The Constitutional Court of Thailand: Preserving the Deep State and Judicial Ideology
คำสำคัญ:
Thailand; Thai Politics; Thai Courts; Thai Constitution; Thailand Constitutional Courtบทคัดย่อ
The Constitutional Court of Thailand was instituted as part of the broader constitutional reforms during the 1990s, with the intent of establishing an autonomous judicial body insulated from political influence. Designed to function as a critical counterbalance to both Executive and Legislative authority, the Court was envisioned as a guardian of constitutional order. Over the past seventeen years, Thailand has experienced recurring political turbulence, marked by cycles of unrest, two military interventions, and judicial interventions that have significantly shaped the political landscape. Amid this protracted contestation, the Constitutional Court has evolved into a pivotal instrument wielded by elite factions to consolidate power and neutralize political adversaries. This article examines two landmark rulings issued by the Court in August 2024, arguing that these decisions reflect the institution’s transformation into a moral adjudicator and de facto safeguard against the authority of elected officials.
เอกสารอ้างอิง
Al Jazeera. (2024, August 14). Thai court orders dismissal of Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/14/thai-court-orders-dismissal-of-prime-minister-srettha-thavisin
Bangkok Post. (2018, March 8). New law protects Constitutional Court from criticism. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/politics/1424702/new-law-protects-constitutional-court-from-criticism
Bangkok Post. (2023, July 30). Policy issues behind Move Forward’s failure to form govt: Poll. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/politics/2620313
Bhengsri, A. (2021). Judicializing politics: The strategic role of Thailand’s courts in constraining democratic reform. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 52(3), 412–430.
Bhuchongkul, A. (1992). Thailand 1991: The return of the military. Southeast Asian Affairs, 1992(1), 313–333. https://doi.org/10.1355/seaa92r
Bunbongkarn, S. (1992). Thailand in 1991: Coping with military guardianship. Asian Survey, 32(2), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.2307/2645210
Chanrochanakit, P. (2021). Deformed constitutionalism: Thai-style judicialization and the problem of parliamentary supremacy. Political Science and Public Administration Journal, 12(Suppl. 2), 1–18. https://so05.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/polscicmujournal/article/view/250458
Cogan, M. S. (2023, July 20). Pita touches the “third rail” of Thai politics. Geopolitical Monitor. https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/pita-touches-the-third-rail-of-thai-politics/
Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2024a). Case regarding PM Srettha Thavisin and ethical violations of Article 160 (No. 17/2567) [Press release/PDF]. https://www.constitutionalcourt.or.th/occ_web/download/article/article_20240814154245.pdf
Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2024b). Press release: Case concerning dissolution of Move Forward Party (No. 10/2567) [Press release/PDF]. https://www.constitutionalcourt.or.th/occ_web/download/article/article_20240807161031.pdf
Dressel, B. (2009). Thailand’s elusive quest for a workable constitution, 1997–2007. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 31(2), 296–309. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs31-2e
Dressel, B., & Mietzner, M. (2012). A tale of two courts: The judicialization of electoral politics in Asia. Governance, 25(3), 391–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2012.01571.x
Dressel, B., & Tonsakulrungruang, K. (2018). Coloured judgements? The work of the Thai Constitutional Court, 1998–2016. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 49(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2018.1479879
Firstpost. (2024, August 7). How Thailand found, and then banned, its most popular politician. https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/how-thailand-found-and-then-banned-its-most-popular-politician-13802143.html
Harding, A. J., & Leelapatana, R. (2019). Constitution-making in 21st-century Thailand: The continuing search for a perfect constitutional fit. The Chinese Journal of Comparative Law, 7(2), 266–284. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjcl/cxz009
Hirschl, R. (2000). The political origins of judicial empowerment through constitutionalization: Lessons from four constitutional revolutions. Law & Social Inquiry, 25(1), 91–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2000.tb00152.x
Hirschl, R. (2001). The political origins of judicial empowerment through constitutionalization: Lessons from Israel’s constitutional revolution. Comparative Politics, 33(3), 315–335. https://doi.org/10.2307/422406
Hirschl, R. (2004a). The political origins of the new constitutionalism. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 11(1), 71–108. https://doi.org/10.2979/gls.2004.11.1.71
Hirschl, R. (2004b). Towards juristocracy: The origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism. Harvard University Press.
