Thailand is marking the fifth year of its latest Constitution in a few months, but political analysts here say the country is still learning how to make best use of its democratic features.

Among the features of the 1997 'People's Constitution' are independent agencies, whose function is to protect the rights and liberties of citizens in this country of more than 60 million people.

''People often say the 'New Constitution', referring to the good political patterns in other countries, could not solve 'Thai' problems,'' said Issra Nithitanprapas, president of the Constitutional Court, one of the independent agencies created under the new charter.

''They argue that the laws best for other countries do not mean they would be best for Thailand,'' he told a seminar this week on the role of constitutional organs in protecting freedoms, organised by the Constitutional Court and Germany's Konrad Adenauer foundation.

But ''the new laws were purposely written to correct long repeated and unsolved problems of the country on corruption, red tape and concept of human rights,'' Issra said. ''The critical ideas on the new constitution are, in fact, not preferable for our political reforms.''

Apart from the Constitutional Court, the other independent agencies at the seminar were the Administrative Court, National Human Rights Commission of Thailand, the Office of the Ombudsman, secretariat of the Senate and the Supreme Court.

The independence of these bodies is guaranteed by the constitution, which created some new agencies and strengthened existing ones.

The Constitutional Court itself has had its independence — guaranteed by the constitution — tested by no less than cases involving the top officials of this country.

High-profile case

In a high-profile case last year, the court dealt with charges that Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra had, during an earlier stint in the government, violated anti-graft laws by transferring US$98.4 million in assets to his driver, domestic worker and security guard.

This was done allegedly with the aim of concealing the assets and evading taxes on them.

In August last year, eight out of 15 judges of the court voted to find Thaksin, who had just won a clear majority of seats in parliamentary elections in January, not guilty in the case.

Thaksin's defence was that he did not know about the transfers to his staff, because his wife was the one who did them.

Although the verdict got mixed reactions, it was seen as another sign of democratic maturity that the country had a process to follow in handling such issues — and institutions that could tackle such cases.

Two years ago, the same court convicted Maj Gen Sanan Khajornprasart — then deputy prime minister and minister of interior — of intentionally submitting statements of assets and liabilities that had false information or concealed the facts.

That led to his ban from politics for five years.

Before this case, hardly had officials holding prominent positions been found guilty in corruption cases.

Experts say that the Constitution, which turns five years old in October, has allowed democratic institutions and mechanisms to take root. In truth, the concepts of rights and liberty were also mentioned in Thailand's past 15 constitutions, but they were not implemented much.

Indeed, maximising the use of avenues in place for public accountability might not come overnight for this South-east Asian country, which has been through 17 military coups within the past 65 years.

''Most Thais have basic understanding about their rights,'' agreed Issra. ''That is, however, only one angle of rights they perceive. They totally ignore it when talking about the public interest. ''

''Even in the judiciary itself, supporting people's rights and liberty is limited,'' said the president of the Supreme Administrative Court, Ackaratorn Chularat. ''Many lawyers and officials too seriously adhere to what written on paper that they forget what the laws were truly written for.'' As in other countries, there is the problem of the bureaucracy and red tape as well as people's access to justice.

''Red tape often makes the process of rights protection late, sometimes too late,'' said Ackaratorn, citing how each lawsuit in the Administrative Court can take years to resolve.

Needless to say, he said, the poor cannot afford an expensive justice process. ''It is not that simple to make all Thais gain equal rights,'' he pointed out.

Different perceptions

Likewise, it is not always easy to get the average citizen to see how the 1997 Constitution, or its independent agencies, can make a difference in their lives. Indeed, the roles of these agencies are often unclear to Thais.

''Many people hold different perceptions of these offices — what they are and do. And since they have not yet been proven to work well together, how well can they achieve the goal of guaranteeing people's rights and liberties?'' asked Banjerd Singkaneti of the faculty of law at Thammasat University.

Some say the biggest aim of the new Constitution and its agencies is to make Thais aware and be clear about their rights as human beings and how these rights cover the political, economic and social spheres.

''Our work is to prove that human rights are not a factor added to have more conflict in society, but a tool to guarantee that people and society are able to develop for their full potential in this changing world,'' said Saneh Chamarik, chairman of National Human Rights Commission of Thailand.

The newest independent agency, the rights commission has in recent years grappled with difficult questions like petitions from local communities seeking the suspension of megaprojects the government designed supposedly for their benefit, or from groups wanting more control over their natural resources.

''Rights in Thailand should always be treated as a dynamic factor,'' said Saneh. ''In the world of globalisation, not only the rights of people are limited by unequal development and access to resources, but also rights of government are challenged by the unclear line of sovereignty,'' he added, referring to how governments find their domestic options limited by international agreements and political factors.

''Most of the time, the government is forced to have rules which violate its people's rights in the country as well,'' Saneh pointed out. A well-known human rights activist, Saneh said there is a need not only to build a ''culture of rights'', but to ensure that people know how to assert their own rights.

In the end, ''citizens of the state, both male and female, do not exist to serve the state but vice versa,'' Dr Dieter Umbach of Potsdam University and a former president of Germany's federal constitutional court, reminded the officials at the seminar.