Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Different Paradigms in the 2007 and 2019 Definitional Reforms of Sexual Offences Under the Thai Penal Code: A Unique Development

  • Published:
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article analyses the definitional reforms and re-categorisation of sexual offences under the Thai Penal Code in the period of 13 years, namely, the 2007 and 2019 amendments. The incidents are of uniqueness as the 2007 amendment shared much resemblance with jurisdictions that have departed the original meaning of rape and attempted to re-conceptualise sexual offences, whereas the 2019 amendment shared much similarities with jurisdictions that decided to retain the original meaning of rape and categorise other serious sexual offences in other names. The article argues that, apart from accounts based on criminal law principles, the two definitional revisions had been carried out in the environments of different legal culture and social values in the Thai legislative bodies. It appears that the 2007 amendment followed a feminist perspective that emphasises the harm of sexual offences to bodily/sexual integrity as a state for individuals to realise their personhood, while the re-categorisation of sexual offences in the 2019 amendment (1) suggests a greater role of the feminist perspective in another camp that views penile-penetration inherently differs from non-penile penetration and (2) implies that the law continues, to a certain extent, regulating sexuality since the 2019 amendment used the reason of “naturalness” of sexual intercourse to distinguish between penile penetration and non-penile penetration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This article notes that the Penal Code does not have a specific term for rape as in Western jurisdictions, but combines the words “lack of consent” and “having sexual intercourse” to refer to the most serious sexual offence.

  2. The article chooses “indecent assault” for the English term representing a lesser sexual offence in Thailand (Section 278 and 279) as it sees this offence with a relatively strong connection with public morality which is to be discussed in Sect. 3. Translations are different in various materials. For example, a privately-translated version of a public prosecutor group translates it as “an act of indecency”, see [32: 237]; Ronnakorn Bunmee and Pokpong Srisanit translate it as “sexual assault”, see [7: 200–219, 39: 101].

  3. The law is written “กฎหมายตราสามดวง” in Thai.

  4. Ayutthaya was the name of the Kingdom as well as the capital. Siam was the former name of Thailand and the capital of Siam/Thailand is Bangkok.

  5. Contrasting to the dominant narrative in the Thai educational system, the Siamese royal family and elites were not forced to sign the Bowring Treaty with the United Kingdom but they actually prepared Siam for this incident for their wealth expected to arise from foreign cooperation. The extraterritoriality that was considered to be a threat to the absolute monarchy Siam was when there were excessive amounts of non-white/Japanese subjects under extraterritoriality rights. [See 25: 41–44].

  6. “พระราชกำหนดลักษณะข่มขืนล่วงประเวณี ร.ศ. 118” in Thai.

  7. “กฎหมายลักษณะอาญา ร.ศ. 127” in Thai.

  8. Interestingly, this wording, derived from the World Health Organization’s list of international classification of diseases, was translated into Thai in the legal text as “the condition that one’s gender does not match his/her sex at birth”. The official legal text shows the Thai translation along with the official term from the WHO in brackets.

  9. Indeed, since the Royal Ordinance was promulgated but with slightly different wording.

  10. Different English words are used for translation, for example, Ronnakorn Bunmee uses “lack of consent” for “komkuen” in his 2019 article [see 7]. However until currently, “compelling” or an act leading to “lack of consent” under the Thai Penal Code is limited only to four scenarios which are the commission (1) of coercion, (2) of an act of violence, (3) when the person subject to rape is under the condition that he or she cannot resist, and (4) of making the person subject to rape to mistake the perpetrator as another person. Aware of the possibility to cause misunderstanding of the concept of consent in the prohibition against sexual offences, the article, therefore, uses a literal translation. (Ronnakorn is also very well aware of this but his article was written in a different context with a thorough explanation of consent.).

  11. For statutory rape (committed to minor aged 15 years old or less), no element of compelling is required.

  12. In this article, when referring to “cham-rau” under the Penal Code as sexual intercourse, or penetration which is its original meaning, they are to be written in italic in order to be distinguishable from sexual intercourse or penetration as the words describing an act.

  13. Section 276 paragraph one of the Penal Code before the 2007 amendment.

  14. Section 276 paragraph one of the Penal Code after the 2007 amendment.

  15. Section 276 paragraph two and 277 paragraph two of the Penal Code after the 2007 amendment. The first half of the translation is done by Amnart and others, see [32: 233–235].

