Regulatory Reform in Thailand

Rising from a low-income to an upper-middle-income country within a generation, Thailand is often cited as a social and economic development success story. This transformation, marked by significant economic growth and poverty reduction, saw an average annual GDP growth rate of 7.5% from 1960 to 1996 and 5% from 1999 to 2005 following the Asian Financial Crisis. Economic growth has generated millions of jobs and significantly improved welfare dimensions, including education and health insurance coverage (World Bank, 2024[1]).

However, challenges persist. The export-led growth model that once drove Thailand's economy has seen diminishing returns due to stagnant productivity. The COVID-19 pandemic further impacted Thailand's economy, which contracted by 6.1% in 2020, worse than the global average of 3.5%. The service sector, especially tourism, saw a significant decline, leading to a 70% drop in tourism revenue (OECD, 2024[2]). This contraction, more severe than during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, led to widespread income declines, particularly affecting vulnerable groups. Poverty increased especially in rural areas where 79% of the poor reside and inequality remained high, with Thailand having one of the highest income Gini coefficients1 in the East Asia and Pacific (World Bank, 2024[1]). The industrial and agricultural sectors also contracted but to a lesser extent. The pandemic also exacerbated labour market issues, increasing unemployment, reducing working hours, and raising household debt levels. Nonetheless, Thailand's strength in connectivity and technology adoption could facilitate the swift and effective implementation of new regulatory policies designed to mitigate these difficulties (OECD, 2024[2]).

Notably, Thailand’s strong and timely policy response helped cushion the negative economic and social impact of the pandemic and rising energy and food prices (OECD, 2023[3])). This fiscal response effectively mitigated the impact on household welfare. However, as relief measures phased out amid elevated inflation, the country still faces long-term challenges, such as an aging population set to increase public spending on pensions and healthcare. In fact, the combined fiscal costs of the Civil Servant Pension, the Social Security Fund, and the Old Age Allowance are projected to rise from 1.4% of GDP in 2017 to 5.6% in 2060 (World Bank, 2024[1]).

Economic growth has also posed significant environmental challenges. Greenhouse gas emissions have risen markedly, alongside substantial plastic pollution. Thailand remains a major marine plastic polluter on land, in river systems, and along coastlines. The increasing frequency of natural disasters further threatens sustained economic growth, exacerbating environmental and social inequalities (World Bank, 2024[1]). In response, Thailand introduced initiatives like the National Action Plan on Marine Plastic Debris 2023-2027 and the Bio-Circular-Green Economy (BCG) Model. This model, part of the Thailand 4.0 strategy, promotes the integration of bioeconomy, circular economy, and green economy principles, while leveraging Thailand’s strengths in agriculture, natural resources, and geographic diversity to transition the nation into a value-based and innovation-driven economy (Mahanakorn Partners Group, 2021[4]). These initiatives reflect Thailand's commitment to tackle environmental challenges while promoting sustainable economic growth.

Despite progress, Thailand remains an upper-middle-income country grappling with structural issues. It relies heavily on foreign capital and technology and has limited bargaining power in the global value chain. This dependence, coupled with low economic productivity, makes Thailand more vulnerable to external changes and hampers efforts to improve income levels. The industrial sector relies heavily on traditional production methods with limited value addition and faces constraints in technological transfer and low domestic value-added generation. The service sector, primarily low-skilled and technology-deficient, generates low value-added and limited growth. Both sectors face challenges from technological advancements, demographic changes, consumer behaviour shifts, and global trade conflicts (OECD, 2024[2]). However, economic growth is projected to accelerate in the coming years. In 2024 and 2025, growth is expected to rise from an estimated 2.5% in 2023 to 3.2% and 3.1%, respectively. The recovery of the tourism sector and sustained private consumption are anticipated to be the major drivers of this growth (World Bank, 2023[5]).

Thailand’s economic growth has also brought new responsibilities, particularly within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). As an ASEAN founding member, Thailand adheres to regional commitments and initiatives, including the Kuala Lumpur Declaration for ASEAN 2025 and the Masterplan for ASEAN Connectivity. Regulatory excellence is a key area of cooperation. Within the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) framework, Thailand focuses on public sector reform by utilising systemised digital services and enhancing data linkages. These reforms aim to bolster market competition, ensure consumer protection, and facilitate ease of doing business, complemented by the development of Regulatory Impact Assessments (RIA).

As one of the largest economies in Southeast Asia and a major hub for regional and global value chains, Thailand's economic trajectory underscores the need for sustainable growth practices. Amidst challenges, Thailand has shown a strong commitment to regulatory reforms to support economic recovery and growth. Good regulatory practices are featured prominently in the 2017 Constitution of Thailand and are also woven into national strategies. The Thai National Strategy (2017-2036), which is the country’s first national long-term strategy aims to transform Thailand into a “developed country with security, prosperity, and sustainability” (OSMEP, n.d.[6]). The Thirteenth National Economic and Social Development Plan (2022-27) emphasises adopting good regulatory practices to modernise outdated rules and regulations to reduce unnecessary costs of living and doing business. The post-COVID 19 strategy focuses on creating the resilient, sustainable, and bio-circular economy of Thailand.

