Preventive Criminalization: A Case Study on the Appropriateness of Criminal Liability Legislation Regarding “Mule Accounts”

Abstract

Abstract
This article analyzes the “appropriateness of enacting criminal liability regarding mule accounts” under the concept and principles of “preventive criminalization.” The analysis examines the appropriateness in terms of both content and form. Specifically, in terms of content, it assesses whether it is appropriate for the state to enact provisions concerning mule accounts. In terms of form, it evaluates the appropriateness of the state’s decision to incorporate these provisions into the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023). The analysis concludes that the state’s specific enactment of provisions related to mule accounts is appropriate because (1) mule accounts have the potential to cause future harm, (2) mule accounts are inherently blameworthy, (3) mule accounts pose a threat to public safety, and (4) criminal liability for mule accounts represents a measure of last resort. Additionally, the decision to include provisions on mule accounts in the Emergency Decree on Measures for the Prevention and Suppression of Technological Crimes B.E. 2566 (2023) is deemed appropriate due to the urgent and unavoidable necessity arising from the rapid technological advancements during that period (B.E. 2566). The situation constituted an emergency, requiring immediate legislative action in the form of an “Emergency Decree” to protect national security, public safety, and economic stability.