Constitutionalism and Elections in Thailand

Abstract

A LTHOUGH CONTEMPORARY Thai governmental structure is underwritten by a constitution based on free elections and the principles of separation of power, substantial changes have been made in each of these elements as they have been integrated into the Thai culture. The result has been a distinctive political system which can only be partially understood in a Western framework of analysis. In June i968, Thailand promulgated its eighth constitution since the I932 revolution which replaced the absolute monarchy with a bureaucratic regime. The new constitution set the stage for another major political event -the elections for national assembly representatives on February io, i969, the tenth election since the revolution but the first since December I957 under Field-Marshal Sarit Thannarat. The Thai propensity for changing constitutions has been referred to as faction constitutionalism,'' whereby each successive draft reflects, makes legitimate, and strengthens major shifts in factional dominance. Thai constitutions have not been considered the fundamental law of the land; rather, they have functioned to facilitate the rule of the regime in power. Thailand's post-revolution history suggests the direct relationship between power configurations and the content of the successive constitutions. The promoters of the I932 revolution drafted Thailand's first constitution in order to enhance their own power and to curtail severely the power of the King and other royalty. Because the King had less power, the highly trained and educated pro-monarchist elements did not support the new regime. In order to regain the support of this important group, the King was accorded symbolic functions in the second constitution, but the promoters assured their own continued dominance of the government by appointing one-half of the legislative body. Successive constitutions followed this pattern. Regimes whose power emanated from the electorate or from the parliament empha-