This section discusses Thailand’s regulatory governance and oversight mechanisms, building on the 2020 OECD Diagnostic Scan’s findings. This review supports the national administration in aligning with the 20-year National Strategy by developing an effective regulatory governance framework. Key developments since 2020 include Parliament's adoption of its own regulatory policies, aligned with the 2019 Act on Legislative Drafting and Evaluation of Law. The Act, effective from November 2019, led to the Office of the Council of State (OCS) issuing Guidelines on Regulatory Impact Assessment, Stakeholder Engagement, and Ex post Evaluation of Law. The Law Reform Commission (LRC) develops new regulatory practices, including RIAs for subordinate regulations and clarifies ambiguities in the Act. Initially, the 2019 Act required RIAs only for primary legislative proposals, but since 2022, most subordinate regulations affecting people and businesses also require RIAs, adhering to Section 5 principles, including Regulatory Impact Statements (RIS) and public consultations. Since August 2021, the Central Law Portal has been a platform for public consultation on new legislative and regulatory proposals and ex post evaluation of laws. Further details are in Chapter 3 in relation to the key reforms introduced since 2020 linked to the Thai government commitment to strengthening transparency, participation, and accountability in the legislative process. This report is conducted under Pillar 1 as part of the OECD Country Programme, in addition to other related reviews (see Box 1.1).

Thailand has shown a strong commitment to improving regulatory quality. Since the 2020 OECD Diagnostic Scan, the country has made some improvements in regulatory policy, guided by national strategies aimed at fostering good regulatory practices into daily government operations. This section provides an overview of Thailand's legislative process and key institutions, detailing recent developments such as the Parliament's new role, the implementation of RIA, the Office of the Council of State's first four years as an oversight body, the extension of RIA to subordinate regulations, the implementation of the Regulatory Guillotine, and the RIA training programme overseen by OCS.

The Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (2017) significantly shapes the country's regulatory policy-making landscape. Section 77 stipulates that before enacting any law, the state must solicit relevant opinions, analyse the potential impacts of the law, and transparently disclose these findings to the public. Such principles of good regulatory practice are intended to ensure laws are introduced only when necessary and require the repeal or revision of outdated laws. Thailand is making progressing on consistently implementing these principles in their rule making procedures.

To implement these provisions, a Cabinet Resolution on 4 April 2017 temporarily transposed Section 77 into an executive order, pending the passage of an Act to establish these requirements. This transition phase should have ensured that the principles of good regulatory practice were upheld while the legislative framework was being developed. The 2017 Constitution applies to the executive, legislature, government agencies, and sub-national governments, ensuring comprehensive adherence. The 2019 Act followed, requiring RIAs for primary laws and ex post reviews for both primary and subordinate regulations.

Regarding the judiciary branch of the government, the Constitution outlines a four-pillar court system. The Court of Justice has the exclusive jurisdictions over civil and criminal matters. The administrative court system rules over the matters between the state or government agencies and private citizens, primarily regarding the use of administrative powers by the former. Lastly, the constitutional court holds the ultimate authority over disputes over constitutional matters while the military court makes up the final part of Thailand’s judicial system.

Section 65 of the Constitution mandates a national strategy for sustainable development. In 2017, the implementation of the National Strategy Act, B.E. 2560 (2017 C.E.) led to the creation of the National Strategy Committee (NSC) tasked with developing the National Strategy. Released in 2018, the National Strategy 2018-2037 outlines a 20-year vision for Thailand to become a “developed country with security, prosperity, and sustainability in accordance with the Sufficient Economy Philosophy”, ultimately aiming for the happiness and well-being of all Thai people.

The Strategy addresses several challenges to Thailand’s development, including the integration of innovative technologies, low productivity in the agricultural and service sectors, and a workforce not fully equipped for the labour market. Social challenges include low-income levels, poverty, inequality, and issues with public service quality and accessibility. Environmental sustainability and the preservation of natural resources are also key concerns. It also highlights the impacts of an aging society, disruptive technologies, changing international relations, regional integration, and climate change on national development. To transform such vision into cohesive, systematic plans, Thailand's National Strategy serves as the primary framework for balanced development across stability, economy, health, society, and environment through public participation. Secondary plans then operationalise the National Strategy, including (Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council, 2023[12]):

• Master Plans defining integrated development goals and issues.

• The National Reform Plan addressing structural barriers for focused development.

• The National Security Policy and Plan for safeguarding against threats to national security.

• The National Economic and Social Development Plan, guiding sector-specific goals aligned with national dynamics.

The 13th National Economic and Social Development Plan (2023-2027) identifies the development direction and goals under the National Strategy, considering development dynamics and conditions the country is facing so that relevant sectors can adapt their operations to those conditions. It aims to support Thailand navigate through domestic and international challenges, enhancing its capacity to leverage arising opportunities.

The Plan aims to transform Thailand into a “Progressive Society with a Sustainable Value-Creating Economy” (Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council, 2023[12]). To pursue this objective, the five main development targets of the 13th plan are as follows:

• Restructuring the manufacturing and service sectors towards an innovation-based economy.

• Developing human capital for the new global era.

