Thailand has plunged into yet another chapter of political instability following the Constitutional Court’s decision on Friday to remove Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra from office. The court ruled that the 39-year-old leader had breached ethical standards during a leaked phone conversation with Cambodia’s former strongman Hun Sen, marking her as the fifth Thai prime minister to be ousted by judicial intervention since 2008. With the country’s major political factions now scrambling to form a new government, the path forward remains fraught with uncertainty, as competing interests and ideological divides threaten to deepen the nation’s chronic instability.
| Prime Minister | Term in Office | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Srettha Thavisin | 22 Aug 2023 – 14 Aug 2024 | Elected following the 2023 election; removed by Constitutional Court. |
| Phumtham Wechayachai (Acting) | 14 Aug 2024 – 16 Aug 2024 | Briefly served as acting PM after Srettha’s dismissal. |
| Paetongtarn Shinawatra | 16 Aug 2024 – 29 Aug 2025 | Youngest and second female PM; suspended and later dismissed by court. |
| Suriya Juangroongruangkit (Acting) | 1 Jul 2025 – 3 Jul 2025 | Took over immediately after Paetongtarn’s suspension. |
| Phumtham Wechayachai (Acting, again) | 3 Jul 2025 – Present | Resumed acting premiership and currently serves in the role. |
A Damning Ruling and a Leaked Call
The Constitutional Court’s decision centered on a leaked phone call from June 15, in which Paetongtarn pressed Hun Sen for a peaceful resolution to an ongoing border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia. According to the court’s ruling, reported by local media, the prime minister’s conduct during the conversation demonstrated a prioritization of personal or political interests over national ones, undermining public trust. The nine-judge panel described her actions as a serious violation of the ethical duties expected of a prime minister.
Paetongtarn’s removal adds her to a growing list of Thai leaders felled by judicial or military interventions, including her father, Thaksin Shinawatra, and her aunt, Yingluck Shinawatra, both ousted in coups in 2006 and 2014, respectively. Her immediate predecessor, Srettha Thavisin, was also dismissed by the same court for an alleged ethical breach just months prior. This pattern of abrupt leadership changes has become a hallmark of Thai politics, where the judiciary and conservative establishment often wield outsized influence over democratic processes. 
Power Vacuum and Parliamentary Maneuvering
The ruling has triggered a race among Thailand’s largest political parties to secure the 251 votes needed for a simple majority in the 500-seat House of Representatives. Under the Thai Constitution, the next prime minister must be chosen from a pre-approved list of candidates nominated by parties ahead of the 2023 general election. A parliamentary vote to select the new leader could occur as early as September 4, though no clear frontrunner has emerged.
Pheu Thai, the party that backed both Paetongtarn and Srettha, has only one remaining candidate on its list: Chaikasem Nitisiri, a 77-year-old veteran lawyer. With two of its nominees already dismissed, Pheu Thai is under pressure to stabilize its position. Meanwhile, Bhumjaithai, a conservative party and former coalition partner of Pheu Thai, is pushing its leader, Anutin Charnvirakul, for the role. Bhumjaithai withdrew from Paetongtarn’s coalition after the leaked call, signaling a fracture in the alliance that could complicate negotiations.
At the heart of this political chess game is the progressive People’s Party, the successor to the dissolved Move Forward Party (MFP), which secured the most seats in the 2023 election with 143 representatives. Despite its electoral success, the MFP was blocked from forming a government by military-appointed senators—a veto power that has since expired—and was later dissolved by the Constitutional Court. Rebranded as the People’s Party, it now holds significant leverage as a potential kingmaker in the upcoming vote.
People’s Party Plays Hardball
The People’s Party, led by Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, has made its intentions clear: it will support a caretaker prime minister only if the incoming government commits to dissolving parliament within four months and holding snap elections. Additionally, the party is pushing for a referendum to amend the military-drafted 2017 Constitution, which it views as a tool of the conservative establishment to suppress progressive reforms. In a strategic move described by some observers as a political innovation, the People’s Party has proposed a confidence and supply arrangement, offering parliamentary support for a new government without formally joining the coalition.
