THAILAND’S JUDICIARY AND (UN)RULE OF LAW: A LOOK BACK AT THE UNDERMINING OF THAILAND’S JUDICIARY

Main Article Content

WILLIAM J. JONES, VIROT ALI

Abstract

The ongoing political conflict in Thailand stems from conflict among Thailand’s various elite factions, nominally those aligned with Thailand’s monarchy and those aligned with Thaksin Shinawatra. With political conflict spilling into the streets annually it has become apparent that Thailand’s political system has failed in its functional capacity as a conflict mediation/resolution mechanism. In the face of an increasingly assertive rural population and consecutive electoral victories by pro-Thaksin political parties Thailand’s conservative traditional elite have increasingly turned to the judicial branch of government in order to counter threats to their rule and overturn majoritarian electoral democracy. In this paper we argue that the politicization of Thailand’s judiciary since 2006 has undermined the legitimacy of Thailand’s courts as well as devolved dangerously into a system of Un-rule of law.

Article Details

Section
Articles
Author Biography

WILLIAM J. JONES, VIROT ALI

WILLIAM J. JONES1, VIROT ALI2

Mahidol University International College, Thailand1

Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat University, Thailand2

William.jon@mahidol.edu1

Virot.ali@hotmail.com2

References

Asian Network for Free Elections. (ANFREL). (2005). Observation Mission for House of Representatives Elections in Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand.

Bangkok Post. (2005). Court allows Commission to start new selection. November 5.

Bangkok Post. (2020). FFP dissolved, executives banned for 10 years. February 21. https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/politics/1862769/ffp-dissolved-executives-banned-for-10-year.

Cheesman, N. (2009). Thin Rule of Law or Un-Rule of Law in Myanmar? Pacific Affairs, 82(4), 597–613. https://doi.org/10.5509/2009824597.

Civil Court of Thailand (2010a) [B.E. 2553]. Decision No. 2/2553.

Civil Court of Thailand (2010a) [B.E. 2553]. Decision No. 1433/2553.

Civil Court of Thailand (2014) [B.E. 2557]. Decision No. 275/2557.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2006) [B.E. 2549]. Decision No. 607-608/2549.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2008a) [B.E. 2551]. Decision No. 12-13/2551.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2008b) [B.E. 2551]. Decision No. 20/2551.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2010) [B.E. 2553]. Decision No. 9/2553.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2013) [B.E. 2556]. Decision No. 41/2556.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2013) [B.E. 2556]. Decision No. 44/2556.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2013) [B.E. 2556]. Decision No. 49/2556.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2014) [B.E. 2557]. Decision No. 1/2557.

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2019) [B.E. 2563]. Decision No. 14/2562

Constitutional Court of Thailand. (2020) [B.E. 2563]. Decision No. 7/2563

Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand. B.E. 2540 [1997].

Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2550 [2007].

Croissant, A., & Pojar, D. J. (2005). Quo Vadis Thailand? Thai Politics after the 2005 Parliamentary Election. Strategic Insights, 4(6). https://www.uni-heidelberg.de/imperia/md/content/fakultaeten/wiso/ipw/croissant/publications/croissant_pojar_2005_quo_vadis_thailand.pdf

Dressel, B. (2012). Thailand: Judicialization of politics or politicization of the judiciary?. In: Dressel, B. The Judicialization of Politics in Asia. New York: Routledge. 79-97.

Gel’man, V. (2004). The unrule of law in the making: The politics of informal institution building in Russia. Europe-Asia Studies, 56(7), 1021–1040. https://doi.org/10.1080/1465342042000294347

Jones, W. J. (2024, March 6). 9DASHLINE — 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.

Mahidol, B. (2012). Statement at the High-level meeting on the rule of law at the national and international levels. New York. 24 September.

Méndez, J. E., O’Donnell, G. A., & Pinheiro, P. S. (1999). The (un)rule of Law and the Underprivileged in Latin America. Notre Dame University Press.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2022). Press Statement regarding the Dissolution of the Future Forward Party. กระทรวงการต่างประเทศ. https://www.mfa.go.th/en/content/114395-press-statement-regarding-the-dissolution-of-the-future-forward-party?cate=5d5bcb4e15e39c306000683e&menu=5d5bd3da15e39c306002aafa

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

Nelson, M. H. 2006. Political turmoil in Thailand: Thaksin, protests, elections, and the King. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia 5(1), eastasia.at.

Nogsuan, S. (2007). The 2005 General Elections in Thailand: Toward a One-Party Government. Kasarinlan: Philippine Journal of Third World Studies, 20(1), 48–71.

Pariyawong, V. (2010). Three-Course recipe for the court's cookery: A critique on Thai democracy and judicial review. Master of Laws (LL.M.). Cambridge: MA: Harvard Law School.

Thai PBS. (2023). Thailand Election Results 2023 real-time | Thai PBS Election 2023 Choose Thailand Future. Thai PBS. https://election66.thaipbs.or.th/result/en.

The Nation. (2007). Five Day to Go: Judgment Day King Warns of Trouble. 25 May.

Raz, J. (1979). The Rule of Law and its Virtue. In: The Authority of Law Essays on Law and Morality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ueranantasun, A. (2012). Analyzing national elections of Thailand in 2005, 2007, and 2011 – Graphical approach. International Journal of Business and Social Science. 3(19), 70-79.

World Justice Project. (2014). WJP Rule of Law Index. Washington, D.C.