• Creating a society of opportunities and fairness.

• Ensuring the transition of production and consumption towards sustainability.

• Enhancing Thailand’s capability to cope with changes and risks in the new global context.

To translate the main targets into an actionable development agenda, 13 development milestones have also been formulated and categorised in 4 development areas, which are 1) Targeted manufacturing and service sectors, 2) Socioeconomic opportunity and equality, 3) Natural resources and environmental sustainability, and 4) Key enables for Thailand’s transformation.

Overall, the 13th Plan focuses on structural, policy, and mechanism levels to foster a society that adapts to global dynamics and maximises the potential of its people. A key priority is the development of human capital by equipping Thai people with modern skills, enhancing workforce quality to meet labour market demands, and supporting social security for life stability. The plan also aims to reduce economic and social disparities, ensure equitable access to quality public services, and promote fair competition in the business sector. Sustainability is emphasised by reducing pollution, improving natural resource use, and achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 and net zero emissions by 2065. Additionally, the plan enhances Thailand’s readiness to handle global challenges such as ageing populations, climate change, epidemics, and cyber threats by developing infrastructure and mechanisms for digital transformation and efficient public administration.

As part of the 20-Year National Strategy (2017–2036), Thailand 4.0 is an economic model aimed at transitioning Thailand towards a high-income nation through innovation and technology. Building on previous economic models that emphasised agriculture (Thailand 1.0), light industry (Thailand 2.0), and advanced industry (Thailand 3.0), Thailand 4.0 focuses on reforming both the economic and social sectors, with particular attention to ten targeted industries. These include modern automotive and bio-industry sectors for existing industries, and robotics and automation for future sectors, to drive Thailand’s economic growth.

This strategy supports the development of targeted high-tech industries, promotes SMEs, and enhances local economies through initiatives such as Creative Innovation Villages. It aligns closely with regulatory policy improvements, as reducing regulatory burdens and fostering an innovation-friendly environment are crucial to its success. The reforms and policies under Thailand 4.0 are integral to advancing the country’s regulatory framework, ensuring that economic and social advancements are both sustainable and inclusive. Thailand 4.0 aims to use digital technology to enhance competitiveness of the local business environment and to increase transparency to provide its citizens with equitable access to public services and their data. The advancements made by Thailand in implementing its digital government policy have the objective of spearheading the digitalisation of the private sector and enhance the access of both citizens and businesses to public sector data to drive the country’s overall economic competitiveness (Bangkok Post, 2021[13]).

The government's central legal drafting and advisory agency Office of the OCS under the Prime Minister's office is responsible for developing laws, by-laws, rules, and regulations as requested by the executive. Staffed by legal experts and scholars, OCS provides legal advice and training to state agencies and state enterprises, coordinating with them to develop legal principles and state administration practices. OCS submits legal opinions to the Council of Ministers for the creation, implementation, amendment, or repeal of regulations. It also serves as the secretariat for the Law Reform Commission and the Council of State, which drafts legislation and offers legal advice to state entities upon the Prime Minister's direction or by the Council of Ministers' resolution. The Office was transformed by the 2019 Act on Legislative Drafting and Evaluation of Law from a legal scrutiny body into a more comprehensive regulatory oversight body, including capacity-building, methodology development and quality scrutiny. The effect has been that OCS has to equally prioritise legal review and regulatory policy management, establishing it as the regulatory oversight body. This will be addressed in more details under the Key reforms since 2020 section.

In Thailand, the Prime Minister, Head of Government, leads a Cabinet, officially, the “Council of Ministers”, which forms the leadership of the Executive. The Executive is one of three main branches of government along with the legislative and judicial ones. OCS, under the Office of the Prime Minister, has exclusive jurisdiction over the implementation of regulatory management or oversight. The 2019 Act does not assign specific responsibilities to the legislature for regulatory policy oversight or review. However, the legislative branch retains the power to pass amendments or enact primary legislation to initiate reform The government agencies can propose legislative proposals which, if approved by the Council of Ministers, will be submitted to the Parliament for further deliberation. In addition, the Council of Ministers has the power to issue additional ministerial regulations (secondary legislation) for executing the act.

The Secretariat of the Cabinet (SoC), also part of the Prime Minister’s office, supports public administration and coordinates the implementation of Cabinet policies. It manages affairs between the Cabinet and the Monarch, including requests for amnesty and the assent of bills. The SoC acts as a coordination centre between the Cabinet and Parliament, analysing draft bills, proposing initial drafts to parliament, and handling enactments and amendments. It processes motions, questions, and reports, and communicates new legislation to the public, for instance, through the Gazette.

The Law Reform Commission, established under the Council of State Act, B.E. 2522 of 1979, initiates law reform programmes for legislation deemed outdated, necessarily costly, or uncompetitive OCS. Once the Cabinet approves this agenda, the LRC drafts a report and corresponding legislation, which, if passed by the Parliament, becomes law. The LRC, with assistance from OCS, advises the Cabinet on legal reforms and can form sub-committees, fund research, or seek input from other agencies. In terms of the 2019 Act, the LRC will hold a similar advisory role to the Cabinet. In Section 7 of the Act, it can advise the Council of Ministers on:

• The enactment of ministerial regulations.

