The Department of Special Investigation (DSI) is preparing to coordinate with the Election Commission (EC) to request the final ruling report on the Senate vote-rigging case involving 77 individuals. This will support building the case file before conducting further investigations to proceed under the law. It focuses on the election case concerning 67 Senators in 2024.
On 15 Sep 2026 GMT+7, reporters received updates from the Department of Special Investigation that after the Election Commission resolved to investigate the 2024 Senate election corruption case, deciding to prosecute 77 people by sending the case to the Supreme Court's election division, the DSI’s Special Case Investigation Team 24/2568, handling organized crime and money laundering related to Senators, plans to formally request the EC's final rulings. This includes the preliminary ruling announced by the EC Chair on 14 Sep to the media, as well as the detailed case report which the EC must complete within 60 days. These documents are expected to be precise and clear for DSI to incorporate into their case file for review.
Following that, a meeting will be scheduled with the special investigation team—including DSI and prosecutors—to define key issues and discuss the EC’s decision to prosecute 77 individuals by sending their cases to the Supreme Court's election division. Each commissioner's perspective on the conduct and evidence related to the accused will be examined. DSI will then conduct further investigations according to directions from the special prosecutors, such as consolidating the first batch of eight suspects with other co-offenders into one case file, incorporating key evidence from the EC's inquiry, documents on bank account openings and transactions related to the group network, and additional inquiries based on petitions for justice.
The DSI is required to investigate thoroughly until the case is fully resolved because the special prosecutors believe a group of offendersacted jointlywith a systematic plan involving many individuals, resembling a large organization. They conspired to gain legislative power in the Senate by violating the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand. This may constitute offenses involving offering, promising, or preparing to offer property or other benefits convertible to money to induce others to become Senate candidates or withdraw candidacy, or to take lawful actions causing them to lose the right to vote or be elected, or to influence candidates or voters to vote or abstain for any person. The division of responsibilities among them prevents DSI from concluding the case and re-submitting charges against the original eight suspects to the special prosecutors.
Regarding the EC Chair’s statement that the actual number of accused in the Senate vote-rigging case under election law is 427, not just 229 as previously reported, the facts are that before the Central Subcommittee No. 26 resolved to prosecute 229 accused individuals and forwarded the case to the EC Deputy Secretary-General (acting on behalf of the Secretary-General), it was found that the EC also considered other cases with complainants, increasing the total accused to 427. However, Subcommittee No. 26 proceeded to prosecute only 229 individuals based on the available evidence.
Concerning the EC Chair’s remark that testimony from witness code 16 (Mr. Ekkarat Changlao) is inadmissible since his initial testimony, because he was convicted by a court for embezzlement and has reversed his statements multiple times in the Senate vote-rigging case, undermining his credibility. Although Mr. Ekkarat’s detailed testimony to DSI’s special investigation team in the organized crime and money laundering case included clear accounts of individuals, names, phone numbers, timelines, dates, and locations, his evidence has not been accepted into the case file. This has prevented the EC from prosecuting individuals such as executives of the Bhumjaithai Party or political figures named in the case. It is acknowledged that Mr. Ekkarat testified both to DSI and to the EC’s Subcommittee No. 26, providing consistent information initially, and prosecutors were present during his first testimonies. However, after reversing his statements, he sent only one letter requesting to amend his testimony to the EC Chair.
The fact that witness code 16 reversed his testimony multiple times and gave materially contradictory statements is significant evidence itself. This could be regarded as perjury before officials or investigators, which is a criminal offense. It remains to be seen how the DSI investigation team and the EC’s Subcommittee No. 26, as the case owners, will proceed regarding this witness.
Regarding the EC Chair’s statement acknowledging that the EC is not a court but also nota mere postmanwho can forward all petitions and objections to the Supreme Court without prior screening, he questioned whether any witnesses would be willing to testify before the EC in court if every case were forwarded unfiltered. He asked how many witnesses would remain willing to cooperate with the EC. Justice Ministry sources commented that this view is incorrect because whether witnesses appear in court is a separate matter. The EC’s duty is to pursue witnesses to enter the court process. Otherwise, if in any criminal case police investigators doubted witness statements for fear they might not testify in court, no criminal cases would be prosecuted.
When comparing the list of eight suspects previously prosecuted by DSI in the organized crime and money laundering case related to Senators with the 77 individuals the EC decided to prosecute in the 2024 Senate vote-rigging case, it was found that six of those prosecuted by DSI are also among the 77 individuals the EC sent to court.