Julaphan, leader of the Pheu Thai Party, urged the Election Commission (EC) to review its own performance in managing advance voting, citing faults that have damaged society. Meanwhile, Chusak refrained from definitively stating a violation of Article 157, recommending the appointment of an investigative committee to reach a conclusion, fearing a repeat of the annulled 2006 election.
On 3 February 2026, Mr. Julaphan Amornwiwat, leader of the Pheu Thai Party and prime ministerial candidate, addressed problems found in the out-of-district advance voting held on 1 February, which may have caused voters to lose votes. He said the Pheu Thai Party would monitor or demand measures to prevent issues in the 8 February election. He acknowledged these issues are real faults, and the EC should review its work, as errors such as incorrect posting of candidate numbers affected many political parties, including Pheu Thai. The party has already taken legal steps to correct these mistakes.
Regarding vote-buying, the situation is currently severe in many areas. The Pheu Thai Party asserts that vote-buying is wrong and that they do not engage in it. They call on all parties to pursue fair and honest politics. Today, the EC must take action and fulfill its duties to strictly monitor misconduct more rigorously than before. Society awaits answers on several matters, such as the Bank of Thailand's report of unusually large withdrawals of 200-300 million baht from branch banks. The progress on this issue is unclear. Therefore, I urge the EC to provide clarity. Whether these faults are honest mistakes or politically motivated, I do not accuse anyone’s integrity, but it is the EC’s responsibility to fully address them.
Regarding the observation that the Pheu Thai Party might not be significantly affected by the advance voting management faults compared to other parties, Mr. Julaphan disagreed. He said all parties were affected, including those whose candidate number ballots were lost. This concerns the fairness and integrity of the election. Pheu Thai also experienced lost ballots and candidate number placards. He believes Thai society as a whole is the real victim and the EC must review its work. However, resigning now is not timely; efforts should continue until the election concludes.
On whether these faults constitute a violation of Article 157, Mr. Chusak Sirinil, deputy leader of the Pheu Thai Party, said if he were in the EC’s position, he would set up a fact-finding committee to clarify and help the public understand the cause of the faults—whether they were simple negligence or intentional. He noted that the issue’s practical impact depends on whether advance voting ballots actually reached the provinces. From news reports, the EC has admitted to mistakes, so he believes this is not ordinary negligence, especially since old candidate numbers from the 2023 election were used, which should not happen with professionals.
Regarding the possibility of complaints affecting the election outcome, Mr. Chusak said it depends on the discretion of the relevant authorities. He recalled a long-ago incident when the EC arranged voting booths facing away from voters. Although contexts differ, combining multiple issues led to a ruling of unfairness, ultimately annulling that election. At that time, there were many problems and political motives appeared aimed at overturning the election. However, the current situation’s context is different.