NULLITY AND LEGAL DEFECTS: SEVERELY UNLAWFUL ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS IN THAI LAW AND COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE

Abstract

This research provides a comprehensive examination of the theoretical underpinnings and legal concepts surrounding administrative orders issued unlawfully by state officials, particularly those with severe and manifest defects. Focusing primarily on the Thai legal framework, the study integrates comparative analyses with foreign jurisdictions, employing documentary research and legal analysis of statutory provisions, judicial precedents, and scholarly works. Findings reveal that administrative orders characterized by a blatant violation of statutory law or an incontrovertible factual contradiction are devoid of legal effect (null and void ab initio), and administrative authorities lack the competence to enforce them. The Administrative Court in Thailand is shown to possess the authority to raise issues of severe illegality ex officio. The study highlights the gradual judicial recognition of the doctrine of nullity in Thailand, drawing parallels with doctrines such as nichtige Verwaltungsakt in Germany and acte administratif inexistant in France. It argues for the adaptation of principles from foreign administrative law to enhance fairness, legal certainty, and efficiency within the Thai administrative adjudication system. The research proposes legislative and judicial reforms to clarify the distinction between void and voidable administrative acts, thereby strengthening the rule of law and ensuring greater alignment with international administrative law standards.