STAY UP TO DATE: The Effects of the US Foreign Aid Freeze on Freedom House
Expanding Freedom and Democracy
Freedom on the Net 2025

Thailand

Not Free
39
100
A Obstacles to Access 17 25
B Limits on Content 14 35
C Violations of User Rights 8 40
Last Year's Score & Status
39 100 Not Free
Scores are based on a scale of 0 (least free) to 100 (most free). See the methodology and report acknowledgements.
thailand-hero_map

header1 Key Developments, June 1, 2024 – May 31, 2025

Internet freedom remained severely restricted in Thailand as prodemocracy activists and journalists faced arrest, surveillance, extralegal harassment, and violent attacks in retaliation for their online content. Internet users continued to be charged with lèse-majesté, and some received heavy prison sentences for defaming the monarchy online.

  • Pirongrong Ramasoota, a member of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC), was sentenced to two years in prison in February 2025 after a criminal court found her guilty of “malfeasance in office”; she was released on bail pending appeal. True Digital Group Co. Ltd., a subsidiary of the telecommunications conglomerate True, had filed a criminal complaint against Pirongrong because she led an NBTC subcommittee that issued a public warning letter to digital television licensees over the broadcasting of advertisements with their programs on True’s online video-streaming platform. The subcommittee argued that the advertisements amounted to a violation of the broadcasters’ licenses, while True, which was not itself a licensee, claimed that it was unfairly harmed by the letter (A5).1
  • In April 2025, an appellate court upheld the lawfulness of an order to block the website no112.org, which hosted an online petition calling for the repeal of the lèse-majesté law.2 The Ministry of Digital Economy and Society had blocked the site in February 2022,3 and it remained blocked throughout the coverage period on some internet service providers, as did the Change.org petition site (B1 and B3).4
  • Thai prodemocracy activists continued to receive long prison sentences for their online expression. In the aftermath of a September 2024 appellate court ruling, Mongkol Thirakot, also known as “Busbas,” faced a total of more than 54 years in prison from multiple cases related to his online commentary.5 As of May 2025, human rights lawyer Arnon Nampa had been sentenced to more than 24 years in prison in various lèse-majesté cases, after courts added some 12 years to his term in five separate sentencing hearings over the course of the coverage period (C3).6
  • In January 2025, the NBTC approved a draft regulation that would require mobile service providers to use biometric data to confirm people’s identities when registering SIM cards;7 the agency formally instituted the rule in August, after the coverage period (C4).8
  • In March 2025, an opposition lawmaker revealed government documents indicating that Thai police and military units had operated a “Cyber Team” tasked with carrying out online harassment campaigns and cyberattacks against several civil society groups, including Amnesty International, Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, and iLaw (C7 and C8).9

header2 Political Overview

Following five years of direct military rule, Thailand transitioned to a military-dominated, semielected government in 2019. Protests calling for further democratic reform in 2020 and 2021 prompted authorities to use repressive tactics including arbitrary arrests, intimidation, lèse-majesté charges, and harassment. While 2023 elections were comparatively open and competitive, the leading opposition party, Move Forward, was blocked from forming a government by the military-appointed Senate and subsequently dissolved by the Constitutional Court. The second-largest opposition group, the Pheu Thai Party (PTP), entered government in coalition with several military-aligned parties, but its initial prime minister was later removed by the same court over an alleged ethics violation, signaling the continued dominance of the country’s unelected institutions. Press freedom remains constrained, due process is not guaranteed, and there is impunity for crimes committed against activists.

This report has been abridged for Freedom on the Net 2025 due to ongoing budget constraints. Please consider making a donation to support future editions of this vital resource.

For additional background information, see last year’s full report.

A Obstacles to Access

A1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do infrastructural limitations restrict access to the internet or the speed and quality of internet connections? 6.006 6.006

Score Change: The score improved from 5 to 6 because the country’s internet penetration rate increased.1

A2 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Is access to the internet prohibitively expensive or beyond the reach of certain segments of the population for geographical, social, or other reasons? 2.002 3.003
A3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the government exercise technical or legal control over internet infrastructure for the purposes of restricting connectivity? 5.005 6.006
A4 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are there legal, regulatory, or economic obstacles that restrict the diversity of service providers? 4.004 6.006
A5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do national regulatory bodies that oversee service providers and digital technology fail to operate in a free, fair, and independent manner? 0.000 4.004

B Limits on Content

B1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does the state block or filter, or compel service providers to block or filter, internet content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 3.003 6.006
B2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do state or nonstate actors employ legal, administrative, or other means to force publishers, content hosts, or digital platforms to delete content, particularly material that is protected by international human rights standards? 1.001 4.004
B3 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do restrictions on the internet and digital content lack transparency, proportionality to the stated aims, or an independent appeals process? 1.001 4.004
B4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Do online journalists, commentators, and ordinary users practice self-censorship? 1.001 4.004
B5 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are online sources of information controlled or manipulated by the government or other powerful actors to advance a particular political interest? 1.001 4.004
B6 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are there economic or regulatory constraints that negatively affect users’ ability to publish content online? 2.002 3.003
B7 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the online information landscape lack diversity and reliability? 2.002 4.004
B8 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do conditions impede users’ ability to mobilize, form communities, and campaign, particularly on political and social issues? 3.003 6.006

C Violations of User Rights

C1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that lacks independence? 1.001 6.006
C2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 0.000 4.004
C3 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Are individuals penalized for online activities, particularly those that are protected under international human rights standards? 0.000 6.006
C4 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts
Does the government place restrictions on anonymous communication or encryption? 2.002 4.004
C5 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does state surveillance of internet activities infringe on users’ right to privacy? 1.001 6.006
C6 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts
Does monitoring and collection of user data by service providers and other technology companies infringe on users’ right to privacy? 1.001 6.006
C7 1.00-5.00 pts0-5 pts
Are individuals subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor in relation to their online activities? 2.002 5.005
C8 1.00-3.00 pts0-3 pts
Are websites, governmental and private entities, service providers, or individual users subject to widespread hacking and other forms of cyberattack? 1.001 3.003

Score Change: The score declined from 2 to 1 because leaked government documents indicated that security forces had carried out cyberattacks against civil society groups.1

On Thailand

See all data, scores & information on this country or territory.

See More

Country Facts

  • Population

    71,700,000

  • Global Freedom Score

    34 100 not free

  • Internet Freedom Score

    39 100 not free

  • Freedom in the World Status

    Not Free

  • Networks Restricted

    No

  • Websites Blocked

    Yes

  • Pro-government Commentators

    Yes

  • Users Arrested

    Yes