Thailand’s endless power struggle: Court poised to strike again
Thailand is a nation not so much perpetually wrestling with its history, as shackled to it, doomed to reenact a familiar drama of power, populism, and palace intrigue with only slight variations in the script. The impending Constitutional Court ruling on Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, detailed in a recent report by the Bangkok Post, isn’t just another act; it’s a metronome marking time in a conflict that seems increasingly inescapable. What appears a narrow legal case — stemming from a leaked phone call and allegations of unethical conduct — is in reality a high-stakes proxy battle in a war over Thailand’s very identity.
The specific charge against Paetongtarn hinges on her communication with Hun Sen, a call in which she allegedly disparaged a senior army commander while addressing the Cambodian leader as “uncle.” Petty stuff, perhaps, a minor diplomatic faux pas. But the Constitutional Court’s willingness to entertain this case, and consider suspending her in the meantime, speaks volumes about the chasm between the formal institutions of Thai democracy and the enduring, often invisible, power of its entrenched establishment.
In an audio clip of the call leaked by Hun Sen, Ms Paetongtarn is heard calling the Cambodian strongman “uncle” and making disparaging remarks about a senior army commander.
To understand this, you need to zoom out, then zoom out again. Paetongtarn is not just any politician; she is the daughter of Thaksin Shinawatra, the exiled former prime minister who, despite being out of power for years, remains a political phantom limb — a force felt but never directly seen. Thaksin, a populist who promised to redistribute power and wealth, triggering a backlash from the traditional elites, was ousted in a 2006 military coup. His sister, Yingluck, also served as prime minister before being removed by a similar fate in 2014. But go back further. This cycle echoes the People’s Party coup of 1932, promising democracy but ultimately consolidating a new form of elite control. The players change; the game remains stubbornly the same.
The shadow of Thaksin looms large over Thai politics, but it’s not just Thaksin. It’s the fear of what he represents: a challenge to the deeply embedded power structures that have shaped Thailand for generations. The lese-majeste case against him, ruled on August 22nd, the Supreme Court ruling on his controversial hospital stay scheduled for September 9th: These aren’t isolated events, but rather symptoms of a system actively immunizing itself against disruption. Political scientist Thitinan Pongsudhirak argues that Thai politics is trapped in a cycle where populist leaders are elected and then removed through judicial or military interventions, perpetuating instability and undermining democratic institutions. He’s right, but the cycle isn’t just about populism. It’s about any force perceived as threatening the delicate balance of power that preserves the status quo.
The fact that these cases are unfolding in sequence underscores a broader trend in Thailand: The judiciary, along with the military, has become less an impartial arbiter and more a carefully calibrated instrument for preserving political control. The Constitutional Court, in particular, has a history of controversial rulings that have often served to curtail the power of elected governments perceived as a threat to the establishment. Consider its dissolution of the Thai Raksa Chart Party in 2019 for nominating a member of the royal family as a prime ministerial candidate — a move many saw as a blatant overreach.
The question isn’t just whether Paetongtarn survives this legal challenge. The larger question is whether Thailand can break free from this destructive cycle, or whether it is condemned to endlessly repeat its past. As Joshua Kurlantzick, a senior fellow for Southeast Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, has written, the ongoing political instability in Thailand undermines its economic potential and its role as a regional leader. But perhaps the real tragedy is not just the lost economic potential, but the lost potential of a society yearning for a more open, inclusive, and genuinely democratic future. The ruling on August 29th will be another chapter in that long, tragic story. Whether it hardens into another immutable verse, or hints at a new, unwritten one, remains to be seen.
