issue implementing regulations that address this ambiguity before the law is implemented in May 2020.

The E-commerce Law creates a safe harbor rule for e-commerce service providers and intermediaries whereby they are not liable for unlawful third-party content on their online platforms; however, they must comply with certain mandatory content removal procedures upon becoming aware of such content. Additionally, they are obligated to comply with an e-commerce code of conduct.

The E-commerce Law also reaffirms that e-commerce service providers and intermediaries are subject to tax laws and incentives, just like brick-and-mortar businesses.     

Payment service providers must also obtain authorization or a license from the National Bank of Cambodia (NBC) before commencing operations, such as operating a payment system, providing payment services, or issuing electronic payments. However, many existing banking and financial institutions in Cambodia have already been providing these payment services and have obtained necessary authorizations under various laws (e.g., the Prakas on Payment Service Providers and the Law on Banking and Financial Institutions). For that reason, it remains uncertain whether the E-commerce Law merely reiterates the existing licensing regime for payment service providers or establishes a new, separate one.

In addition, the E-commerce Law outlines situations where payment service providers must be liable for the damage caused to customers unless the damage is caused by force majeure or the customer’s own fault.

Consumer Protection and Data Protection

Besides obligations under the newly legislated Law on Consumer Protection, which are applicable to both online and offline businesses, the E-commerce Law imposes additional requirements to which e-commerce enterprises must adhere.

The E-commerce Law requires anyone selling goods or services using electronic communications, except insurance and security companies, to disclose information that is necessary for customers to decide whether to purchase the goods or services. The information must at least include names, addresses, contacts, costs of the products and services, and terms and conditions for payments, cancellation, refunds, and so on. Furthermore, it is strictly prohibited to send unsolicited communications without providing clear and straightforward opt-out instructions irrespective of the originator’s or recipient’s locations. 

Data protection rules that apply to all sectors have also been set out for the first time in the E-commerce Law. Any business that electronically stores personal information is now obligated to establish all necessary measures to ensure that the data are reasonably protected from loss or unauthorized access, use, alteration, leaks, or disclosures. In addition, a person who enters information inaccurately to an automated system that does not allow any modification has the right to correct or delete the inaccurate information.

The E-commerce Law is much-welcomed by consumers, and is a positive step for the country’s digital environment. In addition, the harmonization that it brings with other countries should encourage cross-border transactions and paperless interactions among businesses and between businesses and governmental bodies.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 6, 2026
Thailand’s Legislation Consideration Committee of the Ministry of Interior has ruled that in-game loot boxes in online games do not constitute gambling under the Gambling Act B.E. 2478 (1935). This first-of-its-kind ruling provides useful guidance for online game operators and digital entertainment companies operating in Thailand. Background The ruling came in response to an inquiry concerning an online role-playing game operator that launched a campaign featuring a loot box mechanism. The mechanism allowed players to purchase a token in exchange for the opportunity to receive a virtual loot box containing randomized in-game items. The key features of this were as follows: The items received were digital, noncash items usable only within the game. The items could not be exchanged, redeemed, or converted into cash with the game operator. Items may differ in rarity but remain purely virtual. The central question was whether paying money to obtain randomized in-game items constituted a risk-based activity involving the chance to receive money or property of monetary value, which would constitute gambling under the Gambling Act. Committee Ruling The committee reached the following conclusions regarding the characteristics of the game’s loot-box mechanism: No cash or monetary equivalent: Players did not receive cash or property that could be exchanged for cash. The in-game items were merely usage rights within the online game ecosystem. No real-world monetary valuation: There was no determination of item value in real currency, and no mechanism for redeeming or converting items into money with the game operator. Any off-platform trading of in-game items between players is irrelevant to online game operators, as any value arising from such transactions is determined by the market rather than by the operators themselves. Service fee characterization: Payments made by players purchasing in-game loot boxes constituted fees for online game services. Accordingly, the committee concluded
March 5, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a criminal complaint against a licensed digital asset broker, its overseas trading platform, and its executives for allegedly operating an unlicensed digital asset exchange targeting Thai customers. The case marks an escalation in the SEC’s enforcement efforts against unlicensed offshore platforms that attempt to serve Thai users through local licensed entities. Criminal Complaint On February 20, 2026, the SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Suppression Division against a local licensed digital asset broker, its overseas global trading platform, and its executives. The SEC alleges that the parties violated the Digital Asset Business Emergency Decree B.E. 2561 (2018) by cooperatively operating a digital asset exchange business on a cross-border basis since 2023 without the required SEC license. According to the SEC, the local broker promoted the overseas platform’s services to the public through Thai-language posts on social media channels, with services available exclusively to customers residing in Thailand. Access to the global platform was provided through the local broker’s website and mobile application. Customers who registered for the local broker’s services were automatically granted access to the global platform without having to undergo a separate identity verification process. The SEC also found that the local broker provided back-office system support services to the global platform. The SEC considers these activities to constitute joint operation of an unlicensed digital asset exchange. The former executives of the local broker are being held liable as the responsible persons during the relevant period. The SEC emphasized that the complaint initiates the criminal process, and the decision to prosecute or convict the accused parties will ultimately be made by law enforcement authorities and the criminal courts. Platform Blocking The SEC has also coordinated with the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society to block public
February 27, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) has officially implemented a new regulatory framework supervising systemically important retail payment systems (SIRPS), effective February 21, 2026, with PromptPay being the first payment system designated as a SIRPS. Under this new set of regulations, the BOT may designate payment systems under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017) as SIRPSs based on quantitative and qualitative assessments. Once a system is designated as a SIRPS, the operator becomes subject to expanded supervisory obligations beyond the general requirements of the Payment Systems Act. Enhanced Supervisory Requirements SIRPS operators must comply with a heightened supervisory regime across three key areas, outlined below. 1. Governance SIRPS operators must maintain robust and transparent governance structures, including: Balanced board composition, with at least one-third of the board comprising independent directors who represent stakeholders in the system (such as payment service providers, consumers, and experts). Independent directors may serve for no more than two consecutive terms. Subcommittees to assist the board in overseeing compliance, policy implementation, and operational strategy. Clear separation between executives responsible for risk and information security and those overseeing day-to-day business operations. Risk Management and System SecuritySIRPS operators must implement comprehensive risk management frameworks, including: Clear service agreements between the SIRPS operator and its direct participants (payment service providers who connect directly to the SIRPS), defining roles and responsibilities among stakeholders. These agreements must include obligations for direct SIRPS participants to supervise any indirect participants they onboard to ensure compliance with service agreements and business rules. A business continuity plan covering both IT and non-IT aspects, with annual review. The SIRPS must target service availability comparable to international payment infrastructures, including the ability to recover operations within two hours of a disruption and to maintain scalable operational capacity. Tools and controls to monitor and manage material or
February 26, 2026
Thailand is preparing to offer new tools for intellectual property enforcement as the Electronic Transactions Development Agency (ETDA) recently released for public consultation a draft notification requiring social media platforms to verify user identities and conduct know-your-customer (KYC) checks on advertisers. The draft Notification of the Electronic Transactions Commission on Measures to Prevent Technological Crimes for Social Media Service Providers, which is to be issued under the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023), as amended in 2025, primarily aims to combat online fraud and technology-related crimes. However, its new obligations also provide IP owners with valuable tools to identify anonymous infringers. Key Regulatory Mandates The draft notification imposes several verification requirements on social media platforms operating in Thailand. These requirements also strengthen IP rights holders’ ability to identify anonymous infringers, as platforms must: Verify user identities through registered phone numbers and link all accounts to verifiable identities. Conduct KYC checks on advertisers, including individuals, companies, and any third-party payers. Perform heightened identity checks for high-risk or repeat offenders before publishing advertisements. Promptly remove content flagged by the Anti-Technology Crime Division and prescreen advertisements for prohibited or high-risk content. How IP Owners Can Use This Notification for Enforcement The phone number–based verification requirement enables IP owners to work more effectively with enforcement authorities in tracing individuals or entities responsible for infringing content. The comprehensive advertiser KYC obligations, including mandatory disclosure of third-party payment sources, create a clear audit trail even when bad actors attempt to obscure their identity through intermediaries or shell accounts. This traceability is essential for pursuing damages and dismantling organized counterfeit operations. The ETDA is now considering adjustments to the draft notification after receiving comments during the public consultation period, which ended on February 2, 2026. Following finalization