It was a somewhat below-the-belt blow by the opposition, but the growing crowd at Sanam Luang believed it was what he deserved. With the House dissolution, called by Thaksin last Friday, viewed as the latest in an endless series of "abuses" of democracy by the PM, the poll boycott was deemed a response in kind.

If the opposition parties, which have flip-flopped over the past two days regarding the boycott plan, manage to stand their ground, Thaksin's crisis will reach epic proportions. Since every MP is legally required to be elected by at least 20 per cent of voters in his or her constituency, there is a good chance the April 2 snap election will not produce 500 MPs, as required by the Constitution. Whether an "incomplete" House of Representatives can elect the next prime minister could become a big constitutional issue.

The Democrats' strong support in the South make it very likely that, if the ruling Thai Rak Thai Party decides to go ahead with the poll unchallenged, it won't get the much-needed 20 per cent backing for many of its candidates. The same might also happen in some Bangkok constituencies.

Even without such mammoth legal and constitutional dangers, Thaksin will still be in a bind. His current crisis stems from widespread fears of his domination, and winning a virtually uncontested general election would be the last thing he needs. But talk about "winning" might be premature, as many observers believe that if common sense still prevails, there is no way such an election could take place. While a boycott may be condemned by Thaksin's supporters, he lacks backing from the country's intellectuals who have all joined the alliance campaigning for his ouster.

"The opposition has turned the table on Thai Rak Thai, which now has only two options - confrontation or compromise," said Somchai Phakapaswiwat of Thammasat University. Confrontation means going ahead with the poll while trying to discredit those boycotting it at the same time. This carries major risks including violence that could have far-reaching consequences.

Compromise would mean Thaksin resigning, which could salvage something for Thai Rak Thai and its embattled leader. But according to Somchai, neither option bodes well for the Thai economy, as the PM's departure in a compromise scenario would also disrupt a lot of major policies and projects.

But other academics blamed Thaksin for the impasse. Pairoj Vongvipanond, a lecturer of Thurakitbundit University, said dissolving the House was a mistake. "It has been proven he is no longer fit to rule the country, so the planned snap election has not given hope - just fear that it will be used to whitewash [him] so he can again reclaim a mandate to govern Thailand," Pairoj said.

Teerana Bhongmakapat, a lecturer at Chulalongkorn University, could not foresee a one-horse election race. "A lack of election legitimacy would fuel public displeasure," he said.

Thai Rak Thai's desperate and intense lobbying efforts yesterday confirmed the ruling camp was aware that the boycott would deprive them of political and constitutional leverage. The impasse has already prompted political pundits to start talking about "divine intervention". Attention was drawn yesterday to Article 7 of the charter, which experts believe gives His Majesty the King power to resolve unprecedented deadlocks "through traditions of the constitutional monarchy."