Priset Challenges Election Committee's 36th Review Panel

Priset Wachrasindhu, a Pheu Thai list MP and deputy party leader, outlined four objections to the work of the Election Commission's 36th review panel at the New Future Building on September 6. He explained that the investigation committee's 26th panel had recommended charges against 229 people based on evidence and documents, with the Deputy Secretary-General of the Election Commission recommending charges against at least 140 of them. However, the 36th review panel concluded that no one should be charged at all.

Priset's four objections are: First, the unclear rationale and necessity for establishing the 36th panel. While both the 26th and 36th panels are special committees, the 26th had clearer justification because officials from the DSI (Department of Special Investigation) were involved. The 36th panel's justification—that the workload of the existing 35 committees was already heavy—raises questions about whether its seven members have no other duties and whether there is overlap with the other committees. Second, the work process differs significantly: the 26th panel met approximately 80 times between March and July 2025, reviewing 80,000 to 90,000 pages of documents and hearing testimony from over 700 witnesses. The 36th panel met only 20 to 30 times between November 2024 and March 2025, with unclear outcomes and minimal transparency about its work product.

Third, analysis of publicly available information suggests the 36th panel's interpretations and rulings may coincidentally align with political agendas rather than legal analysis. Fourth, Priset indicated concerns that the panel appears to be acting as a court itself. He emphasized that the party seeks clarity on whether the 36th panel's work has been sufficiently thorough compared to the 26th panel, and demands transparent information about the panel's composition and working methods from the Election Commission.