  16. Section 276 paragraph one of the Penal Code after the 2019 amendment.

  17. Section 1 (18) of the Penal Code after the 2019 amendment.

  18. Section 278 paragraph two and Section 279 paragraph four of the Penal Code after the 2019 amendment.

  19. But Kietkajorn Vachanasvasti is of the opinion that it can still be rape, see [52].

  20. For sexual assaults, Section 271–273 and for the definition of assault, Section 265 of the Canadian Criminal Code.

  21. Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 of the United Kingdom before repealed by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 on 1 May 2004.

  22. Sexual Offences Act 2003 of the United Kingdom.

  23. Under the Thai Penal Code, for the major sexual offences (rape and indecent assault), an adult is a person aged more than 15 years old and a child is a person aged 15 years old or less. While rape committed to a child was non-compoundable since the Penal Code first came into force in 1957, rape committed to an adult (without causing grievous bodily harm or death, or committed in public) became non-compoundable only in 2019.

  24. Section 337 and 246 of the Penal Code 1908; [14: 1–7].

  25. As this article concerns only the Thai jurisdiction, arguments that are not applicable to the Thai context, such as labelling an offence to be comprehensible for juries, are not presented.

  26. Chalmers and Leverick observe that Ashworth and Horder’s explanations in different versions slightly differ. [See 11: 230].

  27. See Section 93 of the Penal Code where the Code identifies in detail the criteria for sentencing reoffending cases and it still works properly even offence names are not provided.

  28. For a review of feminist debates on sexual offences in the North American context (until 2000), see [10: 127–135].

  29. Section 128 of the Crimes Act 1961 (Reprint as at 28 September 2017) of New Zealand.

  30. These four legal feminist models are roughly categorised by Gordon [20] and other theorists such as Patricia Cain [9] and Vanessa Munro [30].

  31. Gordon applies the postmodern, anti-essentialist, and queer models and groups them together. In this article, to prevent confusion, it uses only “the postmodern model” as the representative of this group of legal feminism.

  32. Indeed, the word “penetration” was used in the early draft of the 2007 Amendment Act, see [3: 205].

  33. See a brief but informative historical overview of gender relations in Thailand, in [8: 2–3].

  34. Indeed, sexual offences were not separated from the (heterosexual) family law [33: 11–26].

  35. The National Legislation Assembly was the legislative body established by the Thai Junta that led the Coup in 2014. It acted as the parliament in 2014–2019.

  36. As stated earlier, this article focusses only on texts shown to the public; other factors such as different political backgrounds of each amendment must be taken into account for a full analysis elsewhere.

References

  1. Act Amending the Penal Code (no. 19), B.E. 2550 (2007).

  2. Act Amending the Penal Code (no. 27), B.E. 2562 (2019).

  3. Ashworth, Andrew, and Jeremy Horder. 2013. Principles of Criminal Law. 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Boonchalermwipat, Sawaeng. 2007. คำโบราณในกฎหมายปัจจุบัน [Ancient Words in the Current Law]. In Thai Language in the Three Seals Law, ed. Vinai Pongsripian, 27–31. Bangkok: Samlada.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bunmee, Ronnakorn. 2013. พยายามข่มขืนกระทำชำเรา ปี 2553 [Attempted Rape in 2010]. In Family, Administrative, Works, Pairojana: A Compilation of Articles in Memory of 60th Anniversary of Professor Dr. Pairojana Kambhumsiri, 151–189. Bangkok: Faculty of Law, Thammasat University.

