Complaints enforce electoral law, not intimidate media or public, says EC

The Election Commission (EC) has strongly denied as false reports that it had filed criminal complaints against members of the media and the public for photographing ballot papers in order to intimidate press freedom.

The EC stressed that members of the public or the media may set up video cameras or take photographs of ballot papers while polling station officials announce and count votes, including showing ballots that have already been adjudicated to the public.

Filming or photographing the atmosphere of voters exercising their rights is also permitted and not illegal, provided that it does not:

violate the rights of voters;

interfere with or obstruct the duties of polling station officials; or

undermine the EC’s responsibility to oversee the electoral process and results.

The EC said that, as can be seen during the February 8 election and the re-run on February 22, the public was allowed to inspect every stage of the election process on both occasions.

However, the EC is legally obliged to act and cannot neglect its duties if any scrutiny violates these three rules.

The EC statement said the complaints filed were directed at those who allegedly worked together in an organised manner.

The EC has lodged complaints with Crime Suppression Division police against six people: Parit Wacharasindhu, spokesman for the People’s Party; former EC member Somchai Srisutthiyakorn; Thammathee Sukchoterat, director of D-Vote at Sri Pathum University; Thanarat Kuawattanaphan, CEO of Domecloud and an expert in blockchain and computer software; Chaiyaphan Chavalvanichai, owner of M.I.B Marketing in Black; and Songphol Ruangsamut, chief photographer of Spacebar.

The EC statement alleged that on February 22, some individuals were found to have set up video cameras from early morning to film voters casting ballots and continued filming through the vote count.

At the front of the polling station, others allegedly attempted to decode photographed ballot papers to identify which voter had cast which ballot.

Under the law, voting must be direct and secret.

The EC said the group attempted to disclose, or risked disclosing, how voters cast their ballots, claiming they were conducting some form of verification, even though the official results would ultimately be used.

The EC said such actions undermine its legal authority and damage the credibility of the electoral process.

The EC said the methods used could not be considered actions taken in good faith. It noted that if this had been a mock election with no official consequences, it would have been a different matter.

However, given that the February 22 vote was official, the EC filed complaints on the following grounds:

Obstruction of the EC’s work

Some eligible voters reportedly chose not to vote after learning that cameras would be installed to observe the process. Others who arrived at the polling station and saw video cameras set up decided not to cast their ballots. There were also reports that images of voters would be processed using technology to identify individuals, targeting those who voted that day.

Attempt to read barcodes on ballot papers

Attempting to read ballot barcodes to determine how a voter cast a ballot constitutes electoral fraud under the law. The EC therefore has the authority and duty to take legal action.

-Claims that the EC prosecuted ordinary citizens are untrue

In the past, the EC has never prosecuted anyone in such circumstances. The current case is the first, filed in Constituency 1 of Chon Buri province by the constituency election director, because some people involved allegedly acted in bad faith and in violation of the law, not as ordinary citizens.

Some of the six suspects named in the EC complaint to the Crime Suppression Division were present at the scene, with evidence including jointly presented information, photographs and other materials linking them to the alleged operation.

Others were not present at the scene but had arranged with the group to publicly disclose their actions. Their conduct indicates involvement in the operation.

The EC also mentioned certain social media activity that posted content compiling information about ballot barcodes in an apparent attempt to undermine ballot secrecy.

The EC said the methods used were dishonest and involved coordinated efforts to stir public unrest, potentially threatening national security.