Methodology
Publication principles
Thai PDPA Files is designed as an evidence-led public case study.
- Document the chronology accurately
- Distinguish facts from allegations and positions
- Protect unnecessary personal information
- Publish source material where appropriate
- Identify evidentiary limitations
- Provide correction mechanisms
- Avoid presenting unresolved disputes as established legal findings
Source verification
Every statement is traced to a document, a piece of correspondence or a party statement. Where a document is an official record, it is labelled as such. Where a record was prepared by the complainant, it is labelled as a complainant-prepared record and is not treated as independently verified.
Fact vs position
A procedural fact is something that demonstrably happened, such as a complaint being forwarded on a given date. A position is what a party says. The two are never merged, and a position is never presented as an established fact.
Redaction
Organisations and individuals are referred to by neutral descriptions. Documents are published only as public redacted editions, with personal identifiers and information not necessary to understand the case removed.
Evidence limitations
Where a record was requested but is not included in the materials currently published, the archive says so. Absence from this archive is never treated as proof that a record does not exist.
Corrections
Any organisation or individual materially referenced may submit a correction or supporting document for review. Corrections are logged rather than silently overwritten.
Updates
The case is ongoing. Each page carries a last-updated stamp, and material developments are recorded in the case log.
Final determinations
The classification FINAL DETERMINATION appears only where an authoritative final decision actually exists. No such determination is recorded in this archive at present.
The classification set used site-wide
- Last updated
- Source record last reviewed
- Case status