Reviewed by Wichuda Atthamethakon, LL.M., Thai Bar Licence 3149/2556, for ThaiLawOnline, a Thai law firm acting for foreigners since 2006.
Update log
- 3 November 2026: Added the statute box with Thai, English and French text and checked the page against the official text
Thailand is one of the few countries where defamation is still a criminal offence. Most Western countries treat defamation as a purely civil matter. Thailand is different. Thai law allows both prosecutors and private complainants to seek imprisonment for statements that harm another person’s reputation.
This guide covers the full legal framework for defamation in Thailand. It explains the criminal provisions under the Thai Criminal Code, the civil remedies under the Civil and Commercial Code, and the additional liability under the Computer Crime Act. It is written for expatriates, business owners, journalists, and content creators who need to understand their legal exposure.
For a detailed analysis of how these laws apply to social media, see our guide on online and social media defamation in Thailand. For all available legal defences and landmark court rulings, see our article on defamation defences and Supreme Court decisions. If you are a foreigner facing defamation charges, read our practical guide for foreigners facing defamation in Thailand.
The Thai legal system’s approach to defamation reflects deep cultural values around reputation, social harmony, and respect. However, this creates a legal minefield for foreigners accustomed to broader freedom of expression rights. Between 2015 and 2021, more than 25,000 defamation cases have been filed. ARTICLE 19 found many of them brought against critics, activists and journalists. These laws can be used as a weapon against critics, whistleblowers, and anyone who speaks out against powerful interests.
Understanding the defamation laws in Thailand: is essential for anyone engaging in public discourse. Many expatriates have faced severe repercussions due to misunderstandings about these laws.
Table of Contents
1. Legislative History of Defamation in Thailand
The Penal Law of R.S. 127 (B.E. 2451 / 1908)
Thailand’s earliest codified defamation provisions appeared in the Penal Law of R.S. 127 (B.E. 2451). This law was promulgated in 1908 during King Chulalongkorn’s reign. The code was heavily influenced by European civil law traditions, particularly French and Japanese models. It introduced the concept of criminal liability for injuring another person’s reputation.
Defamation was already treated as a criminal matter in this early code. This reflected the Thai legal tradition of protecting personal honour through penal sanctions rather than purely civil remedies.
The Criminal Code B.E. 2499 (1956)
In 1956, King Bhumibol Adulyadej signed into law the Criminal Code B.E. 2499. It came into force on 1 January 1957. This code replaced the 1908 Penal Law and consolidated all criminal provisions into a single statute.
The defamation provisions were codified in Sections 326 through 333 of Book 2, Title 11, under the heading “Offences Relating to Liberty and Reputation.” The drafters drew upon continental European legal models and adapted them to Thai social values. Personal reputation and face (หน้าตา) carry significant weight in Thai daily life. The dual approach of criminalising defamation while also providing civil remedies was a deliberate legislative choice.
Penal Code (No. 11) Amendment Act B.E. 2535 (1992)
The most significant amendment to the defamation provisions came with the Penal Code (No. 11) Amendment Act B.E. 2535 (1992). This amendment revised Section 326 by adjusting the penalties and refining the elements of the offence. Cases committed before the enforcement date continued to be prosecuted under the original text of Section 326.
The Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007) and Its 2017 Amendment
The rise of the internet prompted the enactment of the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007). This Act created a parallel track of liability for online statements. It was significantly amended in 2017, broadening its scope and increasing penalties. For a full analysis, see our guide on online and social media defamation in Thailand.
Criminal Procedure Code Amendments (2019)
In 2019, the Thai government amended the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to address frivolous defamation suits. In a case brought by a private prosecutor, section 161/1 requires the court to dismiss the charge if it was brought in bad faith or by distorting the facts to harass or take advantage of the defendant, and bars the prosecutor from filing it again. Section 165/2 lets the defendant, at the preliminary examination, point the court to important facts or law showing the case has no grounds, and name witnesses or documents that the court may then call as its own witnesses. These anti-SLAPP provisions are analysed in detail in our article on defamation defences and Supreme Court decisions.