  6. Bunmee, Ronnakorn. 2017. การข่มขืนกระทำชำเราโดยหลอกลวง: วิเคราะห์คำพิพากษาศาลฎีกาที่ 10007/2557 และการกระทำอื่นๆ [Rape by Fraud A Comment on Supreme Court Decision no. 10007/2557 and Beyond]. Thammasat Law Journal 46(3): 647–663.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bunmee, Ronnakorn. 2019. Examining Elements of Rape Offences in Thailand. Thammasat Law Journal 48(1): 200–219.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Buranajaroenkij, Duanghathai. 2017. Political Feminism and the Women’s Movement in Thailand: Actors, Debates and Strategies. Bangkok: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Thailand Office.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cain, Patricia. 1990. Feminism and the Limits of Equality. Georgia Law Review 24: 803–847.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cashman, Danette C. 2000. Negotiating Gender: A Comparison of Rape Laws in Canada, Finland, and Pakistan. Dalhousie Journal of Legal Studies 9: 120–187.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chalmers, James, and Fiona Leverick. 2008. Fair Labelling in Criminal Law. Modern Law Review 71(2): 217–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chamsanit, Varaporn. 2008. วิธีคิดเรื่องเพศวิถีของรัฐไทย [Paradigms in Sexuality of the Thai State]. Bangkok: Women’s Health Advocacy Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chanhom, Kanaphon. 2018. คำอธิบายกฎหมายอาญาภาคความผิด เล่ม 3 ลักษณะ 1 ถึงลักษณะ 9 [Criminal Law: Specific Offences Vol.3 Title I to IX]. Bangkok: Winyuchon.

  14. Council of State. 1939. Minutes of the Sub-committee on Examination of the Revision of the Penal Code. no. 47, 150/2482, (November 4, 1939).

  15. Cowan, Sharon. 2010. All Change or Business as Usual? Reforming the Law of Rape in Scotland. In Rethinking Rape Law, ed. Clare McGlynn and Vanessa E. Munro, 154–168. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Damrongkulnan, Wiwat. 2019. ขอบเขตของการกระทำชำเราการกระทำอนาจารและการคุกคามทางเพศ [The Extent of Sexual Penetration, SexualContact and Sexual Harassment]. Thammasat Law Journal 48(1): 107–137.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dictionary of the Office of Royal Society B.E. 2555 (2012).

  18. Diduck, Alison. 2005. Shifting Familiarity. Current Legal Problems 58(1): 235–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Draft of the Act Amending the Penal Code (no.), B.E.(Sexual Offences).

  20. Gordon, Demoya R. 2009. Transgender Legal Advocacy: What Do Feminist Legal Theories Have to Offer? California Law Review 97: 1719–1762.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Herring, Jonathan, and Michelle Madden Dempsey. 2010. Rethinking the Criminal Law’s Response to Sexual Penetration: On Theory and Context. In Rethinking Rape Law, ed. Clare McGlynn and Vanessa E. Munro, 30–43. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kerdcharoen, Siwadee. 2009. ผลกระทบจากการบัญญัติแก้ไขเพิ่มเติมความผิดฐานข่มขืนกระทำชำเราตามพระราชบัญญัติแก้ไขเพิ่มเติมประมวลกฎหมายอาญา (ฉบับที่ 19) พ.ศ. 2550 ต่อความผิดฐานอนาจาร [The Effects from 19th Penal Code (B.E.2550) Revising on Offenses of Rape and Indecent Act]. Master’s thesis, Chulalongkorn University.

  23. Kevelson, Roberta. 1988. The Law as a System of Signs. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Lacey, Nicola. 1998. Unspeakable Subjects: Feminist Essays in Legal and Social Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Loos, Tamara. 2006. Subject Siam: Family, Law, and Colonial Modernity in Thailand. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. MacKinnon, Catherine. 1989. Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. McDonald, Elisabeth. 2019. Gender Neutrality and the Definition of Rape: Challenging the Law’s Response to Sexual Violence and Non-Normative Bodies. University of Western Australia Law Review 45(2): 166–194.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Menakanist, Twekiat. 2019. ความหมายของ‘การกระทำชำเรา’ ตามกฎหมายที่แก้ไขใหม่ [The Definition of ‘Rape’ under the Amended Law]. Thammasat Law Journal 48(3): 618–619.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ministry of Justice. 2018. Memorandum of the Summary of the Analysis of the Draft of the Act Amending the Penal Code (no.), B.E. (Sexual Offences) prepared by the Ministry of Justice, attached to the letter of the Prime Minister, no. NorRor 0503/42994, Subject: Draft of the Act Amending the Penal Code (no.), B.E., addressing the President of the National Legislative Assembly, dated 27 December 2018.

