Section 14 — Change of safety measure conditions
English translation
If, according to the provisions of a law enacted afterwards, the conditions of a safety measure are changed, the court may, when it thinks fit or when an interested person so requests, order that safety measure to be revoked or changed in accordance with the law enacted afterwards, if it is of the opinion that this is more favourable to the person subjected to the safety measure.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 14 addresses the middle case between Section 12 (authority and time of the law) and Section 13 (outright abolition): here the safety measure still exists but its conditions have been changed by a later law. The court is empowered to revoke or modify an existing measure to match the new law, but only where doing so is more favourable to the affected person, and it may act on its own view or on the request of an interested person. The reference to an interested person is broader than the person subjected to the measure in Section 13. Together, Sections 12 to 15 form a coherent favourable-law regime for safety measures, parallel to the treatment of penalties in Sections 2 and 3.
Why this matters in practice
Section 14 is the tool to use when a safety measure remains on the books but its conditions have become more lenient under a later law. An interested person, not only the person under the measure, can ask the court to revoke or modify it to the more favourable new conditions. The gate is that the change must benefit the affected person; the court will not use Section 14 to make a measure harsher. In practice this arises with long-running measures such as preventive detention, where amendments narrow the grounds or shorten the period. Anyone subject to an ongoing safety measure should check whether later amendments justify a Section 14 application.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 709/2503 (1960)
Under Section 14 the court has power to order as it thinks fit regarding a safety measure, and may accordingly cancel preventive detention imposed on the defendant.
After the assault offence could not ground preventive detention and only a qualifying theft offence remained, the Supreme Court held that the court had power under Section 14 to order as it thought fit and could cancel the defendant's preventive detention.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Frequently asked questions
Can a safety measure be modified if a later law changes its conditions?
Yes. Under Section 14, the court may revoke or modify the measure to match the later law, if that is more favourable to the person subjected to it.
Who can request a change under Section 14?
The court may act on its own view, or an interested person may request revocation or modification, which is broader than the person subjected to the measure.