OFFENSES OF POSESSION OF PROHIBITED GOODS IMPORTS INTO THE KINGDOM ACCORDING TO THE NOTIFICATION OF THE MINISTRY OF COMMERCE : A CASE STUDY OF E-CIGARETTE POSSESSION

Abstract

ABSTRACT

            This article will discuss a problem of legal interpretation when government officials enforce
the law to sanction possessors of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) following the Customs Act,
B.E. 2560 (2017). Other legal provisions with different purposes may apply if authorities propose enforcement by legal provisions deviating from standard criminal law interpretations, raising the issue of legal interpretative problems outside the scope of the Customs Act.

            Data was gathered from documents, books, theses, and laws, including articles relating to
e-cigarettes and problems of legal interpretation. An international comparative legal analysis was made with Singapore and India, both of which have imposed clear penalties for e-cigarette owners. Data was analyzed and compared with internal issues in Thailand, especially the problem of criminal law interpretation insofar as government officials apply a law differently from its purpose to enforce penalties for e-cigarette possessors. Does the interpretation of said law differ from the interpretation of criminal law, damaging the criminal justice system, and how may such issues be resolved? 

            Results were that provisions of Thai law and measures applied to e-cigarette possession cases should be to developed and clarified by textual improvement, including rearrangement,
to remove ambiguities for authorities and avoid legal interpretative issues due to excessively broad classifications. Relevant items should be united and legal provisions improved categorically and methods adopted for determining alternatives to criminal enforcement, such as compulsory monetary fines for some cases of possession. Such measures would control e-cigarette product possession and use appropriately, ensuring safety for society while protecting the rights and freedoms of all without simultaneously infringing on the liberty of e-cigarette product users.