2. Criminal Defamation: Sections 326 to 333 of the Criminal Code
The core of Thai defamation law sits in Sections 326 through 333 of the Criminal Code B.E. 2499. These eight sections establish the offences, penalties, defences, and procedural rules that govern criminal defamation.
Section 326: Simple Defamation (หมิ่นประมาท)
Section 326 is the foundation of criminal defamation in Thailand. It provides:
“Whoever imputes anything to the other person before a third person in a manner likely to impair the reputation of such other person or to expose such other person to be hated or scorned, is said to commit defamation, and shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year or fined not exceeding twenty thousand Baht, or both.”
Three elements must be proven for a conviction under Section 326:
- An imputation: a statement attributing something to the victim.
- Communication before a third person: the statement must be conveyed to at least one person other than the victim.
- Likelihood of reputational harm: the statement must be likely to damage the victim’s reputation or subject them to hatred or contempt.
The prosecution does not need to prove that actual harm occurred. The mere likelihood is sufficient. The accused must, however, have made the imputation intentionally: criminal liability requires intent unless the law expressly punishes negligence (Section 59), and there is no negligent form of criminal defamation. What the prosecution need not prove is an intention to cause harm, or that harm actually followed.
Section 327: Defamation of the Deceased
Section 327 extends defamation protection beyond death. Imputing anything to a deceased person before a third person is punishable under the same penalties as Section 326 when the imputation is likely to make the deceased’s father, mother, spouse or child lose reputation or be despised or hated. This reflects the Thai cultural concept that a person’s reputation extends to their family.
Section 328: Defamation by Publication (Libel)
Section 328 creates an aggravated offence for statements made through publication or broadcast:
“If the offence of defamation be committed by means of publication of a document, drawing, painting, cinematograph film, picture, or letters made visible by any means, recording tape, or recording picture, or broadcasting or spreading the picture, or by any other means, the offender shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding two years and fined not exceeding two hundred thousand Baht.”
Thai courts have consistently held that social media posts, blog entries, and online comments qualify as “publication” under Section 328. The penalties are harsher than Section 326: up to two years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to 200,000 Baht. For Section 328, imprisonment and fine are cumulative. The court must impose both.
Section 329: Statutory Defences
Section 329 provides four categories of protected expression when statements are made in good faith. These include self-justification, official functions, fair comment on public matters, and fair reporting of open proceedings in court or at a meeting. For a full analysis with Supreme Court interpretations, see our dedicated guide on defamation defences in Thailand.
Section 330: The Truth Defence
Section 330 provides that a defendant who proves the imputation true is not punished. Proof is not allowed, however, where the imputation concerns a personal matter and proving it would not benefit the public, so a true statement about a private matter can still be punished. This is a critical distinction from common law jurisdictions where truth is generally an absolute defence.
Section 331: Privilege for Court Proceedings
Section 331 provides absolute privilege for statements made by parties or their lawyers during court proceedings. Any opinion expressed in court in favour of a party’s case shall not give rise to defamation liability.
Section 332: Court Orders Upon Conviction
Section 332 empowers the court to order the seizure and destruction of defamatory material. The court may also order publication of its judgment at the convicted person’s expense.
Section 333: Compoundable Offence
Section 333 classifies defamation as a compoundable offence (ความผิดอันยอมความได้). The case can only be initiated through a private complaint by the injured party. The State cannot prosecute on its own. If the injured person dies before making a complaint, the right passes to the father, mother, spouse, or child of the deceased. The complaint can be withdrawn, or the case settled, at any time before the judgment becomes final.
The law behind this page
English
Section 326
Defamation is making a statement about another person to a third party that is likely to damage that person's reputation or expose them to insult or hatred. The penalty is up to one year in prison, a fine of up to 20,000 baht, or both.
Full text
Whoever imputes anything to another person before a third person in a manner likely to cause that other person to lose reputation, to be insulted or to be hated, commits the offence of defamation and shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding one year, or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand baht, or both.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 328
When defamation is committed through publication (documents, images, film, broadcasting or any other means of spreading it widely), the penalty is heavier: up to two years in prison and a fine of up to 200,000 baht. This is the section commonly used for online and media defamation.
