Section 226/3 — Hearsay Evidence Rule and Exceptions
Statutory text (Thai original)
ข้อความซึ่งเป็นการบอกเล่าที่พยานบุคคลใดนำมาเบิกความต่อศาลหรือที่บันทึกไว้ในเอกสารหรือวัตถุอื่นใดซึ่งอ้างเป็นพยานหลักฐานต่อศาล
หากนำเสนอเพื่อพิสูจน์ความจริงแห่งข้อความนั้น ให้ถือเป็นพยานบอกเล่าห้ามมิให้ศาลรับฟังพยานบอกเล่า
เว้นแต่
(๑) ตามสภาพ
ลักษณะ แหล่งที่มา
และข้อเท็จจริงแวดล้อมของพยานบอกเล่านั้นน่าเชื่อว่าจะพิสูจน์ความจริงได้ หรือ
(๒)
มีเหตุจำเป็น เนื่องจากไม่สามารถนำบุคคลซึ่งเป็นผู้ที่ได้เห็น ได้ยิน
หรือทราบข้อความเกี่ยวในเรื่องที่จะให้การเป็นพยานนั้นด้วยตนเองโดยตรงมาเป็นพยานได้
และมีเหตุผลสมควรเพื่อประโยชน์แห่งความยุติธรรมที่จะรับฟังพยานบอกเล่านั้นในกรณีที่ศาลเห็นว่าไม่ควรรับไว้ซึ่งพยานบอกเล่าใด
และคู่ความฝ่ายที่เกี่ยวข้องร้องคัดค้านก่อนที่ศาลจะดำเนินคดีต่อไป
ให้ศาลจดรายงานระบุนาม หรือชนิดและลักษณะของพยานบอกเล่าเหตุผลที่ไม่ยอมรับ
และข้อคัดค้านของคู่ความฝ่ายที่เกี่ยวข้องไว้
ส่วนเหตุผลที่คู่ความฝ่ายคัดค้านยกขึ้นอ้างนั้น
ให้ศาลใช้ดุลพินิจจดลงไว้ในรายงานหรือกำหนดให้คู่ความฝ่ายนั้นยื่นคำแถลงต่อศาลเพื่อรวมไว้ในสำนวน
English translation
A statement of assertion that any witness brings to testify before the court, or that is recorded in a document or any other object adduced as evidence to the court, shall, if presented to prove the truth of that statement, be deemed hearsay. The court shall not admit hearsay evidence except: (1) where, by its condition, nature, source, and the surrounding facts, such hearsay is credible to prove the truth; or (2) where there is necessity, because the person who saw, heard, or knew the matter in the subject to be testified cannot personally be brought as a witness, and there is reasonable cause in the interest of justice to admit such hearsay. Where the court considers that any hearsay should not be admitted and the concerned party objects before the court proceeds further, the court shall record the name, or the type and nature, of the hearsay, the reason for refusal, and the objection of the concerned party. As for the grounds raised by the objecting party, the court shall in its discretion record them in the report or require that party to submit a statement to the court to be included in the case file.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 226/3 is the codified hearsay rule for Thai criminal trials, placed in Book 5 General Principles on evidence. Paragraph one defines hearsay by purpose: a statement offered to prove the truth of its contents. Paragraph two sets the two gateways for admission, reliability (condition, nature, source, surrounding facts) and necessity coupled with the interest of justice. The remaining paragraphs impose a recording duty when the court rejects hearsay over a party's objection, preserving the point for appeal. It works closely with Section 227/1, which requires special caution in weighing hearsay once admitted.
Why this matters in practice
For litigants this rule decides whether police statements, written records, and reports of what an absent person said can reach the judge. If your case turns on such material, the fight is usually over reliability and whether the original speaker could really not attend. Even when hearsay is admitted, Section 227/1 means the court should not convict on it alone. If you object to hearsay, make the objection before the court moves on so the refusal and your grounds are recorded for a possible appeal.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 685/2567 (2024)
Where hearsay is credible under Section 226/3 paragraph two (1), the court may admit it, but must weigh it with caution and not convict on it alone absent compelling reasons, special circumstances, or corroboration under Section 227/1.
The court found the defendant's recorded statements at the questioning and investigation stages credible under Section 226/3 paragraph two (1), and admitted them together with other evidence under Section 227/1, stressing the need for cautious weighing.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4943/2567 (2024)
A statement given voluntarily at the arrest and investigation stages, credible by its condition, nature, source, and surrounding facts, is admissible hearsay under Section 226/3 paragraph two (1) to support other prosecution evidence.
The court accepted that a person gave his arrest and investigation statements voluntarily and, finding them credible under Section 226/3 paragraph two (1), admitted them with Section 227/1 to support the other evidence and convict the second defendant.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4040/2567 (2024)
A defendant's investigation-stage statement, though hearsay, is not barred where its condition, source, and surrounding facts make it credible to prove the truth under Section 226/3 paragraph two (1).
In a transnational organized crime case, the court held that although the defendant's investigation statement was hearsay, its condition, nature, source, and surrounding facts made it credible, so it was admissible under Section 226/3 paragraph two (1).
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
What counts as hearsay in a Thai criminal trial?
Under Section 226/3, hearsay is a statement, whether spoken by a witness or contained in a document or object, that is offered to prove the truth of what it says rather than merely that it was said.
When can a court accept hearsay evidence?
Only when the statement is credible given its source and surrounding circumstances, or when the original witness genuinely cannot be produced and admitting the statement serves the interest of justice.
Can I be convicted on hearsay alone?
The court should not convict on hearsay by itself. Read together with Section 227/1, hearsay needs compelling reasons, special circumstances, or independent corroborating evidence before it can support a conviction.