Final Remarks
The 2017 constitution-making experience reflected struggles over the locus of sovereign authority and the legitimacy basis of political authority in Thailand. However, rather than facilitating political stability under royal hegemony, its authoritarian character instead stirs the greater gravitational pull between the RCP and the LDCP.
Ambitious demands for the latter prompted a series of massive protests calling not only for a more democratic constitution but also for monarchy reform since 2020. This indicates that the more the ruling elites exploit constitution-making as a vehicle for institutionalising the RCP and prolonging a military-supervised rule under its auspices, the greater the exertion of the RCP tears Thailand's deeply divided society more asunder, thus increasingly becoming ‘[the power] of some rather than all of the people’.[1254] Undemocratised, the RCP however risks its own collapse. Yet, the militant suppression of the LDCP by the ruling elites, with the assistance of the CC, unfortunately thwarts a peaceful democratic transition. This ultimately leaves open one extreme possibility. The next constitution-making round may perhaps be revolutionary - an all-or-nothing situation risky for all sides.[1255]
More legal literature on Laws.Studio
More on the topic Final Remarks:
-
Agricultural law -
Constitutional law -
Fundamentals of Advocacy -
History of state and law -
Muslim (Islamic) law -
Professional ethics of a lawyer -
Roman law -
Theory of state and law -
UK Bar -
US Bar -
-
Conflictology -
Ecology -
Economy -
Finance -
History -
Law -
Medicine -
Philosophy -
Religious studies -