The Constitutional Court of Thailand: Its Role in Protecting the Rule of Law and Democracy

Abstract

On 2 December 2008, the Constitutional Court of Thailand passed a unanimous verdict dissolving the ruling People Power Party (PPP), and banning Prime Minister Somchai Wongsawat, from politics for five years because PPP executives had been convicted of electoral fraud in the general elections in December 2007. In two separate verdicts on the same day, the Constitutional Court also dissolved two parties in his coalition Chart Thai and Matchimathipataya on the similar grounds. As a result of the Court's rulings, anti-government protesters, led by the so-called 'People's Alliance for Democracy' (PAD) or the 'Yellow Shirts', ended the week-long siege of Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi and Don Mueang airports. While the Constitutional Court's verdicts were greeted by the PAD and its supporters as a legitimate tool to heal Thailand's fractured democracy, others questioned whether a proper legal procedure was fully followed by the Court in arriving at such radical verdicts. The paper will first provide a review of the constitutional history of Thailand. It will then look at the powers and functions of the Constitutional courts under the former provisions of the 1997 Constitution in comparison with the new provisions of the current 2007 Constitution. In the next section, it will analyse the recent controversial cases decided by the Constitutional Court of Thailand, especially those concerning electoral fraud and corruption. Finally, the paper will critically assess the role of the Constitutional Court in protecting the Rule of Law and democracy in Thailand.