Former Election Official Questions Mystery Votes in Senate Case
A former Election Commission member questions which two commissioners switched votes to create a 4-3 majority ordering prosecution of 26 senators in a censure case, with their identities and motivations still unknown.
Somchai Srisutthiyakorn, a former Election Commission member, posted on Facebook on September 16, 2569, questioning which two commissioners switched their votes to create a 4-3 majority ordering the prosecution of 26 senators in the censure case. The Election Commission's majority decision in the senate censure case was 5-2, except on the question of whether the 26 senators committed a legal violation, which became a 4-3 vote.
The four-vote majority has remained consistent in other decisions, with commissioners Sitthichoti and Chai holding firm throughout. The identity of the additional two voters and their reasons remain a mystery. The 26 senators facing prosecution include many prominent figures, such as Alongkot Vorakij, General Sawatdi Tatsana, Brigadier Bunyachan Nuan Sai, Maria Phaopratarn, and Chiwapap Chiwatham, among others. Several are committee chairs and ranked first in their professional groups.
The two commissioners who changed course may have acted for two possible reasons: either the evidence against the 26 senators is so solid it cannot be resisted, and with both the Pheu Thai and Move Forward parties having lost political leverage over the past two months, defying the majority could endanger their futures; or they chose to abandon their former allies to survive, regardless of past obligations. This defection allowed two original votes to become four, creating the majority needed to prosecute the senators.
However, the two commissioners who switched sides have not benefited themselves. They now face threats on two fronts: the public remains determined to pursue cases against the original five-vote majority, with many other decisions that contradicted evidence and law under Article 157; and the blue party, deeply resented by the defection and network fracturing, is unlikely to forget this betrayal soon. The identities of the two commissioners remain unreported, though sources suggest caution and discretion are warranted.
