| Abstract: | AbstractHow far can judges hope to address Thailand’s political problems? This article reviews six Thai-language books dealing with various aspects of the judiciary, exploring the historical and intellectual origins of the institution. Thirayudh Boonmee’s 2006 call for a judicialisation of politics – his own elaboration of two important royal speeches – builds on judges’ longstanding belief that they are acting “in the name of the King”. But their narrow, formalistic training ill-equips them to exercise broad powers. The article contrasts judges’ idealised self-understandings (as seen in a popular book on how to become a judge by Natthapakon Phitchayapanyatham, and in the 2010 Judicial Code of Ethics) with revisionist perspectives on the judiciary developed by critical scholars Nidhi Eoseewong, Piyabutr Saengkanokkul, and Somchai Preechasilapakul. Whereas judges may imagine themselves to be acting directly on behalf of the monarchy, revisionist scholars insist that since 1932 judges have formed part of a modern democratic order, in which they need to be more transparent and accountable. A close reading of these books reveals that there is no shared agreement in Thai society about the nature or basis of judicial authority. |
