The Bhumjaithai Party has accused iLaw of applying double standards in its scrutiny of the 2024 Senate election, saying it had overlooked similar conduct by the Progressive Movement.
Supachai Jaisamut, the party’s legal affairs chairman, said on Friday that the Senate election regulations were complex, involving district, provincial and national rounds of voting, which had led candidates to organise themselves into groups.
He said iLaw and the Progressive Movement, which is affiliated with the opposition People’s Party, had openly campaigned under the “Senate 67” banner and encouraged people to stand as candidates, yet they accused another group of “collusion” despite engaging in similar activities.
“What is the difference? You say organising candidates is collusion when one group does it, but it is acceptable when your group does the same thing,” he said.
iLaw in recent weeks has released evidence of what it says were coordinated efforts on a national scale to ensure the election of senatorial candidates linked to the Bhumjaithai Party.
The election and transparency watchdog also named Bhumjaithai leader Anutin Charnvirakul, now the prime minister, and other senior party figures as being aware of or involved in the plot.
Mr Supachai claimed to have evidence that a network calling itself the “People’s Senate”, or “Orange Senate”, privately coordinated voting strategies through chat groups.
Some candidates were assigned the role of “voters”, whose sole task was to vote for preferred candidates, he added.
The Bhumjaithai list-MP also dismissed as untrue claims by Sen Nantana Nantavaropas that about 300 candidates who gathered at Jupiter Hall in Impact Muang Thong Thani had shared the venue costs among themselves.
He said he had receipts showing the venue had been booked and paid for by a representative of Fa Diew Kan Publishing (Same Sky), and that the matter could be independently verified.
The gathering prompted political activist Srisuwan Janya to petition the Election Commission (EC) to investigate whether any activities had undermined the fairness of the Senate election.
Mr Srisuwan said Senate candidates were supposed to compete independently, yet some had openly referred to a “joint mission”, “the same team” and “sending our people in”.
He also questioned why similar conduct was described as “organisation” or “teamwork” in one case but labelled “collusion” in another.
The Election Commission is expected to decide in the next few weeks whether to forward a collusion case to the courts, after a series of investigations that began nearly two years ago.
An EC subcommittee in May this year voted 5-2 to clear all 229 people named in the case file: 138 sitting senators and 91 Bhumjaithai Party executives, members and associates. The ruling overturned the recommendation of an earlier panel that the case go to the Supreme Court.
In a related development, in Amnat Charoen, senators Somphan Phalasak and Daeng Kongma filed a defamation complaint against iLaw director Yingcheep Atchanont, accusing him of falsely claiming they lacked the qualifications to contest Group 10 in the Senate election.
Both insisted the EC had cleared them nearly two years ago after complaints questioning their eligibility to contest Group 10 were investigated.
- Newsmaker : ‘We’re no suicide squad,’ says iLaw director
