The concept of privilege in Thailand may operate differently in civil, criminal, regulatory and investigatory situations. This may be summarized as follows:

• In civil proceedings which are undertaken in the civil courts, it may be deemed that the lawyer has an automatic privilege not to disclose any attorney-client communication.
• However, under the Criminal Procedure Code, the criminal courts may still order the disclosure of confidential information, notwithstanding the existence of the privilege under the attorney-client communication.
• Moreover, in regulatory and investigatory situations, regulators and investigatory bodies in Thailand (such as the Department of Special Investigation) may have the authority to compel the production of privileged documents depending on the particular statute from which they obtain their powers. In such case, a lawyer may refuse to provide privileged documents (as this may be an offense under the Penal Code), and such regulators or investigatory bodies may therefore have to obtain a court order (though there do not appear to be any court precedents on this issue).

Notes of interviews with employees and other documents produced during investigations may be covered by privilege if the notes and documents are created by lawyers who possess lawyer licenses under the Lawyer Act. Otherwise, such notes and documents may not be protected by attorney-client privilege pursuant to the Lawyer Act and the Civil Procedure Code.