Julphan clarified that the delay of the Social Security Board election is not a postponement but a temporary suspension because the Supreme Administrative Court accepted a suspension request after a petition was filed. He revealed plans to appeal the suspension order and await the court’s ruling. If the ruling is positive, the election can proceed as originally scheduled on 27 September.
At 08:10 on 28 July 2026 at Sanam Luang, Julphan Amornwiwat, Minister of Labor, spoke about a petition filed to the Administrative Court requesting a delay of the Social Security Board election. He explained that the Supreme Administrative Court accepted the petition and temporarily suspended the registration announcement. Therefore, the Social Security Office held a meeting of the election committee on 27 July, which was not a postponement but a delay while awaiting court clarity on whether the election can proceed and the suspension lifted promptly. He emphasized sticking to the original election timeline. He explained that this involves two parts: the regulations from 2021-2022, which were already in place when he assumed office, and which were based on public demands to expedite the election process. He recognized the necessity of having a fully empowered board quickly and followed the existing election regulations, issuing announcements in line with previous practices. Since a petition was filed, it is a legal right, and the court’s suspension must be respected until clarity is given. The Social Security Office plans to appeal the suspension order and proceed legally to allow the election process to continue properly.
When asked whether there was political involvement or attempts to prevent the election, Julphan said he did not want such extensive speculation. He stated that he does not personally know the petitioner and only knows that the petitioner is a lawyer, whom he has never met. He cannot analyze the petitioner’s motives but acknowledged that filing such a petition is a legitimate legal right, and the petitioner is following lawful procedures, which must be respected.
Asked whether the appeal process might delay the board election scheduled for 27 September, Julphan expressed hope that it would not be postponed. He stressed the urgency of having a new Social Security Board that can function effectively and reiterated the need to proceed with the election. However, he acknowledged that future events are beyond his control or prediction.
Responding to opposition claims that the government lacks sincerity in organizing the election, Julphan said such accusations were unfounded. He said he has talked with several opposition members, the Social Security team, and progressive Social Security groups and believes he has demonstrated full sincerity and followed all procedures properly. Since there is now a petition outside their jurisdiction, the process must follow legal steps. He reiterated that he does not know the petitioner and has no connection but that the petitioner is entitled to act within the law.
When asked what message he had for employers and registered voters concerned about whether the election would occur, Julphan assured that the Social Security Board election will happen. Optimistically, it will take place on the scheduled date of 27 September. If an emergency arises and the court rules one way or another, then there will be a process to amend the regulations as needed. This depends on the court’s ruling, which may legally delay the process somewhat, but the election must happen and cannot be denied. He pledged to push forward until the election day arrives.
Julphan also urged insured persons and employers who have registered to protect their rights by following updates. He assured that nothing secretive or complicated is happening; all procedures follow clear steps with public explanations. He said the ministry will keep informing the public about how the process will unfold and will announce developments as they occur.
When asked whether there were any flaws in the regulations requiring amendment, Julphan explained that it is not a flaw but involves two levels: regulations and announcements. The regulations, established in 2021-2022, have been used before and cover insured persons’ registration. However, the petition challenges the announcement, not the regulation itself. The court suspended the announcement, halting that part of the process, but issuing a new announcement contrary to the existing regulations is not possible. Therefore, they must wait for the court’s clear ruling in one direction or the other.