Thailand: Computer Crime Act, 2017 ARTICLE 19 notes Section 8 does not provide for any intentionality requirement. We observe that Cybercrime Convention Article 3 which punishes illegal interception has several components not present in Section 8 of the Computer Crime Act. The Convention provides for public transmission onSections 9 and 10 punish the interference with and damaging of computer data and systems, respectively, without requiring there to be serious damage. We observe that Section 5 of the Cybercrime Convention requires system interference to includ an exceedingly broad provision and could lead to severe punishment of conduct that does not actually cause harm. Both Sections 9 and 10 of the Amended Act as written only require conduct to be done - at a minimum added to both provisions. Recommendations: Section 8 should replace the vag - Punishing anonymous speech manner that disturbs the 19 finds that this provision is unnecessary and interferes with the ability to remain anonymous online. As we outlined in the previous section of this analysis, anonymous speech is necessary for human rights defenders, journalists, and protestors to engage in the legitimate exercise of expression both online and offline. Punishing anonymous communications is hence a restriction on expression. As the Special Rapporteur on FOE stipulated in his 2015 Report, restrictions on anonymity must meet the three-part test of limitations to the right to freedom of expression under international law. Here, the restriction does not achieve a legitimate purpose, and is based on a vaguely-defined harm of d ARTICLE 19 Free Word Centre, 60 Farringdon Rd, London EC1R 3GA Page 16 of 24 www.article19.org +44 20 7324 2500