Election 2026: Legal Provisions to Hold the Election Commission Accountable When Officials Err, and Which Laws Citizens Can Use to Sue

An in-depth analysis of Section 157 and related laws for prosecuting Election Commission officials in cases of corruption or neglect during the 2026 election, along with procedures for filing cases in the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct.

When voluntary oversight proves insufficient and irregularities in the 2026 election intensify, escalating to criminal prosecution becomes the final recourse protected by the Constitution. Many wonder how an independent agency like the Election Commission (EC) can be sued. Thairath Online summarizes the legal tools available for citizens to hold corrupt or negligent EC officials accountable.

First weapon: Section 157 – the "trump card" against officials.

Section 157 of the Criminal Code is the most familiar legal weapon to prosecute state officials, including members and staff of the Election Commission, as "officials" under the law.

• Elements of the offense: The act must involve performing or neglecting duties "improperly," causing harm to any person, or performing duties "dishonestly."
• Examples that can be prosecuted: The EC deliberately ignoring complaints with clear evidence; unfairly ruling valid ballots as invalid to benefit a particular party; or intentionally announcing election results despite widespread fraud.

Second weapon: The Election Commission Act, B.E. 2560 (2017).

Besides the Criminal Code, the EC is subject to its own specific law prescribing severe penalties if any commissioner or official acts to compromise the election's integrity.

• Section 69: Specifies punishment for commissioners or staff who act dishonestly or in ways that make the election neither honest nor fair. Penalties include imprisonment from 1 to 10 years, fines between 20,000 and 200,000 baht, and revocation of voting rights for 20 years.

Where to start the legal process?

If you have solid evidence, taking action against the EC does not always require going through the EC itself. Citizens can use the following channels.

• Filing a complaint with the Central Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct: This specialized court handles cases of corruption by state officials directly. Affected citizens, such as candidates or voters in problematic constituencies, can file suit themselves.
• Complaining to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC): The NACC has authority to investigate EC commissioners. If sufficient grounds are found, the NACC refers the case to the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Political Office Holders for consideration.
• Petitioning the Speaker of the Parliament: Although the 2017 Constitution removed the public’s ability to initiate EC removal as before, it still allows a number of eligible voters (as specified by law) to petition the Speaker of the Parliament to request the Supreme Court Chief Justice to appoint an "independent investigator" if the NACC is slow or conflicted in investigating the EC.

A sustainable solution: 8 February 2026, the day to decide oversight power.

However, lawsuits only address symptoms. As long as the highest rules do not allow citizens independent oversight, the referendum on 8 February 2026 is the most crucial milestone.

If we want a transparent EC and the return of a "people's removal" system, voting "yes" to amend the Constitution is the only chance to unlock the chains that have restrained citizens for years.

Related news

• 2026 Election must be transparent: Citizens’ guide to monitoring the Election Commission that can change the game.