Cambodia has lodged a formal protest after Thailand moved to pursue legal action against two of its most prominent leaders, warning that the step undermines ongoing efforts to calm recent border tensions. On January 29, the Cambodian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation issued a statement condemning Thailand’s decision to initiate proceedings against Senate President Hun Sen and Prime Minister Hun Manet.
Bangkok’s announcement followed comments on January 27 from the secretary‑general of Thailand’s National Security Council that legal measures were being taken to hold Hun Sen and Hun Manet responsible for recent clashes along the Thailand‑Cambodia frontier. The statement echoes a resolution announced on August 19, 2025, by then‑acting Thai prime minister Puttan, which said Thailand would pursue civil and criminal cases in Thai courts for alleged harm to Thai lives and property.
Phnom Penh said the lawsuits run counter to the spirit of a joint statement issued at the third special meeting of the Cambodia‑Thailand Joint Boundary Committee and warned the move could reverse progress on de‑escalation. The ministry urged Thai authorities to take necessary steps to address what it called a regrettable action and to avoid measures that would affect the ceasefire and the restoration of bilateral ties.
The dispute sits on top of a long history of border friction between the two neighbours, where occasional skirmishes have repeatedly tested diplomatic mechanisms and confidence‑building measures. Legal filings by one state against another’s leaders are rare in Southeast Asia and risk transforming a security and territorial issue into a protracted legal and political confrontation.
Beyond immediate diplomatic fallout, the Thai decision has broader implications: it could harden domestic political postures on both sides, complicate mediation by regional actors, and invite reciprocal legal or political counters from Phnom Penh. For now, the case is likely to be as much a signal to domestic audiences in Thailand as it is a tool of foreign policy, but it carries the real risk of entrenching mistrust and slowing any return to normal bilateral relations.