The Senate's Political Development Committee on Political Development invited the Election Commission (EC) to clarify the request for TOR documents related to ballot production, viewing the lawsuit as an attempt to silence the public after filing a trespassing complaint against citizens.
On 17 Feb 2026 GMT+7, Mr. Noraset Pratyakorn, chairman of the Senate's Committee on Political Development, Public Participation, Human Rights, Freedoms, and Consumer Protection, spoke before a meeting to consider the case of the EC prosecuting citizens who demanded a recount in Chonburi's electoral district 1. The meeting invited Mr. Kranit Charoen-in, EC Deputy Secretary-General; the district election director for Chonburi district 1; Ms. Khumklao Songsomboon, head of litigation at the Human Rights Lawyers Center; Mr. Noraset Nanongtoom, a lawyer from the same center; and affected citizens to clarify the matter. He noted public interest because the EC's lawsuit against citizens raised questions about whether it was intended to silence public scrutiny. The lawsuit, brought by a government authority against citizens overseeing the EC's work, came after irregularities in vote counting. Citizens sought to monitor the process, suspecting possible violations. He urged the EC to clarify if such actions complied with the Election Act, whether the charges reflected legal interpretation or intent, and emphasized the importance of these issues since the EC's accusations have caused citizens to fear scrutiny repeatedly.
He added that if citizens fear oversight, it creates a chilling effect through lawsuits. Today's meeting provides a forum for both sides to clarify: citizens can explain their intentions in their actions on that day, and the EC can explain why it considers those actions wrongful enough to sue.
Mr. Noraset said he had not been informed why the EC did not attend in person but participated via Zoom. Regarding the ballot boxes, which raised concerns but were already collected by officials, he said the EC must clarify the collection process and whether each location followed standard procedures. Differences in procedures could cause public doubt about the legality of the process.
He said the committee's approach to further action refers to drafting a report on a transparent and fair election process, which is currently being presented to the Senate. He personally remains uncertain whether the report will be useful given ongoing issues with the recent election.
"This election has raised many questions, including several issues to follow up, such as the barcode on ballots. The committee has requested the EC's TOR documents for procurement related to ballot production in 2023 and 2026 to compare specifications and see if specific details like barcodes are indicated in the ballot specifications." . (This part only contains the phrase 'นายนรเศรษฐ์ กล่าว' which means 'Mr. Noraset said' and is a continuation marker; thus, no translation beyond this phrase.)
Mr. Noraset also addressed the EC's urgent meeting about combating fake news and whether it might cause tensions between the public and the EC. He said that the best way to address public questions is transparent truth-telling and showing clear procedures. While some information may be inaccurate, many public doubts are genuine. Actions labeling all as fake news do not alleviate suspicion. Clarifying doubts requires explaining processes such as ballot box handling or reasons for fluctuating total votes. The vote counting in the EC’s closed rooms remains unknown to the public.
Regarding senators submitting a petition to the Constitutional Court about barcodes potentially invalidating the election, Mr. Noraset said that filing such a petition is within senators' duties. However, this stage has not yet been reached. Currently, the EC must explain to the public how it addresses doubts about its work. If the public loses confidence in the explanations and the EC's operations, it could affect not only trust in this election but also the democratic system in Thailand.
He also mentioned that lawyer Aun plans to request senators' names to submit a petition to the Constitutional Court on election issues. He said that according to Ms. Nantana Nantavaropas, a senator, if this process proceeds, it will require discussion among senators. Personally, he sees irregularities in vote counting and ballot marking that raise doubts because all units appear to follow the same procedures—suggesting uniform training. Election laws require transparent, open vote counting, but whether ballot marking is interpreted consistently is questionable. Numerous doubts exist in the process. Before the election, the committee discussed these with the EC. The election results still show problems, so the EC must promptly improve and disclose information.
Ms. Benjaporn Suksawang said that all complaints for Chonburi district 1 were dismissed. On the day she opened the ballot boxes, the EC’s statement was inaccurate and incomplete. The EC did not mention the evidence found or reasons why boxes remained open. She believed Lt. Col. Chanin Noilek, EC Deputy Secretary-General, did not present all evidence to the EC Secretary-General. She suspects the report was incomplete and insufficient. This issue remains a public concern, so she intends to continue pursuing it. She is not hopeless but is no longer worried. She hopes today's committee meeting will improve transparency.
Besides the Chonburi district 1 issue, there is also the matter of barcodes on ballots. Currently, Mr. Prayoon Watthanasiribanjong, the election director for Chonburi district 1, has filed a countersuit against her for trespassing. She said it is not that they want to prolong the matter, but instead of explaining with reason, the EC uses the law against citizens. Therefore, legal action is necessary to respond, and she believes this lawsuit is intended to silence her.
