4. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Originally, the Thai traditional law was probably a body of simple customary rules which could be classified into Volksrecht. With the reception of Indian cultural influences, the written law element was formally introduced into the Thai legal system, and the Thai judiciary came to be dominated by Hindu Brahmins from India.
The Thai jurisprudence also evolved itself along this line of law under the influence of Indian law and culture. When the evolution reached the stage of maturity, the law was probably taught and imparted by Court Brahmins as a variation of Juristenrecht. The Hindu belief that the Code of Manu was sacred and unalterable, representing the principles of justice and equity, was also kept alive. This belief, combined with the concept of Hindu Devaraja and Buddhist Dharmaraja (Divine and Righteous Kingship), led the Thais to hold the idea that the monarch is merely the upholder of law and not its creator, for his authority was human. The Dharmasastra was the basic written law of Thailand and filled with such legal provisions and principles.
Apart from the Dharmasastra, there were many other rules enacted by the Kings to enforce temporary measures for the administration of the country. They were issued in the form of Royal Ordinances, and after repeated application were compiled into a body of texts known as Rajsastra. The Rajsastra was neither sacred nor immutable and could be altered by the King, who issued other Royal Ordinances, or his successors. Thus the Thai traditional legal system implied a concept of hierarchical pluralism of the Dharmasastra and Rajsastra. Such a concept of law in Thailand was similar to that in Europe in ancient times and the middle-ages, but different from that in modern times (cf. Mclllwain, 1955: 364–365).
Last but not least, it should be particularly noted that the reception of the Dharmasastra into Thai law did not, contrary to the case of modern codes, produce any disturbing effects on the existing customary rules, for the Hindu idea of law was by no means hostile to usages and customs.
On the contrary, the Dharmasastra served as an ideal criterion for criticizing and improving the customary rules of law by its very moral nature, thereby producing salutary effects on the positive law, in that the Hindu notion of law facilitated Thai law, transforming it from a simple law to a sophisticated system of mature law, as Stoicism did for Roman law.We can see that the spirit of Thai jurisprudence from the time of King Rama I to the era of the reception of Western law showed a strong tendency toward jus striatum as typically understood by the background story of the compilation the Code of the Three Great Seals. When we survey the judicial decisions during this period, we can conclude that the Thai legal profession had an admirably high degree of judicial sophistication.10 This had a great positive influence on the legal development at the time Thailand began to receive Western law.