Thailand’s Death Penalty and the ASEAN Dilemma: Reform in the Shadow of Punishment

 

Thailand’s justice system stands at a crossroads—caught between a legacy of punitive enforcement and the slow march toward reform. With nearly 300,000 prisoners (over 100,000 on remand) as of July 2025, the country’s prisons are bursting at the seams. UK with 95k prisoners one of the highest in EU. The majority of Thai inmates are incarcerated for drug-related offences, a reflection of decades-long policies that favoured incarceration over rehabilitation.

Thailand retains the death penalty, making it one of eight ASEAN nations that still enforce capital punishment. Only Cambodia and the Philippines have abolished it in law. While executions are rare in Thailand —just seven by lethal injection since 2003 and the last in 2018—the penalty remains on the books for 35 crimes, including murder, drug trafficking, and lese majeste, the controversial law criminalizing insults to the monarchy. And 500 prisoners are on Death Row: a high cost as in USA in lawyers and shuttling prisoners from jail to court with, growing moratorium, little likelihood of a death sentence carried out.

And 700 gun deaths sees Thailand edging towards USA per capita rates and one of the highest in Asia.

The country’s approach to justice is deeply rooted in a “punitive legacy,” as described by Prof. Tongthong Chandransu, adviser to the Prime Minister. Speaking at a forum marking 110 years of the Department of Corrections, he emphasized that Thai society has long equated justice with suffering, leaving little room for rehabilitation.

But in all sincerity change is stirring. Thailand has embraced the Bangkok Rules, a set of UN-backed standards for the treatment of prisoners, especially women and non-violent offenders. These rules expand on the Nelson Mandela Rules, promoting dignity, humane treatment, and reintegration. Since their adoption in 2017, Thailand has cautiously redesigned correctional facilities to include vocational training, mental health support, and gender-sensitive care. those Rules neatly fitting with Thai accession to the UN Human Rights Council (and Anti-Torture Laws) and OECD accession plans.

OECD urging limited use - which 35 crimes on the books would fail - and progressive restriction of the use of the death penalty. SG (11 deaths per year) and Vietnam (4 deaths) the only regular practitioners in ASEAN, plus, more sporadically, Indonesia and Myanmar.

Perhaps the G20/EU nations bear fault in failing to exercise prison transfers, sentence commutation, weekly welfare visits etc. Even a dedicated Embassy-Prison team by say the Dean of Corps beyond the cocktail party circuit.

Still, the tension between reform and retribution remains. The Thai Narcotics Code of 2021 introduced alternatives to incarceration, such as community service and treatment programs. Yet, over 74% of inmates are still imprisoned for drug offences. Critics argue that the reforms are cosmetic, failing to address the systemic drivers of mass incarceration—poverty, lack of education, and aggressive policing. An argument perhaps overlooking the vast meth labs in nearby Myanmar.

To Western eyes, there has been further confusion, and traffiking, from the brief legalisation of cannabis. Cannabis stores on every corner increasing use without control via prescription or Government monopoly of supply/tax/quality. While the state of Thai prisons suggests more could be done with house arrest/tags as well as rebuild programs.

As in UK prison rebuilding is overlooked as an economic stimulant.

The issue of lese majeste adds another layer of complexity. While not directly tied to the death penalty, it reflects the broader climate of legal severity. Individuals convicted under Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code can face up to 15 years per count, and the law has been used to silence dissent, raising concerns about human rights and proportionality.

The law has been widely criticized for its broad interpretation and use against political dissenters, especially since the 2020 youth-led protests that openly challenged royal and political authority. Cases often involve multiple charges for repeated online posts, leading to staggering sentences—such as the 87-year term initially handed to Anchan Preelert, a former civil servant convicted for sharing critical audio clips. Her sentence was later halved to 43 years due to a guilty plea. 

The royal family, since King Bhumibol's concerns, may similarly be concerned at their name being used in such a draconian and unpopular way.

More than 280 people have been prosecuted under Article 112 in the past five years, according to Thai Lawyers for Human Rights - and Lawfare of banned PMs, MPs and parties are a regular part of what would be normal parliamentary debate on any aspect of society.

Despite the severity of these convictions, royal pardons have occasionally offered reprieve. Anchan was released in August 2025 after serving over eight years, as part of a mass pardon marking King Rama X’s birthday. These pardons are often granted to elderly inmates with limited time remaining, and are framed as acts of mercy and rehabilitation. However, critics argue that relying on royal clemency does not address the structural overreach of Article 112. 

Thailand’s cautious steps toward prison and justice reform—through royal-backed programs, international frameworks, and legal revisions—are commendable. But the road ahead requires more than symbolic gestures. It demands a cultural shift: from punishment to rehabilitation, from fear to dignity.

In the ASEAN context, Thailand’s leadership in adopting the Bangkok Rules could serve as a model. Yet, its continued use of the death penalty and reliance on incarceration for drug offenses place it at odds with emerging global norms. As the region grapples with balancing sovereignty and human rights, Thailand’s next moves will be watched closely—not just by its neighbours, but by the world.