BANGKOK — Debates have stirred over Thailand’s safety regulations and the legal loopholes that allow some venues to avoid stricter standards since a deadly fire at a Bangkok music bar killed more than 30 people and injured over 70 earlier this week.

The capital of Thailand is renowned for its vibrant nightlife, with bars and clubs spread across the city. However, gaps in the country’s licensing system have left many venues operating under regulations that may not match their activities.

The fire that broke out Sunday night killed at least 33 people and injured dozens, with 27 people still hospitalized on Thursday, Erawan emergency services said. Most of the victims died from smoke inhalation, while a few died from burn injuries, officials said.

The bar claimed on social media to have space to accommodate around 600 people, but it is unclear how many were there Sunday night.

What set off the flash blaze at the Rong Beer Na Ladprao bar in northern Bangkok and why it caused so many casualties is under investigation.

Amorn Pimanmas, president of the Thailand Structural Engineers Association, cited possible causes including overcrowding, combustible materials inside and obstructed exits, an analysis that has been echoed by fire safety and engineering experts.

The tragedy could have been prevented “if proper engineering principles and all relevant laws and regulations had been strictly followed,” Amorn said.

The primary law regulating nightlife venues in Thailand, the Entertainment Place Act, was enacted in 1966. The statute was updated in 2012, three years after 67 people were killed and more than 200 injured in a fire during a Jan. 1, 2009, New Year’s Eve celebration at the Santika nightclub.

The revised standards include fire-resistant or non-flammable materials for interior decoration and acoustic soundproofing. They also must have smoke ventilation systems, sprinklers and fire escape routes sized appropriately for the number of patrons.

However, those requirements apply only to entertainment venues that are licensed and operate within designated zones, including three zones in Bangkok. Opposition lawmaker Paramait Vithayaruksun of the People’s Party called the law “outdated and unrealistic.”

Paramait told Parliament on Monday that although there are clubs and bars across Bangkok, by law the venues outside the three designated zones cannot obtain proper licensing, even if operators are willing to meet the safety standards.

Instead, many operate by registering as restaurants licensed to sell alcohol and host live music, which have less stringent safety regulations, he said.

The Na Ladprao bar where Sunday’s fire occurred is located outside Bangkok’s entertainment zones and was registered as a restaurant with live music, officials said.

The restricted zoning law for entertainment venues is in effect in 55 provinces throughout Thailand, while 22 other provinces do not provide entertainment venue licenses, according to the Department of Provincial Administration.

The measures as they are written have enabled businesses to circumvent the law, allowing nightlife venues to “evade strict safety standards and face much lighter legal penalties,” Paramait said.

Restaurants do not have to meet the same requirements, especially for soundproofing materials, and operators can install cheaper soundproofing foam for live music performances, he said.

Thailand’s conservative, Buddhist values also have shaped policymaking decisions, with tight controls reflecting concerns over social impact from nightlife businesses. The venues cannot be within 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) of a temple or school.

Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul acknowledged the shortcomings this week and said the law should be reviewed.

“Times have changed. I’ve asked officials to study how we should adjust the rules,” he said. “We need to look at it from every angle — what society is like today, as well as our culture, customs and traditions.”

Wasawat Kitsiriteeraphak, former president of the Building Inspectors Association, said inspections should focus on how structures are actually used rather than solely on their licensed classification.

“The risks to lives and assets of the people depends on the actual use of the building rather than how the business is called,” he said in a statement, urging relevant authorities to conduct a sweeping review of similar establishments in Thailand based on their operations to prevent future tragedies.