The Parliamentary Committee on Political Development held a forum dissecting the Election Commission and the senator bribery case. MP Chayaphol demanded the EC file charges, threatening to reveal evidence if they fail to act, while former EC member Khotom emphasized the commission’s role is to uphold integrity, fairness, and impartiality.
On 11 Sep 2026 GMT+7 at the Parliament Building, the Parliamentary Committee on Political Development, Mass Communication, and Public Participation of the House of Representatives held a seminar titled “Crisis of Confidence in the Upper House: Opportunities and Challenges in Thai Politics.” This occurred three days before the Election Commission’s vote on whether to indict those accused in the senator bribery case. The panel included former EC member and Mahidol University Institute for Human Rights and Peace Studies advisor Khotom Areeya; writer and researcher Sarinee Achavanantakul; former Thammasat University Law Dean Munin Pongsapan; and Bangkok MP Chayaphol Sathondee of the People's Party.
MP Chayaphol said that during this week’s second reading of the 2027 budget bill, debate was delayed and extended to four days. He suggested this was an attempt to delay the presentation of the Election Commission’s 2024 and 2025 performance reports. Although additional meetings could have been scheduled, they were not, leading him to suspect government efforts to withhold the reports from being considered this week.
He also observed government attempts to schedule the EC budget debate during the worst, latest hours and noted pre-planned targets for protests. After the targeted individuals finished speaking, many government MPs promptly left the chamber.
Chayaphol added that the government sought to legitimize the 36th Subcommittee on Decisive Judgments to prepare for the upcoming senator bribery verdict on 14 Sep. For example, when it was raised that a member of this subcommittee attended the high-level political and electoral development course alongside personnel from the Bhumjaithai Party, the government clarified that others had also attended. However, the real issue is what relationships from the course were leveraged afterward.
Based on information he received and public sources, clear irregularities suggest some networks acted as “directors” overseeing people across regions and provinces, forming groups that contracted benefits, provided special care, and coordinated plans. Thus, the Election Commission, as the electoral law authority, must conduct preliminary checks and, given the substantial "credible evidence," must forward the case to the Supreme Court for judgment.
“Currently, it seems like a slow strangulation of democracy until it may remain only nominal. This causes widespread despair and loss of faith, even though democracy functions only when everyone participates continuously, not just every four years. People want clarity, justice, and transparent, verifiable investigations. If indictments are incomplete or not filed at all, I am ready to reveal evidence continually to show why such decisions contradict public expectation.” Chayaphol said further,
He admitted he fears the EC may not file charges against any of the 229 accused. If some are sacrificed to the process, those individuals might not withstand pressure and could expose information, posing risks to involved parties. Therefore, it is highly probable no indictments will be filed, but the EC might be sacrificed to public criticism instead. He is confident this will not matter because the 2017 Constitution has mechanisms that make investigating and prosecuting the EC difficult.
Meanwhile, Khotom stated that the EC’s duty is to uphold integrity and fairness, maintain neutrality, and remain independent from the executive branch. The absence of an EC or an EC that fails in its duties may yield similar results, but he prefers having an EC. If dissolved, all power would revert to the Ministry of Interior, potentially worse. However, escaping this system requires completely overhauling the EC selection process, which the current constitution does not readily allow.
Munin said that legally, lawyers agree on the elements of offense under the Senator Selection Act, Section 62, which clearly states that the offender may be a candidate or others. The EC Secretary-General’s opinion that only candidates can be offenders is alarming. He emphasized the EC is not to weigh evidence but to assess if there is sufficient grounds to send the case to the Supreme Court. If the EC concludes the acts are not offenses or insufficient to be offenses, it violates legal procedures and encroaches on the Supreme Court’s authority. The EC’s role is to evaluate all evidence to decide on referral, and the Supreme Court has direct authority to verify integrity and fairness. Attempts to shield opacity and derail the process raise suspicion and support claims of wrongdoing, which the Supreme Court must investigate. He affirmed that independent bodies like the EC must be subject to judicial oversight.
Sarinee revealed extensive financial trails in the case, highlighting one clear financial evidence set from Investigation Team 26, which involved close cooperation between EC officials and the Department of Special Investigation (DSI). The EC’s claim that it needs more time to review additional data raises questions about what further evidence is required, as the existing evidence is clear and unambiguous.
She noted two main financial evidence points: the motivation for money transfers and the credibility of explanations for them. Considering only personal motives to become a senator seems unreasonable because transfers occurred at many levels. The broader picture indicates a systematic effort to “control the upper house” through organized management. Suspicious transactions include multiple Senate candidates receiving transfers on election day, some from MPs’ assistants, and some single transfers to 10 individuals for equal amounts. The payer behind such transfers must be affiliated with the MPs’ assistants. These financial data form credible evidence of actual corruption.