  30. Munro, Vanessa. 2007. Law and Politics at the Perimeter: Re-Evaluating Key Debates in Feminist Theory. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Na Nakhon, Kanit. 2016. กฎหมายอาญา ภาคความผิด [Criminal Law: Offences]. 11th rev. ed. Bangkok: Winyuchon.

  32. Netayasupha, Amnart, Piyapohn Pisitpit, and Benjaporn Watcharavutthichai. 2013. Criminal Code (Thai-English Version). 3rd. Rev. Bangkok: Winyuchon.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Phansuwan, Chitchanok. 2005. ความผิดฐานข่มขืนกระทำชำเราและอนาจาร: ศึกษาตั้งแต่สมัยกฎหมายตราสามดวงถึงประมวลกฎหมายอาญา [The Ravish Offence and Indecent Offence: A Study from the Period of the Code of Three Great Seals to the Period of the Penal Code]. Master’s thesis, Chulalongkorn University.

  34. Preechasilpakul, Somchai. 2015. การวิจัยกฎหมายทางเลือก: แนวคิดและพรมแดนความรู้ [Alternative Legal Research: Concept and Knowledge Boundary]. Bangkok: Winyuchon.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Prokati, Kittisak. 1984. ตำนานรักร่วมเพศ [History of Homosexuality]. Thammasat Law Journal 13(12): 85–95.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Rumney, Philip N.S.. 2007. In Defence of Gender Neutrality within Rape. Seattle Journal for Social Justice 6(1): 481–526.

    Google Scholar 

  37. R. v. Bernier, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 975.

  38. Secretariat of the House of Representatives. 2007. เจตนารมณ์รัฐธรรมนูญแห่งราชอาณาจักรไทย พุทธศักราช 2550 [Intention of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2550].

  39. Srisanit, Pokpong. 2016. กฎหมายอาญาชั้นสูง [Advanced Criminal Law]. Bangkok: Winyuchon.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Supreme Court Decision 353/2476 (1933).

  41. Supreme Court Decision 1048/2518 (1975).

  42. Supreme Court Decision 157/2524 (1981).

  43. Supreme Court Decision 4836/2547 (2004).

  44. Supreme Court Decision 4164/2555 (2012).

  45. Supreme Court Decision 1390/2555 (2012).

  46. Supreme Court Decision 5448/2557 (2014).

  47. Supreme Court Decision 6323/2557 (2014).

  48. Supreme Court Decision 12983/2558 (2015).

  49. Supreme Court Decision 1201/2559 (2016).

  50. Tadros, Victor. 2012. Fair Labelling and Social Solidarity. In Principles and Values in Criminal Law and Criminal Justice: Essays in Honour of Andrew Ashworth, ed. Lucia Zedner and Julian V. Roberts, 67–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  51. United Nations Development Programme and Ministry of Social Development and Human Security of Thailand. 2018. Legal Gender Recognition in Thailand: A Legal and Policy Review. Bangkok: United Nations Development Programme Thailand.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Vachanasvasti, Kietkajorn. 2019. คำอธิบายกฎหมายอาญา ภาคความผิด เล่ม 2 [Criminal Law: Specific Offences]. 6th. Rev. Bangkok: Krungsiam Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Vetpisai, Parinda. 2008. ความผิดฐานข่มขืนกระทำชำเรา: ศึกษาองค์ประกอบความผิดกรณีผู้ถูกกระทำ [Offence of Rape: Study Element of Crime ‘Victim’]. Master’s thesis, Thammasat University.

  54. Warburton, Damian. 2004. The Rape of a Label - Why It Would Be Wrong to Follow Canada in Having a Single Offence of Unlawful Sexual Assault. Journal of Criminal Law 68(Part 6): 533–544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Whisnant, Rebecca. 2017. Feminist Perspectives on Rape. In the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/ feminism-rape/. Accessed 28 Mar 2020.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laws Programme, School of Political Science and Laws, Walailak University, 222 Thaiburi, Tha Sala District, Nakhon Si Thammarat, 80160, Thailand

    Tanarat Mangkud

Authors
  1. Tanarat Mangkud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tanarat Mangkud.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mangkud, T. Different Paradigms in the 2007 and 2019 Definitional Reforms of Sexual Offences Under the Thai Penal Code: A Unique Development. Int J Semiot Law 35, 2027–2056 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09809-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-020-09809-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation