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​ 

April 9, 2026
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
April 3, 2026
On March 16, 2026, Vietnam’s Ministry of Public Security released a draft version of a new Decree on the Prevention and Combating of Cybercrime and High-Tech Crime to replace the currently effective Decree 25/2014/ND-CP. In the draft, the ministry has proposed a comprehensive regulatory framework aimed at addressing violations occurring within the cybersecurity domain, including measures related to intellectual property. Acts of Online IP Infringement Article 9 of the draft decree notably introduces specific provisions addressing online intellectual property infringement, with detailed lists of acts considered to constitute infringement in the online environment. Copyright and related rights infringement includes: Uploading or sharing works, performances, sound recordings, video recordings, broadcasts, computer programs, software, research, documents, theses, or other intellectual creations on digital platforms without the consent of the rights holder. Unauthorized livestreaming of copyrighted television programs, sporting events, or artistic performances. Uploading, sharing, storing, transmitting, or providing links to infringing works or digital content via websites, social networks, applications, or digital platforms. Providing or using software, tools, devices, or access codes to circumvent technological protection measures or evade lawful control mechanisms implemented by rights holders. Using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to replicate the ideas or structure of another person’s work without significant new creativity or without proper attribution, thereby causing damage to the original author. Industrial property infringement includes: Manufacturing, trading, advertising, or distributing counterfeit goods bearing counterfeit trademarks, geographical indications, or industrial designs, as well as goods infringing industrial property rights through online platforms. Unauthorized registration, appropriation, or use of domain names, account names, or digital identifiers that create confusion regarding the rights holder or the origin of goods or services. Producing, using, or offering for sale products containing all or part of a patented invention via online platforms. Advertising or introducing products with technical features or characteristics identical
April 3, 2026
Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established a comprehensive governance framework for the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) in the capital markets. The framework provides guidance to capital market business operators on understanding the risks associated with AI/ML implementation and adopting appropriate practices to build public confidence in Thailand’s capital markets. While the guidelines are principle-based rather than prescriptive, they reflect the SEC’s expectations for responsible AI/ML governance and are likely to inform supervisory activities and industry standards going forward. Scope The framework applies to capital market business operators supervised by the SEC. This includes, for example, securities and derivatives firms, asset management companies, mutual fund and private fund managers, investment advisors and investment consultants (including robo-advisory service providers), derivatives intermediaries, and other licensed intermediaries and market operators in the Thai capital markets that deploy AI/ML in their operations. Core Principles of the Guidelines The framework is presented as a best-practice manual rather than prescriptive regulation, providing guidance that regulated entities may apply to their AI/ML governance and risk management as appropriate. While currently nonbinding, the guidelines signal the SEC’s expectations for the sector, particularly in relation to other binding SEC regulations such as those covering IT risk management and market conduct. The guidelines name four core principles for AI/ML deployment: Fairness: Design and develop AI/ML with consideration for fairness, equality, and social diversity to prevent discrimination against individuals or groups. Legal and ethical compliance: Ensure AI/ML use aligns with applicable laws, ethical standards, and organizational values and policies. Accountability: Establish clear responsibility—both internally and externally—for AI/ML activities and outcomes. Transparency: Provide adequate disclosure to users about AI/ML use, including explainability of decisions and traceability of activities. AI/ML Best Practices The guidelines prescribe best practices across four stages of the AI/ML lifecycle, as described below.
April 2, 2026
Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) enforcement has entered a new phase, and the insurance industry is squarely in the regulatory spotlight. The Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) considers insurers “large-scale” processors of sensitive data—including health records, financial information, and biometric data—making the sector a focal point for enforcement action. In August 2025 alone, the PDPC issued administrative fines totaling THB 21.5 million, and fines for individual violations have ranged from THB 50,000 to THB 2 million. The PDPC has also deployed its “Eagle Eye Crawler,” an AI-driven surveillance tool that monitors websites around the clock for data leaks and noncompliant privacy notices. This article highlights the key regulatory developments directly affecting insurers and outlines practical steps toward compliance. What Has Changed: OIC and PDPC Alignment The Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) has synchronized its sector-specific rules with the PDPA through the Notification on Customer Personal Data Protection (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025). The combined effect of the PDPC’s general enforcement push and the OIC’s sectoral guidance creates four critical compliance areas for insurers. Consent unbundling. Consent for marketing must be strictly separated from the core insurance contract; bundling marketing consent into the policy application is no longer permissible. Agent and intermediary oversight. Insurance intermediaries are generally classified as data processors, meaning that insurers—as data controllers—must provide specific written instructions and security protocols to all agents and brokers. A 2026 enforcement trend shows controllers being held liable for the “weak security” of their vendors and downstream processors. Enhanced privacy notices. Insurers must provide a summary privacy notice alongside the full policy, plainly stating categories of data, purposes, lawful bases, disclosure recipients, cross-border transfers, retention periods, data subject rights, and easy marketing opt-out channels. DPO registration and ROPA. All organizations involved in “regular or systematic monitoring of data subjects on