Throughout 2022, the Central Bank of Myanmar (CBM) has implemented a series of rules surrounding the compulsory conversion of foreign currency balances in the country. This began on April 3, when the CBM issued a notification directing foreign currency holders in Myanmar to convert their foreign earnings into Myanmar kyat (MMK), within one day, at the official exchange rate. Since then, the CBM has issued further clarifications and instructions for banks authorized to handle foreign currency, responded to some concerns from foreign investors by exempting certain foreign investment projects from the conversion requirement, and relaxed the currency conversion requirements for trade at the Chinese and Thai borders. The process has not been without some trial-and-error as well, with the CBM walking back some exemptions after they were enacted. Foreign investors and business owners, both in the country and abroad, have raised concerns about this centralized control of foreign currency flow and the depletion of foreign currency in Myanmar’s business community. To help readers understand the sometimes-surprising moves by the CBM over the past months, this article will summarize the key developments in the CBM’s efforts relating to foreign currency conversion. Establishment of Compulsory Exchange Requirement On April 3, 2022, the CBM issued Notification No. 12/2022 and Directive No. 4/2022 requiring nearly all individuals, companies, and other organizations in Myanmar to convert foreign-currency income received from abroad to MMK within one working day of receipt. These requirements took immediate effect for all transfers and applied retroactively to foreign currency balances already in the country. All authorized dealer (AD) banks (i.e., those licensed to exchange foreign currency) were instructed to convert foreign currency held in the foreign currency accounts of “internal residents”—which included locally registered companies, organizations, and offices; Myanmar branches of foreign companies; and individuals residing or established in Myanmar for at least

While much attention has been paid to the data localization requirements for foreign enterprises under Vietnam’s 2018 Cybersecurity Law (“CSL”) and the recently issued Decree 53 guiding its implementation, the corresponding requirements for domestic enterprises are often overlooked, despite being potentially more troublesome. Under Decree 53, “domestic enterprises” are defined to mean enterprises established or registered for establishment under Vietnamese law and having their head offices in Vietnam (Article 2.11), so this designation includes not only Vietnamese companies, but foreign-invested enterprises as well. Background Before analyzing the stipulations in Articles 26 and 27 of Decree 53 further guiding the data localization/storage requirements, it is worth restating the very problematic Article 26.3 of the CSL, which reads: “Domestic and foreign enterprises providing services on telecommunication networks or the internet or value-added services in cyberspace in Vietnam with activities of collecting, exploiting, analyzing, and/or* processing personal information data, data on the relationships of service users, or data generated by service users in Vietnam must store such data in Vietnam for the period prescribed by the government. Foreign enterprises mentioned in this clause must open branches or representative offices in Vietnam.” [* Note: The Vietnamese text simply uses a comma here, without specifying whether this should be “and” or “or,” leading to additional problems in interpretation.] Because of this very broad and ambiguous wording, Article 26.3 of the CSL required further guidance from the government and remained unenforced for more than three years after the CSL took effect on January 1, 2019. Decree 53 guiding the implementation of the CSL was finally issued on August 15, 2022, and provides additional clarity on this matter. But does Decree 53 provide sufficient guidelines for implementation with regard to domestic enterprises? Scope of Application With regard to foreign enterprises, although there remains some ambiguity, Decree 53 provides clearer guidelines by specifying 10 types

「中小企業」 (SMEs: Small and Medium Enterprises) に対する商品価格・サービス料の支払いにおける与信期間の上限等を定めた2021年5月24日付のタイ取引競争委員会 (TCC: Trade Competition Commission)布告は2021年12月から施行されていた。 この布告においては、「中小企業」が製品やサービスを販売する場合の「中小企業」に対する支払いにおいて与信期間の上限を規定していた。法定の期間よりも長い与信期間を設定することは、仏歴2560年（西暦2017年）取引競争法に違反する不公正取引行為に該当するとされた。上記布告においては、「中小企業」の定義を下記の通りに規定していた。   改正前の「中小企業」の定義 製造業: 従業員数200人以下、又は 年間売上高5億バーツ以下 サービス業、卸売業、小売業: 従業員数100人以下、又は 年間売上高3億バーツ以下 この度、2022年７月６日付のタイ取引競争委員会布告においては「中小企業」の定義が以下の通りに改正された。   改正後の「中小企業」の定義 製造業: 従業員数200人以下、且つ 年間売上高5億バーツ以下 サービス業、卸売業、小売業: 従業員数100人以下、且つ 年間売上高3億バーツ以下   改正前においては、従業員数基準又は売上高基準のどちらか一方のみを満たせばよいことになっていた。 改正後の「中小企業」の定義においては、「中小企業」とみなされるためには、従業員数基準と売上高基準の両方の基準を満たすことが必要とされている。この改正により、「中小企業」に該当する事業者が減少することが予測される。 布告に基づく与信期間を要請するためには、「中小企業」は、従業員数基準及び売上高基準を満たすことを証明する書類を取引先に提出しなければならない。 今回改正された「中 小企業」の定義は2022年9月16日から施行された   備考：本和文は英文記事から作成しました。原文については、以下のリンクをご参照ください。 Thailand Tightens Definition of SMEs Eligible for Special Protection from Unfair Credit Terms