• The prescription of guidelines.

• An agency’s compliance with the Act.

• Overall government compliance with the Act.

Furthermore, the LRC may advise an agency if it is not compliant with the Act. Compliance is achieved once the agency follows the LRC’s advice. The LRC and OCS share legal oversight of regulatory policy under Sections 7 and 8 of the 2019 Act, with OCS serving as the LRC's Secretariat. OCS conducts initial analysis and oversight, then presents its findings to the LRC for approval. The extent of the LRC's discretion may determine whether further clarification of responsibilities is needed. Additionally, the LRC was tasked with producing guidelines for impact assessment, stakeholder consultation, and ex post analysis. While OCS assisted in designing these documents, the LRC was responsible for their final production and submission to the Council of Ministers. These guidelines came into effect on 24 November 2019 with subsequent amendments and additions.

Thailand is a centralised state divided into 76 provinces (Changwats), led by officials appointed by the Ministry of Interior, except in the Bangkok Metropolitan Area (BMA) and Pattaya, where leaders are elected. Provinces are subdivided into districts (Amphoe), sub-districts (Tambon), and villages (Muban). Village heads are elected by constituents, and sub-district officials are usually chosen from among the village heads. However, both sub-district and village heads are supervised by provincial governors and chief district officers under central government control.

Since the Municipality Act of 1953, there has been a separation of power between central and local governments. Various versions of the Constitution have devolved powers to local authorities, with the current Constitution enshrining the right to self-government in Chapter 14. Supplementary acts, like the Provincial Administration Act of 1997 and the City of Pattaya Administrative Act of 1999, outline the jurisdiction and powers of local authorities based on the administrative structure.

Local authorities can enact rules on, among other things, public health and natural resource management, provided they do not conflict with primary legislation. While license and permit systems are centrally managed, local authorities implement these regulations. However, sub-national units are not responsible for the quality control of their regulations, which remains under central government oversight. Regulatory assessments, as stipulated in Constitutional Articles 77 and 258, apply to all levels of government. The 2019 Act focuses on implementing regulatory policy tools in primary law, requiring new secondary legislation to undergo impact assessment after five years, along with existing regulations.

Under the 2019 Act, ministries in Thailand are required to prepare impact assessments, conduct stakeholder consultations, and complete ex post analyses. They formulate laws within their remit, based on government plans, cabinet direction, or issues identified by constituents or agency staff. Regulatory agencies, under ministerial supervision, have jurisdiction-specific mandates to enact regulations, including licensing regimes, supervisory approaches, or sanctions. The relationship between the central government and these agencies varies, with some regulators enjoying greater independence than others. For instance, capital market regulators have minimal government interference, while those related to public security work closely with agency leadership. Key national regulatory agencies include the Office of National Broadcasting and Telecommunication Commission, Office of Securities and Exchange Commission, Bank of Thailand, and Office of Insurance Commission.

Before the 2019 Act, there was a recognised need for a central agency to oversee, train, and coordinate good regulatory practices, particularly in impact assessments and stakeholder consultations. Individual initiative previously played a crucial role in regulatory adherence (Ongkittikul, S. and N. Thongphat, 2016[14]). Agencies like the Bank of Thailand and the Office of Securities and Exchange Commission have integrated regulatory policy tools into their processes, conducting structured impact assessments and stakeholder consultations. Prior to the 2019 Act, ministries could be consulted on draft bills relevant to their jurisdiction, but there was no formal requirement. Proposing agencies were required to publicly post laws for 15 days. The 2019 Act mandates stakeholder consultation during legislation drafting and requires legislation to be entered into a central system for review by other agencies. Thailand lacks a systemised conflict mechanism for ministerial or regulatory overlaps, with disputes typically resolved by the involved ministries or, ultimately, the Cabinet or Prime Minister.

Thailand’s policy-making process, underpinned by its civil law system and parliamentary constitutional monarchy, balances the roles of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches with the monarchy functioning in a ceremonial capacity. Thailand operates as a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, with the King serving as the head of state in a ceremonial role. The executive branch is led by the Prime Minister, who heads the Cabinet, officially known as the Council of Ministers. The Cabinet comprises 36 members, including ministers who lead the central ministries and advisors to the government. The legislative branch is represented by the Parliament, which is a bicameral body consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The judiciary includes the Court of Justice, the Administrative Court, and the Military Court, while the Constitutional Court is constitutionally mandated to adjudicate on the constitutional matters.

The Cabinet is primarily responsible for introducing bills to the Parliament, although members of the House of Representatives or eligible voters can also propose legislation. Most bills originate from the executive branch. The legislative process for an executive bill begins with the drafting by an agency, followed by a preliminary check by the Secretariat of the Cabinet. The bill is then reviewed by various committees for legal and policy compatibility before being formally approved by the Cabinet. Once the Cabinet approves a bill, it is forwarded to the Office of the Council of State for legal scrutiny and formal drafting. OCS ensures the bill's constitutionality, compatibility with existing laws, and suitability of its mechanisms. After this review, the bill undergoes three readings each in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. If it passes all readings, it is sent to the King for royal assent, published in the Government Gazette and then becomes law.

