Elaboration of Interpretation of Term "Assault" according to the Criminal Code of Thailand's Courts: Case Study of Judgment No. 12983/2558

Abstract

              This article studies the meaning of term “Assault” according to Section 1 (6) of the Criminal Code since the Supreme Court Decision No. 12983/2558 put an extensive interpretation on the term. In this case, the accused installed closed-circuit camera under a prosecutor’s desk covertly. The circumstance was interpreted as lust and sexual desire without the prosecutor’s awareness or consent so the prosecutor could not resist. Even the accused did not touch the prosecutor’s body directly, the Supreme Court considered its conduct as the assault.  

            Term “Assault” means committing assault upon person’s mind and body. The Supreme Court decided that such conduct was the assault upon mind which constituted all elements of indecent assault and battery crime according to the Criminal Code. In the past, a Supreme Court decision interpreted the assault as crime only if a victim is touched physically or used force against. Hence, this extensive interpretation of Supreme Court protects women’s rights so that no one could use technological tools for indecent assault. Similarly, Republic of Korea found this effect and mass protest was staged by female people calling for government’s measure to prevent the problem.    

            The author agrees with this Supreme Court decision’s interpretation and suggests that the legal amendment should be made. The newly-introduced law establishes the particular offence of indecent assault and battery with technology to protect person from sexual assault.