Thailand’s Trade Competition Commission has amended the guidelines prohibiting large purchasers from setting unfair credit terms for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The new guidelines, which were published in the Government Gazette on August 17, 2022, revise the definition of SMEs and clarify the duties of concerned parties. The original guidelines, which took effect in December 2021, set a favorable maximum period for credit terms for SMEs selling products or services to a third-party purchaser. Prescribing longer credit terms than the mandatory period would constitute an unfair trade practice in violation of the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017). In defining what businesses are considered SMEs, the guidelines set thresholds for the number of employees and amount of annual turnover. The amended guidelines maintain these thresholds, but the new guidelines require that both employee-number and turnover thresholds be met in order for a business to be considered an SME. In contrast, the original guidelines only required either the employee-number threshold or the turnover threshold to be met. This amendment will likely mean that fewer business operators qualify as SMEs. Accordingly, two types of businesses are defined as SMEs under the guidelines: Manufacturers of goods with up to 200 employees and an annual turnover of no more than THB 500 million (approximately USD 13.5 million); or Service providers or wholesale or retail businesses with up to 100 employees and an annual turnover of no more than THB 300 million (approximately USD 8.1 million). To benefit from protection under the new guidelines against unfair credit terms, SMEs must provide documents proving the number of employees and the amount of annual turnover to trade partners that purchase goods or services from them. The new guidelines come into force on September 16, 2022. For more information on the unfair credit term guidelines, or on any aspect of compliance with Thailand’s antitrust

The Thai Customs Department has issued a notification that changes the customs recordation system and the customs procedures for the seizure of counterfeit and pirated goods. Customs Notification on the Export, Import, and Transit of Trademark- and Copyright-Infringing Goods was published in the Government Gazette on August 4, 2022, and had gone into effect on July 29, 2022. Previously, trademark owners seeking customs recordation needed to record the relevant information with the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP), but under the new notification, both trademark and copyright owners can record their intellectual property information with the Customs Department directly. The system and procedures established by the notification are detailed below. Customs Recordation System Trademark or copyright owners (or their representatives) may file an application specifying any information that customs officers can use to verify the authenticity of goods being exported, imported, or transited through Thailand. The application can be filed with the Enforcement Division of the Customs Department. The information in the application will be kept for three years from the date of receipt (or for the remaining period of trademark or copyright protection, if less than three years). Renewals can be filed no later than 30 days before the expiry date. Any changes in information must be made with the Enforcement Division. Ex Officio Impounding Procedure When customs officers suspect any goods of infringing intellectual property rights according to the information recorded, they will impound the goods and inform the exporter, importer, or transit person (or agent) as well as the trademark or copyright owner. If the customs officers cannot contact the exporter, importer, or transit person (or agent), or if this person does not oppose the action within three days, the impounded items will be deemed infringing goods. Importantly, if the exporter, importer, or transit person admits that the goods are infringing, the officers will prepare a