Thai laws originate from both the legislative and executive branches. Acts are complemented by various administrative laws and regulations, issued by the Cabinet, ministers, or department directors-general. Thailand's legal framework includes various types of legislative instruments (Nilprapunt, P., 2015[15]; Ongkittikul, S. and N. Thongphat, 2016[14]; ThaiLaws, n.d.[16]):

• Acts (Organic Acts and Acts of Parliament): Passed through the National Assembly (referred to as parliament after 2017).

• Emergency Decrees: Issued in cases of national urgency and must be ratified by the Parliament.

• Royal Decrees: Subordinate legislation approved by the Council of Ministers and signed by the King.

• Ministerial Regulations: Issued by ministers and require Cabinet approval.

• Notifications: Promulgated by department directors-general and executed by the relevant minister without needing Cabinet approval.

• Cabinet Resolutions: Non-binding but influential in government policy enforcement and interpretation.

The legislative process begins with the drafting of the bill by the proposing ministry, which includes an associated RIA and a summary of stakeholder consultations as required by the 2019 Act (Section 12 of the 2019 Act). These documents are then sent to the Secretariat of the Cabinet for a preliminary check, then the Secretariat reviews the draft, the public consultation summary, and the RIA report, and provides opinions or blocks the draft if necessary (Section 25 of the 2019 Act).

Figure 1.1 provides an overview of the primary legislative process, including of the ex ante regulatory impact assessments (Chapter 4 of the 2019 Act). Chapter 2 of this review will describe ex ante RIA in more details. Nevertheless, once the SoC's preliminary check is complete, the draft proceeds to the Cabinet, which reviews the policy principles and rationale behind the proposed legislation. The draft is then forwarded to OCS. OCS conducts a thorough review, focusing on the legality and substantial evaluation of the RIA and stakeholder consultation summary. According to Section 26 of the 2019 Act, OCS should issue an opinion and advice, by assessing the necessity of the draft legislation and communicate it to the Cabinet through the SoC. The Cabinet uses this information to decide on the necessity of the proposed law.

OCS ensures that the draft legislation complies with Section 5 of the 2019 Act. This includes verifying that the bill is up to date, not excessively burdensome, and has undergone proper impact analysis and public consultation. The legislation must also be clear and comprehensible. If needed, OCS can request further public consultation or a re-assessment of the law’s impacts. This can be conducted either by OCS itself or by the relevant government agency. Following OCS's review, the Cabinet approves the draft bill and submits it, along with the RIA report and stakeholder consultation summary (or their revised versions), to the Parliament for consideration. The Cabinet is not obliged to share OCS's opinion and advice with the Parliament, but the submitted materials are made publicly accessible on the government's central system.

Over the past two decades, Thailand's economic progress highlights its commitment to regulatory reforms. The first wave of reforms laid the groundwork for a robust system of regulatory governance, emphasising service improvement and adopting key principles to enhance regulatory policymaking (OECD, 2021[11]). The following wave focused on modernising regulatory governance, encompassing oversight and the promotion of good regulatory practices (GRPs). These efforts are expressed in the 2017 Constitution and reflected in strategic documents like the Thai National Strategy (2018-2037) and the Thirteenth National Economic and Social Development Plan. Against this background, the OECD's support, particularly through the Office of the Council of State, has been pivotal in issuing a series of recommendations on regulatory governance and reform (see Box 1.2).

Furthermore, effective regulatory policy hinges significantly on the institutional architecture supporting it. This framework goes beyond the central government's executive centre, although in many OECD countries, this remains the primary focal point. Reforms are crucial not just in designing suitable institutional frameworks but also in ensuring they are adequately resourced and capacitated to deliver effectively and sustainably over time. This systemic approach is essential for ensuring that resources invested in regulatory decision-making yield relevant and impactful outcomes, as shown by the second set of recommendations proposed in the 2020 OECD report (see Box 1.3).

In general, while Thailand has made significant efforts to enhance its regulatory policy governance framework by establishing new mechanisms and requirements that will be discussed in more detail in the following section, the main governance structure in Thailand largely remains as described in the 2020 repor (OECD, 2021[11]).

Section 77 and 258 of the Thai Constitution bound the Parliament to better regulations principles. The Parliament of Thailand primarily acts as a legislative scrutinising body, with most legislation introduced by the government. Executive agencies and regulatory bodies are responsible for passing rules and regulations to implement primary legislation, making the executive branch crucial for maintaining a good regulatory framework and practice. Furthermore, the country has established a RIA mechanism through the Act on Drafting Legislation and Evaluation of Law, B.E. 2562 (2019).

This law enhances the clarity of criteria and practices regarding law drafting and RIA. It applies to state agencies not involved in administration and specifies the criteria for drafting laws, including constitutional laws, royal decrees, and acts that impose obligations on the public. The law mandates the use of information technology and network systems for disseminating information and verifying the necessity of legislation. Government agencies must justify the necessity of new laws, provide clear information, and seek input from relevant parties before drafting any law, including key principles or issues related to the draft legislation (Srivithaya, 2024[17])).