This stance reflects the party’s broader goal of returning to the polls, where it hopes to capitalize on growing public frustration with Thailand’s entrenched political instability. The People’s Party believes that fresh elections, free from the interference of unelected senators, could pave the way for a progressive mandate. Natthaphong emphasized this strategy in a recent statement to reporters, declaring that the party aims to use its 143 votes to “break the political deadlock for the country without joining the government.” He also rejected any notion of backroom deals, signaling a commitment to transparency as the party weighs its options.
Both Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai have expressed willingness to meet the People’s Party’s conditions. Acting Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai, speaking on behalf of Pheu Thai, confirmed after a meeting with party representatives that they are prepared to dissolve parliament within the requested four-month timeframe, or even sooner if necessary. Bhumjaithai echoed this sentiment, stating its readiness to return power to the people through snap elections. However, lingering distrust between the People’s Party and Pheu Thai, stemming from the latter’s decision to abandon the MFP after the 2023 election and form a coalition with conservative forces, could hinder a potential alliance.
Historical Grievances and Ideological Divides
The fallout from the 2023 election continues to cast a shadow over current negotiations. After the MFP’s electoral victory was thwarted by the Senate, Pheu Thai opted to align with military-backed and conservative parties, a move that facilitated the return of Thaksin Shinawatra from over 15 years of self-exile. This perceived betrayal alienated many progressive supporters and strained relations with the MFP’s successors. Recent reports suggest that Thaksin has met with Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, a prominent figure associated with the People’s Party, to seek support for Pheu Thai’s candidate. Yet, it remains unclear whether such overtures can mend past rifts.
A potential alliance with Bhumjaithai poses its own challenges for the People’s Party, given the stark ideological differences between the progressive faction and the conservative party. With only 69 seats in parliament, Bhumjaithai would also struggle to form a majority even with the People’s Party’s support, requiring additional partners to reach the necessary threshold. By contrast, Pheu Thai’s 135 seats, combined with the People’s Party’s 143, provide a clearer path to a majority, though mutual suspicion could still derail cooperation.
A Fractured Political Landscape
Thailand’s political scene remains deeply fragmented, characterized by frequent interventions from the judiciary and military-aligned establishment. The removal of Paetongtarn Shinawatra is just the latest in a long series of disruptions that have prevented any single party or coalition from achieving lasting stability. Since the 2006 coup that ousted Thaksin, the country has cycled through multiple governments, with judicial rulings and military takeovers often preempting democratic outcomes.
The People’s Party’s push for constitutional reform underscores a broader public demand for systemic change. The 2017 Constitution, drafted under military rule, has been criticized for entrenching the power of unelected bodies and limiting the influence of popularly elected leaders. Amending or replacing it could reshape Thailand’s political framework, potentially reducing the frequency of judicial ousters and coups. However, such reforms face fierce resistance from conservative forces who benefit from the status quo.
Regional Implications and Public Sentiment
Beyond domestic politics, Paetongtarn’s removal raises questions about Thailand’s regional standing. The leaked call with Hun Sen, a polarizing figure in Cambodian politics, highlighted the delicate balance of cross-border relations in Southeast Asia. While the content of the conversation suggested an intent to de-escalate tensions, the court’s interpretation framed it as a betrayal of national interest—a reminder of how personal diplomacy can backfire in a region marked by historical rivalries and territorial disputes.
Public sentiment in Thailand, meanwhile, appears increasingly weary of the revolving door of leadership. Urban centers like Bangkok and progressive strongholds in the northeast have shown growing support for parties like the People’s Party, which promise to challenge the entrenched elite. Yet, rural areas and conservative bastions remain loyal to parties like Bhumjaithai, creating a polarized electorate that mirrors the fractured parliamentary landscape.
What Lies Ahead?
As Thailand awaits the parliamentary vote, the question of who will emerge as the next prime minister remains unanswered. Whether it is Pheu Thai’s Chaikasem Nitisiri, Bhumjaithai’s Anutin Charnvirakul, or an unforeseen compromise candidate, the new leader will inherit a nation grappling with deep-seated divisions and a history of abrupt political shifts. They will be Thailand’s third prime minister in as many years, stepping into a role that has proven precarious for even the most seasoned politicians.
The coming weeks will test the resolve of the People’s Party to push for elections and constitutional reform, as well as the willingness of Pheu Thai and Bhumjaithai to cede ground for the sake of stability. For now, Thailand stands at a crossroads, with the specter of further uncertainty looming large over its democratic future.
