A dangerous misconception persists in business and media circles: that using the word “alleged” when reporting an accusation provides a safe harbour from defamation claims. In Thailand, this assumption is not only incorrect but can also lead to severe civil and criminal penalties.
Thai law prioritises the overall impression a publication leaves on an ordinary reader. If the context, headlines, or tone suggest someone is guilty of misconduct, the mere presence of the word “alleged” will not shield the publisher from liability.
This is a critical point of divergence from some common law systems. In Thailand, defamation is not merely a civil tort; it is also a criminal offence, carrying the potential for imprisonment. This dual threat necessitates a significantly higher degree of caution.
The Legal Framework in Thailand: Civil and Criminal Liability
Two primary legal sources govern defamation and Libel in Thailand:
- The Thai Civil and Commercial Code (CCC): Sections 420 and 423 provide the basis for civil liability. A person who, contrary to the truth, asserts or circulates a statement which injures the reputation or credit of another is liable to compensate for the resulting injury (CCC Section 423).
- The Thai Penal Code: Sections 326-328 address criminal defamation. Section 326 states that whoever, imputing anything to the other person before a third party in a manner likely to impair the person’s reputation or place such person in contempt or hatred, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year and/or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand Baht.
The key takeaway is that an aggrieved party in Thailand can sue for financial damages and file a criminal complaint that could lead to the publisher’s imprisonment.
Why “Alleged” is an Inadequate Shield in the Thai Context
Thai courts, like their common law counterparts, look at the substance of a publication, not just its form. The “sting” of the accusation is what matters. If the ordinary, reasonable reader is left with the impression that there is fire, merely pointing out that you are only describing “smoke” with the word “alleged” is often insufficient. Consider a news headline: “CEO Allegedly Embezzles Company Funds.” While it includes “allegedly,” the prominent accusation can still destroy the CEO’s reputation. In a Thai court, the defence would bear the heavy burden of proving the truth of the underlying embezzlement claim to avoid liability, not merely that the accusation was made.
Furthermore, the defences available are strict. For example:
- Truth as a Defence: Under Section 330 of the Penal Code, proving the truth of a statement is a defence only if it is made for the public benefit. This is a higher bar than in many common law jurisdictions, where truth can be an absolute defence. The publisher must prove both the factual truth and the public benefit element.
- Good Faith Report: Under Section 329, there are limited privileges for fair and accurate reports of official proceedings, but these are narrowly construed. Sensationalising or presenting such reports out of context can easily void this protection.
The Peril of Republishing Allegations
A fundamental principle in Thai defamation law, consistent with international norms, is that repeating a defamatory statement is considered equivalent to making it oneself. Sharing a damaging post on social media or reporting a third-party’s accusation without proper context is not a neutral act. The law views the republisher as adopting the statement and assuming full responsibility for its defamatory sting.
A Practical Guide to Mitigating Defamation Risk in Thailand
Given the severe consequences, businesses, journalists, and individuals must exercise extreme care. The following chart outlines a prudent approach to publication.
Conclusion
In Thailand’s legal landscape, where defamation can lead to both financial ruin and imprisonment, relying on semantic tricks like the word “alleged” is a profound professional risk. The courts will look past the label to the damaging impression it creates.
The only safe path is to prioritise accuracy, context, and balance in all communications. Before publishing any potentially damaging statement, one must be prepared to prove its truth for the public benefit, not just its existence as an allegation. In Thailand, more than in many common law countries, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
If you enjoyed the above article and would like to learn more about defamation and court cases in Thailand, the following articles may also be of interest:
- Criminal Defamation Litigation in Thailand
- Rules of Evidence in Proving Criminal Defamation in Thailand
- Computer Crime Act in Thailand – Supreme Court Application
- Thailand’s Amended Organic Act on Anti-Corruption
This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. For specific guidance on Thai defamation or libel law, please get in touch with us at [email protected]
