Abstract
In Thailand, s. 231 Criminal Procedure Code provides the court the broad discretion to direct the physician to disclose medical confidentiality in judicial proceedings. No criteria or guidelines have been formulated by the law to limit the judge’s discretion. This can lead to a problem in the standardisation of judgements, as different judges hold different views concerning the protection of medical confidentiality. Therefore, this thesis argues that some criteria should be set up to support the judge in exercising the discretion about the disclosure of medical confidentiality in judicial proceedings. The argument has been supported by the results of empirical study which aims to explore the stakeholders’ about the mentioned issue. The thesis findings are; (1) more education about the law concerning medical confidentiality should be provided to the public, (2) the court should interpret the law to give effect the Constitutional right to privacy, (3) S.231 Criminal Code should be revised to include the clause: “The court should direct the person to disclose confidential information only in the circumstance that the information is relevant and material to the case, and also balance the interest between maintaining confidentiality and the interest of justice”. More relevant factors lie in English laws such as necessity, proportionate and safeguards against abuse should also be considered. (4) more study is needed about the possibility of appointing an expert to a panel of judges
