Thailand clarifies foundation law amid questions over donations
Legal action against foundations requires evidence, while Deputy Prime Minister Pakorn backs public disclosure of their income and expenditure.
- Thai authorities clarified existing laws that allow for the removal of foundation board members for mismanagement or the dissolution of a foundation for illegal activities.
- The clarification was prompted by public questions regarding donation transparency, with the government stressing that any legal action must be based on a formal, evidence-based investigation.
- A Deputy Prime Minister called for greater oversight, including more rigorous auditing of foundations and making their income and expenditure reports public to maintain donor trust.
- Officials are also considering new accounting guidelines and standards to prevent the personal use of donations and restore public confidence in charitable organizations.
The Department of Provincial Administration clarified legal procedures governing foundations on Friday (October 30, 2026), following public questions over the transparency of donation management and building construction at the Do Good Foundation.
The Ministry of Interior agency, which oversees foundations, outlined two main grounds for legal action.
Under Section 129 of the Civil and Commercial Code, a registrar, public prosecutor or interested party may petition a court to remove a foundation board member or board for mismanagement detrimental to the foundation, breaches of the law or its regulations, or status or conduct that makes them unsuitable to carry out its objectives.
Under Section 131 of the code, the same parties may seek a court order dissolving a foundation whose objectives are unlawful, whose activities breach the law or public morals, or which may endanger public peace or national security.
A petition may also be made if the foundation cannot continue operating for any reason or has stopped operating for at least two years.
The department stressed that news reports or public allegations do not establish that wrongdoing has occurred.
Decisions on legal action must follow prescribed procedures and rely on facts and evidence from a thorough examination that is fair to all parties.
If facts indicate activities that may breach the law, the competent authorities will consider action within their powers and duties.
Foundations must operate transparently, remain open to scrutiny and follow their registered objectives, it added.
Donations and assets must be managed lawfully to protect the public interest, maintain public and donor confidence, and prevent foundations from being used to obtain unlawful benefits.
Deputy Prime Minister Pakorn Nilprapunt called for more rigorous auditing and closer scrutiny of foundations’ reports.
Speaking at Government House at 12.20pm, he was addressing calls to examine foundations accepting donations for social assistance after the issue involving “Bum” Panadda’s foundation.
Foundations and associations must submit financial and operational reports to the Ministry of Interior each year, he noted.
He suggested there were probably many such organisations and that scrutiny might not yet be sufficiently rigorous.
Pakorn advocated making all foundations’ income and expenditure public, noting that the ministry already held the information and could be asked to disclose it.
This should not be an issue if the information was not complicated.
“The money was given out of trust,” he said.
He compared it with temple donations, saying people also wanted to know how those funds were spent.
He stressed that disclosure was his personal view and that the same principle should apply even if no rules were yet in place.
To prevent people within foundations from using donations for personal purposes, Pakorn said accounting systems might need to be examined and new guidelines drawn up.
He understood that the Federation of Accounting Professions would probably hold further discussions to establish standards, particularly on disclosure.
Incidents of this kind would erode faith in helping one another, he added, describing this case as a poor example and affirming that a solution was being sought.