Full text
Where the offence of defamation is committed by publication through a document, a drawing, a painting, a cinematograph film, a picture or letters made visible by any means, a record, a sound recording, an image recording or a character recording, by sound broadcast or image broadcast, or by any other means of propagation, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding two years and a fine not exceeding two hundred thousand baht.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 329
A person who expresses an opinion or statement in good faith is not guilty of defamation in four situations: self-justification or protecting a legitimate interest, acting as an official on duty, fair comment on a matter open to public criticism, or fairly reporting open court or meeting proceedings.
Full text
Whoever, in good faith, expresses an opinion or a statement: (1) by way of self-justification or self-defence, or to protect a legitimate interest of his own according to righteousness; (2) in the capacity of an official in the performance of his duties; (3) by way of fair comment on a person or a thing which is open to public criticism; or (4) by way of fair report of proceedings openly conducted in a court or at a meeting, is not guilty of defamation.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 330
A person charged with defamation is not punished if they prove the imputation was true. But proof of truth is not allowed where the matter is purely personal and proving it would not benefit the public.
Full text
In a case of defamation, where the person accused proves that the imputation alleged to be defamatory is true, that person is not punished. But proof is not admitted where the imputation alleged to be defamatory concerns a personal matter and the proof would not benefit the public.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 333
This section states that all the defamation offences in this chapter, namely Sections 326 to 328, are compoundable, meaning they are private offences that require a complaint and can be settled or withdrawn to end the case. Section 331 is not one of those offences: it grants an immunity to a party or a party's lawyer, so there is no offence under it to compound. The section also provides that where the injured person dies before making a complaint, the father, mother, spouse or child may complain and is deemed to be the injured person.
Full text
The offences in this Chapter are compoundable offences. Where the injured person in an offence of defamation dies before making a complaint, the father, mother, spouse or child of the injured person may make the complaint and is deemed to be the injured person.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 96
For compoundable offences, the injured person must lodge a complaint within three months of learning both of the offence and of who committed it. Missing that window bars the case, and this rule operates within the outer prescription limits of Section 95.
Full text
Subject to Section 95, in the case of a compoundable offence, if the injured person does not lodge a complaint within three months from the date of becoming aware of the offence and of the offender, the case is barred by prescription.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 423
Full text
A person who, contrary to the truth, asserts or circulates as a fact that which is injurious to the reputation or the credit of another or his earnings or prosperity in any other manner, shall compensate the other for any damage arising therefrom, even if he does not know of its untruth, provided he ought to know it. A person who makes a communication the untruth of which is unknown to him, does not thereby render himself liable to make compensation, if he or the receiver of the communication has a rightful interest in it.
ThaiLawOnline translation
Section 14 Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550
Full text
Any person who commits any of the following offences shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or a fine not exceeding 100,000 baht, or both: (1) dishonestly or by deception entering into a computer system computer data that is distorted or forged, wholly or in part, or computer data that is false, in a manner likely to cause damage to the public, not being an offence of defamation under the Criminal Code; (2) entering into a computer system false computer data in a manner likely to cause damage to the maintenance of national security, public safety, national economic security or the country's public infrastructure, or to cause panic among the public; (3) entering into a computer system any computer data that constitutes an offence relating to the security of the Kingdom or an offence relating to terrorism under the Criminal Code; (4) entering into a computer system any computer data that is obscene, where that computer data is accessible to the general public; (5) disseminating or forwarding computer data knowing it to be computer data under (1), (2), (3) or (4). If an offence under paragraph one (1) is committed not against the public but against a particular person, the offender, or the person who disseminates or forwards that computer data, shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding 60,000 baht, or both, and the offence shall be compoundable.
