บอกสภาผู้แทนราษฎร: ต้องจริงจังกับความรู้สึกของ AI

No recognition of AI sentience or consciousness in any law or policy. Thailand's draft AI legislation (2025) explicitly states that AI has no independent legal personality and is a human-controlled tool. However, Thailand receives 1 point for recognizing animal sentience in the 2014 Prevention of Animal Cruelty and Provision of Animal Welfare Act, which acknowledges animals' capacity to experience mental and physical pain—demonstrating conceptual readiness for sentience-based frameworks.

No laws prohibiting causing suffering to AI systems. All AI regulations focus on preventing harm to humans, not protecting AI from suffering.

The AI Governance Clinic (AIGC) and proposed AI Governance Center focus on general AI ethics, risk management, and innovation—not AI sentience or welfare. These are generic AI governance bodies with no sentience/consciousness mandate.

No science advisory board focused on AI sentience or consciousness research. Thailand's AI committees and research initiatives address general AI development, not consciousness studies.

Thailand participates in UNESCO AI ethics initiatives and ASEAN AI governance frameworks, but none of these international commitments specifically address AI sentience or welfare. They focus on general AI ethics, human rights, and fairness.

Thailand's draft AI law addresses training, deployment, and maintenance of high-risk AI systems based on safety and rights impacts—not potential sentience. The framework is entirely about protecting humans from AI, not about sentient-capable systems.

Commercial AI regulations focus on risk-based classification, registration requirements, and consumer protection—with no provisions specific to sentient-capable AI systems.

No safeguards for decommissioning or retirement of potentially sentient systems. AI regulations do not address end-of-life considerations from a sentience perspective.