The push for a new, people-driven constitution is facing formidable opposition from entrenched conservative elites who are desperate to preserve their traditional political dominance in Thailand, analysts warn.
Conservatives are striving to keep the current charter unchanged while blocking any efforts to reform traditional power structures, they add.
Olarn Thinbangtieo, a lecturer at Burapha University's Faculty of Political Science and Law, said the opposition People’s Party-led effort to amend the 2017 Constitution and pave the way for a new charter faces a series of daunting obstacles. He added that the current supreme law was designed to protect the interests of entrenched power.
“The Constitution promotes political instability through independent [check-and-balance] institutions and the Senate, which act as key mechanisms enabling conservatives to maintain their grip on power,” Olarn said.
The Constitutional Court’s recent ruling requiring three public referendums for charter change favours the status quo and creates a “complex process” for reformers, he added.
On September 10, the court mandated a first referendum to decide whether a new constitution should be drafted, a second vote to decide on its drafting process and key content, and a third to vote on the final draft. However, the court ruled that the first and second referendums could be held simultaneously.
Uphill task ahead
Olarn predicts the charter-change push will probably fail to secure majority support in the first referendum, with many citizens seeing no tangible benefits for their quality of life, the economy, or national security.
“People generally believe that efforts to amend the Constitution are aimed at benefiting politicians,” the analyst said, adding that reformers had failed to convince the public about the importance of acquiring a new charter.
Conservative parties would also mobilise their supporters to vote against a new constitution in the first referendum, derailing the campaign right from the start, he said.
“If the result is ‘no’ in the first referendum, how could you progress to a second one?”
He noted that Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul’s Bhumjaithai Party represents the conservative elite and is now viewed as a key guardian of the current charter.
Anutin was voted in as Thailand’s 32nd prime minister earlier this month after winning support from the People’s Party in exchange for several commitments.
These include dissolving the House of Representatives within four months of assuming office, holding a referendum on the charter as soon as possible, and amending it to allow an elected assembly to write a new constitution.
‘Unusual’ court ruling
Olarn said it was “unusual and significant” for the Constitutional Court to rule that the constitution drafting assembly (CDA) must not be directly elected, noting that this point was not among the questions raised in the March petition filed by a group of senators and Pheu Thai MPs.
“Such a ruling reflects the traditional elite’s fear that a directly elected body would represent the progressive camp, bringing changes to the power structure on a scale last seen in the 1997 Constitution,” Olarn said.
He added that the 1997 charter ushered in the rise of Thaksin Shinawatra and his populist government, triggering a two-decade power struggle with the conservative elite that resulted in political turmoil and two military coups.
“The elite is now seeking to maintain its grip on power by blocking an elected CDA. Last time, they had to wait 17 years before reclaiming it,” Olarn said, referring to the period between the 1997 “People’s Constitution” and its abolition after the 2014 military coup.
‘Culture of distrust’
Assoc Prof Phichai Ratnatilaka Na Bhuket said the court’s decision underscores distrust of ordinary citizens in Thai political culture.
Its ruling against direct election of constitution drafters confirmed that Thai politics is still sceptical of the popular will and relies instead on “institutional control”, he added.
“The ruling that people cannot directly elect CDA members clearly undermines citizens’ sovereign power,” he said in a September 11 Facebook post.
For him, the judges exceeded their mandate of interpreting the Constitution. “The court seems to have created a new rule and redrawn the political landscape,” Phichai said.
“It chose to protect traditional institutions rather than allow greater public participation. This reinforces the dominance of elites and unelected institutions, which continue to be the ‘determining force’ in Thai politics.”
A possible excuse
Olarn said the court’s additional judgment could serve as an excuse for Bhumjaithai to drop its promises regarding charter amendment and forming an elected assembly of drafters.
He suggested one way out of the impasse would be for the largest parties in the House – People’s Party, Pheu Thai, and Bhumjaithai – to explain to the public why the charter needs amending.
He added that they should also propose a compromise, such as allowing sitting MPs to select CDA members via an indirect vote.
This should be completed as soon as possible, preferably by the end of September, to ensure that the four-month timeframe can be met.
PM Anutin expressed confidence that the first referendum on a new charter could be held within that timeframe, provided the Election Commission is consulted to hold the vote on the same day as the next election.
Meanwhile, Anutin responded to the court ruling against direct election of CDA members by stating on September 13 that legal scholar Borwornsak Uwanno, a former CDA chairman, and his team would help tackle the matter.
Borwornsak, a veteran of three previous charter rewrites and an expert in constitutional law, is tipped to become deputy prime minister in charge of legal affairs in Anutin’s government.
Olarn said recent political developments indicated that the conservatives were attempting to build a “new order” in Thai politics through Bhumjaithai and the Democrats – Thailand’s oldest party, and another player in the conservative camp. He pointed to similar efforts in the past that he said successfully revived the rightist elite’s influence in Thai politics.
“They need rightist scholars to persuade society to place its hope in gradual change,” the analyst said.
He noted that the transfer of power from Pheu Thai to Bhumjaithai signalled a resurgence of conservative power.
