关于泰国司法化的诸种不同观念

Competing Notions of Judicialization in Thailand

本文主要研究2006—2014年间泰国司法化的政治问题,并审视此极端争议期间司法被卷入政治的诸种形式。本文从2006年国王的两次重要演讲以及知名学者、社会批评家提拉育·汶密的诠释切入,细究几项具有持久政治影响的关键司法判决,包括2006年的大选无效案、2007年的取缔泰爱泰党案、2008年和2014年的亲他信·西那瓦的沙马·顺达卫和英拉·西那瓦两位总理被免案、2008年他信受到数项腐败指控并被判罪名成立,以及2010年的司法扣押他信资产案等。本文提出以下几个问题:司法化必定意味着保守主义者千方百计要剥夺从政者的权力并破坏选举政治吗?法官们是为泰国社会工作还是同某些既得利益集团结盟?在泰国语境下,司法能动性越强,是否就越能推进社会与政治领域的进步?本文认为,泰国的"司法化"是一个复杂的社会现象,对不同的法庭在不同的情况下以及不同的时间做出的判决,都必须仔细斟酌,辨明其各自所起的作用。

This article examines the politics of judicialization in Thailand between 2006 and 2014, looking at the ways in which the judiciary became regularly embroiled in politics during this extremely contentious period. It takes as its starting point important royal speeches of 2006, and the interpretation of those speeches offered by the prominent academic and social critic Thirayudh Boonmee. Several key judicial decisions which had lasting political consequences are closely examined, including the 2006 election annulment, the 2007 banning of Thai Rak Thai, the removal of pro-Thaksin Shinawatra prime ministers Samak Sundaravej and Yingluck Shinawatra in 2008 and 2014, Thaksin＇s conviction on corruption-related charges in 2008 and the judicial seizure of his assets in 2010. Some of the questions posed in this paper are as follows ： Does judicialization inevitably mean conservative attempts to curtail the power of politicians and undermine electoral politics？ Are judges working on behalf of Thai society, or in alignment with certain vested interests？ Could greater judicial activism serve progressive social and political causes in the Thai context？ The paper argues that Thailand＇s ＂judicialization＂ is a complex phenomenon： judgements made by different courts, in different cases and at different times need to be scrutinized on their individual merits.