Satit sharply criticized the Election Commission (EC) for undermining itself in the senator vote-rigging case. He pointed out that four EC members delayed action to protect implicated senators, cutting off the investigation to close the case. Society places its hopes on the DSI and Supreme Court. Ratklao analyzed EC’s performance, noting over 60% of the anti-corruption budget remains unspent and investigations have surged to 1,564 cases.
At 11:40 a.m. on 16 September 2026 GMT+7. Mr. Satit Wongnongtoey. Mr. Satit Wongnongtoey, a party-list Member of Parliament from the Democrat Party, raised concerns about the Election Commission’s (EC) performance during a debate acknowledging the EC’s 2024 and 2025 annual reports to the House of Representatives. He described the 2024 report—covering the senator election year—and the 2025 report—covering local elections—as problematic reports that finally reached parliamentary consideration after two weeks of delays and disputes.
Prior to 14 September, there were attempts to block consideration of this report, possibly by parties seeking to protect personal interests using the EC’s influence. After 14 September, those interests were resolved, leaving only the EC exposed. The EC’s credibility is now seriously endangered following the breakdown of its protective shield due to the senator vote-rigging case verdict. Public confidence in the EC, which has operated for over 20 years with nearly 100 billion baht of public funds, has collapsed since the vote-rigging indictment on 14 September.
Mr. Satit continued that the EC was originally established to combat vote-buying corruption. Before the EC, vote-buying included fish giveaways, giving mismatched shoes, and 120-baht bribes, escalating to 500, 1,000, 3,000, 5,000, and even 10,000 baht bribes. Yet the EC was powerless to stop it, recently even failing to prevent buying of polling station officials during MP elections. The greatest collapse occurred with the senator vote-rigging process, involving influence, political power, and money to manipulate political appointments, which the EC could not control.
For two years society has closely followed this issue, culminating in national shock over the decision to indict for senator vote-rigging. Public trust in the EC ended when the majority of four EC members—appointed by the implicated senators themselves—voted to cut off the case, preventing exposure of the main perpetrators. The EC minority, who courageously explained the facts, received public praise as the voice of truth.
"The senator vote-rigging case has become a last straw. Although the EC has submitted the case files to the Supreme Court, the Thai public no longer trusts the EC. Instead, there is hope that the DSI will continue the investigation. The EC may face criticism even if the DSI submits money laundering and organized crime case files to the EC, as these are linked to the vote-rigging network."
The DSI is under scrutiny whether it will face political interference if it pursues the case further. This is a matter the public will watch closely. Since public trust in the EC is lost, hopes rest with the Supreme Court, which under its general regulations clause 39 can conduct hearings and summon related parties for further proceedings. The Democrat Party calls on the EC to submit all case files from Subcommittee 26 to the Supreme Court, not just those against the 77 defendants, as the Supreme Court has authority to call additional witnesses and evidence.
Mr. Satit added that the EC faces major upcoming changes during the constitutional drafting process, which will dismantle the EC’s structure including appointment and powers. The EC acts as a gatekeeper for political power but has been distorted, undermining democratic checks and balances. Before the Supreme Court’s hearing and decision, EC insiders who know of external interference or manipulation should come forward to reveal the truth. The EC minority’s courage in speaking out is commendable and shows there are still members with ethical integrity who can preserve the EC’s protective shield.
Therefore, the two EC reports lack credibility given their results. One page in the 2025 EC report states the EC scored 93.47% in the National Anti-Corruption Commission’s assessment of integrity and transparency. How is this possible when the EC’s actual work was to prematurely close the senator vote-rigging case? The two contradict each other. EC members must bravely expose who interfered in the senator vote-rigging case to partially restore the organization’s credibility.
On another note, Ms. Ratklao Intawong Suwankiri. Ms. Ratklao Intawong Suwankiri, party-list MP and Deputy Leader of the Democrat Party, expressed gratitude to the two EC minority members, especially Mr. Sitthichot Intrawiset, for clearly explaining their voting rationale to the public. Transparency is key to public confidence in independent agencies. Reviewing the EC’s operations and budget spending over the past two years reveals worrying inefficiency, especially regarding Strategic Plan 1, a key mission to promote political development based on fair and honest elections.
In fiscal year 2024, the EC approved a budget of 51.35 million baht for Strategic Plan 1 but spent only 20.48 million baht (39.88%). In fiscal year 2025, the budget for this plan dropped to 36.19 million baht, with actual spending only 15.14 million baht (41.8%). These figures raise significant questions: as election corruption becomes more complex, can the EC effectively use its allocated budget to prevent and combat corruption? Budget allocations unused or unimplemented as planned call into question the effectiveness of spending.
Additionally, there are ongoing backlog issues. In 2024, seven projects comprising nine main activities remained incomplete and were carried over, with budgets totaling over 28.4 million baht. In 2025, four projects with five activities again failed to meet deadlines. "The concern is not only underutilized budgets but also accumulated unfinished work. As an agency directly responsible for election oversight, delays directly impact public trust."
Ms. Ratklao also noted a sharp rise in cases the EC must handle. In 2024, there were 394 pending cases and 162 criminal cases under investigation. In 2025, cases increased to 1,938, with 1,564 under investigation—nearly a tenfold increase from the prior year.
"Certainly, the context of 2025’s major local elections must be considered. However, this dramatic rise forces us to question whether the EC’s systems, personnel, and resources are designed to handle the actual workload. In justice processes, delays affect the rights and confidence of those involved."
Ms. Ratklao emphasized that these points are not meant to attack the EC but to express concern for an organization vital to democracy. The public wants the EC to effectively and independently oversee and manage elections fairly and transparently. She also highlighted the senator vote-rigging case as a critical test of public confidence. The EC minority’s clear explanation of their vote is essential transparency for an independent agency.
"We should not only ask whether the EC is independent but also whether it can fully exercise its constitutional powers and resources effectively. Ultimately, the public wants to see a functioning, transparent, accountable organization that builds confidence in the election system."
Ms. Ratklao concluded that if Thailand aims to elevate democratic standards to international levels, ensuring elections are honest, fair, and credible is unavoidable—and the EC is one of the most crucial mechanisms in this process.