Issues in the Definition of Offenses under Section 14 (1), (2), and (3) of the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007)

Abstract

Background and Purpose: The Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), particularly Section 14 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), criminalizes the introduction of false or fake information into a computer system, as well as information affecting national security or related to terrorism. While the Act was enacted to prevent technological misuse, the wording of Section 14 remains ambiguous and lacks sufficient legal precision. Terms such as “false information” and “fake information” are undefined, and broad expressions like “causing public panic” or “harming national security” invite arbitrary interpretation and overbroad application. Such ambiguity undermines the rule of law, the principle of legal certainty, and the protection of fundamental rights.

Objective: This article seeks to examine the substantive scope of offenses under Section 14 (1), (2), and (3) of the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007) and to propose legislative reforms that align Thai law with contemporary legal principles emphasizing proportionality, fairness, and clarity.

Methodology: The study adopts a documentary research method, drawing upon the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007) and its amendments, relevant Constitutional Court judgments, legal commentaries, academic works, and comparative analyses with international legal standards. The findings are synthesized to develop policy and legislative recommendations for addressing the current ambiguities in the law.

Results: The research reveals that Thai criminal law retains characteristics of centralized interpretive authority and imposes uniform penalties without distinguishing between levels of harm or intent. This approach impedes the realization of justice within the criminal process and creates potential for misuse of Section 14 against individuals expressing political dissent.

Conclusion: It is recommended that Section 14, particularly subsections (1), (2), and (3), be amended to include precise definitions within Section 3 of the Computer Crime Act, differentiate penalties based on the gravity of the offense, and clarify the elements of intent and consequence. Such revisions would strengthen legal certainty, safeguard civil liberties, and promote more equitable and effective law enforcement.