The law also establishes criteria for reviewing the content of legislation, encouraging government agencies to consider reviews at various stages, such as when introducing a licensing or committee system. It sets the responsibilities and authority of the Legislation Development Committee for implementing the law and specifies penalties for offenses and wrongful conduct to prevent non-compliance. Following Section 77's requirement for the State to regularly assess the effectiveness of laws, the Thai Parliament established mechanisms to perform its own standardised RIA framework.

In October 2019, the parliament announced the notification of the House of Parliament regarding the criteria and process of public consultation and RIA from the legislative proposals by members of the Parliament of the Electorate B.E. 2562 (2019). This notification requires the Secretariat of the Parliament to carry out RIA for all legislative proposals by Members of Parliament and the public. Public consultation must be conducted through the government's central law portal. Since August 2020, the Parliament has had a committee on public consultation and regulatory impact assessment to review summaries of public consultation and RIA reports for these legislative proposals.

OCS as stated in the in the legislation preamble of the 2019 Act will be “tasked to lead the administration of the implementation of the national strategy in the area of law and legal reform.” Under this role (as well as according to their roles stipulated in the Council of State Act, B.E. 2522 (1979), OCS has the responsibility to train ministry officials who will perform regulatory analysis and provide official guidance in the form of manuals or ad hoc support. OCS's traditional function of legislative review now incorporates elements of regulatory oversight, ensuring that all legislative proposals meet the requirements for regulatory impact statements and public consultations as mandated by the 2019 Act.

In the first four years of implementing the 2019 Act, the Office of the Council of State has played a critical oversight role in Thailand's regulatory framework. Tasked with leading the administration of legal reform and regulatory policy, OCS has focused on several responsibilities, as outlined in the Act. In fact, OCS oversees and ensures the quality of ex ante impact assessments and stakeholder consultation for legislative proposals. Although it does not have explicit authority to enforce ex post reviews, but de facto, OCS sets forth guidelines and manuals to maintain oversight. It administers the central system for information dissemination and legislative verification, collaborating with the Electronic Government Agency to maintain and develop this system.

Reflecting international best practices, OCS can request revised impact assessments but cannot alter the principles of proposed legislation, which is a prerogative of the Cabinet. OCS's oversight function also involves training ministry officials in regulatory analysis and providing official guidance through manuals and ad hoc support. It does not assist with non-executive bills, which are handled by other secretariats like the Secretariat of the House of Representatives. However, OCS has developed guidelines, subordinate regulations, and a long-term training programme to support the 2019 Act's implementation. These resources were created by the Subcommittee on RIA within the Law Reform Commission and include templates for legislative proposals, which came into force with the 2019 Act.

Since the Act’s enactment, OCS seemed to have prioritised compliance by regularly submitting requests to the Council of Ministers for action on outstanding legislative obligations. For example, in February 2023, the Council of Ministers ordered all ministries and government agencies to expedite the issuance of crucial subordinate regulations.

Initially, the 2019 Act only required RIA for primary legislative proposals. However, since October 2023, this requirement has been extended to include most subordinate regulations that affect people and businesses, in accordance with the principles enshrined in Section 5 of the Act. These regulations must now undergo RIA and public consultation as a minimum requirement. Specifically, RIAs are required for draft regulations that set criteria, processes, or conditions regarding permit applications, registrations, certifications, and other similar processes, as well as those prescribing specific procedures for businesses and individuals in their interactions with public agencies.

To support this extension, the Office of the Council of State has developed comprehensive subordinate regulations, guidelines, and manuals. These were created by the Subcommittee on RIA, under the Law Reform Commission, and came into force with the 2019 Act. These documents outline the process, requirements, and oversight mechanisms for conducting RIAs, stakeholder engagement, and ex post reviews. Templates for submitting proposals to the Council of State and OCS are included, facilitating a standardised approach. The initial set of guidelines and manuals were published within the first three months of the enactment of the Act.

A complementary element of these reforms is the Regulatory Guillotine project, which aims to streamline the country's legal and regulatory framework by reducing unnecessary regulations. The Guillotine is a reform initiative designed to simplify and rationalise the existing regulatory framework by identifying and eliminating outdated, redundant, or overly burdensome regulations.

Launched in 2017 by the Office of the Prime Minister, it aims to overhaul the regulatory landscape to improve Thailand's ranking in the World Bank's Ease of Doing Business index and other international competitiveness indices. Notably, Thailand's position in the World Bank's Doing Business Indicators improved significantly from 48th to 21st place between 2016 and 2020 (World Bank, 2020[18]). Together with the Regulatory Guillotine, two other legal text were part of a broader wave of reforms targeting the stock of regulations in Thailand:

• The Royal Decree on Revision of Law, B.E. 2558 (2015), also known as the “sunset law”, mandated a review of each law's appropriateness every five years. This happened after a 2014 review by the Law Reform Commission of the Office of the Council of State that highlighted how many enterprise-related laws were outdated and had not been assessed for regulatory impact.

• The Licensing Facilitation Act, B.E. 2558 (2015) required authorities to review and potentially repeal or replace licensing requirements every five years, thereby reducing administrative burdens on businesses.

