Two weeks have passed since the censure debate assault was mounted against the government and it may be delusional to think the political onslaught was fait accompli.
Unlike the previous two no-confidence debates, the one in February and the first exactly 12 months before that, this latest grilling session had a lot riding on it.
By far the most eventful and dramatic censure debate so far, the session had many in the opposition banking on it to deliver a crushing blow against the government. It would have been a democratic means of initiating a changing of the guard.
But Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha, along with five other ministers, managed to survive this toughest censure challenge since the government was elected more than two years ago.
Although the four-day grilling was wrapped up on Sept 3 and the censure vote called the following day, the opposition says the game is not over yet.
In fact, chief opposition whip Sutin Klungsang has said the opposition bloc has decided to pick up where it left off in the censure onslaught and pursue criminal action against Gen Prayut and several cabinet members over allegations related to irregular procurements of vaccine and antigen test kits and the alleged kickback to government MPs to keep them from casting no-confidence votes against the prime minister and the censure-targeted ministers.
The opposition also plans to build on its censure "achievements" by compiling details of allegations it raised in the no-confidence debate and incorporating them in complaints to be filed with the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the Constitutional Court with the apparent aim to seek the removal of Gen Prayut and the five ministers from office.
A source noted the post-censure debate development came as the anti-government protests on the streets have been losing steam.
The protests were reportedly attracting smaller crowds with organisers blaming the rain, the Covid-19 pandemic and the emergency decree which restricts supporters from travelling from the provinces to join the rallies in Bangkok.
Also, the rallies are increasingly prone to disruption as protest leaders, such as the likes of Nattawut Saikuar and Sombat Boonngam-anong, are facing a raft of serious legal charges in connection with the protests, including incitement, sedition and attempt to overthrow a government and colluding to breach the emergency decree and the disease control law.
A political observer said there was no telling when the leaders would be targeted by police at rallies and served with arrest warrants.
With the anti-government movement hit with the prospect of enjoying less of a free rein, the ball may be back in the opposition's court to maintain the anti-government momentum, according to the source.
The source said this might explain, at least in part, the motivation behind the opposition's pursuit of legal action against the government.
Although the opposition has never openly admitted it supported the anti-government street protests, quite a few MPs of the Move Forward Party have been spotted taking part in several rallies.
The source said the battle with the government was being fought on two fronts, one in parliament and the other on the streets. If one suffers a hitch, the other could assume a more active role in the fight.
Mr Sutin insisted the opposition has solid evidence to hold Gen Prayut and some ministers criminally responsible for their alleged offences that sprang from the censure allegations.
However, the source said if the opposition had indeed laid its hands on such ammunition, it would have lost no time revealing it during the no-confidence session.
In the meantime, at least three of the opposition's star speakers in the censure debate may find themselves in trouble with the law.
During the course of the debate, Wisarn Techathirawat, a Pheu Thai MP for Chiang Rai, accused Gen Prayut of paying five million baht to some MPs in exchange for votes of confidence.
Natcha Boonchai-insawat, spokesman of the Move Forward Party, alleged the army was conducting information operations (IO) to spy on political opponents while Chonlanan Srikaew, a Pheu Thai deputy leader, accused Gen Prayut, the Public Health Ministry and the Centre for Covid-19 Situation Administration of deflating the daily Covid-19 caseload figures in a bid to ease political pressure on the government.
Seksakol Atthawong, a deputy minister at the Prime Minister's Office, has asked parliament president Chuan Leekpai to launch a probe into the three opposition lawmakers for using false information in the censure debate, which constitutes a gross ethical violation punishable by revoking their MP status.
Also, an online sign-up campaign was underway organised by the so-called Next Gen group of young activists to amass signatures supporting the removal of the three MPs.
Boxing over ballot change
Political analysts all agree that the reintroduction of the dual-ballot method with a new calculation formula for list MPs will benefit big parties such as Pheu Thai and Palang Pracharath (PPRP) at the expense of medium-sized and small ones.
