The military regime's apparent addiction to the powerful Section 44 does more harm than good to the country, legal experts argue.
Since the start of the year, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has increased his heavy reliance on the interim charter's Section 44 -- which grants him sweeping powers -- to tackle social and political ills as well as fast-forward the government's economic plans and policies.
Fifty-six orders have been issued so far this year, as opposed to 48 orders in all of 2015.
However, the orders merely provide quick-fix solutions to complex and long-standing problems that require thorough analysis, academic Jon Ungpakorn said.
Beneath this thin veneer of success, the PM's orders are in fact a manifestation of his autocratic leadership, he added.
The prime minister may use his power in arbitrary ways as there are no mechanisms for checks and balances, he added.
Mr Jon compared the interim charter's Section 44 to the infamous Article 17 of the 1959 charter imposed by Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat.
In issuing these orders, the premier goes beyond his executive role to routinely act as a legislator and judge, he said.
Furthermore, frequent use of Section 44 may erode the country's legal system with consequences that will outlast the junta's rule, Mr Jon argued.
Section 44 cuts the due process of law short, he says.
Services from the National Legislative Assembly or the Council of State are no longer required for the premier to draw up new regulations.
Everything comes down to one man's decision, he added.
For many, Section 44 is indeed a magic wand to swiftly and effectively implement policies and regulations.
Seree Suwanpanont, a member of the National Reform Steering Assembly (NRSA) defended his decision to ask the premier to use Section 44 to ease Bangkok's traffic problems.
The premier's powers under Section 44 are sweeping, he conceded.
However, Mr Seree sees no problem in using them if done for the right purposes and to benefit the country.
Increasing petitions addressed to the Prime Minister asking him to wield his special powers to tackle various problems show the measures taken are effective, he argued.
Nonetheless, he acknowledged such orders could never be issued under an elected government.
"In many cases, it's a careless and lazy way to provide solutions," Mr Jon weighed in.
Due to the lack of prior public consultation, no one can tell whether these solutions are the most effective or adequate, he said. Orders came out like lightning bolts and were effective immediately, he added.
Supapporn Malailoy, a coordinator at EnLaw Foundation, said she doesn't believe one man or a small group of individuals have sufficient knowledge to single-handedly address such a wide array of issues.
Many policies to boost the economy have disastrous impacts on the environment and local communities, she said.
Such consequences could have been prevented had the premier engaged in discussions with various parties before issuing the orders, she added.