AI in the Legal Sector in Thailand

November 17, 2025
Teerin Vanikieti Thanthiti Seneewong Na Ayudthaya
Teerin Vanikieti Thanthiti Seneewong Na Ayudthaya
Posted in Tech Regulation insights Artificial intelligence

Thailand’s legal sector, both the courts and the Lawyers Council, is beginning to develop frameworks, standards and guiding principles for AI utilization by lawyers and the judiciary that aim to maximize public benefit while ensuring transparency, accountability and the preservation of human decision-making authority.

Below is a summary of the most recent developments related to AI laws in Thailand’s legal sector.

Lawyer Councils of Thailand Under the Royal Patronage

On 10 October 2025, the Vice President for Academic Affairs of the Lawyers Council under the Royal Patronage revealed that the Lawyers Council, in collaboration with the Faculty of Law, Thammasat University, has established a working group with the ETDA to develop the “AI Guidelines for Lawyers and Legal Advisors.” The guideline is expected to be completed by the end of 2025. In parallel, efforts are being made to enhance legal education through modern curricula, including compliance law for the finance, banking, and insurance sectors, digital asset and blockchain law and medical law.

The Thai Courts

On 22 October 2025, the Royal Gazette published the recommendation of the President of the Supreme Court of Thailand regarding the use of AI in court and case management. The key points can be summarized as follows:

  • The use of AI must be carried out with the highest responsibility toward the integrity of the court process and with due consideration for the safety and reliability of the technology.
  • The use of AI must not result in the disclosure of official secrets to any person who is not legally authorized to access such information and it must not involve the use of personal data from legal cases in connection with AI.
  • Judges must maintain their independence in exercising discretion when determining cases and free from any interference or influence by AI and AI must not be used to analyse the probability of facts that are in dispute in a case.
  • Judges must maintain full independence and discretion when adjudicating cases and must remain free from any interference or influence by AI.
  • The use of AI in administrative or academic tasks, such as information retrieval or data summarization, requires users to always verify the accuracy of the information produced by AI.