Political Accountability in Thailand-Institutional Problems of Constitutional Independent Organs

• In Event: Development of Accountability Systems and Their Impact on Democratization in Southeast Asian Countries

Abstract

Severe political strife has been waged in Thailand over the amendment to the country’s constitution. One of the issues under debate is the abolishment of “independent organs,” which were introduced to crack down on the corruption and election fraud made permissible by the 1997 Constitution. Beginning with the decision that ruled the April 2006 election invalid, the Constitutional court ordered to dissolve the Thai Rak Thai party in 2007 after the coup and overthrew the two regimes of the People’s Power Party in 2008. Although independent organ advocates argue that politicians should follow the “Rule of Law,” critics state that independent organs inhibit democracy. What are the problems of independent organs in Thailand? This paper validates the institutional problems of independent organs in Thailand.
The independent organs package is structured by the Election Commission, Anti-Corruption Commission which are responsible for investigation and prosecution, and the Senate and the Constitutional Court which are responsible for a final decision. This package consists of a series of judicial proceedings. Members of the organs are selected by an appointment process similar to each other, resulting in the independent organs being of a relatively homogeneous group. Through the 2007 constitutional reform, the independent organs package is almost completely controlled by the judiciary. The judicial power is said to be the safest among the three branches of government because the judiciary is unable to prosecute by themselves. But the independent body package has become the judiciary that can prosecute by themselves in Thailand.

Author

• Ayako Toyama, Center for Southeast Asian Studies, Kyoto University