The Regulatory Guillotine set ambitious targets, such as the removal of 1 000 unnecessary laws from an estimated 100 000 in the country's regulatory system (Apisitniran, L., 2019[19])). Initial efforts have focused on reducing procedures and paperwork in key sectors, including the Industry and Labour Ministries, and the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC) Office. Lately this effort has stalled due to inconsistent political support, poor reception from some bureaucrats and agencies and well shifting mandates.

Recognising the need for sustained capacity building, OCS has implemented a comprehensive long-term training programme for Thai officials, aimed at enhancing their skills and comprehension in implementing RIA across the government. To achieve this, OCS has developed comprehensive training programmes for government lawyers and officials, focusing on the effective implementation of the 2019 Act. Initially, 60 OCS officials were designated as “trainers” to assist ministries and agencies with the new reforms. This initiative has since been formalised under the Advanced Legal Training Institute (ALTI).

Currently, ALTI oversees three annual training programmes tailored to different levels of government officers: entry-level, professional-level, and senior professional-level programmes. These courses are designed to ensure that up to 300 government officers receive in-depth training each year. The curriculum includes RIA lessons, which have been an integral part of the training since 2019. In 2020, the Law Reform Division planned specialised RIA training sessions and a joint programme with Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, further enhancing the skills of officials involved in legislative drafting. This sustained focus on capacity building is crucial, as the reforms introduced by the 2019 Act are still relatively new, and understanding among Thai officials remains a key challenge. By equipping government officers with the necessary knowledge and skills, OCS aims to foster a culture of effective regulatory practice and ensure the successful implementation of Thailand's regulatory framework.

The Law Reform Commission, as established under the Council of State Act, B.E. 2522 (1979), holds a key role in evaluating and reforming legislation deemed inadequate or unfit for purpose by the Office of the Council of State. The LRC's reform agenda is submitted to the Cabinet, which, upon approval, allows the Commission to prepare detailed reports on the proposed reforms. These reports, along with draft legislation, are then submitted to the Cabinet and, if approved, proceed to the Parliament for enactment. This should position the LRC as a key advisory body to the Cabinet on matters of legal reform.

Under the 2019 Act, the LRC's advisory role extends to ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements. According to Section 7 of the Act, the LRC advises the Council of Ministers on the enactment of ministerial regulations, the prescription of guidelines, and overall compliance with the 2019 Act by various agencies. When the LRC identifies non-compliance, it should advise the agency concerned on the necessary course of action. Compliance with the LRC’s recommendations is considered adherence to the law.

The LRC shares its oversight responsibilities with OCS, which acts as its secretariat, conducting preliminary analyses and presenting findings for the LRC's approval. This collaborative approach is meant to ensure thorough oversight of regulatory policies. In addition to its advisory duties, the LRC did produce a series of guidelines for impact assessment, stakeholder consultation, and ex post analysis, which came into effect on 24 November 2019. While OCS assisted in designing these documents, the LRC was responsible for their final production and submission to the Council of Ministers. These guidelines serve as a template and methodology for consistent and effective regulatory practices.

The LRC's recent activities highlight its commitment to effective regulatory reform. For instance, it advised the Ministry of Culture to review the Movie and Media Act B.E. 2551 (2008), identifying outdated provisions that imposed unnecessary burdens. It also urged the Land Department to expedite the issuance of subordinate rules under the Protection of the People in the Hire Purchase Agreement for Agricultural and Residential Land B.E. 2562 (2019), to avoid confusion and ambiguity. The LRC has assisted other ministries and agencies in easing administrative procedures around permit applications,2 helping digitise government,3 supporting good regulatory practices,4 as well as, revoking outdated legislation.5

Additionally, the LRC is in charge of advising the Department of Provincial Administration to review laws related to the establishment and regulation of associations and charities, addressing potential constitutional conflicts. Through these actions, the LRC should ensure that the implementation of the 2019 Act aligns with the principles of better regulation as enshrined in the Constitution. The Commission guides ministries and government agencies, providing clarification and addressing uncertainties to facilitate compliance and improve legislative quality.

While Thailand has made substantial progress in strengthening its regulatory governance framework —through the new requirement for the Parliament to conduct RIA for all legislative proposals, the enhanced role of OCS as an oversight and training body, the implementation of the regulatory guillotine, and the Law Commission’s ex post reviews— the fundamental structure of its regulatory governance remains largely unchanged. Consequently, many of the recommendations outlined in the OECD 2020 review (OECD, 2021[11]) continue to be relevant and should be prioritised moving forward. In light of this, the following recommendations, should be taken forward by the Government of Thailand:

• Continuous commitment to regulatory reform to support evidence-based and participatory decision-making. This can be achieved by:

  • Actively mainstreaming the use of regulatory impact assessments and public consultations.

  • Enhancing public awareness through government statements, media interviews, and awareness campaigns will reinforce the commitment to these principles and ensure that regulatory reforms are grounded in robust evidence and public input.

  • Promote a comprehensive Better Regulation Strategy. As suggested in the OECD 2020 review (OECD, 2021[11]), this includes ensuring that all ministries and agencies fully embed the principles and tools of good regulatory governance in their practices. Enhanced internal and external communication of the strategy is key to align regulatory initiatives with government policy strategies.

