91ÊÓƵ

In an era of rapid technological advancements, autonomous systems are becoming increasingly prevalent across various domains. In Thailand, the use of automated driving or self-driving vehicles has also emerged in recent years. The evolution of ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems) has led to a rise in the number of use cases involving level 2+ autonomous vehicles (AVs), also known as ¡°hands-off¡± vehicles, on national roads. Additionally, there have been instances of fully automated vehicles used to unload cargo at certain locations such as ports.

Amid the development of policies and legislation to keep pace with the rapidly evolving technological trends of autonomous driving systems in the US and many European countries, Thailand, in comparison, is still in its infancy stage regarding the local legal framework to regulate AVs. However, there are signs of policymakers in relevant sectors becoming more active in considering the adoption of well-established regulatory concepts in this area.

The necessity to regulate AVs mainly revolves around safety and consumer protection. This article discusses the current state of the regulatory framework for the main enablers that make autonomous driving possible, consisting of two crucial elements: hardware and software. For hardware, sensor devices and equipment used in AVs to identify other vehicles, road signs, traffic signals or obstacles for hazard analysis, such as light detection and ranging ¡°LiDAR¡± and millimeter-wave radar, which are considered radio equipment, are regulated under the relevant notifications issued by the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC).

These notifications establish technical standards of radio equipment and criteria for permission to use radar system radio equipment for vehicles, requiring, among others, that the technical standards of such equipment as prescribed by the NBTC must be met. To manufacture or import the radio equipment, including those already equipped in vehicles, a separate licence for each purpose must be obtained from the NBTC. The NBTC notifications are generally reviewed and updated from time to time to keep pace with fast-developing specifications of sensor technologies.

Although there is no specific standard that applies to AV driving systems under Thai law at present, in early 2024 an AV-related industrial product standard was issued under the Industrial Products Standards Act (1968). This latest notification of the Ministry of Industry establishes fundamental standards on the role and functional model of low-speed automated driving system (LSADS) services for intelligent transport systems and infrastructure facilities to support driving in urban and countryside areas.

It covers topics such as automated driving system classification, infrastructure support for LSADS services, and concept of operations. The standard covers only services using LSADS-equipped vehicles, including platforms for driving monitoring, emergency response, operation management, and other platforms for supporting automated driving systems, and does not include in-vehicle control systems.

While the standard is not mandatory, its introduction can be seen as another step closer to the adoption of the AV-related standards under Thai law. It may also be possible that the early adoption of AVs in Thailand would begin with low-speed AVs, contributing to a new mode of public transportation of goods and people.

For software, autonomous driving systems generally run on specific task artificial intelligence (AI) systems, which process signal inputs from numerous sensors and control the AV¡¯s driving systems.

The AI regime in Thailand is in its early stages, with a few draft legislations being introduced in 2022. It is noteworthy that AI for AVs may be categorised as a high-risk type AI, which may be subject to certain obligations including prior registration with the responsible governmental regulator and compliance with risk control measures and risk management measures, under the Draft Royal Decree on Business Operations that Use Artificial Intelligence Systems.

The draft decree was based on the risk-based approach in the European Commission¡¯s proposal for the EU AI Act. However, it remains to be seen to what extent Thailand¡¯s AI legal framework will affect the AV regulations. Even if the AI law does not directly affect AV manufacturers, there is high possibility that suppliers of AI for AVs will be affected.

Another issue worth monitoring closely is extraterritorial applicability, which is becoming more common for this type of regulation. On the other hand, there has been draft legislation on the promotion and support of AI innovation in Thailand, with related draft notifications issued for public hearing in 2023. However, they do not contain any specific provisions regarding AVs.

While the AI regulatory regime, when established, may not cover all aspects of AV systems, it would establish significant rules for AI in a cross-sectoral manner. These rules may include data governance, data sharing and trading, risk assessment and management, technical robustness, safety and accountability, and may affect the adoption of AVs in Thailand to a certain extent.

Needless to say, cybersecurity and data privacy-related regulations are also crucial points of concern. These laws were introduced during the past decade, and more detailed regulations are being developed to further complete the legal framework.

In the absence of AV-specific laws at present, AVs and their operations in Thailand will be governed by and rely on general laws including traffic, transport and motor vehicle laws, consumer protection law, product liability law, tort law under the Civil and Commercial Code (CCC), and criminal law.

Since these traditional laws do not take into consideration the AVs, there can be challenges when determining liabilities arising from the use of AVs. For example, the first paragraph of section 437 of the CCC prescribe that ¡°a person must be responsible for injury caused by any vehicle propelled by mechanism which is in his possession or control, unless he proves that the injury results from force majeure or fault of the injured person¡±.

The intention of this provision is to impose strict liability on the driver when the injured party is not using a vehicle, such as a pedestrian, by shifting the burden of proof to the driver¡¯s side. However, for the high-level AVs where the drivers do not have to monitor the driving constantly or do not control the AV at all, and as a result cannot prevent such injury even if they exert appropriate care, questions arise as to whether this can be determined by the court as force majeure.

Additionally, questions arise as to whether liability may also be imposed on any other party such as the AV maker or AV system developers. Considering the scenario of an accident involving an AV in its automated mode and another non-autonomous vehicle, or when both are AVs, proving fault would be more problematic.

Other existing liability laws were also not originally designed to address these challenges. Therefore, developing an AV-specific regulatory framework ¨C such as requirements for: (1) driving control records, which should be required at all times during the use of automated driving systems; or (2) notifications or alerts given to the driver of potential risks requiring human intervention during the use of automated driving ¨C would be necessary to fill these gaps and provide more precise determinations of liabilities in relation to AVs, as well as more practical and informative evidence to be presented to the court.

Similar to AI regulations, the legal framework for AVs should not hinder their utilisation, innovation, and further development. For example, AVs should generally be accepted to operate if they fully comply with applicable traffic and motor vehicle laws, and meet relevant standards to ensure minimal risks, and their autonomous driving systems are approved by regulatory bodies for the applicable elements (i.e. hardware and software).

Thailand¡¯s AV regulations should follow the legal framework of countries that already have well-developed legislation in place, such as designation of situations where automated driving systems can operate, and ensuring the performance of automated driving devices and systems comply with security standards.

It should also be essential to consider unique challenges specific to Thailand, such as pedestrian behaviours and types of vehicles that are not found in other countries, as well as special laws and regulations applicable to specific traffic conditions, locations or territories. Additionally, adjustments to traffic laws may be necessary when AVs become widely used, as ultimately there may only be passengers in the vehicles.