The Constitutional Court has ordered expert witnesses in the 2026 election case concerning barcode and QR code ballots to provide explanations within 15 days. It rejected the request to add information from a "petitioner," noting he is not a party to the case.
On 22 April 2026, the Constitutional Court The Constitutional Court judges reviewed a petition filed by the Ombudsman requesting the court to rule under Section 213 of the Constitution on the case involving the Election Commission and related parties as respondents. The case concerns the general election of House of Representatives members held on 8 February 2026, where the Election Commission set the design and printing of ballots featuring QR codes and barcodes. It is credible that these codes could be used to identify voters and verify votes, compromising the secrecy of the ballot. This practice was challenged as violating or conflicting with Sections 4, 25, 32, 34, 50(7), 83 paragraph 2, 85, 94, and 224 of the Constitution. Additionally, Mr. Kongdecha Decharat, a political activist, filed a petition on 6 April 2026 seeking to add factual information to the case. He claimed to be the complainant against the Election Commission and related parties in the Supreme Administrative Court case number F.46/2569 and requested to contest the Constitutional Court's acceptance of the petition in this case.
After deliberation, the Constitutional Court unanimously dismissed Mr. Kongdecha's petition, reasoning that he is not a petitioner in this case and therefore cannot file a petition. Other requests were also denied. To assist in the court's consideration, expert witnesses were ordered to prepare opinions as specified by the court and submit them within 15 days from receipt of the letter to support the Constitutional Court's ruling. .