Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra will call five expert witnesses on August 21 to support her defence over a leaked audio with Cambodian leader Hun Sen, amid rising border tensions, court scrutiny and fears of another constitutional crisis in Thailand.
The Constitutional Court set its judgment day for Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra on Wednesday. Her potential removal has raised serious political and constitutional concerns. Tensions on the Thai-Cambodian border are increasing. Conservative factions are pushing to create friction between the Royal Thai Army and the Pheu Thai-led government. On Thursday, the Prime Minister’s legal team confirmed five expert witnesses will testify on August 21. They aim to support her defence regarding a leaked audio call with Cambodian leader Hun Sen on June 15. The court’s decision, some fear, could determine whether Thailand’s elected government survives or the country stumbles into another constitutional crisis.
After the Constitutional Court set August 29th to hand down the judgment on the case against Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, concern is rising across political circles. The case was brought by senators over an audio clip of her conversation with Samdech Hun Sen, President of the Cambodian Senate. In addition, this comes after Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin was ousted last year for putting forward a cabinet appointee. Furthermore, the political arena has been shaken by multiple investigations and probes into officials this year.
If the Prime Minister is deposed, she will become the fifth Thai Prime Minister removed by the Constitutional Court in two decades. That is after the removal by coup d’état of her father, Thaksin Shinawatra, in 2006. That means six democratically installed Prime Ministers have been removed by means other than democratic elections or a democratic process.
Rising concern over the constitutional court ruling and history of prime ministerial removals in Thailand
Indeed, this highlights the potential for political instability under the 2017 Constitution. Analysts note that despite a series of unfortunate events and trends this year, the government continues pushing forward in the face of adversity. Consequently, many commentators are urging the Court to examine the case in detail rather than relying solely on leaked remarks or public sentiment.
Paetongtarn Shinawatra has submitted a formal statement to the Constitutional Court regarding the audio clip. She requested that five expert witnesses be called to clarify her remarks and the broader context. Moreover, she asked the Court to review the order to suspend her duties during the trial. This request is intended to ensure the trial is thorough, comprehensive, and fair, and to avoid decisions based purely on perception or emotion.
On August 14, 2025, the Constitutional Court scheduled the examination of two witnesses: Prime Minister Paetongtarn and Mr. Chatchai Bangchuad, Secretary-General of the National Security Council (NSC), for August 21, 2025, at 10:30 a.m. Failure to appear would result in a no-confidence claim.
Additionally, petitioners or defendants who wish to submit closing statements must submit written versions by August 27, 2025. If they miss this deadline, it will also trigger a no-confidence claim. The Court scheduled oral statements, consultation, and voting for August 29, 2025, with hearings starting at 3:00 p.m.
Court schedules witness hearings and deadlines to ensure a fair and thorough examination of the case
Ms. Paetongtarn maintains that her actions, as alleged by the senate petitioners, did not violate the Code of Ethics for Political Officials B.E. 2564 (2021). She emphasised that the conversation was part of a negotiation intended to prevent conflict on the Thai-Cambodian border.
In her statement, she requested the examination of five qualified witnesses who have direct knowledge of the situation and national security concerns. The five witnesses include:
- Mr. Chatchai Bangchuad, Secretary-General of the NSC, is familiar with all armed forces commanders.
- Mr. Arsit Sampantharat, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Interior, is experienced in border administration.
- General Phuchong Rattanawan is an expert on Cambodia, with decades of operational experience in Thai-Cambodian relations.
- Lt. Gen. Puttipong Chipsamut, Deputy Director-General of the Military Judge Advocate General’s Department, is an expert in military security law and national sovereignty.
- Mr. Thanathip Upatising, a former Thai ambassador to Japan, the Philippines, and Russia, will provide insight on diplomatic practices and informal negotiations.
