Independent State Agency in Non-Democratic Regimes A Conceptual Controversy Explaining the Relationship Between Independent State Agency and Thailand's Non-Democratic Regimes

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to study and to compare conceptual frameworks related to the analysis of non-democratic regimes in both Thailand and in foreign countries, totaling 5concepts, namely 1.) Bureaucratic Polity, 2.) Deep State, 3.) Authoritarian Durability, 4.) Juristocracy. 5.) The Functions of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes to determine which concepts can be applied to explain the relationship between non-democratic regimes and Thai independent state agencies in the sense that independent state agencies become the working mechanism that most appropriately drives authoritarian regimes or hybrid regimes. Focusing on the government of General Prayut Chan-o-cha from 2014-2023 only, the study found that Andreas Schedler's concept of authoritarian durability is most appropriate for analysis because this concept can explain the Thai regime during that period most accurately with the actual situation. It also describes four key elements in building durability and survival for the authoritarian regimes that can be used to analyze how to take control of independent state agencies to change independent state agencies to become mechanisms for working for the regime and covering almost all levels of politics.