Section 116: Sedition and incitement of unrest
Statutory text (Thai original)
ผู้ใดกระทำให้ปรากฏแก่ประชาชนด้วยวาจา หนังสือหรือวิธีอื่นใดอันมิใช่เป็นการกระทำภายในความมุ่งหมายแห่งรัฐธรรมนูญ หรือมิใช่เพื่อแสดงความคิดเห็นหรือติชมโดยสุจริต (๑) เพื่อให้เกิดการเปลี่ยนแปลงในกฎหมายแผ่นดินหรือรัฐบาล โดยใช้กำลังข่มขืนใจหรือใช้กำลังประทุษร้าย (๒) เพื่อให้เกิดความปั่นป่วนหรือกระด้างกระเดื่องในหมู่ประชาชนถึงขนาดที่จะก่อความไม่สงบขึ้นในราชอาณาจักร หรือ (๓) เพื่อให้ประชาชนล่วงละเมิดกฎหมายแผ่นดิน ต้องระวางโทษจำคุกไม่เกินเจ็ดปี
English translation
Whoever makes anything appear to the public by words, writings or any other means which is not an act within the purpose of the Constitution and is not for the expression of an honest opinion or criticism, in order to: (1) bring about a change in the laws of the country or the Government by the use of force or violence; (2) raise unrest and disaffection among the people to a degree likely to cause disturbance in the Kingdom; or (3) cause the people to transgress the laws of the country, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding seven years.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified. Always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 116, the sedition offence, is another provision in the title on offences against the internal security of the Kingdom. Its structure is important: the offence applies only where the appeal to the public is not within the purpose of the Constitution and is not an honest expression of opinion or criticism, and is made with one of three specified aims, namely forcing a change of law or government by force, raising unrest likely to cause disturbance, or inciting the people to break the law. The built-in exception for honest opinion or criticism within constitutional purposes is what separates lawful political expression from the offence. It sits between the force-based insurrection offence in Section 113 and ordinary public-order offences, and is frequently charged with the Computer Crime Act when the communication is online.
Why this matters in practice
The maximum penalty is seven years, and where the communication is online a parallel charge under the Computer Crime Act often follows. The strongest line of defence is usually the statutory carve-out: conduct that is an honest expression of opinion or criticism within the purposes of the Constitution is not an offence, so the dividing line between protected political speech and sedition is central. As an offence against the State, only the State is treated as the injured party, so it is prosecuted by the public prosecutor rather than by a private complainant.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2857/2530 (1987)
Sedition under Section 116, together with the insurrection offences in Sections 113 and 114, is an offence directly against the State, so only the State is the injured party and a private person, even a member of parliament, has no power to prosecute.
The public prosecutor charged the defendants under Sections 113, 114 and 116 as offences against the internal security of the Kingdom. The court held that these are offences committed directly against the State, so the State alone is the injured party with power to prosecute. A member of parliament acting as complainant was not an injured person under the Criminal Procedure Code and had no standing to bring the case.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 9 Supreme Court decisions (1962 to 2018)
Selected citing decisions
- Decision 4265/2561 (2018)
- Decision 8811/2558 (2015)
- Decision 4519/2544 (2001)
- Decision 970/2505 (1962)
- Decision 2857/2530 (1987)
- Decision 2038/2527 (1984)
- Decision 2396/2530 (1987)
- Decision 2038-2041/2527 (1984)
This list is selected automatically, weighted towards judgments that turn on this section rather than ones that merely recite it when passing sentence. It has not yet been reviewed by the firm.
Most often cited alongside
- Section 83 5
- Section 91 3
- Section 215 3
Sections that appear in the same judgments as this one most often. The figure is the number of decisions.
Counted across the firm's corpus of 83,652 Supreme Court decisions, 1921 to 2026. The count is complete; the stated year range trims rare outliers so it describes where the citations actually sit. These figures are computed by us and are not official court statistics. How we count these, and what we measured
Frequently asked questions
Does Section 116 criminalise ordinary criticism of the government?
No. The section expressly excludes honest expression of opinion or criticism within the purposes of the Constitution; it applies only to appeals made with one of the three prohibited aims, such as forcing change by violence or inciting people to break the law.
What is the penalty under Section 116?
The offence carries imprisonment not exceeding seven years, and an online communication may attract an additional charge under the Computer Crime Act.
Related guides on ThaiLawOnline
Cite this section
-
Plain citation
Penal Code, s. 116 (Thailand) -
Academic citation
Penal Code (Thailand), s. 116. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-116/ (accessed 21 August 2026). -
Thai citation
ป.อ. มาตรา 116 -
Permalink
https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-116/ -
Embed on your site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-116/"><p>Whoever makes anything appear to the public by words, writings or any other means which is not an act within the purpose of the Constitution and is not for the expression of an honest opinion or criticism, in order to: (1) bring about a change…</p><footer>Penal Code, s. 116 (Thailand) — <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-116/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.