|
Thailand Judiciary
The legal system remained an amalgam of the traditional and
the modern. In several southern provinces, for example, Islamic
law and custom were applicable to matrimonial and inheritance
matters among the Muslims. A large part of the modern legal
system was made up of criminal, civil, and commercial codes
adopted from the British and other European legal systems with
some modifications borrowed from India, Japan, China, and the
United States. Also, an extensive body of administrative law
consisted of royal decrees, executive orders, and ministerial
regulations.
The judiciary provided for three levels of courts: the courts
of first instance, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court.
The courts came under two separate jurisdictions. The Ministry of
Justice appointed and supervised the administrative personnel of
the courts and instituted reform in judicial procedures; the
Judicial Service Commission, which was responsible for the
independence of the courts, appointed, promoted, and removed
judges. As a rule, judges retired at age sixty, but their service
could be extended to age sixty-five.
The country was divided into nine judicial regions, which
were coextensive with the nine administrative regions
(phag), in contrast to the four geographic regions (North,
Northeast, Center, and South). At the base of the judiciary
system were the courts of first instance, most of which were
formally known as provincial courts with unlimited civil and
criminal jurisdiction. Petty civil and criminal offenses were
handled by magistrates' courts, which were designed to relieve
the increasing burden on provincial courts. Offenses committed by
Thai citizens on the high seas and outside the country were tried
before the Criminal Court in Bangkok. Labor disputes were
adjudicated by the Central Labor Court established in Bangkok in
1980. Offenses by persons under eighteen years of age were
referred to the Central Juvenile Court and its counterparts in
several regional centers.
The Court of Appeal in Bangkok heard cases from all lower
courts (except the Central Labor Court) relating to civil,
juvenile, criminal, and bankruptcy matters. At least two judges
were required to sit at each hearing. Cases of exceptional
importance had to be heard by plenary sessions of the court. The
appellate court could reverse, revise, or remand lower court
decisions on questions of both law and fact.
The Supreme Court, which was the highest court of appeal,
also had original jurisdiction over election disputes. Although
decisions of the court were final, in criminal cases the king
could grant clemency. A dispute over court jurisdiction was
settled by the Constitutional Tribunal.
Data as of September 1987
|
