In March, the cabinet approved a draft of the Entertainment Complex Bill, clearing the path for up to five casino resorts around the country. The proposed industry was supposed to boost tourism, jobs and foreign investment. 

Eager investors – including several of Macau’s Big 6 casino concessionaires – soon lined up, drawn by estimates of $8 billion to $15 billion in annual revenue. At that level, Thailand would replace Singapore as the world’s third-largest gaming jurisdiction, after Macau and Las Vegas.

But the bill never won broad public support. A poll by the National Institute of Development Administration suggested that up to 80% of Thai residents opposed legal casinos, fearing they would lead to gambling addiction and increased crime. Anti-gaming activists, always organised and vocal, staged multiple street demonstrations outside Government House in Bangkok.

The bill hit a hard wall in June, when scandal erupted around Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, supporter-in-chief of casino resorts. Paetongtarn’s government fell into disarray after the release of a recorded phone conversation between her and Cambodian strongman Hun Sen.

In the leaked call, placed after a border skirmish between Thai and Cambodian forces, Paetongtarn seemed to kowtow to the Cambodian leader, even taking his side over her own military. On 1 July, a constitutional court suspended her from duty. Her fate remains in question.

Legislation ‘remains viable’

Also up in the air is the ultimate fate of Thailand casino legislation.

Less than a week after the prime minister stepped aside, lawmakers withdrew the casino bill from consideration. “We’re not pulling it out of fear or anything,” government whip Visuth Chainaroon told reporters. “We’d just like to communicate with the people first on the issue and clear any lingering doubts.” 

Attorney Panisa Suwanmatajarn says winning over the public should have been the government’s first order of business.

In a special report published 22 July, Panisa, managing partner at The Legal Co of Bangkok, called the legislation economically sound. However, she wrote, “its social and political foundations proved insufficiently robust to withstand public scrutiny and political volatility”.

While the draft is now on the shelf, Panisa added, “the possibility of reintroduction remains viable once the political situation stabilises and a broader public consensus is achieved”.

Consulting “diverse societal groups … must precede legislative drafting to ensure broad-based support”, she admonished lawmakers. “Prioritise inclusive dialogue, precise legal mechanisms and broad-based stakeholder support to ensure lasting success.”