PATTAYA, Thailand – Adisak Tantiwong, President of the Supreme Court of Thailand, has issued new judicial guidance aimed at preventing the misuse of criminal lawsuits as tools to intimidate, silence, or harass members of the public. Signed on May 25, the recommendation on bad-faith criminal litigation establishes guidelines for courts to scrutinize cases that may be filed dishonestly or with the intention of unfairly burdening defendants, rather than seeking legitimate justice. The directive stresses that the justice system must not be distorted into a mechanism for suppressing freedom of expression or targeting individuals acting in the public interest. Courts are encouraged to carefully assess whether lawsuits are intended to threaten, pressure, or create excessive hardship for defendants.
The guidance outlines several warning signs that may indicate abusive litigation practices, including filing multiple cases over the same incident, bringing cases in distant jurisdictions without reasonable cause, or using legal action to pressure individuals into taking or refraining from certain actions for improper benefit. It also specifically highlights cases targeting people who exercise legal rights or speak out in good faith on matters of public interest, including human rights, environmental protection, consumer rights, labor rights, anti-corruption efforts, and exposing unlawful conduct.
Under Section 161/1 of Thailand’s Criminal Procedure Code, courts may dismiss cases at the filing stage if evidence clearly shows the lawsuit was initiated in bad faith. Courts may also assign judicial officers to assist in gathering evidence and reviewing facts to ensure more thorough and efficient proceedings. The recommendation additionally protects plaintiffs from procedural abuse by defendants, allowing courts to halt tactics aimed solely at delaying proceedings or disrupting the judicial process. The move is being viewed as a significant step toward strengthening judicial transparency and protecting civic participation in Thailand’s democratic system, while balancing the rights of plaintiffs, defendants, and the broader public interest.
