On August 12, 2026, Pol. Lt. Col. Trairong Phiuphan, Deputy Commissioner-General of the Royal Thai Police and spokesperson for the Royal Thai Police (RTPS), posted a message on his personal Facebook page stating, “How much right does a homeowner have to defend themselves against a home invader?”Recently, there has been much discussion about cases where homeowners have used firearms to kill intruders, and there has been a lot of talk about the relevant laws. As a police officer, I would like to explain the relevant legal principles to ensure a common understanding.In general, if someone is shot and killed, it is considered a criminal case that police officers must investigate, verify facts, and gather evidence to determine what happened. Whether the person who used the weapon is guilty and their legal status will be determined by the investigating officer based on the facts and evidence presented. Once the investigation is complete, legal proceedings will follow, including the prosecutor’s opinion.Therefore, it is not possible to determine the legal outcome solely based on whether the deceased was an intruder or the incident occurred inside the house. However, the law clearly protects the right of citizens to defend themselves and others.The Criminal Code, Section 68, outlines the principles of lawful self-defense. If there is imminent danger from a criminal act, and the defensive action is proportionate to the threat, the defender is not guilty. Therefore, there is no simple rule that “intruders can be shot in all cases,” nor is there a rule that “homeowners are always guilty if they shoot intruders.”The key is the circumstances at the time of the incident. For example, if an intruder enters a house at night, approaches the homeowner, does not stop when asked, or behaves in a way that reasonably leads the homeowner to believe they are in danger, these are important facts in determining whether the defensive action was lawful and proportionate.Conversely, if the danger has passed and the defender continues to pursue or use force, the legal assessment may differ based on the circumstances. If the facts show that the defensive action was lawful and proportionate under Section 68, the defender is not guilty. However, if the action exceeds what is proportionate, it may fall under Section 69, where the court can impose a lesser penalty. If the action was due to excitement, fear, or panic, the court may choose not to impose a penalty.Another point to understand is that police investigations do not mean the police conclude that the defender is guilty. When someone dies, the police must investigate the scene, examine weapons and injuries, conduct forensic tests, review CCTV footage, interview witnesses and involved parties, and gather all relevant circumstances to understand what happened at the time the weapon was used. The justice system will then consider the facts and evidence at each stage, from the investigating officer to the prosecutor, and if the case goes to court, the court will make the final judgment.Therefore, we should not view this issue in black and white terms of “can shoot” or “cannot shoot.” What is more important is that citizens have the right to defend themselves and others as protected by the law, and the justice system has the duty to verify the facts to ensure the defensive action complies with legal conditions.Finally, the law does not consider only whether the incident occurred “inside” or “outside” the house but examines all circumstances at the time of the incident, particularly whether there was imminent danger from a criminal act and whether the defensive action was proportionate.This is the legal principle I would like to share to help citizens understand their rights and the workings of the justice system better.
Thai Police Clarify Law on Shooting Home Intruders, Emphasizing Circumstances
