The majority decision by the Constitutional Court judges found that Poomtham and Tawee, accused of interference in the Senate election collusion case, did not violate severe ethical standards and their ministerial positions do not terminate as a result.
On 21 January 2026, the Constitutional Court delivered a majority ruling determining that the ministerial status of Mr. Poomtham Vejchayachai, former Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence, and Pol. Col. Tawee Sodson, Minister of Justice, does not end under Section 170, paragraph one (4) in conjunction with Section 160 (4) and (5) of the Constitution, despite allegations they used the Department of Special Investigation as a tool to interfere with the Senate election oversight process, which is under the authority of the Election Commission (EC). The Court concluded that neither showed a lack of clear honesty nor engaged in conduct violating ethical standards.
Regarding Mr. Poomtham, who was accused of lacking clear honesty under Section 160 (4) of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court voted 8 to 1 that his ministerial status does not terminate under Section 170, paragraph one (4) in conjunction with Section 160 (4). The sole dissenting judge was Mr. Jiraniti Hawanont.
On whether he engaged in conduct violating severe ethical standards under Section 160 (5) of the Constitution, the Court's majority decision was 7 to 2 that his ministerial status does not terminate under Section 170, paragraph one (4) combined with Section 160 (5). The two dissenting judges were Mr. Jiraniti Hawanont and Mr. Sarawut Songwilai.
For Pol. Col. Tawee, on the question of clear honesty under Section 160 (4), the Constitutional Court's majority decision was 7 to 2 that his ministerial status does not terminate under Section 170, paragraph one (4) in conjunction with Section 160 (4). The dissenting judges were Mr. Virul Sangthian and Mr. Jiraniti Hawanont.
Regarding whether Pol. Col. Tawee engaged in conduct violating severe ethical standards under Section 160 (5), the Court's majority decision was 5 to 4. The majority—comprising Mr. Nakarin Mektrairat, President of the Constitutional Court; Mr. Udom Sitthiviratchatham; Mr. Napadon Thepphitak; Mr. Banjongsak Wongprat; and Mr. Udom Rattamrit—ruled that his ministerial status does not terminate under Section 170, paragraph one (4) combined with Section 160 (5).
The four dissenting judges—Mr. Virul Sangthian, Mr. Jiraniti Hawanont, Mr. Sumeth Roikulcharoen, and Mr. Sarawut Songwilai—held that the second accused's ministerial status should terminate under Section 170, paragraph one (4) combined with Section 160 (5).