U.S. Voices Concerns Over Thailand’s New Tech Crime Law

[webfact]

Picture courtesy of Thai PBS Facebook

 

The United States has raised concerns regarding Thailand’s newly revised emergency decree on technology crime, sparking a dialogue about its implications on digital platforms. Prasert Jantararuangtong, the Thai Minister of Digital Economy and Society, addressed these concerns on Tuesday, noting their potential impact but affirming the law's planned enforcement.

 

The revised decree, approved by Thailand’s cabinet on January 28, places responsibility jointly on banks and mobile operators for any customer losses due to technological crimes, conditional on compliance failures with the new regulations. Additionally, the amendment sets forth rules affecting social media platforms and websites, many of which are heavily used by Thai consumers and based in the United States.

 

In response to the US embassy's concerns, Mr Prasert stated that while the issues raised by various stakeholders, including Thailand’s mobile operators and the Thai Bankers’ Association, are acknowledged, they will not postpone implementing the legislation. Instead, Prasert plans to convene affected parties to foster mutual understanding regarding the law’s scope and application.

 

Importantly, the specific details of the amendment will remain undisclosed prior to enforcement to prevent any lobbying that could influence the drafting process. The decree, currently undergoing review by Thailand's Council of State, is expected to be published soon in the Royal Gazette.

The minister maintains that the new regulations aim to combat technology crimes and scams more effectively, protecting the public from financial harm. He cites a significant reduction in daily damages from such crimes—down from approximately THB 100 million (Thai Baht) to THB 33 million—as evidence of Thailand's ongoing efforts to curb illicit activities. These reductions were partly due to cutting off resources to crime centres in neighbouring countries like Myanmar, Laos, and Cambodia.

 

The amendment includes 16 articles highlighting key responsibilities for financial and telecom services. Companies are required to take swift action in suspending SIM cards associated with illegal activities and must expedite compensation for fraud victims. Additionally, the decree enhances the authority of officials to act against non-compliant platforms and stiffens penalties for the misuse of personal data.

 

As discussions around this tech crime legislation continue, the focus remains on balancing stringent regulatory measures with enabling a robust, secure digital economy. Observers from within and outside Thailand will undoubtedly continue to scrutinise the impact of these changes on international digital cooperation and user protection, reported Bangkok Post.

 

-- 2025-03-06

 

 

[JoePai]

the specific details of the amendment will remain undisclosed prior to enforcement to prevent any lobbying that could influence the drafting process

 

You can't make this stuff up !!!

[WDSmart]

This law, as described above, would not be as audacious as some would think. For example, right now, if two or three people with guns were to come into a bank's branch and rob the bank, or someone would dig their way into a bank's vault and steal money, the bank wouldn't charge their customers for that loss, would they? So, why should they not accept the risk of doing their business on websites or apps? 

[Purdey]

This is a big reason for not using banking apps. Risky.

[Puccini]

Bye-bye, e-banking in Thailand.

 

Details of the new emergency decree are kept secret until the decree is published in the Royal Gazette, but based on the details given in the news article it will render all existing e-banking contracts between banks and their customers null and void.

[topt]

1 hour ago, Puccini said:

Bye-bye, e-banking in Thailand.

 

Details of the new emergency decree are kept secret until the decree is published in the Royal Gazette, but based on the details given in the news article it will render all existing e-banking contracts between banks and their customers null and void.

Please explain how the "details" in the OP make you come to that conclusion?

[GreasyFingers]

If I provide a paid for service to anyone should I not be responsible if that service is used to defraud someone. If you provide a service you should be responsible for it. Sorry banks, True H and the others.