As readers might have heard, Thaksin's sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, and the Puea Thai party won an overwhelming victory in Thailand's July 3 elections. While military leaders ruled out a coup, the defeated Democrat Party is asking the Election Commission to file charges against Puea Thai. In particular, the Democrats want the Constitutional Court to dissolve Puea Thai because of Thaksin's involvement in the campaign and allegations of "corruption." According to the news I've seen thus far, this "corruption" largely amounts to Puea Thai candidates handing free noodles during campaign events. So far, the EC hasn't actually filed a case against Puea Thai yet, but it's only a matter of time.
Thus far, history looks set to repeat itself. Of course, back in 2008, the Constitutional Court was instrumental in the PPP's downfall. Last year, the Court refused to dissolve the Democrat Party on similar charges. There's no reason to think the justices have changed their basic political outlook since the 2008 cases; I haven't heard of any major changes in court personnel, nor have Puea Thai allies been in a position to appoint new justices. However, if the Court dissolves Puea Thai now, it risks cementing a reputation for partisanship. I'll definitely follow this case to see how it develops and if it actually goes to trial.
Critics agree that much of Southeast Asia desperately needs judicial reform and rule of law. Yet, there is remarkably little comparative scholarship on law and legal institutions in the region. In this blog, I'll follow constitutional developments in Brunei, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam, as well as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
No comments:
Post a Comment