Thai opposition party seeks to rein in constitutional court’s power after political upheaval

The Constitutional Court has dissolved more than 100 political parties and unseated three prime ministers in the past 27 years, heightening concern about democracy in Thailand, which has had two military coups in the same period. Critics are saying the court safeguards the interests of the pro-royalist establishment.

The recent rulings signal an erosion in the separation of powers, said Napon Jatusripitak, a visiting fellow at ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, arguing that the court effectively dictates the scope of possible legislative actions and exerts control over who has the right ethical standards to be the head of the executive branch.

The court said it had no choice but to dissolve, Move Forward to stop the destruction of Thailand’s constitutional monarchy. In the ruling against prime minister Srettha Thavisin, the court had cast itself as the ultimate protector of the constitution.

The new opposition party, whose name is a nod to the group behind the 1932 Siamese Revolution that ended absolute monarchy, emerged two days after the widely expected dissolution of Move Forward on August 7.

The court said Move Forward’s election campaign had violated rules by pushing to amend the country’s controversial lèse-majesté law, known as Article 112, which shields the Thai royal family from criticism. Its top leaders were banned from politics for 10 years.

A week later, the same court ousted Srettha as prime minister, saying he had violated ethical standards by appointing a lawyer with a jail history to the cabinet.

He has since been succeeded by Paetongtarn Shinawatra. Her father, Thaksin Shinawatra, who is also facing prosecution under Article 112, was ousted as premier in a coup, while her aunt was dismissed as prime minister by the Constitutional Court shortly before a military takeover.

Natthaphong said People’s Party will prioritise the court reforms over Article 112 changes, and will seek bipartisan support within months and seek to pass the legislation ahead of the next national election, expected in 2027.

That may be tough, according to Napon. “The power to dissolve political parties has proven to be the most reliable among the tools used to check the power of elected forces,” he said. “It is difficult to imagine conservative stakeholders relinquishing it without a fight.”

Indeed, though People’s Party remains popular, with Move Forward winning the most seats in last year’s elections, it faces other legal troubles.

A probe by the National Anti-Corruption Commission into a draft Article 112 amendment bill from Move Forward could lead to a lifetime ban from politics for about 25 lawmakers in People’s Party – including Natthaphong. Eight former lawmakers – including former prime ministerial candidate Pita Limjaroenrat – have already been banned for a decade by the court’s dissolution order.

Move Forward itself was a successor to another reformist party, Future Forward, which debuted in the 2019 election but was dissolved a year later.

“If we end up getting banned, we’ll just pass on the torch to our friends who will step up to take our place,” said Natthaphong.

The party remains committed to reforming Article 112 even after a court order banning Move Forward lawmakers from campaigning or seeking to amend the law via any means other than the legislature – a ruling which didn’t clarify possible paths forward.

“We don’t have a clear timeline for Article 112 amendments yet, but we will certainly push ahead with it,” Natthaphong said. “Right now, our focus is on rebuilding ourselves after the dissolution and pushing the amendments to the constitution and the law governing political parties.”