ThaiLawOnline translation
ไทย
มาตรา 326
ข้อความเต็ม
ผู้ใดใส่ความผู้อื่นต่อบุคคลที่สาม โดยประการที่น่าจะทำให้ผู้อื่นนั้นเสียชื่อเสียง ถูกดูหมิ่น หรือถูกเกลียดชัง ผู้นั้นกระทำความผิดฐานหมิ่นประมาท ต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินหนึ่งปี หรือปรับไม่เกินสองหมื่นบาท หรือทั้งจำทั้งปรับ
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 328
ข้อความเต็ม
ถ้าความผิดฐานหมิ่นประมาทได้กระทำโดยการโฆษณาด้วยเอกสาร ภาพวาด ภาพระบายสี ภาพยนตร์ ภาพหรือตัวอักษรที่ทำให้ปรากฏไม่ว่าด้วยวิธีใด ๆ แผ่นเสียง หรือสิ่งบันทึกเสียง บันทึกภาพ หรือบันทึกอักษร กระทำโดยการกระจายเสียง หรือการกระจายภาพ หรือโดยกระทำการป่าวประกาศด้วยวิธีอื่น ผู้กระทำต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินสองปี และปรับไม่เกินสองแสนบาท
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 329
ข้อความเต็ม
ผู้ใดแสดงความคิดเห็นหรือข้อความใดโดยสุจริต (๑) เพื่อความชอบธรรม ป้องกันตนหรือป้องกันส่วนได้เสียเกี่ยวกับตนตามคลองธรรม (๒) ในฐานะเป็นเจ้าพนักงานปฏิบัติการตามหน้าที่ (๓) ติชมด้วยความเป็นธรรม ซึ่งบุคคลหรือสิ่งใดอันเป็นวิสัยของประชาชนย่อมกระทำ หรือ (๔) ในการแจ้งข่าวด้วยความเป็นธรรมเรื่องการดำเนินการอันเปิดเผยในศาลหรือในการประชุม ผู้นั้นไม่มีความผิดฐานหมิ่นประมาท
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 330
ข้อความเต็ม
ในกรณีหมิ่นประมาท ถ้าผู้ถูกหาว่ากระทำความผิด พิสูจน์ได้ว่าข้อที่หาว่าเป็นหมิ่นประมาทนั้นเป็นความจริง ผู้นั้นไม่ต้องรับโทษ แต่ห้ามไม่ให้พิสูจน์ ถ้าข้อที่หาว่าเป็นหมิ่นประมาทนั้นเป็นการใส่ความในเรื่องส่วนตัว และการพิสูจน์จะไม่เป็นประโยชน์แก่ประชาชน
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 333
ข้อความเต็ม
ความผิดในหมวดนี้เป็นความผิดอันยอมความได้ ถ้าผู้เสียหายในความผิดฐานหมิ่นประมาทตายเสียก่อนร้องทุกข์ ให้บิดา มารดา คู่สมรส หรือบุตรของผู้เสียหายร้องทุกข์ได้ และให้ถือว่าเป็นผู้เสียหาย
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 96
ข้อความเต็ม
ภายใต้บังคับมาตรา ๙๕ ในกรณีความผิดอันยอมความได้ ถ้าผู้เสียหายมิได้ร้องทุกข์ภายในสามเดือนนับแต่วันที่รู้เรื่องความผิดและรู้ตัวผู้กระทำความผิด เป็นอันขาดอายุความ
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 423
ข้อความเต็ม
ผู้ใดกล่าวหรือไขข่าวแพร่หลายซึ่งข้อความอันฝ่าฝืนต่อความจริง เป็นที่เสียหายแก่ชื่อเสียงหรือเกียรติคุณของบุคคลอื่นก็ดี หรือเป็นที่เสียหายแก่ทางทำมาหาได้หรือทางเจริญของเขาโดยประการอื่นก็ดี ท่านว่าผู้นั้นจะต้องใช้ค่าสินไหมทดแทนให้แก่เขาเพื่อความเสียหายอย่างใด ๆ อันเกิดแต่การนั้น แม้ทั้งเมื่อตนมิได้รู้ว่าข้อความนั้นไม่จริง แต่หากควรจะรู้ได้ผู้ใดส่งข่าวสารอันตนมิได้รู้ว่าเป็นความไม่จริง หากว่าตนเองหรือผู้รับข่าวสารนั้นมีทางได้เสียโดยชอบในการนั้นด้วยแล้ว ท่านว่าเพียงที่ส่งข่าวสารเช่นนั้นหาทำให้ผู้นั้นต้องรับผิดใช้ค่าสินไหมทดแทนไม่
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
มาตรา 14 พระราชบัญญัติว่าด้วยการกระทำความผิดเกี่ยวกับคอมพิวเตอร์ พ.ศ. 2550
ข้อความเต็ม