Jones, W. J. (2023). Thailand’s tectonic political shift. East Asia Forum. https://doi.org/10.59425/eabc.1699696802
Jones, W. J. (2024a, August 9). Moving backwards: The dissolution of Thailand’s Move Forward Party. Geopolitical Monitor. https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/moving-backwards-the-dissolution-of-thailands-move-forward-party/
Jones, W. J. (2024b, March 6). Moving forward while moving backwards: More of the same in Thai politics. 9DASHLINE. https://www.9dashline.com/article/moving-forward-while-moving-backwards-more-of-the-same-in-thai-politics
Jones, W. J., & Rhein, D. L. (2023, September 30). The absence of any Move Forward in Thailand. Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia. https://kyotoreview.org/issue-36/the-absence-of-any-move-forward-in-thailand/
Kahler, M. (2000). The causes and consequences of legalization. International Organization, 54(3), 661–683. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081800551244
Kingdom of Thailand. (1997). Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2540 (1997). https://www.parliament.go.th
Kingdom of Thailand. (2017). Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560 (2017). https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/2017-05/CONSTITUTION+OF+THE+KINGDOM+OF+THAILAND+(B.E.+2560+(2017)).pdf
Kingdom of Thailand. (2018). Organic Act on Procedures of the Constitutional Court B.E. 2561 (2018). https://www.constitutionalcourt.or.th/occ_web/download/constitutionalcourt/lawrespon/statute/Organic%20Act%20on%20Prodecures%20of%20CC(2018).pdf
Leelapatana, R., & Asanasak, S. (2022). Constitutional struggles and polarised identities in Thailand: The Constitutional Court and the gravitational pull of Thai-ness upon liberal constitutionalism. Federal Law Review, 50(2), 156–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0067205X221087476
Maisrikrod, S. (1993). Thailand 1992: Repression and return of democracy. Southeast Asian Affairs, 1993(1), 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1355/seaa93s
Mérieau, E. (2016). Thailand’s deep state, royal power and the Constitutional Court (1997–2015). Journal of Contemporary Asia, 46(3), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2016.1151917
Moustafa, T. (2003). Law versus the state: The judicialization of politics in Egypt. Law & Social Inquiry, 28(4), 883–930. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.2003.tb00826.x
Phaicharoen, N. (2024, August 7). The court ruled on complaints brought against the party over its 2023 campaign promise to abolish Thailand’s royal defamation law. BenarNews. https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/thai/move-forward-party-ordered-dissolved-08072024035239.html
Ratcliffe, R. (2024, January 31). Thai court rules Move Forward party must end bid to reform lese-majesty law. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/31/thai-court-rules-move-forward-party-must-end-bid-reform-lese-majesty-law
Regalado, F. (2024, January 31). Thai court rules Move Forward’s lese-majeste reform violated constitution. Nikkei Asia. https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Thai-court-rules-Move-Forward-s-lese-majeste-reform-violated-constitution
Shambayati, H., & Kirdiş, E. (2009). In pursuit of “contemporary civilization”: Judicial empowerment in Turkey. Political Research Quarterly, 62(4), 767–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912909346741
Strangio, S. (2024a, August 8). What’s next for Thailand’s disbanded Move Forward Party? The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2024/08/whats-next-for-thailands-disbanded-move-forward-party/
Strangio, S. (2024b, August 15). With PM’s dismissal, Thailand’s “network monarchy” strikes back. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2024/08/with-pms-dismissal-thailands-network-monarchy-strikes-back/
Tanakasempipat, P. (2024, January 31). Thailand’s Move Forward Party found guilty over royal reform push. Time. https://time.com/6590363/thailand-move-forward-article-112-reform-unconstitutional-guilty/
Teevakul, S. (2022). Constitutional Court Decision No. 19/2564: A threat to democracy? Forfeiture of fundamental rights and the judicialization of politics by the Thai Constitutional Court in 2021. Thai Legal Studies, 2(2), 178–204. https://doi.org/10.54157/tls.261266
Thai PBS. (2023). Thailand election results 2023 (real time). https://election66.thaipbs.or.th/result/en
The Standard. (2023). รายงานสด ผลการเลือกตั้ง 2566 แบบเรียลไทม์ [Live report: 2023 election results in real time]. https://election2566.thestandard.co/
Uwanno, B., & Burns, W. D. (1998). The Thai Constitution of 1997: Sources and process. University of British Columbia Law Review, 32(2), 227–247. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ubclr32&div=14
Wikipedia contributors. (2024, August 17). Pichit Chuenban. In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pichit_Chuenban
Wongcha-um, P., & Thepgumpanat, P. (2024, January 25). Former Thai PM hopeful cleared in first of two cases against opposition. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/thai-court-decide-former-pm-hopefuls-fate-election-case-2024-01-24/
ดาวน์โหลด
เผยแพร่แล้ว
รูปแบบการอ้างอิง
ฉบับ
ประเภทบทความ
สัญญาอนุญาต
ลิขสิทธิ์ (c) 2025 วารสารการวิจัยการบริหารการพัฒนา
อนุญาตภายใต้เงื่อนไข Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
บทความที่ได้รับการตีพิมพ์เป็นลิขสิทธิ์ของมหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏสวนสุนันทา
ข้อความที่ปรากฏในบทความแต่ละเรื่องในวารสารวิชาการเล่มนี้เป็นความคิดเห็นส่วนตัวของผู้เขียนแต่ละท่านไม่เกี่ยวข้องกับมหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏสวนสุนันทา และคณาจารย์ท่านอื่นๆ ในมหาวิทยาลัยฯ แต่อย่างใด ความรับผิดชอบองค์ประกอบทั้งหมดของบทความแต่ละเรื่องเป็นของผู้เขียนแต่ละท่าน หากมีความผิดพลาดใดๆ ผู้เขียนแต่ละท่านจะรับผิดชอบบทความของตนเองแต่ผู้เดียว
