Former Thammasat Vice Rector warns PM Paetongtarn Shinawatra faces Constitutional Court defeat over Hun Sen call, calls Thailand’s democracy failing, suggests China-style system as coup fears rise. At the same time, Pheu Thai insists the PM can survive the storm.
A former Vice Rector of Human Resources at Thammasat University warned Wednesday that Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra is unlikely to survive her Constitutional Court showdown over the explosive Hun Sen audio clip. The academic heavyweight slammed Thailand’s representative democracy as failing and suggested the country might need a system more like China’s. His remarks follow a surge of conservative online voices, fiercely critical of the government and openly supportive of the military. Anxiety is rising across Thailand, with talk of another coup d’état now out in the open. Despite this, the ruling Pheu Thai Party insists it is ready for any outcome but remains cautiously confident that Ms Paetongtarn can survive the case.
Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra is expected to appear before Thailand’s Constitutional Court this Thursday. Her political future hangs in the balance as she defends herself against charges of breaching ethical standards and damaging national integrity.
The case centres on a leaked audio clip of her phone call with Cambodian strongman Hun Sen, dated June 15. The recording has triggered public backlash and renewed scrutiny of the Pheu Thai-led government. By late Wednesday, official sources confirmed she would attend in person. She will appear alongside Chatchai Bangchuad, Secretary-General of the National Security Council, who is also expected to testify.
Prime minister frames call as diplomatic effort while critics see reckless breach of protocol and law
According to government sources, the Prime Minister intends to frame the call as a legitimate diplomatic effort. However, critics have argued it was a reckless breach of protocol. The recording, which has since gone viral across Thailand and Southeast Asia, is being interpreted by many as a violation of the constitution and national security.
On August 29 at 3 p.m., the Constitutional Court will issue its verdict. Until then, speculation dominates the national conversation.
Earlier this week, members of Parliament and insiders within the Pheu Thai Party suggested Paetongtarn might survive the court case. Some believed the court would not risk further political instability. Yet, others have begun to doubt. The mood among coalition members reportedly may shift following a negative outcome. On Wednesday, a damning analysis was posted on Facebook by one of Thailand’s top academics.
On August 20, Associate Professor Harirak Sutabutr, former Vice President for Human Resources at Thammasat University, released a scathing commentary. The post spread rapidly. In it, he argued that Paetongtarn not only cannot survive politically—she should not.
“Her position is no longer tenable,” he wrote. “She cannot be saved.”
Professor Harirak cites three reasons why Paetongtarn cannot survive politically or restore public trust
Professor Harirak outlined three powerful reasons behind his conclusion. First, he said the audio clip was self-evident. In his view, no explanation can undo what the public heard. According to him, “Thais across the country—and beyond—have heard enough to reach their own conclusion.” He added that only hardcore party loyalists were still defending the Prime Minister.
Secondly, he warned that the judges themselves have too much at stake. “Each Constitutional Court judge has a reputation to uphold,” he wrote. “To ignore this case would risk their legacy, and worse, ignite public anger.” The implication is that ruling in Paetongtarn’s favour could bring the court into disrepute—and even provoke protests.
Thirdly, he pointed to widespread hopelessness. “More than ever,” he said, “Thai people have lost trust in the entire political class—government and opposition alike.” He referenced a recent NIDA Poll, which showed that over 75% of Thais feel little or no hope in parliamentary politics.
These aren’t just feelings—they’re hard numbers. The NIDA poll, released August 18, surveyed 1,310 people across all regions. A stunning 41.9% said they had completely lost hope in political parties. Another 34% described themselves as “rather hopeless.” Just 2.98% said they remained “very hopeful.”
Public dissatisfaction with MPs highlights a wider crisis in Thai democracy and trust in the political system
Even more damning: 60% of respondents said they were dissatisfied with their local Members of Parliament. In fact, over 50% stated they would not re-elect their MP if an election were held today. Only 11.6% expressed strong satisfaction with their representatives.
Clearly, this isn’t just about Paetongtarn. It’s about a crisis in Thai democracy. Public trust in both parties and Parliament is rapidly evaporating.
Nevertheless, the professor’s most explosive suggestion came in his proposed solution. Instead of calling for elections or military intervention, Harirak advocated for radical constitutional reform. Specifically, he called for a move away from universal suffrage. In its place, he proposed indirect elections, where only a qualified elite can vote.
Such a model, he suggested, would resemble China’s governance structure. It would reduce vote-buying and remove what he sees as the corrosive effects of populism. He also rejected the idea of a coup d’état to reset the system. Yet, ironically, the conversation his post has triggered resembles those that often precede military intervention in Thailand.
Political uncertainty grows as former leaders and new system proposals dominate the debate
For now, political uncertainty dominates the national mood. There is, however, a clear successor if Paetongtarn is removed. That is the relatively unknown Chaikasem Nitisiri, Pheu Thai’s third and final Prime Ministerial nominee in the 2023 General Election. However, former Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha remains a strong and more popular contender. He recently topped a NIDA poll asking who the public preferred among existing candidates.
Still, Harirak warned against bringing Prayut back. According to him, a return to the same political players, without a new system, would be meaningless. “The same faces in the same broken system will only bring the same results,” he warned.
He also dismissed the idea of dissolving Parliament. Harirak believes new elections would worsen the crisis. He argued that growing political apathy, combined with rampant vote-buying, would only empower corrupt networks. “If we go back to the polls under the same rules,” he warned, “we will get the same outcome—or worse.”
Instead, Harirak urged national introspection. He said Thailand must now choose between clinging to a broken democratic framework or building a new political architecture. That architecture, in his view, must abandon the illusion that all votes are equal when corruption dominates elections.
Controversial idea ignites praise and outrage as Thailand faces rising political tension and investor concern
Not surprisingly, his post has sparked both praise and outrage. Pro-democracy groups called his ideas dangerous and undemocratic. Meanwhile, conservative commentators saw his suggestions as a breath of fresh air. Several military-linked pages reposted his comments with support.
As this ideological divide deepens, Bangkok is witnessing an increase in politically charged media content. State-run channels have aired documentaries favourably comparing Thailand’s governance challenges with China’s stability. Some independent outlets have warned that this is how the country typically looks before a coup.
At the same time, the business community is growing nervous. Investor confidence is faltering, and the baht has shown signs of instability. Foreign observers have expressed concern over both the court case and the broader political climate. Diplomats have warned of “institutional erosion” and called for Thailand to protect democratic norms.
Student rallies and public unrest could escalate rapidly following the court verdict on Paetongtarn case
Meanwhile, university students across several campuses are planning rallies for the weekend following the verdict. While still small, these movements could grow quickly if Paetongtarn is removed or if the court’s ruling is seen as politically motivated.
If history is a guide, the days ahead may prove volatile. Thailand’s recent past is filled with sharp turns—from court rulings to protests to coups. Whether this case marks a similar turning point remains to be seen.
Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra a no-show at cabinet and an appointment with Pheu Thai MPs
Pheu Thai increasingly confident that PM Paetongtarn can survive her Constitutional Court survival test
What is certain is that the stakes are higher than ever. This is not just about one leader or one conversation. It’s about whether the Thai public still believes in democracy, and whether the country’s institutions can adapt before it’s too late.
For now, all eyes remain on August 29. The verdict may decide more than Paetongtarn Shinawatra’s fate. It may define the future of Thai politics.
Join the Thai News forum, follow Thai Examiner on Facebook here
Receive all our stories as they come out on Telegram here
Follow Thai Examiner here
Further reading:
Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra a no-show at cabinet and an appointment with Pheu Thai MPs
