Prompong calls for attention on 14 Sep as a test of public trust in the Election Commission, which is preparing to vote on the Senate 'collusion' case. He highlights three openness principles to clarify the matter, ease doubts, provide clear and verifiable explanations, and stand firmly on legal grounds.
12 Sep 2026 GMT+7 Prompong Nopparit, former spokesperson of the Pheu Thai Party, commented on the case in which the Election Commission (EC) is scheduled to consider and vote on the investigation report regarding the acquisition of Senate members on 14 Sep 2026. He said this is an important day to prove the public’s confidence in the EC, as the case has attracted continuous public interest and doubts. According to media reports, the 26th Central Investigation and Inquiry Committee opined that the behavior of the 229 accused had grounds, whereas the 36th Adjudication Subcommittee voted 5 to 2 that there was no wrongdoing. Recently, reports emerged about some witnesses reversing their statements, further intensifying public attention on how the full EC will consider all facts and evidence.
With conflicting opinions and evidence raising public questions, the EC must explain why it believes or disbelieves each piece of evidence. Personally, I do not presume the EC’s verdict direction, as it is the EC’s duty to independently judge based on facts, evidence, and law. Whatever the outcome, there will be both satisfied and dissatisfied parties. The key is not just the verdict itself but that the public understands the reasons behind it.
Prompong added that the case involves differing views during the process and many public questions. If the EC wants to dispel doubts and restore confidence, a mere verdict may not suffice. There must be clear, verifiable explanations grounded in law, unaffected by any pressure.
He said the EC should adhere to the principle of "three openings" to bring clarity to society.
1. Open reasons: The verdict must include explanations of key reasons supporting the decision, referencing facts, evidence, and laws straightforwardly within the limits allowed by law, so the public understands why the decision was made, not just the verdict outcome.
2. Open answers to doubts: The EC should clarify important issues raised by society about the process to provide transparency, ensuring fairness, avoiding implying guilt, and not infringing on the accused’s rights. Addressing doubts with facts is essential to dispel suspicion and restore trust in the institution.
3. Open the path for law to proceed: The EC must follow legal processes equally and fairly. If evidence suffices for legal action, procedures must continue without discrimination. If evidence is insufficient, fairness to the accused must be ensured along with explanations so society understands.
Prompong concluded by saying, "On 14 September, society is watching not just which way the verdict goes but where the standards of this independent organization stand. Verdicts will have supporters and detractors, which is natural. What people deserve is verifiable reasons. Independent organizations must be free from interference but not from scrutiny. Citizens have the right to examine information, facts, and critique honestly under the constitution and law. Transparency does not harm independent bodies; suspicion does. Regardless of who you are, which side you are on, or how much power you hold, the law must have one standard."