ผู้ใดกระทำความผิดที่ระบุไว้ดังต่อไปนี้ ต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินห้าปีหรือปรับไม่เกินหนึ่งแสนบาท หรือทั้งจำทั้งปรับ (๑) โดยทุจริต หรือโดยหลอกลวง นำเข้าสู่ระบบคอมพิวเตอร์ซึ่งข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์ที่บิดเบือนหรือปลอมไม่ว่าทั้งหมดหรือบางส่วน หรือข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์อันเป็นเท็จ โดยประการที่น่าจะเกิดความเสียหายแก่ประชาชน อันมิใช่การกระทำความผิดฐานหมิ่นประมาทตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา (๒) นำเข้าสู่ระบบคอมพิวเตอร์ซึ่งข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์อันเป็นเท็จ โดยประการที่น่าจะเกิดความเสียหายต่อการรักษาความมั่นคงปลอดภัยของประเทศ ความปลอดภัยสาธารณะ ความมั่นคงในทางเศรษฐกิจของประเทศ หรือโครงสร้างพื้นฐานอันเป็นประโยชน์สาธารณะของประเทศ หรือก่อให้เกิดความตื่นตระหนกแก่ประชาชน (๓) นำเข้าสู่ระบบคอมพิวเตอร์ซึ่งข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์ใด ๆ อันเป็นความผิดเกี่ยวกับความมั่นคงแห่งราชอาณาจักรหรือความผิดเกี่ยวกับการก่อการร้ายตามประมวลกฎหมายอาญา (๔) นำเข้าสู่ระบบคอมพิวเตอร์ซึ่งข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์ใด ๆ ที่มีลักษณะอันลามกและข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์นั้นประชาชนทั่วไปอาจเข้าถึงได้ (๕) เผยแพร่หรือส่งต่อซึ่งข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์โดยรู้อยู่แล้วว่าเป็นข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์ตาม (๑) (๒) (๓) หรือ (๔) ถ้าการกระทำความผิดตามวรรคหนึ่ง (๑) มิได้กระทำต่อประชาชน แต่เป็นการกระทำต่อบุคคลใดบุคคลหนึ่ง ผู้กระทำ ผู้เผยแพร่หรือส่งต่อซึ่งข้อมูลคอมพิวเตอร์ดังกล่าวต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินสามปีหรือปรับไม่เกินหกหมื่นบาท หรือทั้งจำทั้งปรับ และให้เป็นความผิดอันยอมความได้
ตรงตามข้อความในราชกิจจานุเบกษา / สำนักงานคณะกรรมการกฤษฎีกา (Verbatim from the Royal Gazette / Office of the Council of State)
Français
Article 326
Quiconque impute un fait à autrui devant un tiers, d'une manière susceptible de nuire à sa réputation ou de l'exposer au mépris ou à la haine, commet une diffamation, punie d'un emprisonnement d'un an au plus, d'une amende de 20 000 bahts au plus, ou des deux.
résumé non officiel
Article 328
La diffamation commise par publication (écrit, dessin, peinture, film, image ou texte rendu visible, disque, enregistrement sonore, visuel ou écrit), par radiodiffusion, télédiffusion ou autre proclamation publique est punie de deux ans d'emprisonnement au plus et de 200 000 bahts d'amende au plus.
résumé non officiel
Article 329
Ne commet pas de diffamation quiconque s'exprime de bonne foi: (1) pour se justifier ou défendre ses intérêts légitimes; (2) comme agent public dans ses fonctions; (3) en critiquant loyalement ce que tout citoyen peut critiquer; (4) en rendant compte loyalement d'audiences publiques ou de réunions.
résumé non officiel
Article 330
En matière de diffamation, le prévenu qui prouve la vérité des faits imputés n'est pas puni. Cette preuve est toutefois interdite si l'imputation porte sur la vie privée et que sa preuve ne présente aucun intérêt pour le public.
résumé non officiel
Article 333
Les infractions du présent chapitre sont susceptibles de transaction. Si la victime d'une diffamation décède avant d'avoir porté plainte, son père, sa mère, son conjoint ou son enfant peut porter plainte et est réputé victime.