Jurin: Eyes stronger political system
Knowing what lies ahead if the two-ballot system is put in place, the Bhumjaithai Party abstained from voting on as well as debating the bill. The party claims the change will only serve the interests of some political parties, not the people.
The fact that the Democrat Party sponsored and voted for the charter amendment bill seeking to restore the two-ballot voting system has political observers asking whether the coalition party is taking a big gamble.
The Democrats' performance in the previous poll was their worst ever.
However, the observers point out that the country's oldest political party has no other choice. It has to push through the charter amendment bill.
The party announced its rejection of the 2017 charter at the referendum that saw a majority of voters backing the constitution. The Democrats went on to contest the 2019 general election with charter amendments high on its manifesto agenda.
Moreover, its amendment bill was the only one of 13 competing bills presented by various parties to recently sail through parliament.
In the third and final reading, the charter proposal won support from 323 MPs and 149 senators, meeting the required tally of at least one-third of senators, or 84, and at least 20% of opposition MPs, or 43.
The main opposition Pheu Thai Party also joined the PPRP in voting in favour of the bill.
The single ballot method dealt a serious blow to Pheu Thai, several of whose big guns did not make it into the House of Representatives at the last polls. The party won the most constituency seats but did not get a single party-list seat.
Several observers believe that under the dual-ballot system, the Democrats are likely to get no more than 10 seats from the party-list system while Pheu Thai and the PPRP are predicted to rake in no fewer than 30 list seats each.
As for the constituency system contest, the number of House seats each party wins will hinge on the popularity of the party and individual candidates.
According to the observers, the coalition and opposition partners -- if they wish to maintain their political alliances -- will need a good election strategy to make sure that they do not compete against each other and open doors for their rivals.
The PPRP has to watch out for candidates from the Democrats and Bhumjaithai while Pheu Thai may see its votes snatched by fellow opposition Move Forward or the Seri Ruam Thai Party.
When comparing medium-sized parties like Bhumjaithai and Chartthaipattana, another coalition partner, the Democrat Party is in a more precarious situation under the new election system.
Bhumjaithai's political stranglehold over the lower northeastern region remains unchallenged and the party may stand an even better chance at winning big in the southern region following its political breakthrough in the previous election.
The party is expected to win between 30-40 seats in the constituency system after luring several MPs away from Pheu Thai and the Move Forward Party.
The dual-ballot system, meanwhile, is unlikely to affect Chartthaipattana which is said to be setting its sights on retaining its 10 seats in the central provinces. The worst-case scenario is that it might not retain its two current party-list seats, according to observers.
The Democrat Party suffered a huge loss in the last general election seeing its stronghold in the southern region tapped by the PPRP and Bhumjaithai. Moreover, the party also saw the departure of veterans like Korn Chatikavanij who founded his own outfit, the Kla, which has since emerged as a strong contender in the next polls.
After the amendment bill passed both Houses early this month, Democrat leader Jurin Laksanawisit thanked parliament for its cooperation in pushing the bill through. His party would set up a panel to work on an organic law on the new election system and the Democrats would work closely with MPs and senators in pushing for the next step.
Mr Jurin expressed confidence that the changes would strengthen the country's political system.
However, critics have warned Mr Jurin not to get carried away with his optimistic disposition, especially when it comes to planning the Democrats' future.
Some Democrat members fear their party will be fighting for its political life, predicting it is likely to gain about 30 seats at most -- 20 from the constituency system and the other 10 from the party list -- in the next elections.
In the meantime, the charter amendment bill, now pending royal endorsement ,still has a legal hurdle to clear.
A group of 22 small parties have vowed to petition the Constitutional Court to rule on the constitutionality of the bill.
They claim the amendment overlooks the wishes of the people who accepted the charter in the referendum and want to keep the single ballot system firmly in place.