The protests were initially triggered by the dissolution of the Future Forward Party (FFP) in late February 2020 which was critical of Prayut, the changes to the Thai constitution in 2017, and the country's political landscape that it gave rise to.

[37] Government responses included filing criminal charges using the Emergency Decree; arbitrary detention and police intimidation; delaying tactics; the deployment of military information warfare units; media censorship; the mobilisation of pro-government and royalist groups who have accused the protesters of receiving support from foreign governments or non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as part of a global conspiracy against Thailand; and the deployment of thousands of police at protests.

[61] After the period of decreased status of the monarchy during Khana Ratsadon era, he restored influence and respect to the throne, which helped define the modern Thai political landscape.

[63] He became one of the world's richest monarchs in 2018, when he was granted personal ownership of royal assets from the Crown Property Bureau (CPB), valued at approximately US$40 billion, which was formerly legally considered publicly owned.

[82] Shortly before the second wave protests, on 15 July, netizens were infuriated by privileged treatment to "VIP guests" who were later revealed to be positive for the coronavirus,[83] as well as its failure to boost the heavily effected tourism industry.

[86] Other related developments include the suicide of senior judge Khanakorn Pianchana over his frustration due to pressure on his verdicts in favour of military officers, surgical mask profiteering by Thammanat Prompao, delayed COVID-19 welfare money transfers, the government's approval of the Civil Partnership bill (which does not recognize equal status of same-sex couples), and the case against Red Bull heir Vorayuth Yoovidhya.

The protesters, organised under the name Free Youth (Thai: เยาวชนปลดแอก; RTGS: yaowachon plot aek), announced their three core demands:[92] dissolution of the House, ending intimidation of the people and drafting a new constitution.

[99] On 3 August, a Harry Potter-themed demonstration was held, which 200 people joined, featured a public speech by Arnon Nampa which openly criticised the monarchy, and demanded amendment of increasing royal prerogative and reform of the lèse majesté law.

[177] On 18 November, angered by the rejection of the people-proposed constitutional bill and the use of force the day before, thousands of protesters gathered at the Royal Thai Police's headquarters and hurled paint and sprayed graffiti in the area.

Protest leader Panupong "Mike Rayong" Jadnok urged people to park vehicles at key Bangkok intersections in the event of a coup, to obstruct military movement.

Hundreds of protesters also rallied at the 14 October 1973 Memorial that commemorates the lives of pro-democracy supporters lost during a military massacre in 1973, they raised the three-finger salute and shouted "Abolish 112," referring to the criminal code of lèse-majesté law.

Benja scattered paper printed with the names of 11,035 supporters on the stairs to the court building, and said that the students are not a threat to national security but wanting to improve Thai society and for the monarchy to exist under the law.

[225] On 7 August, the Free Youth group planned a march to the Grand Palace from the Democracy Monument asking for reform and a good vaccine program, but Thai riot police pressured them out before the event starts.

[233] By 2022, street protests largely died down, which human rights groups have attributed to heavy suppression and surveillance by the Thai government, although activism has continued online due to being more difficult to prosecute.

[243] A conspiracy theory accusing foreigners, including the United States government and American organisations such as Human Rights Watch and Netflix, of funding the protests has been voiced by the royalist group Thailand Vision and campaigners at pro-government rallies leading the U.S. embassy in Bangkok to issue a formal statement of denial.

[245][246] An Isaan Record analysis found that the government response has included force and intimidation, arbitrary detention, arrests and changes, disinformation, the deployment of military Information and Operations units, media censorship, delaying tactics, obfuscation, support for pro-government groups, gaslighting, and negotiation,[247] as well as mobile jamming devices.

"[252] Public Health Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, a notable politician from a junior coalition partner, expressed concern about implications for COVID-19 spread whilst signaling his own neutrality.

[255] Some universities and schools responded by forbidding their staff and students to join the protests and by banning gatherings on their grounds, claiming COVID-19 concerns, while police issued warning letters.

[264] Following the rally, a minister filed a complaint to prosecute Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube for allowing anti-government content, the first time the Computer Crimes Act has been used against foreign service providers.

[266] A severe state of emergency was declared in Bangkok during 15–22 October,[267] during which the police moved to ban or block anti-government or independent media, together with the Free Youth Facebook page,[268] and seized books criticizing the monarchy.

[269] Ministry of Digital Economy and Society stated it intended to prosecute internet service providers and online platforms which allows prohibited content, and reported about 320,000 illegal messages.

Sunai Phasuk, a senior researcher with Human Rights Watch, labelled the ruling as "a judicial coup" that could pave the way for further legal cases against protesters, including treason.

"[284] Patrick Jory, a senior lecturer in Southeast Asian history at the University of Queensland, described the unpredictable nature of the King and "his willingness to use violence," and says that he may have pressured Prayut to suppress the protesters.

He received stark responses from Manager Online and General Apirat Kongsompong, who insisted that some protesters intended to overthrow the monarchy, or had fallen victim to third-party manipulators.

[293] In August 2020, UNICEF issued a statement invoking the Convention on the Rights of the Child that called for schools and learning institutions to be safe havens and forums for children's freedom of expression.

On 10 August, the Thai Move Institute released a diagram of an alleged 'people's revolution network' linking student protests to former FFP leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

[312] On social media platforms, user accounts, including ones coordinated by the ultra-royalist Rubbish Collection Organization,[313] which has been characterized as fascist, attacked protesters,[k] some going so far as to urging child rape.

Loyal Thai), he also attacking the protester and supporting the government and the monarchy which he reacted to Jonathan Head, BBC News journalist during an interview in Bangkok[327] he said that he believes if English people used the words against Queen Elizabeth, they would have been jailed a long time ago.

[338] After the police crackdown on 16 October 2020, the hashtag #WhatsHappeningInThailand was created and heavily utilized, with content published in various languages across various social media platforms in order to attract global attention to the situation in the country.

However, Thai scholar Pavin Chachavalpongpun believed that the protests had already irrevocably expanded the space for criticism of the ruling elites, while Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch in Asia, thought that the resurgence of the activism could restart after the next general election.