résumé non officiel
Article 96
Sous réserve de l'article 95, l'infraction susceptible de transaction est prescrite si la victime n'a pas porté plainte dans les trois mois à compter du jour où elle a connu l'infraction et son auteur.
résumé non officiel
Article 423
Quiconque affirme ou répand un fait faux nuisant à la réputation, l'honneur, revenus ou prospérité d'autrui doit réparer le dommage, même ignorant la fausseté s'il devait la connaître. Transmettre une information sans savoir qu'elle est fausse n'engage pas si l'auteur ou le destinataire y a un intérêt légitime.
résumé non officiel
Article 14 Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550
Introduire des données fausses, frauduleusement et nuisibles au public (hors diffamation), ou menaçant la sécurité nationale ou semant la panique; données terroristes, de sûreté ou obscènes publiques; ou les diffuser sciemment: 5 ans et/ou 100 000 bahts au plus; (1) visant un particulier: 3 ans et/ou 60 000 bahts, transigeable.
résumé non officiel
Sources
- Penal Code, Office of the Council of State, retrieved 31 October 2026
- Civil and Commercial Code, Office of the Council of State, retrieved 31 October 2026
- Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550, retrieved 2 November 2026
3. Civil Defamation: Sections 420 and 423 of the Civil and Commercial Code
Thai law also provides a civil remedy for defamation under the Civil and Commercial Code (CCC). Victims may pursue monetary compensation without criminal prosecution. They may also pursue both tracks simultaneously.
Section 420: General Tort Liability
Section 420 establishes the general framework for wrongful acts (ละเมิด):
“A person who, wilfully or negligently, unlawfully injures the life, body, health, liberty, property or any right of another person, is said to commit a wrongful act and is bound to make compensation therefor.”
Defamation constitutes an injury to a person’s right to reputation. It can ground a civil claim under Section 420.
Section 423: Defamation-Specific Tort
Section 423 provides a more targeted basis for civil defamation:
“A person who, contrary to the truth, asserts or circulates as a fact that which is injurious to the reputation or the credit of another or his earnings or prosperity in any other manner, shall compensate the other for any damage arising therefrom, even if he does not know of its untruth, provided he ought to know it.”
Unlike criminal defamation, Section 423 focuses on false statements and requires proof of actual damage. It also introduces a negligence standard. The defendant is liable even if they did not know the statement was false, provided they ought to have known.
Limitation Periods
Civil defamation claims must be filed within one year of discovering the defamatory act and the offender’s identity. The alternative deadline is ten years from the date of the wrongful act. Whichever expires first applies, with one exception that matters here: where the wrongful act is also a criminal offence with a longer criminal prescription, the longer period governs the civil claim (Section 448, paragraph two). Defamation by publication under Section 328 carries up to two years, so its criminal prescription is ten years (Penal Code Section 95(3)).
Damages
There is no statutory cap on damages. Courts have discretion to award amounts proportionate to the severity of the defamation. Awards in the hundreds of thousands and even millions of Baht have been granted in high-profile cases.
4. Criminal vs. Civil Defamation: Thailand’s Dual Legal System
Thailand operates a dual system where defamation can trigger both criminal and civil proceedings simultaneously. This creates a harsh situation for defendants. They may face imprisonment in criminal courts and also be sued for money in civil courts at the same time.
Criminal defamation penalties include up to one year in prison, a fine of up to 20,000 Baht, or both, for basic defamation under Section 326. For published defamation under Section 328, penalties increase to two years and 200,000 Baht. The criminal system allows any injured party to file complaints directly with the police or courts. This gives private individuals the power to start criminal cases.
Civil defamation under Section 423 of the CCC focuses on monetary compensation. Victims must prove that false statements caused actual financial or reputational harm. The civil track has a one-year limitation period, running from when the victim learns of the defamation and identifies the offender, unless the longer criminal prescription applies under Section 448.
The dual system means that a single defamatory statement can expose the defendant to both imprisonment and financial damages. Charges under the Computer Crime Act can add further penalties on top of both tracks.
