The Constitutional Court will have the final say when all other bodies have trouble deciding on an issue so the palace will not be disturbed whenever a dispute arises, according to constitutional drafters.
The stipulation was added as the second clause under Section 7 of the draft charter, said Kamnoon Sidhisamarn, spokesman of the Constitutional Drafting Committee (CDC), on the first day of by-section drafting on Monday.
Under the 2007 charter, Section 7 says: "Whenever no provision under this Constitution is applicable to any case, it shall be decided in accordance with the constitutional practice in the democratic regime of government with the King as Head of the State".
The CDC today added the second paragraph: "In the event a problem arises involving action or consideration under the first paragraph, the House of Representatives, the Senate, the National Assembly, cabinet ministers, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Administrative Court or any constitutional organisation, in performing their duties, may ask the Constitutional Court to give the final ruling on any issue. The Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court may do so only when the issue involves a trial and after their general assemblies have resolved to do so".
Mr Kamnoon explained: "The second paragraph is needed because over the past 17 years, or since the 1997 charter, whenever we reach a political impasse, this section has been cited, affecting the monarchy inappropriately. Such cases are primarily issues that no organisation has a clear mandate to decide on."
Asked whether the clause would shut the door to the so-called "Section 7 prime minister", Mr Kamnoon said the provision was not limited to it since there were issues other than the appointment of a prime minister.
In previous charters, a "Section 7 prime minister" is generally perceived as a royally appointed one.
"There is no such thing after His Majesty ruled it out on April 25, 2006," said Mr Kamnoon.