The coup, in addition to affecting legal issues in the field of constitutional law and legal philosophical questions, The coup also raised issues. In international law as well Academic work in Thailand in the past. The focus is on legal issues that arise in the context of public law only, not international law. This writing attempts to explain the impact of international coups on various issues.
1.What is a coup?
Coup d ‘Etat or coup 1 is the abolition of the former government through unconstitutional means. (unconstitutional means) In other words It overthrows the government by using military force. In French, Coup d ‘Etat is used. The English word coup is “strike” or “hit, and d’ Etat means” State “.
Another word that is so often called so that it seems to have a similar meaning is revolution. A coup is different from a revolution. That revolution has changed the structure of society. Or change the image of the government of the country Not a change A coup d’etat In addition, Revolution will be based on or related to one of the two political ideology in the past. Major revolutions of world history have been French Revolution of 1789, Revolution of Russia 1917, Revolution of 24 June 1932, which resulted in the termination of the absolute monarchy of Siam.
2. Type of Coup
Samuel P.Huntington remembers the following types of coups: 3
1) Breakthrough coups
2) Guardian coups
3) Veto coups.
Interestingly, Dr. Pridi Banomyong called the regressive socialist coup a reactionary coup. Such as the coup in Siam on 8 November 1947 4, including the last 19 September that destroyed the constitution. Democracy and the rule of law with uprooting
In addition, A coup without bloodshed Often referred to as the “bloodless coup”, after the successful coup on September 19, 2006, several published books have published the news that It was the most polite coup. Which no people oppose People also offer support. And also said that It’s a coup that is unique in the world. In addition, foreign media use the term “bloodless coup” regardless of reasoning or trying to explain. Did not justify the coup d’etat on 19 September (Not to mention legality) All columnists bring their opinions. This was a coup like no other in the real world, and this point of view is making the public get lost. We are talking about “The legitimacy of the coup” “the rule of law and democracy” “the election that will take place in the next 1-2 months”, etc. ThereforeThe 5, or bloodshed coup, is the total overthrow of governments out of constitutional means and deserves condemnation and opposition to any other use of power that will follow directly from the coup. Especially Deprivation of the rights and liberties of the people and the media
3.Can a coup be made according to international law?
The problem to think about in law is Whether a coup is legal or not. Or is there an explanation that cannot do or cannot do The coup itself would destroy the rule of law and democracy. It also has an impact on the status of the former government that is legitimate as well. This problem can be divided into two levels. Is the level of internal law within the context of constitutional law and criminal law (eg treason Also known as treason) 6 and at the level of international law But this article will only limit the issues relating to international law.
international law It does not prohibit the state from taking a coup. Although many democratic countries condemn a coup. The reason for not banning is because international law sees that People of any country have the right to choose a regime that is considered domestic affairs. 7.
While Professor Hans Kelsen * describes the coup by setting the principle that There are three components of statehood under international law: territory, citizenship and state power, which are passed on by the government. And at the same time, the executors have successfully established effective control (efficacy) over land or citizens. It is a coup government used state power to 8 Kelsen, called the coup a success as -creating Fact Law from 9.
Kelsen’s focus on the element of “effective control” or “efficacy” is so much less of a mention of legitimacy or legality. Those that are illegal may have a valid (valid) or even legal effect as well. And revolutionary acts and coups are examples of the exceptions that “Dharma is not born of unrighteousness” (ex injuria jus non oritur) 10It is likely that Kelsen, as an international lawyer, viewed the state as a member of the international community. The state of existence of the state has to be continually and continuously changing Could be called a master “Continuity of state” The state of the state cannot be terminated by a coup. As for the government that gained the power to rule the country in a coup, will it be accepted by the international community? It is another issue which is a government certification issue.
For that country The Supreme Court has always confirmed that The coup, which successfully seized power from the old government, was considered the “new government” or “Lord Athipat”, who used the state power 11 on the issue that How should the court react to the “order” of the junta? Or if the court has to decide on the legal issue of a coup In this regard, one of the scholars suggested that The court has only two options: Surrender to being part of a coup or constitutionality Another option is The court had to use moral courage to deny the legal status of the junt 12.
4. The impact of international coup d’etat
However, international law does not forbid a state from coup. But a coup would inevitably affect the country as follows:
4.1 Government Certification Issues
According to international law Change of government By means of outside the constitution (unconstitutional means) such as revolution, coup, civil war They all lead to government certification problems. As for the change to the government according to the constitutional framework provided, such as the completion of the government’s term of work and a new election. The dissolution of the parliament is good. The resignation of the government is good. Has resulted in no 13 issues of government certification
Government recognition is a unilateral act, a political act with a legal implication, which can be described as follows:
1) It is a unilateral act of the State, meaning that the recognition of the Government is due to the exercise of the powers of any State that wishes to endorse it alone. This is not the result of an agreement between the accredited state and the accredited state.
2) It is a political act, meaning that the endorsement of the government or the non-recognition is the absolute discretion of the state. Government certification is inevitably connected with interests or international politics. International law is not always a duty of the government to certify. Therefore, the state that accepts the certification will carefully consider what it will gain from it. His or her endorsement will not affect diplomatic relations, both to the accredited government as well as from other countries, especially those that oppose the government that they will recognize.
3) Certification has legal implications Certification of a government, whether it is a de facto or de jure endorsement, has international legal implications or implications, such as the recognition of that government as a representative of a state in foreign affairs.