Thai Court Removes Paetongtarn as Coalition Fractures and Parliament Prepares to Choose a New Premier

A 6-3 ruling ends Paetongtarn's premiership

Thailand's Constitutional Court removed Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra from office on August 29, 2025, ruling that her remarks during a leaked telephone call with Cambodia's former leader Hun Sen violated ethical standards. The nine judges decided the case by a 6-3 majority, ending her premiership after just under a year and leaving Thailand facing another contest over who will govern.

The ruling brought down her administration, with the cabinet continuing in a caretaker capacity until a replacement government is formed. Deputy Prime Minister Phumtham Wechayachai was appointed acting prime minister. As of September 1, attention had shifted to parliamentary sessions scheduled for September 3 to 5 to choose a new leader.

The case centered on a June 15 conversation during mounting tensions along the Thai-Cambodian border. Paetongtarn called Hun Sen "uncle," described a senior Thai army commander as an opponent and offered to respond to the Cambodian leader's requests. Hun Sen later shared the conversation himself, turning a private diplomatic exchange into a public controversy.

Paetongtarn said she had been trying to reduce tensions and protect lives. The court concluded that she had placed personal interests ahead of national interests. Her removal deepens a political crisis involving a fractured coalition, a deadly border conflict and renewed arguments about the power of Thailand's courts over elected governments.

Why the call became an ethics case

Paetongtarn's conversation with Hun Sen took place while nationalist feeling in Thailand was already rising over the border dispute. Her familiar way of addressing Cambodia's former leader, combined with her criticism of a Thai military commander, brought intense scrutiny of her judgment and loyalties.

During the June 15 call, Paetongtarn told Hun Sen that she was willing to respond to his wishes:

If you want anything, just tell me, and I will take care of it.

Critics accused Paetongtarn of weakening Thailand's military position and compromising national interests. A group of senators petitioned the Constitutional Court to remove her for ethical misconduct, making the leaked recording the central evidence in the case.

The court found that her remarks showed a lack of honesty and integrity. It said her relationship with Hun Sen had led her to express a willingness to comply with Cambodia's wishes at Thailand's expense.

In explaining its decision, the Constitutional Court said Paetongtarn had:

put her private interests before those of the nation and damaged the country's reputation,

The ethical question was whether a prime minister had used her position to protect the country's interests or allowed a personal relationship to shape her conduct. Paetongtarn defended the conversation as diplomacy intended to prevent further violence. The judges' majority accepted the case for removing her.

A border dispute with a heavy human cost

Thailand and Cambodia's border confrontation gave the call consequences far beyond an argument over political language. Armed clashes escalated shortly after the recording became public, killing at least 38 people, mostly civilians, and forcing hundreds of thousands from their homes on both sides of the border.

Families in the affected areas faced displacement while their governments confronted a worsening diplomatic and security crisis. Paetongtarn's stated aim of protecting lives was set against criticism that her approach had weakened Thailand's position during a dangerous confrontation.

The conflict also increased scrutiny of the Shinawatra family's relationship with Cambodia's leadership. Public suspicion grew over whether those personal connections were influencing decisions that affected national security.

For Paetongtarn, the dispute became both a test of diplomatic leadership and a source of domestic political pressure. Her explanation that she was trying to calm the situation failed to stop the controversy from spreading through parliament, the courts and the streets.

How the government lost its footing

Bhumjaithai, a key member of Paetongtarn's governing coalition, withdrew after the leaked call. Its departure weakened her parliamentary majority and gave opponents more room to challenge her administration.

Anutin Charnvirakul, Bhumjaithai's leader, began seeking alliances with other parties, positioning his party as a possible leader of the next government. A coalition is an agreement between parties to govern together; when a major partner leaves, the prime minister can struggle to command enough votes to remain effective.

Protesters in Bangkok demanded Paetongtarn's resignation and criticized the Shinawatra family's perceived closeness to Hun Sen. The demonstrations added public pressure to the legal case and the breakdown of support inside parliament.

On July 1, the Constitutional Court suspended Paetongtarn from her duties as prime minister while it examined the complaint. She remained in the cabinet as culture minister until the final ruling on August 29. The suspension therefore interrupted her leadership almost two months before the court formally removed her.

The main events unfolded over the following dates:

• June 15, 2025: Paetongtarn spoke by telephone with Hun Sen during heightened border tensions.
• After the conversation became public: Bhumjaithai withdrew from the coalition, protests erupted and the border crisis intensified.
• July 1: The Constitutional Court suspended Paetongtarn from prime ministerial duties pending its investigation.
• August 29: The court voted 6-3 to remove her, and Phumtham became acting prime minister.
• September 3 to 5: Parliament was scheduled to convene to select a new prime minister.

Another removal in the Shinawatra era

Paetongtarn's dismissal extends a succession of coups and court decisions that have removed members of the Shinawatra family and their political allies. The family has been a dominant force in Thai politics for more than two decades, but winning elections has repeatedly failed to secure its governments' survival.

Her father, Thaksin Shinawatra, won two elections before the military removed him in a coup in 2006. Her uncle, Somchai Wongsawat, served briefly as prime minister in 2008 before being removed by court order.

Her aunt, Yingluck Shinawatra, was dismissed by the Constitutional Court in 2014, only weeks before another military coup. Paetongtarn's immediate predecessor, Srettha Thavisin, was removed by the same court in 2024, opening the way for her to take office.

Paetongtarn is the fifth premier backed by the Shinawatra political camp to be removed by the courts since 2008. She also continues the sequence of family members and allies whose governments have ended through judicial or military intervention since Thaksin's overthrow in 2006.

Supporters of the family see this history as evidence that conservative and royalist institutions use the courts against politicians who challenge the existing distribution of power. The court's decision in Paetongtarn's case rested on its finding of an ethical violation. The broader political argument concerns how unelected institutions can determine whether an elected government's leader remains in office.

