Article 238 — Best Evidence Rule for Documents
Texte légal (original thaï)
ต้นฉบับเอกสารเท่านั้นที่อ้างเป็นพยานได้ ถ้าหาต้นฉบับไม่ได้ สำเนาที่รับรองว่าถูกต้องหรือพยานบุคคลที่รู้ข้อความก็อ้างเป็นพยานได้ถ้าอ้างหนังสือราชการเป็นพยาน แม้ต้นฉบับยังมีอยู่ จะส่งสำเนาที่เจ้าหน้าที่รับรองว่าถูกต้องก็ได้ เว้นแต่ในหมายเรียกจะบ่งไว้เป็นอย่างอื่น
traduction anglaise
Only the original of a document may be cited as evidence. If the original cannot be found, a copy certified as correct, or a witness who knows its contents, may be cited as evidence. If an official document is cited as evidence, a copy certified as correct by the official may be submitted even though the original still exists, unless the summons specifies otherwise.
Cette traduction anglaise est fournie à titre indicatif uniquement et n'a pas encore été vérifiée de manière définitive ; référez-vous toujours à l'original thaï.
Annotation de l'entreprise
Section 238 states the best evidence rule for documentary evidence in Book 5, Chapter 3. The primary rule is that only the original document is admissible, protecting against forgery and inaccurate copies. Two exceptions follow: where the original cannot be found, a certified true copy or oral evidence of its contents is allowed; and for official documents, a certified copy suffices even if the original survives, in recognition of the reliability of government records, subject to any contrary direction in the summons. The rule is applied with regard to purpose, the courts have noted that its strictness is aimed at evidence proving guilt or innocence, and it may be relaxed in ancillary proceedings such as claims for return of confiscated property.
Pourquoi cela est important en pratique
Keep your originals. If you plan to rely on a contract, receipt, or letter in a Thai criminal case, the original is what the court expects; a copy is only a fallback where the original is genuinely lost and is certified true, or where you produce a witness who knows the contents. Official records can go in as certified copies. Preserving and properly certifying documents early avoids fatal evidentiary gaps at trial.
Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3126/2550 (2007)
In a proceeding to recover property already ordered confiscated under Penal Code Section 36, Section 238 need not be applied strictly, because the document rules in Book 5 are aimed at evidence tending to prove the defendant's guilt or innocence.
A claimant sought the return of a photocopier already ordered confiscated, attaching a copy of the hire-purchase contract certified by an attorney-in-fact, with the hirer confirming it. The Supreme Court held that in such a claim under Penal Code Section 36 the best evidence rule in Section 238 need not be applied strictly, since Book 5's document rules target evidence proving guilt or innocence, and the prosecutor had not disputed the copy's contents.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 203/2546 (2003)
Where a written loan record existed but was later lost, the lender may prove the loan by a copy or by a witness under Section 238 paragraph one in criminal cases, so a cheque issued to pay that loan is issued for a genuine, legally enforceable debt.
The defendant argued a loan had no enforceable written evidence. The Supreme Court held that where a written loan record once existed but was lost, the lender may prove it by a copy or a witness under Section 238 paragraph one in criminal matters (or CPC Section 93(2) in civil), so the cheque issued to repay it was for a real, enforceable debt, even though the loan agreement was torn up after the cheque was issued.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 3597/2543 (2000)
A copy of an official document certified as correct by an official and submitted in answer to a court summons is admissible under Section 238 paragraph two, even if the person who made the original does not testify.
A copy of a document made by the Deputy Director-General of the Forestry Department, sent under court summons and certified correct by a forestry academic, was challenged. The Supreme Court held the certified copy of the official document was admissible under Section 238 paragraph two even though its maker did not testify, and on the facts the defendant honestly believed he had permission and lacked criminal intent.
Décisions sélectionnées avec numéros de dossier vérifiés dans la base de données de la Cour suprême. Les versions anglaises sont des traductions éditoriales réalisées par le cabinet à des fins d'étude.
Foire aux questions
Do you need the original document as evidence in a Thai criminal case?
Generally yes. Section 238 makes the original the primary form of documentary evidence. Only if the original cannot be found may a certified true copy or a witness who knows its contents be used.
Can a certified copy of an official document be used as evidence?
Yes. Under Section 238, a copy of an official document certified correct by the official may be submitted even if the original still exists, unless the summons directs otherwise.