The Secretary-General of the Election Commission (EC) reiterated that candidates for the House of Representatives involved with gambling websites do not lose their eligibility unless there is a court-issued imprisonment order. He noted they remain candidates unless they resign membership or are expelled from their party.
At 14:00 on 15 January 2026 GMT+7. Mr. Sa-nguan Bunmee, Secretary-General of the Election Commission (EC). He spoke at IMPACT Muang Thong Thani regarding the case of Mr. Ratchapong Soisuang, a candidate for the House of Representatives from Tak Province, Constituency 2, representing the People's Party. He was detained by the Technology Crime Suppression Division (TCSD) and charged with involvement in an online gambling website. The question was whether this would disqualify him as a candidate. Mr. Sa-nguan said that if nothing else occurs, he remains a candidate until 8 February 2026 and beyond until the EC announces results.
Mr. Sa-nguan further explained that the reported news does not show disqualifying characteristics for a candidate; it is merely an ongoing police investigation. However, if he resigns from party membership or is expelled, that would be considered a disqualifying characteristic. The district officer will petition the Supreme Court. If the court orders removal before the election day, the EC will withdraw the candidate's name. If the Supreme Court decision is delayed past election day, he remains a candidate, and voters can vote for him. If elected, the district officer will submit the case to the EC for review. If the EC agrees the candidate is disqualified, it will annul the election in that constituency and call for a new election. If not elected, no issue arises.
When asked if a candidate detained without bail and imprisoned during investigation would be disqualified, Mr. Sa-nguan answered no, this does not cause disqualification, as there is an exemption. Under the old law, voter eligibility criteria applied to candidates, meaning on election day they must not be lawfully detained. However, the current Constitution, Section 98(3), exempts candidates without a court sentence for imprisonment and detention, unless they create disqualifying conditions themselves, such as in a recent local election case where a candidate became ineligible by ordaining as a monk. Even if the EC considers him disqualified, procedures require the district officer to petition the Supreme Court to remove his name. After the election, it is the EC's duty not to announce his election victory.
Regarding whether a candidate ordered to have assets seized is disqualified, Mr. Sa-nguan said unless there is a court sentence ordering imprisonment and detention, the candidate remains only accused and presumed innocent. If the court sentences imprisonment but suspends the sentence, the law specifies that disqualification requires a court order for imprisonment and detention, with the condition using “and” in Section 98(6).