タイの現在の裁判手続の特徴的な要素の一つは、証人の法廷証言の記録を作成する方法にある。タイ裁判所で用いられる典型的な方法は、裁判所の速記官が逐語的記録を作成するのではなく、裁判官が証人の法廷陳述の要約を述べることである。すなわち、現在の方法は、事実審裁判官が、当事者の質問に対する証人の回答を聞いた後、裁判官自身の理解に基づいて、証人の答えを要約したものをレコーダーに録音し、裁判所書記官がそれを文字に起こして読みあげ、すべての当事者と証人が内容の正確性を確認するというものである。 しかし、タイ政府は現在、証人の証言を録画することによって、この方法を変えることを検討している。 タイでは、中央知的財産・国際貿易裁判所や中央破産裁判所で扱われているいくつかの裁判で、証人の証言のビデオ録画が導入されていた。しかし、2021年10月の規則において特定の重要事件や証人の動きが証言の重要な要素となる場合にビデオ録画の使用が認められるまで、一般的な刑事事件や民事事件では証人の証言のビデオ録画は行われていなかった。同規則の発効以降、被告人の犯行時の動きを供述する目撃者の証言など、証言中の動きが裁判所の判断の重要な要素となるいくつかの刑事事件では、証人の証言のビデオが録画された。 これまでのところ、このビデオ録画の方法がとられたのはごく少数の事件ではあるが、この実務が実行可能であることが分かり、準備も整ったため、タイは、バンコクの刑事事件を皮切りに、すべての裁判でビデオ録画を活用することを検討している。 証人の供述をビデオに記録することは、裁判官が証言について、証人の正確な言葉や身振りを含めて検討することができるため、特に証人の信頼性を評価するうえで役立つと考えられる。さらに、当事者は、裁判官が証人の答弁を要約し、裁判所書記官がそれを書き写すのを待つ必要がなくなるため、証言手続にかかる時間を短縮できる。ただしその代わり、証人の証言は法廷内の複数のカメラで録画されることになる。 しかし、この新しい方法の欠点の1つは、録画と証言記録が当事者に提供されないことである。当事者は裁判所の施設（利用可能な視聴装置は限られている）で録画の閲覧を求めることしかできない。当事者は（裁判所の裁量で）証言に関する裁判所のメモを入手することもできるが、このメモ自体を証人の証言として引用することはできない。また、当事者が、裁判所に証人の証言を検討してもらいたい場合、当事 者は証言の録画のタイムスタンプを引用しなければならないため、証言を引用する弁論（例えば、最終準備書面、不服申立書等）の準備に影響を及ぼす。さらに当事者の弁護士は、証人の発言を記録するためのスタッフを連れてくる必要が生じ、より手間と費用がかかることになる。 証人の証言を録画するこの新しい方法は、（当事者が同意すれば）ラチャダ刑事裁判所のいくつかの法廷で最初に試験的なプロジェクトとして行われることが予定されている。この新しい方法がうまくいけば、タイ最高裁判所長官は、証人の証言を記録する現在の方法を取り消し、この新しい証言のビデオ録画の方法を広範に実施できるような別の規則を発行すると思われる。   備考：本和文は英文記事を翻訳したものです。原文については、以下のリンクをご参照ください。Thailand Considers Expanding Use of Video to Record Witnesses’ Courtroom Testimony

One unique element of Thailand’s current court procedure is in the way records of witnesses’ courtroom testimony are created. Instead of using a court stenographer to create a verbatim record, the typical method used in Thai courts is for the judge to provide a summary of the witnesses’ courtroom statements. After listening to a witness’ answers to the parties’ questions, the trial judge speaks a summary of the witness’ answers—according to the judge’s own understanding—into an audio recorder, and a court clerk then transcribes it so that it can be read for all parties and the witness to confirm the accuracy of the content. However, Thailand is now exploring ways to update this practice with a system that creates video recordings of witness testimony. Creating a video record of witness testimony was introduced into the Thai court system for some court cases handled by the Intellectual Property and International Trade Court and the Central Bankruptcy Court. However, recording video of witness testimony was not done in general criminal or civil cases until an October 2021 regulation allowed use of video recording in certain important cases and when a witness’ movement is an important element of the testimony. Since then, video of witness testimony was recorded in some criminal cases when the movement of the witness during the testimony was an important factor for the court to consider in deciding the case, such as an eyewitness testifying about a defendant’s movement in committing a crime. So far the practice has remained rare, but it has been done enough to demonstrate the viability of the practice. Now that this has proved ready, Thailand is considering widening the use of video recording for witness testimony in all court cases, starting with criminal cases in Bangkok. Recording witness statements on video is thought to be especially helpful

The Thai National Cybersecurity Committee (NCSC), as required by the Cybersecurity Act, reported to the cabinet in mid-August on trends and developments regarding cyber incidents in Thailand. According to the NCSC, the top five most common cyber incidents involve website phishing, website defacement, data leakage, data security vulnerabilities, and ransomware. Reported incidents of cyberattacks have increased in recent years. The report stated that affected organizations primarily responded to cyber incidents and attacks by notifying the NCSC about the incident and the remedial actions planned or taken, and conducting internal training to increase awareness of cyber threats. Only two organizations chose to conduct IT risk assessments and vulnerability tests as preventive measures against future cyber threats. The NCSC report also showed that aside from telecom infrastructure, energy and utilities, and education operators falling victim to cyberattacks, healthcare, webhosting, and data center operators have also become “more common victims” of cyber incidents. The NCSC recommended that all organizations prepare for inevitable future cyber incidents. This includes ensuring that businesses and organizations comply with international standards, which includes measures that are recognized and incorporated in Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) and Cybersecurity Act. Conducting internal training for employees as well as directors and officers is also recommended by the NCSC, as this can help prevent cyber incidents and ensure that businesses comply with the minimum required security standards issued by the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) in their Notification Re: Security Measures of the Data Controller B.E. 2565 (2022), which came into effect on June 21, 2022. Industry-specific minimum required security standards (e.g., those regulated by the Bank of Thailand, Office of Insurance Commission, etc.) should also be considered in conjunction with those in this PDPC notification—particularly when sectoral requirements are more stringent than the PDPC’s recommended measures. PDPA statutory penalties include civil liabilities with punitive