Thailand's Political Turmoil: Judicial Overreach or Ethical Accountability?
“Most people find it too far to say that he is acting dishonestly or criminally, even though the accusation itself is very minor”
Less than a year into his mandate, Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin's dismissal has sent Thailand into political chaos once more. The nation is currently experiencing uncertainty as a result of the constitutional court's decision, which was based on unethical behaviour surrounding the nomination of a minister with a criminal past. The fact that Srettha's removal is the fourth instance in 16 years that a Thai prime minister has been removed by court order underscores how precarious Thailand's political stability is.
As Thailand navigates another political storm, this essay critically looks at the causes that led to Srettha's demise, the consequences of the court's ruling, and possible future directions.
The verdict of the Constitutional Court: Political manoeuvring or ethical breaches?
The dismissal of Srettha by the court was based on his selection of Pichit Chuenban, a former attorney who was found guilty in 2008 of trying to bribe court officials. While some critics of Srettha contend that her appointment was a poor decision and a transgression of ethical standards, others believe the court's decision was disproportionate and driven by politics.
In an attempt to protect Srettha from the consequences, Pichit resigned in May, but it didn't stop the court from approving a request from 40 senators to look into the prime minister's actions. Many observers were taken aback by the court's 5-4 decision, which found that Srettha had committed "grossly" unethical acts. They had anticipated a more lenient verdict.
Political analyst Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang questioned the seriousness of the decision and called the matter insignificant. While he conceded that designating Pichit as the prime minister would have been a bad political move, many people found it harsh to call Srettha a criminal or dishonest person.
Rebuttal: Supporters of the court's decision may contend that, despite the ruling's seeming severity, political leaders ought to uphold the highest moral standards. Given that Srettha is aware of Pichit's criminal past, her knowledge may indicate that he lacked honesty and integrity, which would support his dismissal. Even little ethical transgressions have the potential to erode public confidence in government in a nation where corruption has long been an issue.
A Political Structure Under Stress
Srettha's removal highlights a more significant problem: the ongoing trend of military or legal intervention to remove political leaders. With four prime ministers ousted in 16 years, Thailand's political system appears to be stuck in a never-ending spiral of unrest. This pattern begs the concerns of how the judiciary shapes national governance and if political factors have an impact on court decisions or if they are solely legal.
These worries are heightened by the Move Forward Party's (MFP) recent dissolution by the constitutional court. The MFP was eliminated for suggesting changes to Section 112 of Thailand's Criminal Code, which limits criticism of the monarchy. The MFP saw a large increase in support from younger people in the general election of 2023. The dissolution is similar to what happened to the Future Forward Party, the MFP's predecessor, when it won elections in 2019.
This trend of judicial meddling indicates that the military and courts have a strong hold on political authority in Thailand, which hinders the capacity of democratically elected governments to rule efficiently. These actions have been referred to by some as a "coup by the court," weakening democratic values and escalating political unrest.
Rebuttal: Advocates of judicial supervision contend that Thailand's judiciaries are essential to maintaining the rule of law and avoiding the consolidation of authority within a single political party. A system of checks and balances is kept in place by the court, which removes leaders who transgress moral or legal standards. On the other hand, there are worries regarding the overreach of legal systems in politics given the frequent use of court decisions to remove elected politicians.
The Controversy Over Succession: Who Will Rule Thailand After?
Pheu Thai, the party Srettha led, is rushing to propose a replacement candidate in the wake of his removal. The 75-year-old former justice minister Chaikasem Nitisiri and the 37-year-old Paetongtarn Shinawatra—daughter of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra and niece of former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra—have emerged as the two front-runners. Both Thaksin and Yingluck were removed from office in contentious situations, and their families have a significant political influence in Thailand.
Due to rumours of his poor health, Chaikasem is viewed as a "dark horse" contender and was not expected. But his recent recuperation has made him a sensible choice for Pheu Thai, especially as he offers continuity without the dangers that come with Paetongtarn, who might be viewed as being too young for the premiership.
Rebuttal: Despite his youth and inexperience, Paetongtarn Shinawatra might represent Pheu Thai in a fresh light and appeal to a younger electorate. However, given Thaksin's contentious return to Thailand following years of self-imposed exile, her deep ties to her family's political dynasty may make her a target for opposition forces. Should she be appointed as the country's next prime minister, political conflicts related to the Shinawatra family's power may resurface.
The Effect of Srettha's Removal on the Political Coalition and Pheu Thai
The dismissal of Srettha coincides with a larger political reorganisation in Thailand. Many viewed Pheu Thai's formation of an 11-party coalition following the 2023 election as a betrayal of the pro-democracy movement, as it excluded the progressive Move Forward Party. The party's collaboration with groups associated with the military sparked rumours that it was a political ploy to facilitate Thaksin's return, as he had long avoided facing judicial repercussions.
Pheu Thai is in a vulnerable position because of Thaksin's continuous legal issues, which include accusations of defaming the monarchy. Should Thaksin decide to contest the constitutional court's decision, the consequences could be dire since his bail could be withdrawn at any time, putting him behind bars.
Wrapping Up: Handling an Uncertain Future
After Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin was removed from office, Thailand's political future is still unknown. The court's decision has once again highlighted the nation's democracy's vulnerability, where judicial interventions are crucial in determining the course of political development. Concerns are raised regarding the viability of Thailand's democratic institutions due to the country's ongoing cycle of political instability, which is fuelled by the dismissal of prime ministers and the breakup of popular parties.
Pheu Thai's survival may depend on the decisions it makes in the next several days as it frantically searches for a new leader. The choice will have significant effects for Thailand's political stability, regardless of whether it goes with Paetongtarn Shinawatra or Chaikasem Nitisiri, a more daring option.
View full article: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/15/big-shock-thailand-faces-political-upheaval-as-pm-removed-from-office