• Develop a comprehensive Better Regulation Action Plan with clear targets, and deadlines for individual measures. This plan should outline the steps needed for cultural change in regulatory policymaking and facilitate regular reporting to the Prime Minister’s Office, Parliament, and the public. Implement a dedicated Better Regulation Action Plan with specific targets and deadlines to support overarching regulatory reforms and achievable outcomes.

• Enhance monitoring and evaluation schemes to promote effective implementation of regulatory reforms and maintaining transparency and accountability. Produce annual reports on governmental service performance, which are shared with Parliament and the public. This practice will leverage the scrutiny functions of the Secretariat and coordinating of the Cabinet and OCS to ensure that government decisions are based on robust evidence.

• Promote a holistic, more efficient, and coordinated governance approach for regulatory policy. While Thailand has made significant strides with programmes to enhance capacities across line ministries, especially with ALTI’s training initiatives, in-house capacities for good regulatory practices can still be fostered by:

  • Establishing Better Regulation “leaders” (or units) within line ministries and agencies that focus on regulatory governance and evidence-based decision-making, to effectively champion regulatory reform. They could not only help in mainstreaming GRPs across departments, but also liaise with OCS and perform a functional review within the Office to ensure the efficient use of in-house resources.

  • Creating an informal “Better Regulation Network” across various services in the Executive, serving as a dynamic platform where to exchange ideas, share experiences, and promote good practices on evidence-based decision-making. OCS coordinates this network, fostering an environment that stimulates learning and encourages mutual support in implementing GRPs. This network should include both senior officials and technical members. Initially, it could take the form of a voluntary Community of Practice, but over time, it could be progressively formalised. This formalisation could include job rotation, leading to promotions or other benefits for officials. It is important to ensure sufficient time on the job for members to gain a thorough understanding of better regulation, with overlapping terms to maintain continuity.

• Further clarify the roles of the de jure and de facto Secretariat of the Cabinet and OCS. Effective coordination between these bodies can ensure comprehensive procedural and substantive reviews of regulatory proposals. Introducing common standard criteria for reviewing evidential documentation can help minimise discrepancies.

[19] Apisitniran, L. (2019), Firms urge haste on regulatory guillotine, https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/1612522/firms-urge-haste-onregulatory-guillotine.

[13] Bangkok Post (2021), Thailand’s Digital Transformation Boosts Data Industry, https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/2142475/thailands-digital-transformation-boosts-data-industry.

[4] Mahanakorn Partners Group (2021), The Bio-Circular-Green Economic Model, https://mahanakornpartners.com/the-bio-circular-green-economic-model/.

[15] Nilprapunt, P. (2015), Thailand’s Legislative Process: Overview by Pakorn Nilprapun, https://lawdrafter.blogspot.com/2015/11/thailands-legislative-process-.

[2] OECD (2024), Economic Outlook for Southeast Asia, China and India 2024: Developing amid Disaster Risks, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3bbe7dfe-en.

[3] OECD (2023), OECD Economic Surveys: Thailand 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4815cb4b-en.

[9] OECD (2022), Open and Connected Government Review of Thailand, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1593a0c-en.

[8] OECD (2021), OECD Integrity Review of Thailand 2021: Achieving Effective Integrity Policies and Sustained Reform, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e8949f1b-en.

[10] OECD (2021), OECD Journal on Budgeting, Volume 2020 Issue 3 - Thailand: Gender Budgeting Action Plan, https://doi.org/10.1787/d6d8a509-en.

[11] OECD (2021), Thailand Regulatory Management and Oversight Reforms: A Diagnostic Scan, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2dbaa2e5-en.

[7] OECD (2018), OECD Integrity Review of Thailand: Towards Coherent and Effective Integrity Policies, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264291928-en.

[12] Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council (2023), The Thirteen National Economic and Social Development Plan (2023-2027), https://www.nesdc.go.th/article_attach/article_file_20230615134223.pdf.

[14] Ongkittikul, S. and N. Thongphat (2016), Regulatory Coherence: The Case of Thailand, http://www.eria.org/RPR_FY2015_No.4_Chapter_7.pdf.

[6] OSMEP (n.d.), 20-Year National Strategy (2017-2036), https://www.sme.go.th/en/page.php?modulekey=378#:~:text=The%20National%20Strategy%.

[17] Srivithaya, S. (2024), Regulatory impact assessment for law reform: A comparison of the parliament role, https://doi.org/10.22495/clgrv6i1p7.

[16] ThaiLaws (n.d.), Thailand Legal System, http://www.thailaws.com/index_legal_system.htm.

[1] World Bank (2024), The World Bank In Thailand, https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/thailand/overview#3.

[5] World Bank (2023), Thailand Economic Monitor December 2023: Thailand’s Path to Carbon Neutrality - The Role of Carbon Pricing, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099121223123018912/pdf/P5010090ef52cc09d0b46c0af1a43820def.pdf.

[18] World Bank (2020), Doing Business 2020. Economy Profile: Thailand, http://doingbusiness.org.