These witnesses were involved in discussions or operations related to the conversation with Samdech Hun Sen. Therefore, they can clarify that no actions violated constitutional or ethical standards. Moreover, their testimonies aim to demonstrate that the conversation was intended to safeguard national sovereignty, not for personal gain. In addition, the request follows recommendations from security forces who assessed the situation thoroughly.
Expert witnesses to confirm the Prime Minister’s actions aimed solely at protecting national sovereignty
Ms. Paetongtarn argued that her removal from office could harm national interests. If she remains as Prime Minister, she can coordinate government officials and military forces effectively. This coordination, she explained, would reinforce Thailand’s position and psychological leverage on Cambodia.
Isra News Agency has confirmed aspects of the Prime Minister’s defence. For instance, the phrase, “Just tell me what you want, and I’ll get it done,” was part of a negotiation strategy. In this context, it sought to encourage Cambodia to outline conditions first. Indeed, it did not indicate agreement to all demands. In addition, it reflects standard diplomatic techniques to uncover true intentions during complex negotiations.
Regarding the Second Army Region commander, the Court was informed of misunderstandings. Mr. Khliang Huat, an aide to Samdech Hun Sen, stated that Hun Sen’s border closure was motivated by dissatisfaction with the commander, Lt. Gen. Boonsin Phadklang.
Consequently, Paetongtarn clarified the distinction between administrative and security responsibilities to prevent conflict escalation. Furthermore, this approach aimed to create trust and enable further official negotiations without military or economic consequences.
Suspension of the Prime Minister’s duties could threaten national interests and hinder government
Ms. Paetongtarn reiterated that her sole intention was to protect national interests. At no point did she seek personal gain, nor did she prioritise family or private benefit. Additionally, she emphasised that her actions aligned with her constitutional duties.
Therefore, the inclusion of expert witnesses would provide the Court with a full and accurate picture. Moreover, it ensures that decisions are based on facts, not misinterpretations or what was essentially a calculated leak by a hostile foreign government.
The Constitutional Court’s timeline requires strict compliance. Witnesses must appear on August 21, 2025. Written statements are due by August 27, 2025. Oral statements and consultations occur on August 29, with voting scheduled at 3:00 p.m.
Failure to comply carries the risk of a no-confidence claim, underscoring the stakes for all parties involved.
Meanwhile, the government continues its regular functions despite ongoing scrutiny. Analysts note that the 2017 Constitution has created multiple points of vulnerability. Consequently, political stability often depends on judicial interpretation rather than parliamentary processes.
Expert testimony is critical, as the Constitution creates vulnerability, which undermines political stability
In addition, repeated removals of Prime Ministers illustrate the judiciary’s significant influence on Thailand’s political environment. Therefore, each case carries broad implications for governance, security and diplomatic relations.
Certainly, the Paetongtarn Shinawatra case combines complex legal, political, and security issues. However, the Prime Minister has requested careful examination, ensuring that expert testimony informs the Court.
Indeed, the hearings will clarify her intentions, national security considerations and diplomatic strategies. Furthermore, the proceedings reflect the very real and broader challenges of governance under Thailand’s current Constitution imposed on its elected officials.
Thailand heading into another Constitutional crisis as August 29th date has been set for deciding the PM’s fate
Pheu Thai MP publicly asks the Constitutional Court to defer decision on the PM’s fate, fearing a crisis
The outcome on August 29 will have immediate and long-term impact. Nevertheless, the structured examination of witnesses and expert insights may provide a fair and comprehensive evaluation. Moreover, it emphasises the importance of more informed judicial consideration in highly sensitive political and security matters.
At the same time, it may set a precedent for future cases involving the interaction of governance, diplomacy and national security.
However, many political observers believe the sweeping powers granted to the courts under the 2017 Constitution make decisive governance in Thailand extremely difficult. In effect, it is an elaborate minefield which reduces the power and leeway of politicians seeking to explore solutions to day-to-day problems and national emergencies.
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:
Senate Committee Chair tells government to send Trump’s men packing and accept the 36% tariff rate