5. The Computer Crime Act and Online Defamation
The Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended in 2017, creates additional criminal liability for online statements. It is frequently used alongside traditional defamation charges.
Section 14(1): False Computer Data
Section 14(1), as amended in 2017, concerns dishonest or deceptive introduction of distorted, forged or false computer data likely to harm the public. It expressly excludes conduct amounting to defamation under the Penal Code. The public-harm offence carries up to five years’ imprisonment, a fine up to 100,000 baht, or both. The separate provision for conduct directed at an individual carries up to three years, a fine up to 60,000 baht, or both, and is compoundable. See the consolidated Act published by the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society.
Section 16: Defamation by Image
Section 16 targets the uploading of manipulated images that cause defamation. The penalty, as substituted by the Computer Crime Act (No. 2) B.E. 2560, is up to three years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to 200,000 Baht, both imposed rather than in the alternative.
Charge Stacking
An ordinary defamatory online post does not attract a further five-year charge under Section 14(1) merely because someone published it online. The 2017 amendment expressly excludes Penal Code defamation from that provision. Other offences require their own elements and evidence, such as the manipulated-image offence under Section 16. Adding the maximum penalties from three different provisions is not a reliable statement of exposure for one post.
For a complete analysis of platform-specific risks, the 24-hour takedown obligation, forum shopping, and intermediary liability, see our dedicated guide on online and social media defamation in Thailand.
6. Royal Defamation: Lese-Majeste under Section 112
Section 112 of the Criminal Code provides:
“Whoever defames, insults, or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent, or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years.”
Lese-majeste is entirely separate from ordinary defamation. Unlike Sections 326 to 333, Section 112 is a non-compoundable offence. The State can prosecute without a private complaint. The parties cannot settle. Any person may file a complaint.
The penalties are severe: 3 to 15 years’ imprisonment with no option for a fine alone. Sentences often run consecutively, not concurrently. In practice the provision is applied broadly. The text names only the four offices quoted above; whether it reaches a deceased monarch is unsettled, and we can produce no Supreme Court judgment holding that it does, but comments about former kings have been prosecuted. Even indirect references, sarcastic comments, or sharing content deemed offensive can result in prosecution.
Enforcement has increased significantly since 2020. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights counted at least 274 people in 307 lese-majeste cases between 18 July 2020 and 30 September 2024. Courts routinely deny bail for lese-majeste defendants. The case of Mongkol Thirakhot is a stark example. The Court of Appeal raised his sentence to a record 50 years on 18 January 2024 for Facebook posts.
Foreigners can be charged for content created outside Thailand: under Penal Code section 7(1), an offence under sections 107 to 129, which include section 112, is punishable in Thailand even when committed abroad. American scholar Paul Chambers faced charges in 2025 before prosecutors dismissed the case in May 2025. This is not a subject area where foreigners should take any risks. For more on how foreigners are affected, see our practical guide for foreigners facing defamation charges.
7. Enforcement Trends and Statistics
Criminal defamation prosecutions in Thailand have been on an upward trend. According to ARTICLE 19, cases submitted to Courts of First Instance increased from 1,386 in 2015 to 2,023 in 2019. That is a rise of about 46 per cent in four years. Over 25,000 defamation cases have been filed since 2015.
Between January 2015 and September 2020, there were 8,397 convictions. This represents a conviction rate of approximately 83 percent. Courts convict in the vast majority of cases that proceed to trial.
In the 58 cases ARTICLE 19 identified as aimed at critics between 2014 and 2020, private companies or associations brought 55 per cent, government officials 14 per cent, government agencies 16 per cent and politicians 5 per cent, and 55 per cent of the defendants were community leaders or human rights and environmental activists.
Political prosecutions have increased since the 2020 democracy protests. As of September 2024, 1,959 people have been prosecuted in 1,305 political cases. This includes 274 individuals facing lese-majeste charges and 206 people charged under the Computer Crime Act.
Social media platforms such as Facebook, LINE, Twitter (X), Instagram, and YouTube have become the primary source of defamation complaints. The criminal trial procedures in Thailand are formal and can extend over many months. Early legal intervention is essential.
