Democratic institutions are breaking down and being taken away in Thailand. This is a direct sign of democratic erosion. Democratic erosion or backsliding occurs when there is “…a deterioration of qualities associated with democratic governance within any regime” (Lust 2). This means the country is becoming less democratic than it once was, and it can also occur within democracies. 

One mechanism of democratic erosion is stealth authoritarianism. Political leaders today often use stealth authoritarianism to stay in power. Varol explains that “…Stealth authoritarianism refers to the use of legal mechanisms that exist in regimes with favorable democratic credentials for anti-democratic ends” (Varol 1684). Democratic erosion often occurs when political leaders use stealth authoritarianism to achieve their goals. 

One of the most important aspects of a democracy is plurality, or the existence of multiple candidates and political parties to ensure the citizens’ preferences are accurately expressed. A sign of democratic erosion is when plurality starts to get broken down and the desires of the population are not represented. Stealth authoritarianism is often used to get rid of political opponents, therefore breaking down the plurality in a country. 

Thailand has recently seen signs of democratic erosion and the use of stealth authoritarianism within their government. The most alarming sign involves a court decision made by Thailand’s highest court, the Constitutional Court. This court determines the constitutionality of executive actions and laws passed by the legislature. Recently, this court has made a decision that limits the political opposition therefore removing some of the plurality in the country. They used their legal power as the judicial branch of government to dissolve political opponents, an example of stealth authoritarianism. 

The court decision involves getting rid of a political party. The Constitutional Court of Thailand dissolved the progressive Move Forward Party “…saying it violated the Constitution by proposing an amendment to a law against defaming the country’s royal family” (Saksornchai). This takes away some of the plurality in the country. A strong democracy will have multiple political parties and choices for the citizens to make. If the judicial branch takes away some of this plurality, this important aspect of democracy is no longer present in the country. The Constitutional Court is using their power to silence political opponents. This is not democratic.

One of the fundamental aspects of democracy is political competition and voters having a choice for who they support. In other words, “…democracy relies on the possibility of alternation in power” (Huq and Ginsberg, 51). The Constitutional Court is using its power to eliminate political opponents. This is an example of stealth authoritarianism and leaders using legal pathways to take away democratic institutions. Authoritarians often use legal methods like this to chip away at democracy and go unnoticed. 

Not only is removing political opponents a sign of democratic erosion, the removed party was trying to change censorship laws. The Move Forward Party was trying to pass an amendment to a law against speaking out towards the government: “…the Move Forward party promised to reform Article 112 of the Thai Criminal Code (or lèse-majesté law), which criminalises perceived insults against the monarchy…” 

Another common characteristic of democracies is free speech. This law shows Thailand did not have that because it prohibits speaking out against the government. The removed party was trying to address this law and the Constitutional Court did not agree with the changes they wanted to make. The court then used their power to dissolve the political party. The political party wanted to make the country more democratic by allowing more free speech. However, the court used stealth authoritarianism to avoid an increase in democracy and erode democratic principles. 

Moreover, a large portion of the Thai population voted for the Move Forward Party. Jintamas Saksornchai explains that “Move Forward won the most seats in the 2023 general election, but conservative, military-appointed Senators voted down its candidate for prime minister.” Dissolving this political party disillusions this portion of the population. It also means their voices are not being heard and the supposed democratic institutions are not accurately representing the desires of the people. 

A major aspect of democracy is free and fair elections as well as voters having a choice for who they support. Without a political party representing their desires, this portion of the population supporting the Move Forward Party will not be represented in their government. This is another example of a democratic institution being broken down, and therefore another sign of democratic erosion in Thailand.

The Constitutional Court has used its power to break down democratic institutions in Thailand. It has gotten rid of political opponents by dissolving a political party. This gets rid of the pluralism in Thailand, which is a major characteristic of democracy. It also disenfranchises a large population of Thailand who voted for the political party and who will no longer be represented in their government. 

This Constitutional Court decision in Thailand shows the presence of democratic erosion in the country. Taking away pluralism and political competition takes away a fundamental aspect of democracy. This is an example of stealth authoritarianism and using legal methods to draw back important characteristics of democracy. The Constitutional Court is using their power to draw back aspects of democracy.