N※N

Thailand's ruling party seeks house dissolution as opposition backs rival's PM bid

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. solution-as-opposition-backs-rival-s-pm-bid.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Wednesday, September 3rd 2025 at 1:55 GMT by ThePrint
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Thailand’s ruling party seeks house dissolution after opposition backs rival prime‑minister candidate

In the wake of a dramatic shift in Thailand’s parliamentary arithmetic, the country’s governing coalition is pressing the king to dissolve the House of Representatives. The request comes after a coalition of opposition parties—most notably the Democrat Party, the Thai Sang Thai coalition and the Thai Rak Thai party—publicly declared support for a rival candidate for prime minister, a move that threatens the stability of the current administration.

The political context

Thailand’s 2023 general election produced a fragmented parliament. The Pheu Thai Party, led by Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, emerged as the largest single bloc but fell short of an outright majority. It had secured 149 seats out of the 500‑seat house, a figure that was insufficient to form a governing majority on its own. To stay in power, the Pheu Thai coalition relied on a shaky alliance with the Democrat Party, the Thai Sang Thai coalition and a handful of smaller parties.

The opposition coalition, meanwhile, had long harboured a desire for a change in leadership. In early July, the opposition’s political leadership met in Bangkok and issued a joint statement that the parties had reached a consensus to back a new candidate for prime minister. The candidate in question is Kriangkrai Sopha‑anch, the current leader of the Democrat Party and a former deputy prime minister. Kriangkrai’s support base lies in his long‑standing advocacy for constitutional reforms and his reputation as a moderate willing to bridge the polarized political spectrum.

The dissolution request

Following the announcement that Kriangkrai had the backing of the opposition, Srettha’s administration saw its parliamentary support erode. The Pheu Thai coalition now held only 152 seats, and the opposition’s unified endorsement of Kriangkrai, coupled with the possibility of a Senate vote to confirm him, threatened to dislodge the sitting prime minister. In response, Srettha filed a formal request with the king to dissolve the House and call a snap election.

Under the 2017 Constitution, the monarch may dissolve the House upon the prime minister’s recommendation. In practice, the king has always complied with such requests, and the last time this power was exercised was in 2014 when the then‑Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra was dismissed. The constitution also stipulates that if a vote of no confidence passes, the prime minister is obliged to request dissolution. By seeking dissolution pre‑emptively, the ruling coalition aims to salvage its position by forcing a fresh election in which it hopes to regain a majority.

Reactions from the opposition

The opposition parties, though united in principle, expressed divergent feelings about the move. While the Democrat Party’s leadership celebrated the support for Kriangkrai, other opposition figures—particularly those from the Thai Sang Thai and Thai Rak Thai coalitions—cautiously warned that the political calculus had become too risky. “We are not endorsing a party that has a history of political instability,” said a senior Democrat MP, citing concerns that Kriangkrai’s past involvement in political controversies could be exploited by the ruling coalition.

The opposition also hinted at a desire for a “third‑party” solution. “We believe a compromise candidate could ensure a stable government without the risk of a protracted electoral battle,” an opposition spokesperson added. The call for a compromise has added an extra layer of complexity to the unfolding crisis.

Constitutional and institutional implications

The Senate, a 250‑member body appointed by the king, plays a key role in confirming the prime minister. Under the 2017 Constitution, the Senate votes on the prime ministerial candidate if the House fails to elect a majority. The opposition’s backing of Kriangkrai could mean that, should the House not reach a majority on its own, the Senate could confirm his candidacy. That prospect has led the Pheu Thai coalition to argue that the dissolution is necessary to prevent a scenario in which the opposition can install an opposition‑aligned prime minister.

Moreover, the move has spurred concerns about the monarchy’s involvement in politics. Thai society remains highly respectful of the king’s symbolic role, yet the constitutional framework allows the monarchy to act as a final arbiter in times of crisis. The decision to dissolve the House will rest with King Maha Vajiralongkorn, who has historically been cautious in exercising his powers.

Public and international reaction

The announcement of a dissolution request has sparked protests on both sides of the political divide. Demonstrators in Bangkok’s Civic Center Square have called for an end to what they describe as “political manipulation.” On the other side, rallies in support of Srettha’s government have highlighted the need for stability after a period of political unrest that included the 2014 coup and a series of elections.

International observers have noted that the political stalemate mirrors similar crises in other constitutional democracies, where the dissolution of parliament is used as a strategic lever to shift power balances. The United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has urged all parties to uphold democratic norms and ensure that the election, if called, proceeds with transparency and fairness.

Looking ahead

If the king accepts the dissolution request, a new election will be scheduled within 90 days, as mandated by Thai law. The ruling coalition will face the daunting task of rallying enough seats to form a majority on its own—a challenge given the fragmented nature of the current political landscape. Meanwhile, the opposition will have the opportunity to present a united front and potentially secure a majority coalition with Kriangkrai as prime minister.

In the meantime, the political landscape remains fluid. The current crisis illustrates how quickly parliamentary arithmetic can shift, how constitutional mechanisms can be used to manage or exacerbate political conflict, and how the monarchy’s role continues to be a pivotal factor in Thailand’s democratic evolution. As the nation watches, the next weeks will likely determine whether the current administration can survive, whether the opposition can force a change, or whether a fresh election will reset the balance of power entirely.