Author
Dr Sarah Bishop
Organisation/Institution
National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law
Country
SINGAPORE
Panel
Constitutional and Admin Law
Title
Thai Constitutional Court Dissents: Toeing the Line or Speaking Truth to Power?
Abstract
When the Thai Constitutional Court decides cases, each judge of the court issues an individual decision. Until 2014 this practice was required by Thai constitutions, and, since 2014, while it has no longer been required by the constitutions, it has been mostly retained. Study of the court, however, has directed little attention to these individual decisions. Instead, it has focused mostly on a shared decision issued by the court. This has been especially so in the period since 2006 in which democracy in Thailand has declined, and in which the court has come increasingly to be seen as a tool of a royalist anti-democratic elite. Even as the court has come to increasingly issue decisions that support the royalist anti-democratic elite, however, it has remained common for individual judges, even in the most political cases—those which involve what Ran Hirschl calls issues of mega-politics—to issue individual decisions in which they disagree with the case outcome. This paper explores what has driven this dynamic and what functions these dissenting opinions perform. This includes, in particular exploring whether these decisions still support authoritarian power and royalist anti-democratic elite agendas in ways similar to the courts’ shared decisions, and so might be seen to have had a largely ritualistic function in which their role has been to create an impression of independence and legitimacy. Or, if they have provided a genuine reflection of judicial disagreement and offered real alternate visions. And, to the extent they have offered alternate visions, to explore what these are and how they might be built on.
Biography
Dr Sarah Bishop is a postdoctoral fellow in the Centre for Asian Legal Studies at the National University of Singapore. Prior to taking up this position she completed her Doctor of Philosophy, Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of Asian Studies (specialist) degrees at the Australian National University. Her research focuses on Thai law and aims to offers accounts that illustrate the breadth of engagement with Thai law and the contested nature of Thai legal development. Her current research focuses on two topics. One is the drivers of the recognition of rights in Thai constitutions, and the other is the highly political role of Thai courts in the post-1997 period. She has also published on Thai constitutional change, opportunities for women in the Thai judiciary, and the work of Thai public interest lawyers.