The alliance that weakened Pheu Thai

Pheu Thai, the party led by the Shinawatra family, entered government through an alliance with conservative rivals after the 2023 election. That arrangement prevented Move Forward, which won the largest number of seats, from forming a government and allowed Thaksin to return to Thailand after years in exile.

The bargain carried a political cost. Many traditional Pheu Thai supporters regarded cooperation with conservative forces as a betrayal of the party's reformist roots. Failure to deliver key policy promises further reduced its popularity.

Paetongtarn also faced a perception that Thaksin remained the real power behind her government. That view weakened confidence in her authority, while the leaked call renewed concerns about the family's personal relationships with powerful figures outside Thailand.

The judiciary's role extends beyond dismissing prime ministers. Courts have dissolved dozens of political parties, including Move Forward. Its dissolution added to the frustration of voters who had supported the largest party in the 2023 election but saw it blocked from taking office.

The reformist opposition associated with Move Forward refused to join a new coalition and demanded fresh elections. The leader of the opposition People's Party called for parliament to be dissolved within four months, adding a specific demand to negotiations over the next government.

Who can become the next prime minister?

Phumtham Wechayachai is leading the caretaker administration while parties negotiate. The caretaker cabinet keeps day to day government operating until a new administration takes office, but the political focus is on assembling parliamentary support for a successor.

The Secretariat of the House of Representatives called for parliament to convene from September 3 to 5 to vote for a new prime minister. The choice is restricted: under the constitution, eligible candidates must come from the names parties nominated before the 2023 general election.

Pheu Thai's remaining candidate is Chaikasem Nitisiri, a former attorney general and justice minister who is 77. His candidacy gives the party a route to retaining the premiership despite Paetongtarn's removal.

Anutin Charnvirakul is another contender. Bhumjaithai's withdrawal from the previous coalition and its search for new alliances have made him a central figure in negotiations. Assessments of his prospects have also pointed to palace backing and Senate support as political advantages.

Former prime minister Prayuth Chan-ocha, who led the 2014 coup, is also among the potential contenders. The limited candidate list means parties must negotiate around people nominated before the last election, rather than freely choose a new name.

No successor had been agreed as of September 1. If parliament cannot settle on a government, a snap election may follow. For opposition parties demanding a fresh public vote, the timing of any dissolution is therefore part of the struggle over who should govern next.

Paetongtarn accepts the verdict

Paetongtarn accepted the court's decision after the ruling and reiterated that she had acted for the country's benefit, rather than for personal gain. In her address to the nation, she expressed gratitude for the opportunity to serve and called for unity and political stability.

She also urged political groups to work together to restore stability and prevent further disruption. Her response maintained the explanation she had given throughout the controversy: the conversation with Hun Sen was intended to ease tensions and protect people during the border crisis.

Supporters of the Shinawatra family were left disheartened by another removal. Critics of the judiciary's political role argued that the decision continued a pattern of courts reaching deeply into the affairs of elected governments.

Duncan McCargo, a political analyst at Nanyang Technological University, described the family's reduced political strength:

They still have a lot of power and a lot of influence, but clearly they are now in a much, much weaker position than they've been for some time.

McCargo's assessment captures the immediate difficulty for Pheu Thai. The party still has political influence and a candidate for prime minister, but it must negotiate after losing both its leader and an important coalition partner.

A leadership vote amid wider instability

Thailand enters the next parliamentary contest amid economic stagnation, stalled reforms and unresolved tensions with Cambodia. A caretaker government must manage those pressures while parties decide whether to form another coalition or seek an election.

The dispute reflects a recurring struggle between elected governments, often led by populist parties such as Pheu Thai, and the established power of the military, monarchy and judiciary. Coups, party dissolutions and the removal of prime ministers have repeatedly been justified through constitutional or ethical arguments.

Repeated changes of government have weakened public confidence in democratic institutions and contributed to recurring street protests. A new election would give voters another choice, but Thailand's recent history also shows that governments chosen through elections can later be removed by unelected institutions.

The reformist opposition's support for changes to the military and monarchy has won backing among young and urban voters while drawing suspicion from the conservative establishment. The prospect of another reformist electoral victory has also fed warnings about renewed military intervention.

The US State Department reaffirmed its commitment to the US-Thai alliance after the court's decision, reflecting international concern about Thailand's stability. At home, the immediate task is narrower and more concrete: select a prime minister who can obtain parliamentary support and form an administration.

Conservative forces may seek to retain influence through a weakened government led by Pheu Thai or through Bhumjaithai and other parties aligned with the military. Renewed protests and another coup remain risks in a country where both have repeatedly reshaped political life. The scheduled September parliamentary sessions are the next step in deciding who leads Thailand after Paetongtarn.

Key Points

• The Constitutional Court removed Paetongtarn Shinawatra on August 29, 2025, by a 6-3 vote over ethical violations linked to her June 15 call with Hun Sen.
• Paetongtarn said she was trying to ease border tensions and protect lives. The court found that she placed private interests before national interests.
• The border conflict killed at least 38 people, mostly civilians, and displaced hundreds of thousands in Thailand and Cambodia.
• Bhumjaithai's departure weakened the governing coalition. Phumtham Wechayachai is now acting prime minister, with the cabinet serving as caretaker.
• Parliament was scheduled to meet from September 3 to 5. Potential successors include Chaikasem Nitisiri, Anutin Charnvirakul and Prayuth Chan-ocha.
• The opposition People's Party called for dissolution of parliament within four months, while a snap election remained a possibility if government negotiations failed.
• Paetongtarn's removal continues a long sequence of court decisions and coups affecting the Shinawatra family and its political allies.