8. International Pressure and Reform Proposals
Thailand’s criminal defamation regime has drawn sustained criticism from international human rights organisations. ARTICLE 19 published “Truth Be Told: Criminal Defamation in Thai Law and the Case for Reform” in 2021. It concluded that criminal defamation provisions are incompatible with international human rights standards.
The United Nations Human Rights Committee, in General Comment No. 34, urged all states to consider decriminalising defamation. It stated that custodial sentences are never appropriate punishment for defamation. The International Commission of Jurists has similarly called on Thailand to stop using criminal law to inhibit freedom of expression.
The global trend toward decriminalisation provides momentum for reform. Most democratic countries have shifted to civil-only remedies. However, meaningful reform in Thailand has not materialised. The 2019 CPC anti-SLAPP amendments represent incremental progress. The core criminal provisions remain unchanged since 1992.
For anyone living, working, or creating content in Thailand, the law must be navigated as it stands today.
FAQS about Defamation in Thailand
Can I be jailed for a Facebook post in Thailand?
Yes. Under Section 328, a defamatory Facebook post can result in up to two years’ imprisonment and a 200,000 Baht fine. Section 14(1) expressly excludes Penal Code defamation following the 2017 amendment; an ordinary defamatory post does not attract an extra five-year charge merely because it is online. See our guide on social media defamation for details.
Is truth a defence to defamation in Thailand?
Only partially. Under Section 330, a defendant who proves the imputation true is not punished, but proof is not allowed where the imputation concerns a personal matter and proving it would not benefit the public. Truthful statements about private matters can therefore still be punished. See our analysis of defamation defences.
Can a foreigner be charged with defamation in Thailand?
Yes. Thai defamation laws apply to all persons within Thai jurisdiction regardless of nationality. Online statements made from abroad may also be subject to Thai jurisdiction. See our guide for foreigners.
What is the difference between criminal and civil defamation?
Criminal defamation (Sections 326 to 333) can result in imprisonment and fines. Civil defamation (Sections 420 and 423 of the CCC) results only in monetary compensation. A victim may pursue both tracks simultaneously.
How long do I have to file a defamation complaint?
For criminal defamation, three months from discovering the offence and the offender. For civil defamation, one year from discovery or ten years from the wrongful act, unless the act is also an offence with a longer criminal prescription, which then applies (Civil and Commercial Code Section 448).
Can I be charged for sharing someone else’s defamatory post?
Yes. Sharing or forwarding a defamatory statement is treated as a separate act of publication under Section 328. Both the original author and the person who shares it can face charges.
Last reviewed: 25 September 2026. Read in Thai for this review: Penal Code sections 59, 95, 326, 328, 330 and 333 and Civil and Commercial Code section 448; the Computer Crime Act section 16 penalty was corrected against the Act in an earlier review. The statistics were checked against ARTICLE 19’s report Truth Be Told (2021) and Thai Lawyers for Human Rights’ September 2024 figures. Not verified in this review: the legislative history section, including the 1992 amendment, and the quoted English translations of sections 420 and 423. Re-checked on 10 October 2026: Penal Code sections 7 and 112 read in Thai; the statement that courts extend section 112 to deceased monarchs and unnamed royals was withdrawn because no such judgment could be produced from our stores; the press-reported cases and statistics in that section remain unverified.
Conclusion: Navigating Thailand’s Legal Landscape
Whether you are a potential complainant or defendant, early legal advice is the most important step you can take. Thai defamation law is complex. It involves overlapping criminal and civil tracks, the Computer Crime Act, and nuanced defences.
At ThaiLawOnline, our team has 20 years of experience in Thai criminal law and civil litigation. We advise expatriates, businesses, content creators, and media organisations on all aspects of defamation law.
If you are facing defamation charges or considering filing a complaint, book an online consultation with a Thai lawyer who understands both the legal framework and the practical realities.
You can also visit our legal services in Bangkok page or contact us directly for urgent matters.
- Article 19 on Defamation laws in Thailand
- Free Guide and 10 tips to Avoid Defamation in Thailand by ThaiLawOnline
Thai Law Updates, free by email
Plain-English updates on Thai law changes that affect foreigners: property, visas, marriage, business and wills. One short email a month from a firm practicing since 2006. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.