The Parliament and Enactment of Laws Between 2001-2011
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
During the period from 2001 to 2011, Thailand underwent significant political changes that directly influenced the role of the Parliament in the legislative process. This was particularly evident under the 1997 and 2007 Constitutions of the Kingdom of Thailand, which were designed to enhance the parliamentary system and promote political stability. This research aims to study and analyze the emergence of criteria that are important factors contributing to the enactment of laws between the years 2001-2011. It emphasizes the governance structures of each government to highlight the distinctiveness in legal operations according to the roles of the legislative and executive branches. The study focuses on the enactment of laws announced during that period to compare the unique patterns or characteristics of governments and the components of the parliament under the three constitutions. Additionally, the economic, social, political situations, and various factors influencing the legal direction and the nature of the parliament was shaped by the different forms of governance during the specified period, whether under a dictatorship or a democracy. Therefore, the enactment and enforcement of laws varied according to the political power and dominant ideologies. Studying the characteristics and content of the laws will give us a better understanding of legal concepts and directions. Additionally, the substance of the laws is interrelated with the country's dynamics at different times. The influence of various factors will impact the importance of enactment of laws in response to the current situation, which may vary in degree but always maintains a connection between them.
In summary, the legislative process of the Thai Parliament during this period reflected both the development and limitations of the parliamentary system. Lawmaking was heavily influenced by political factors, which in turn affected the Parliament's effectiveness in fulfilling its role in accordance with democratic principles.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Kasian Tejapira. (2017). Conflict and Royalist Mass Politics: The Contradictions in the Process of Building Democracy and Royal Power in Thai Society. FhaDealKan
Dasinee Malaipong. (1996). The role of Thai Parliament in the making of law: a study of legislative process from 1964-1973. Thesis in Master of Laws Graduate School of Chulalongkorn University.
Montri Tengtrakul. (1974). Thai parliament a case study of its weaknesses. Thesis in Master of Political Science Graduate School of Chulalongkorn University
Nab Sudsanguan. (2539). Tha role of Thai parliament in the making of law : a study of legislative process from 1984-1994. Thesis in Master of Laws Graduate School of Chulalongkorn University.
Noranit Setabutr. (1999). Thai parliamentary legislative process in senate legislation. Research report in The Secretariat of the House of Representatives, Bangkok.
Prajak Kongkirati. (2020). When We Vote: The Dynamics of Elections and Democracy in ASEAN, 2nd edition. Bangkok: Matichon.
Somkiat Tangkitvanich. (2009). Project to Improve the Thai Legislative Process to Promote Public Participation. Good Public Policy Promotion Program and Health Promotion Fund Office. Bangkok.
Thailand Development Research Institute. (2014). Regulatory Impact Analysis. Bangkok.
Suchart Phanchee. (1996). Role of Thai Parliament in the making of law a study of Thai legislative process under FMSarit Thanarat from 1957-1963. Thesis in Master of Laws Graduate School of Chulalongkorn University.
Abhisit Vejjajiva and the Democrat Party. (2021). When Democracy is Questioned.
https://themomentum.co/abhisit-vejjajiva-interview/ Retrieved on September 30, 2021.
Binder Sarah. (2015). The Dysfunctional Congress, The Brookings Institution, Department of Political Science, George Washington University.
Grant Tobin and Nathan J. Kelly. (2008). Legislative Productivity of the U.S. Congress, 1789–2004. Political Analysis: 16(3).
Wendy K. Tam Cho and James H. Fowler. (2010). Legislative Success in a Small World: Social Network Analysis and the Dynamics of Congressional Legislation, The Journal of Politics, 72(1).
