Sonthiya opposes the new vote count in Chonburi District 1 and challenges political parties to reveal if they are behind the orange faction. He firmly states that outsiders have no right to interfere. Meanwhile, a local resident appeared during an interview to ask, “Why can't it be done?”
On 12 Feb 2026 GMT+7, Sonthiya Sawatdee, a political activist, came to the Election Commission (EC) office to urge strict adherence to the constitution and the 2018 Election Act. He stated that Section 140 of the Election Act clearly specifies that only persons eligible in that electoral district—either candidates or political parties fielding candidates there—can file objections for a vote recount or verification, which he submitted to the EC for consideration.
Regarding Chonburi District 1, if the process does not follow these guidelines, Sonthiya requested the EC not to open ballot boxes for a recount and to prosecute all involved who violate the constitution and the Election Act. He also urged political parties to make their demands or actions clear and transparent.
Accepting consequences and buying votes among Thai people.
The purpose of his action is to ensure the EC operates according to every provision of the constitution. He opposes extralegal actions, especially protests causing delays and unrest, and emphasized he gains no benefit from this. The election outcome reflects the decision of 52 million Thai voters exercising their rights.
“If the public perceives that vote-buying occurred, then all Thai people must accept the consequences: having a government with corruption and fraud.”
Sonthiya added that the EC should not be intimidated by protests. He is willing to support lawful and constitutional actions regardless of others’ opinions. He has no personal stake but does have a stake in ensuring the country follows legal procedures.
Challenges to political parties backing the movement.
When asked about suspicions that political parties are behind the movement, Sonthiya said they should clearly identify themselves, as they have full rights to act. Any party with issues such as ballot irregularities or vote-buying can act openly. The winning party should explain how to prevent recounts, while the losing party should verify if previous counts were honest. Although the right to act belongs to the people, it must not infringe upon the EC’s rights. He does not expect anything from the EC meeting on Chonburi District 1’s problems but opposes recounts in any province if not legally justified.
Questioning where the budget for recounts would come from.
Some citizens claimed ignorance of criminal law violations, but Sonthiya said it is not an excuse. He believes those in Chonburi are knowledgeable and must accept responsibility to maintain nationwide election order in nearly 100,000 polling stations. If unrest leads to a recount, the budget required would be 8.7 billion baht; he questioned where that money would come from and how it would be managed.
“I exercise my rights under the constitution for the EC to consider and decide as it sees fit. I did not accuse any political party nor rejoice at anyone’s prosecution. But Thailand must proceed based on legal processes.” Sonthiya stated.
Local resident interrupts to ask, “Why can't it be done?”
While Sonthiya was giving an interview, a citizen submitting a letter to request a recount asked who is eligible to request a vote recount. Sonthiya replied that voters and parties in the electoral district can submit letters directly to the EC to proceed.
The citizen then challenged why outsiders cannot do so, since the law states that if elections are unfair, anyone can file complaints.
Sonthiya explained that promising to allow something and breaking election laws or requesting a recount are different issues, leading to about two minutes of back-and-forth debate before they parted ways to submit their letters.
