Section 148 — Extortion by an official (abuse of power)
English translation
Whoever, being an official, wrongfully exercises the power of his office to coerce or induce any person to deliver or procure property or any other benefit for himself or for another, shall be punished with imprisonment from five to twenty years or imprisonment for life, and a fine from one hundred thousand to four hundred thousand baht, or death.
This English translation is provided for reference only and has not yet been firm-verified — always rely on the Thai original.
Firm annotation
Section 148 is the official-extortion offence. Its elements are (1) being an official, (2) wrongfully exercising the power of the office, (3) to coerce or induce a person, (4) to deliver or procure property or any other benefit for the official or another. It differs from bribery under Section 149: Section 149 punishes demanding or accepting a benefit in exchange for an act of office, while Section 148 punishes the abuse of official power to compel a benefit, typically where the demand is backed by the threat of official action. The person coerced must be someone other than a co-offender; pressure applied to a fellow participant in the scheme does not satisfy the element of coercing another person. This is among the few Penal Code offences carrying a possible death penalty.
Why this matters in practice
This carries the heaviest exposure in the Chapter, up to death, and is non-compoundable and prosecuted by the State through the anti-corruption process. Two defences recur in the case law: first, that the offence was never charged, so a court cannot convict on Section 148 if the prosecution pleaded only bribery or Section 157; second, that the person who paid was a co-offender rather than a coerced outsider, which negates the coercion element. Because the difference between Section 148, Section 149 and the general offence in Section 157 often decides the sentence, precise charge analysis is essential.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4789/2565 (2022)
Where officials make an unlawful arrest and then extract money, the conduct is not bribery under Section 149 but abuse of official power to coerce a benefit under Section 148; however, a court cannot convict under Section 148 when the prosecution did not charge that offence.
Because the arrest was unlawful, the later demand for money could not be bribery under Section 149. The Supreme Court held the conduct fell under Section 148 as abuse of office to coerce a benefit, but since the prosecution had not charged Section 148, no conviction on that count was possible.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 4594/2565 (2022)
The person coerced or induced under Section 148 must be someone other than a co-offender; where the payer had joined in committing the offence with the defendant, there is no coercion of another person and the conduct lacks an element of Section 148.
The Supreme Court held that because the person who provided the benefit was a participant in the offence, the defendant had not coerced or induced another person, so an element of Section 148 was missing. The defendant was instead dealt with under the general malfeasance provision.
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 is the difference between Section 148 and bribery under Section 149?
Section 148 punishes an official who abuses his power to coerce a benefit; Section 149 punishes an official who demands or accepts a benefit in exchange for an act of office.
Can an official be convicted under Section 148 if only bribery was charged?
No. If the prosecution did not plead Section 148, the court cannot convict on it even where the facts fit, because a court cannot punish for an uncharged offence.
Does Section 148 apply if the payer was part of the scheme?
No. The person coerced must be someone other than a co-offender; pressure on a fellow participant does not meet the coercion element.