6-Apr-2017: Thailand's king has signed the country's military-backed constitution.

The new constitution paves way for Thailand to hold elections but critics are wary of increased power of the military.

Voters approved the constitution by a wide margin, two years after the Thai military seized power in a coup. The junta has argued that this constitution is a necessity to restore stability in the country.

The new constitution constrains further elected governments with an appointed senate, and commits governments to follow the military's 20-year development plan.

But this is actually a slightly different document than the one Thailand voted on. It contains six changes made at the request of new King Vajiralongkorn Bodindradebayavarangkun, who acceded after the death of his father in October.

Those changes expand the power of the monarchy. For example, according to the Bangkok Post, the king may leave the country without appointing another regent. Also, it removes a requirement for the king to call a meeting with the heads of top courts and the Senate in the event of a constitutional crisis.

Thailand has had so many constitutions in its modern history — this is the 20th since 1932 — that many of them were introduced with little fanfare. But the extravagant ceremony requested by the king is seen as a sign of royal approval.

Rights groups were critical in the lead-up to the referendum, saying that the ruling junta had stifled dissenting opinions and debate about the draft. Dozens were reportedly detained for encouraging people to vote against.

Now, Amnesty International is concerned that the new document will not protect human rights.

Thailand's military government retains its carte blanche authority to rule by diktat until elections are held, and future governments will have free rein to restrict human rights on various vaguely defined grounds. The new constitution also keeps in place the full gamut of orders and decrees imposed by the military government since the 2014 coup, which have facilitated widespread human rights violations.